Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
16 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

I have a very specific memory from my day in the reserve, on what was then called QL-2. The rankings handed out were total BS, people who were known to be physically fit given poor fitness scores etc. Basically it was a ranking of the LT’s favourites. So I take that with a grain of salt. 
 

Which is why I am asking if that actually happens. Do you have evidence that they’re going hundreds deep to find rhe best non-SWM?  Underpinning your argument is the claim that SWM=inherently qualified and non-SWM = inherently unqualified behind hundreds of more qualified SWMs. All I  asking for is evidence that this is happening. 

Take a look at the new CDS....and how many men were in that category....how much more proof do you need....Also one would need to find out how many people are white and non white, where the bulk of any numbers are going to be white....So my answer to you is this data does not exist why would the government research info that does not defend it's choices...

That being said explain what DEI is superior to the system we had....

We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.

Posted
On 11/23/2024 at 4:21 PM, BeaverFever said:

Canada isn’t a failed state or without national interests. However we still do dumb shit like have official songs that are about how great some other country is. 

We certainly aren't going to have one about how great Canada is. Not in this day and age.

Posted
On 11/23/2024 at 4:33 PM, BeaverFever said:

I don’t see that being a lie, she is saying excluding them from combat arms limits and ignores their contribution  

What contribution?

On 11/23/2024 at 4:33 PM, BeaverFever said:

And at any rate size and strength don’t matter as much in modern war as they once did especially artillery or armour which is where republicans troglodytes also want to ban women.

A 155mm artillery shell weighs 100 lbs. You don't think size matters there?

On 11/23/2024 at 4:33 PM, BeaverFever said:

Small size can actually be an advantage in many situations including armour where space is limited. Plus Women often meet or exceed men in physical endurance and pain tolerance. 

Women are far more fragile than men. Their bones are smaller, they have less muscle, are more easily harmed and take longer to recover. They have less endurance, and of course, far less strength. You should read the article by an American marine captain who was an absolute peak athlete when she joined the men in Afghanistan and what she has to say about the physical problems that resulted from that.

On 11/23/2024 at 4:33 PM, BeaverFever said:

BTW if size and strength matter then you would just exclude any male or female who doesn’t meet the size and strength requirements 

I agree. But that's not what we do. In most such professions, including policing and firefighting, what they do is either have different requirements for men and women, or they water down the overall requirements so women can pass.

Posted (edited)
20 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

“because some sort of DEI policy exists on paper ipso facto the ranks and leadership are filled with unqualified and incompetent non-SWMs.”

Now you've jumped to total incompetence and framed it in a manner that suggests people with contrary minded opinions here are equating incompetence with gender/skin colour.

You're missing the point entirely and IMO, you're doing it deliberately and under the guise of "little ole me is just asking a question." 

Skin pigment doesn't make you incompetent by virtue of its presence any more than it makes your performance superior or outstanding because of it.... that's the point being made here. If you are doing the promoting, hiring, firing (or whatever), allotting extra points in a ranked merit system for skin colour and what happens to exist between your legs only serves to elevate individuals above their peer group by using a random criteria that has nothing to do with merit.

You could just as easily use eye colour, even/odd birth years, or cat person/dog person criteria... and if I were suggest that, you would immediately (and quite rightly) brand it as madness. And when you did, I'd ask you to prove that cat people were incompetent by virtue of not liking dogs.  

I could stand your argument on its head and ask if you have any evidence to suggest that the performance of women and people of colour is, by virtue of the gender/colour difference, superior to that of white males. The reason I haven't done that is because the proposition is ludicrous on its face. No one is saying that... and you know it.

If you were to suggest that any merit list position should be elevated based on being male and being white, I would argue against it for the exact same reason I'm opposed to applying the formula in reverse. And ironically, if you were actually to do stuff like that it would immediately be obvious to everyone and it would have the exact opposite effect of that intended..

What do you suppose that would do to attrition?

What merit list group do you suppose that attrition would most heavily impact?

The answer is it would increase and the demographic that increased it would all be higher performers than the folks you actually promoted... over time, you can easily guess what happens. I think you're actually getting a taste of it right now and I don't think it's working out too well.

Doubling down on it might not be the best plan but it is entertaining to watch once you're retired. When considering some of the LSD induced policy decisions of late, the question most often asked by veterans in the locker room is "WTF did you think was going to happen?"

 

 

 

 

Edited by Venandi
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted

Just wondered if anyone knows whether biological males who identify as females are permitted to use women's facilities in the Canadian Armed Forces.  This would likely be in accord with the government's woke policy for the CAF.  

 In 2017, Trudeau’s government implemented a policy allowing prisoners to be housed according to their declared gender identity rather than their biological sex.

KLEIN: Trudeau's prison policy endangers women and defies common sense

Apparently this was ordered by Trudeau's government since 2017.

 

Posted
On 12/28/2024 at 9:05 AM, blackbird said:

Just wondered if anyone knows whether biological males who identify as females are permitted to use women's facilities in the Canadian Armed Forces.  This would likely be in accord with the government's woke policy for the CAF.  

 In 2017, Trudeau’s government implemented a policy allowing prisoners to be housed according to their declared gender identity rather than their biological sex.

KLEIN: Trudeau's prison policy endangers women and defies common sense

Apparently this was ordered by Trudeau's government since 2017.

 

I assume so. Famously, they put tampons in the mens room for biological females who ID as male so presumably they allow the opposite. 

Posted
On 12/28/2024 at 6:05 AM, blackbird said:

Just wondered if anyone knows whether biological males who identify as females are permitted to use women's facilities in the Canadian Armed Forces

Why? And what possible business of yours could that be?
The rest of us are concerned that they're equipped properly and afforded proper respect and redress for their service.

Posted

It is my business to see that the Canadian Forces is run properly as it is everyone's business.  They are serving Canadians and we pay for them.

Women's rights and safety should not be put at risk.  Simple eh!

Posted
5 hours ago, herbie said:

Why? And what possible business of yours could that be?
The rest of us are concerned that they're equipped properly and afforded proper respect and redress for their service.

well to start with they are government employees, so it should be every canadians business how they are treated or what policies effects them... 

SOME are concerned, for most it does not even come up in conversation, or they are to busy in their own lifes to take any meaningful action to ensure our soldiers are not taken advantage of by government ...lives that sign on to unlimited liability, meaning they can be ordered to their deaths without any recourse.....it use to be a two way street where soldiers agreed to have Canadians back and to risk life and limb to protect them, while Canadian civilians ensured we were not misused or had the equipment to do the jobs they were assigned to....it's funny how the PM drives around with a luxury armored limo, with security teams, made by the finest there is...and our soldiers get the cheapest bidder, as it is cheaper to bury them than it is to equip them...and today we think that is normal....and Canadians don't really care what our military looks like or does, if they did it would be a priority to fix or repair....it would not be in its current state....we are good at talking, lousy at taking action...

We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.

Posted

What kind of car the PM gets driven about in is not the issue being discussed nor does it have jack shit to do with the Forces.

You're missing the point of some Bible thumping retrograde making out thru his limited moral outlook that f*cking bathrooms are a 'problem' lessening the effectiveness or morale of our Forces.

I mean when you count on your fellow to have your back, you're expected to have theirs and are aware you could possibly see the blown to rat shit or have to tend to their injury or personal needs you're at a totally different level of intimacy that's nonsexual. Liuke family, beyond sharing a bathroom or seeing them naked.
WTF is next from this Biblical deviant, separate bathrooms for gays because in his warped mind they can't see a man in the adjacent urinal pee without getting a hard on?

That issue has SFA to do with getting people to sign up, improving morale or anything whatsoever. PAY them, equip them and give them something to do. Or even fewer will volunteer. 

Posted
3 hours ago, herbie said:

What kind of car the PM gets driven about in is not the issue being discussed nor does it have jack shit to do with the Forces.

You're missing the point of some Bible thumping retrograde making out thru his limited moral outlook that f*cking bathrooms are a 'problem' lessening the effectiveness or morale of our Forces.

I mean when you count on your fellow to have your back, you're expected to have theirs and are aware you could possibly see the blown to rat shit or have to tend to their injury or personal needs you're at a totally different level of intimacy that's nonsexual. Liuke family, beyond sharing a bathroom or seeing them naked.
WTF is next from this Biblical deviant, separate bathrooms for gays because in his warped mind they can't see a man in the adjacent urinal pee without getting a hard on?

That issue has SFA to do with getting people to sign up, improving morale or anything whatsoever. PAY them, equip them and give them something to do. Or even fewer will volunteer. 

It has everything to do with it, do you think the PM gets the cheapest bidder....no he gets whatever he wants...soldiers get the cheapest stuff out there....

Once the liberal government started this entire war on military culture, moral and moral values took a huge hit...and it plays a huge role in people continuing in a career, or getting out with a sour taste in the mouths...Liberals don't want a warrior class in the military....they want checks and balances, diversity, DEI policies, that eat up valuable training time, and training resources....which none of that will add to your training skills as a soldier, nor will it make you a better soldier....able to close with and destroy the enemy...and with training resources already strained, everyone has already had their fill of this garbage...

Just for your info you walk into a female shower unit and produce a 6 inch penis your going to have to learn to fly, or defend yourself...they don't care much how you identify, and if they don't do it, some male will come in and do it for them.... now walking into the male shower units as a female and strip down , not a whole lot is going to happen except for some stares and cat calls ...they don't care if your family or not....stay in your lane....or shower someplace else... they are warriors not liberals....

 

 

We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,853
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Beat My Insurance
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Scott75 went up a rank
      Experienced
    • Barquentine earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Barquentine earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Radiorum earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • Wap75 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...