Moderation Questions
The last iteration of the moderation discussion thread was a complete disaster. Numerous attempts to keep it on topic failed, and it became a general discussion thread with almost no moderation related posts at all. And those that were posted were so buried in non-mod posts that it became a huge time drain on the mods to sort through them. Then, when off topic posts were deleted posters complained about that.
This led to the closing of the mod discussion thread, replaced by the post report/pm approach. This has filtered out lots of noise, but has resulted at times in the General Discussion Thread turning into a quasi-mod thread. This is not desirable, but going back to the old mod thread is also not a workable option.
Therefore, I have created this new moderation thread, but with a different purpose and ground rules than previous mod threads. The purpose of this thread is to provide a place for posters to pose questions to the mods about how policies are applied; to bring to the mods attention posts they think are inappropriate and reach the level of requiring mod action; and for mods to communicate to posters things like changes or clarifications to policies, bannings, etc.
Now let me tell you what this thread is NOT a place for. It is not for nonmoderation related posts, even if the discussion originates from a comment in in a mod related post. It is not for posters to post their opinions about other posters or whether a poster should be banned. It is not to rehash past grievances about mod decisions from months or years ago. The focus of this thread will be recent posts that require action now. Or questions about current policies and enforcement.
So basically, this is a thread to ask mods questions. Which means, pretty much that only mods should be answering those questions. If a poster asks why a particular post was deleted or allowed, only a mod can answer that. Everyone else who wants to jump in with their opinion or their mod war story needs to stay out of it. It just increases the noise to signal ratio and does nothing to answer the question.
Everyone needs to understand that this thread has very different rules than the old mod thread and any other thread. Any non-moderation post will be deleted on sight. Not moved to the appropriate thread, just deleted. So don't waste your time crafting a masterpiece post about wars or transgender issues or the presidential election and then post it in this thread. It will be gone. Also, this isnt a thread for general commentary about our mods performance. Posting "browser sucks as a mod" or any such posts that don't actually ask about a policy or request a mod action will be deleted. Everyone is entitled to their opinion about the moderation of this forum. But this thread isnt for complaining about mods. You are free to go to the ATF forum and make your concerns about modding in this forum there.
So with that intro, this thread is open for those who need to bring questions about mod policies or bring inappropriate posts to the mods attention. Again, it is NOT a thread for group discussions about other posters or for other posters to answer questions directed to mods.
We'll see how this goes. If you have what you feel is an open issue raised in the General Discussion Thread, please copy that post or otherwise reintroduce the issue here.
Thanks.
No I cannot. I do not believe that the average male or female shows up when a police officer is called, so explain to me why I should care whether the average male or female is stronger.
because strength unlike other traits (where differences often exist but very nuanced between sexes) is MASSIVELY different men vs women. In some measure of strength the median man is stronger than 95%+ of women.
Basically if you want people pooled by the top 10% of strenght in society for some job, there aren't any women among that portion of society (or like less than 1 in 100k of them is a woman).
regardless of whatever position you may have on this issue, the reality distortion required to even require you to ask this sort of question should disqualify you from the discussion
Do you guys realize I'm not asking why it matters if your officer is strong? I'm asking why it matters that the average man is stronger than the average woman.
That's an entirely different question. You realize that an average man or woman isn't all that exists, right? And there's no reason to expect a female officer to be of average strength.
Your casual dismissals of my question reveal a simplistic thought process.
I am also arguing that strength is far from the only thing I would require of a police officer, but that's secondary. There has been nothing presented here to argue that a female officer will necessarily have adequate strength for the job, nor would that be the fault of allowing females to be police officers if it were the case (rather, it would be potentially the fault of the people choosing the police officers).
No I cannot. I do not believe that the average male or female shows up when a police officer is called, so explain to me why I should care whether the average male or female is stronger.
I do not care if you care. I simply answered your question. Be obtuse at someone else’s expense. MrDavitWilliam ain’t got time for that bullshit.
There is a lot of literature which finds different things, meta researches usually find a small but significant reduction in use of violence by female officers, but afaik almost no one controls for the fact that men are sent more often in the most heinous situations
What data do you have to back up the assumption that men are sent into heinous sitations
What are heinous situations? Uvdale? Thank god those strong brave burly men where there to let those kids get slaughtered
What data do you have to back up the assumption that men are sent into heinous sitations
What are heinous situations? Uvdale? Thank god those strong brave burly men where there to let those kids get slaughtered
It took strong men to prevent the parents from going in to save their children.
The recent right wing obsession with this guy:
was kind of cute tbh but I think underscores the deep fantastical nature of these peoples perception of reality. I assume most of the people who endlessly romanticize a specific brand of manliness have negative chin depth and live vicariously through the social media perception of what a man is. If you have negative aura then a moron like Andrew Tate seems like a strong manly man, but to anyone who grew up in a locker room you know that Andrew Tate is the type of guy who got picked on endlessly and has overcompensated as a coping mechanism
With police, it's the other way around: I want a cute little Sabrina Carpenter-looking officer in a crisp blue uniform showing up when I call the cops to report my car window got smashed in.
What data do you have to back up the assumption that men are sent into heinous sitations
What are heinous situations? Uvdale? Thank god those strong brave burly men where there to let those kids get slaughtered
There's an expression to describe the conversational tactic of using very rare disastrous choices by someone to criticize an entire group behavior through time of which that someone was part of, but i don't remember it.
Like say criticizing all mexicans in the USA if one mexican in the USA rapes someone
There's an expression to describe the conversational tactic of using very rare disastrous choices by someone to criticize an entire group behavior through time of which that someone was part of, but i don't remember it.
Like say criticizing all mexicans in the USA if one mexican in the USA rapes someone
Cool, so anyway, how about those questions he asked?
There are a lot more physically demanding jobs than cops, or jobs that would require the workers to be stronger - imo, a firefighter needs a lot more stamina and strength than cops. They do preform or attempt a lot of rescues that comes down to mostly strenght - so do cops but much less. And of course, the failures of most cops isn't due to their inability to move a dresser to save a cat or because they got body slammed because they skipped pectoral day, its psychological issues.
But it's also silly to say that a cops or firefighters, all else equal, don't have an advantage with an increase in physical strength - which is what your quoted is strongly suggesting at face value. And folks don't need to be afraid to say that because it turns conversations like this into pure garbage.
Women are underrepresented in SWAT teams compared to their proportion in law enforcement in general. And it's incredible this isn't obviously known to you
Cool, but that doesn't answer either of the two questions. I'll repeat them here for you, since you seem to not have any idea what they were.
"What data do you have to back up the assumption that men are sent into heinous situations?"
"What are heinous situations?"
There are a lot more physically demanding jobs than cops, or jobs that would require the workers to be stronger - imo, a firefighter needs a lot more stamina and strength than cops. They do preform or attempt a lot of rescues that comes down to mostly strenght - so do cops but much less. And of course, the failures of most cops isn't due to their inability to move a dresser to save a cat or because they got body slammed because they skipped pectoral day, its psychological issues.
But it's also
No. The key to the question is the "on average" part. "On average" was used to justify the preference when we are not talking about the average strength of the entire population, we are talking about the strength of those who are police officers. It's frustrating to have to keep explaining this.
People seem to be saying that since men are stronger than women on average then it is impossible for a female police officer to be strong enough to do the job she has been hired to do. I hope you can see that this is a non-sequitur.
People have accused me of being obtuse here, but I'm not the one that tried to justify not wanting a female officer because of the average strength of the female population instead of the specific strength of female police officers. Again, being less strong on average does not imply that a female officer can never be strong enough to do the job of a police officer.
Cool, but that doesn't answer either of the two questions. I'll repeat them here for you, since you seem to not have any idea what they were.
"What data do you have to back up the assumption that men are sent into heinous situations?"
"What are heinous situations?"
"Those which need SWAT TEAMS" ffs
No. The key to the question is the "on average" part. "On average" was used to justify the preference when we are not talking about the average strength of the entire population, we are talking about the strength of those who are police officers. It's frustrating to have to keep explaining this.
People seem to be saying that since men are stronger than women on average then it is impossible for a female police officer to be strong enough to do the job she has been hired to do. I hope you can see
I don't know or care what someone else was implying.
It's pretty ****ing simple, women can be exceptional cops, both out of the fact that a lot of women are stronger than men and being a cop doesn't even require the strength that is purported to be needed, imo.
That can easily be said and true while also saying that men are stronger on average than women and that strength could benefit them in certain areas over women - just like being a women can benefit them in certain spots than being a man.
I don't get why we get so damn sensitive over this discussion. Maybe its a man thing.
There are a lot more physically demanding jobs than cops, or jobs that would require the workers to be stronger - imo, a firefighter needs a lot more stamina and strength than cops. They do preform or attempt a lot of rescues that comes down to mostly strenght - so do cops but much less. And of course, the failures of most cops isn't due to their inability to move a dresser to save a cat or because they got body slammed because they skipped pectoral day, its psychological issues.
But it's also
this 100%
absolute cult we're dealing with here that like to deny reality in order to sound progressive and just
That's cool, but you responded to my post that was responding to them, so I supplied the context. I am certainly not requesting that you care.
That's fair, but to end this convo with a bit of a segue, the amount of physical strength needed between a cop and a firefighter, imo is dramatic. The amount of equipment and tools they rush around to break doors, move objects and water and people is on a whole other category. And they constantly do that **** as opposed to a much more rare situation with a cop.
They definitely wish that they had the Hulk by their side to toss around equipment in a lot of instances - or the She Hulk.
There are a lot more physically demanding jobs than cops, or jobs that would require the workers to be stronger -
Yeah. I install solar panels on roofs and have mostly on, but off for a few years, for the last 17 years. I've never seen a woman doing it or roofing at all ever. I'm a medium to moderately strong dude - pretty darn good for my age - and the work puts me at my limits. I know some women could do it, but not that many and most men couldn't do it either.
A cop though? Yeah, a woman can be a perfectly good cop. And, this is speculation and sexist, but I think possibly less prone to the over-aggression that some cops display.
no u
like you literally agree with my point by saying this below
Yeah. I install solar panels on roofs and have mostly on, but off for a few years, for the last 17 years. I've never seen a woman doing it or roofing at all ever. I'm a medium to moderately strong dude - pretty darn good for my age - and the work puts me at my limits. I know some women could do it, but not that many and most men couldn't do it either.
A cop though? Yeah, a woman can be a perfectly good cop. And, this is speculation and sexist, but I think possibly less prone to the over-agg
but then still feel the need to insult me for a comment i made which aligns with your own perspective on this issue
you're so biased with rage and you can't even see it - massive drop in the sklansky power rankings if he saw this
Construction doesn't have to be as male-only as it is though. A lot of things are designed for someone to have to be a certain strength or higher, but for every job it's recognized that after a limit you need more leverage or a power tool. Like a bundle of shingles is about 60lbs. Can you carry around a bundle of shingles? Can you put one on your shoulder and walk up a ladder? Well, every roofer can. But they could package them in 25lb bundles too. They don't because there are enough people to do roofing who can handle a 60lb bundle.
