paritosh
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2008
- Messages
- 3,363
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
I am merely speaking from a medical perspective...if you happen to know a doctor...or are married...you'd know that the first child HAS to be before 30...to avoid complications...and there are many that may arise from a postponed impregnation...still we do see many women not adhering to that...it's an individual's choice...Very right...However shouldn't this be a choice of women??? I am a software engg, and see so many women above 30 who are unmarried...What does that imply??? They have made a choice and want to move forward with career rather than getting involved in a family...Some are doing both...Anyways i have repeatedly said that here we are talking about national security and i don't give two hoots about gender equality(though i am sensitive about it)...however we should not be biased and reject just because the person even though well qualified is a women....we are missing on a significant talent pool just because of our pre-conceived notions...Don't you think so????
If my contract says that a women cannot be pregnant before this age and still women wants to join what does that imply??? On what grounds are we then rejecting them??
same way people smoke and drink the world over...our lifestyle is a
b!cht...
my brother's wife is an officer...and so is my girlfriend...trust me I know what I am talking about...No your are very right...We all know what happens...but again rejecting them because women are typically married at an early age is a lame excuse for me....If being married doesn't effect the effectiveness of a men fighter pilot how come it will effect the worthiness of a women fighter pilot??? Are we saying that women are too dumb to get pregnant even if they don't want???? or are we saying men are insensitive about their families and thus they don't care???
let us not mix performance variance with gender differences...
you can prove me wrong quite easily...as there have been better female pilots and infact women have equaled men in almost all fields...but the point remains that unless there is a dire need...we should indeed squeeze the most out of our flying cadets...handling women here is a tad messy...and as you'd agree the benefit of doubt always goes to the word of yore and what has been followed till the doubt arises...
nothing against the capabilities of women...just that if they are recruited surely a small percentage WOULD crib...WOULD suffer from family pressure....WOULD suffer from complications arising from a late pregnancy...and she has more will power to deal with it...We keep on forgetting that women's might be considered physically weak but they are emotionally for more stronger...Reminds me of OSHO...in one of his book he said a women can do any task that a men can do with 4 times more intensity....
the physical benchmark standards for women serving are already reduced...Now consider if we don't relax our required physical strength level for a women to be combat fit...complemented with all the other restrictions of getting pregnant and what not and still we get women who want to join IAF, IA, IN..just imagine the kind of motivation they have got and the potential
to finish this post off...I'd tell you something that I have realized and which you'd also realize if you happen to come in a prolonged contact of some pilot....they truly understand the value of the machine they are trained to fly..they know that the value of their life marginally exceeds the value of the machine they master...
somewhere I read that a lot of pilots lose precious seconds in cases of mechanical failure while trying to salvage control over their planes when they tend to question the real importance of their own survival versus the worthiness of the machine they try to save...and a lot many die in this freak state of confusion....I request you not to draw gender parallels here...and understand this from the point of view of the generals who value their machines with the same zest..