From: Lady Carrigaholt 



CE wrote:

> On Mar 28, 9:24 am, "CE"  wrote:
> > On Mar 28, 8:43 am, "Joseph Meehan"

> > wrote:
> >
> > >     Are you just a Troll or do you really believe that 1950 stuff?
> >
> > What 1950s' stuff? This is the way it is in 2007.
>
> Here are just two facts for you. According to the United States Fire
> Association, there were an estimated 1,136,650 firefighters in the
> United States in 2005 (career: 313,300, volunteer: 823,350). According
> to a web site for women in firefighting services, there are about
> 6,200 women currently work as full-time, career firefighters and
> officers in the United States and another 40,000 women estimated to be
> volunteer firefighters in that country.
>
> That means that even as recently as 2005, less than five percent of
> all firefighters were women. Among career firefighters, the percentage
> is even lower, with less than two percent of career firefighters in
> the United States being women.
>
> Given these statistics, is it really an outdated notion to consider
> men as protectors of women and children when it comes to fighting
> fires?

When I was in medical school, 20 out of 200 students in my class were women.
The last graduating class from the same school had over 50% women graduates.
Things change, perhaps even with firefighters eventually.


--
Caillean, Lady Carrigaholt

"A revolution without dancing is a revolution not worth having"

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag