Paul, I remenber them very well. And I'm sorry that my question seems to have started this discord. It was a simple question or so I thought. Lady's, females, women are now fairly routine in many professions where one they were not. And as a result of Union Pacific's celebration of their first two, I simply wondered whether anyone knew how ubiquitous they were now in the profession. No intent to antagonize anyone or imply that there was (as Sienfeld would say "Not that any thing is wrong with that") any thought that was negative about the diversifying of the occupation.
And similarly to Deggesty's experience, my first encounter with a lady in train service was when Amtrak was still in its early years and on one of my milage trips I had ridden East to ride the Southern Railroad's train from Ashville to Salisbury that carried a dome car and traversed the loops. I continued North on the Piedmont to Charlottesville VA where I made a connection to Amtrak’s James Whitcomb Riley (Cardinal predecessor) to return home. When the JWR stopped, I found the porter was not male but a young (my estimate was middle twenty's) lady. After identifying my accomodation, I started to pick up my suitcase and she stopped me saying firmly and authoritatively "I"M YOUR PORTER" in a nice manor and proceeded to grab my suitcase and lead me to my room. She performed her duties and ran the car very professionally and had obviously undergone some thorough training and wanted to succeed. As a man, I, like Jimmy Carter famously said, have lusted over women but never strayed. As I would not want my daughter to be hasselled, I don't.
So please, as in the movie A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS, where Paul Scofield as Sir Thomas More says,"I mean no harm, I say no harm" let us do as Rodney King said "Can't We JUST Get Along" and not start fighting.
Thanks
Hello everyone,
Interesting read. I work in the tar sands from northern Alberta and we have a lot of women 400 ton rock truck drivers and also shovel operators. Women tend to be more gentle on equipment, but to get back on subject. In Germany is a women that owns her own locomotive, and hires herself out to the railroad. I know this is not english, and in Europe, but still interesting. Hope the link works.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SP_iNhaUxgU&t=121s
Frank
PS: Her locomotive is from the 40's and prefers this engine over the modern ones, also she does a lot of her own repairs.
"If you need a helping hand, you'll find one at the end of your arm."
1. Interesting thread. BLS53's initial remarks seemed clear enough.
2. Interesting that some feel the need to throw out their credentials on a forum that is for any and all with some interest in railroading.
3. One of the barriers I observed seems correlated with age, though clearly with some exceptions.
4. I think Semper Vaporo had it right.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Where I am at we have several female OTR drivers. I can tell you this much the women that drive our trucks well 90% of them can out run the men of the current generation we hire. When I was hired my boss went here is your job and said scream when you need help. Then we lost 2 people in the office and myself and one other person split their jobs until 1 replacement was finally hired 2 months ago after a 6 month wait.
I had one person go off on me in the office for me working to hard he was a newly hired driver. I looked him in the eyes and said you must not want to be able to run your truck then I am making sure all your permits your wizz quiz and all other information is entered into our system then. He goes all that while on the phone with the FMCSA on something else. I went what I sometimes juggle 6 things at once this is easy.
With my employer the term engineer is obsolete according to them. Instead of Engineers now we have "Locomotive Operators".
SD70M-2DudeAnd I wasn't going to say anything, but boy this thread escalated quickly.
It's been a while since we've had a good ol' fashioned insult everyone thread. They used to be more commonplace. People just need to get it out of their system, then it calms down.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
zugmann edblysard Now that I think about it…I nominate Zugman for the FDI (forum diversity instructor) position… I'd never survive the confirmation meetings.
edblysard Now that I think about it…I nominate Zugman for the FDI (forum diversity instructor) position…
I'd never survive the confirmation meetings.
Just lie a lot, or say you support accountability, or (what the hell) do both! Seems to work for everyone else.
And I wasn't going to say anything, but boy this thread escalated quickly. I thought Ed's original link was interesting and informative, and reminds us of how far we have come as a society while at the same time provoking thought about how much farther we still have to go.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
Disagreeing with another's opinion isn't so terrible. If it was no marriage would last beyond 30 minutes. Good discussions almost invariably involve differing opinions and viewpoints.
To Semper Vaporo:
But.....but....you expressed an opinion. And then explained it. And when I cautioned you about its possibly applicability, you excluded yourself for doing the same thing you chastise others for doing.
How very odd.
Okay, back to remaining silent. I promise.
OK, I've been reading all this ranting and now I'll join in with a couple of rants of my own.
One thing that irks me is people that jump to criticize anything someone says that might possibly be interpreted as being insensitive or politically incorrect.
Another thing that irks me is people who jump to criticize any suggestion that they may have said something that might be insensitive or politically incorrect.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
selector Semper Vaporo Personally, I think the lot of you should be ashamed! He expressed an opinion, which is all that any of US do when we type on this forum, and you jumped down his throat and someone even asked for an explanation, and when he provided it, you jumped on him again for doing so. BAH! to the lot of you! I expect you would want to limit your all-inclusive rant to somewhat fewer of us...?
Semper Vaporo Personally, I think the lot of you should be ashamed! He expressed an opinion, which is all that any of US do when we type on this forum, and you jumped down his throat and someone even asked for an explanation, and when he provided it, you jumped on him again for doing so. BAH! to the lot of you!
Personally, I think the lot of you should be ashamed! He expressed an opinion, which is all that any of US do when we type on this forum, and you jumped down his throat and someone even asked for an explanation, and when he provided it, you jumped on him again for doing so.
BAH! to the lot of you!
I expect you would want to limit your all-inclusive rant to somewhat fewer of us...?
I did! I left me out!
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
I will say this for the gentleman....he's no shrinking violet. He has made numerous attempts at explaining himself. I just wish, and I'll stay silent from now on, that he'd taken a less cryptic approach to his first observation. It left me wondering exactly what he meant, and this from a person with advanced education in human conflict studies who is well versed in needs theory, and who served for 30 years in human resources in the Canadian Armed Forces.
BLS53 - I thought maybe you would settle down and join in the group and play nice.
Doesn't look like this is going to happen. So far, you have had a major chip on your shoulder, you belittled the exact job that my relatives held for many years and that I aspired to become - except I was a "girl" and couldn't. You have yelled politics and traced your pedigree politically, which is a complete no-no on this forum (you need to read the rules) and this means that you will get this thread locked or completely obliterated.
It's too bad your temperment overshadows what could have been some good conversations.
The lock is coming....
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
BLS53 Let's face it. You're a locomotive engineer, with likely little more than a high school education. Nothing wrong with that, but you didn't come up with this phraseology on your own
Let's face it. You're a locomotive engineer, with likely little more than a high school education. Nothing wrong with that, but you didn't come up with this phraseology on your own
PS-I'm not even one of the "inner circle". Look at my post count.
Even more cool, I have a "catch phrase"..
Not sure what it is, but I got one, cause he said so!
23 17 46 11
Norm48327 BLS53 Issues resolved. Game over Thought you said you were done here.
BLS53 Issues resolved. Game over
Thought you said you were done here.
I found one post that I missed, that I felt like responding to. Is that OK? Nobody's forcing you to read it.
BLS53Issues resolved. Game over
Norm
edblysard Oh snap…micro aggressions and trigger words! Pre- disposed victim status. SJW group think. Well, since I was the one who pointed out how my engineer smelled, and that she was a she, and a lady too… Fact is, she does’ smell better than most men, she is a lady, (rare these days on the railroad, all the females out here seem to think they must curse like old sailors and look and dress like men) and her skin color matter not one bit, to her or to any of the rest of us. And yup, she was and still is beautiful, patronizing comment or not. The post was started because I received an email from UP about the subject, that’s the link to the article, and I though other, who don’t get these emails, might find it interesting. Then along comes a lonesome troll, stirs up some crap. And waits for some politically correct apologist here to cajole out of him the rest of his objection and of course, they also make it a point to plead that the troll stay… As for me? I don’t give a hoot, a troll is a troll no matter how well spoken, as far as I am concerned, he can go back where he came from, wouldn’t make a bit of difference here. Although if we are going to encourage thin skinned easily wounded Social Justice Warriors like this guy to post here, we will have to invest in a safe space and publish a list of trigger word and phrases, along with a political correct list of approved topics and then start a gender studies course, and then appoint a forum diversity instructor…any volunteers for the latter position?
You're way off base. I'm a retired Naval Aviation Officer with 26 years service, and have voted Republican all my life. I'm far from being a liberal, or social justice warrior.
The problem with both the far right and far left, is that you look for indications of membership in the opposing group in everything you read that you disagree with. This is ingrained by the media on both sides. The problem comes when you don't take the time to comprehend what your reading. I repeated over and over that my statements here were observational in nature, and socially and politically neutral. But you see a few trigger words (yeah the far right has them too) in my text, and you don't go any further. You make assumptions.
Let's face it. You're a locomotive engineer, with likely little more than a high school education. Nothing wrong with that, but you didn't come up with this phraseology on your own; SJW, trigger words,micro aggression, safe place. Those were all learned through the teachings of Limbaugh, O'Reilly, and Hannity. Just as your opposition learns from Maddow, DeGeneres, and Lemon.
The catch phrase of choice in this thread is "victim mentality". Any statement I make in response, is automatically stamped with having a "victim mentality". Nothing on here is a threat to my personal safety, so exactly what am I supposed to be a victim of? It's the incorrect use of a word that has been taught to you by your political mentors.
Each side is bunkered in with ideology, and ready to fight at a moments notice. I can go on another forum and be considered one of Trump's "basket of deplorables". It all depends on what side the forum audience leans towards. Regardless, they're always ready to throw out their catch phrases and assign their troll designation.
Murphy Siding BLS53 Murphy Siding BLS53 Mookie I disagree that your opening observation was benign. You came across, to me, as entering the forum looking for an argument. Other than trolls, I enjoy seeing new people or 'readers only' post. You know, counselor, you could have stated your case a little better as to why you are disagreeing with how the subject of women and jobs is being treated. I, for one, would have been interested in what your reasoning was. Instead you were so busy shooting toes off, you just didn't make any sense to me. Where in the heck did i say I was disagreeing with anything? Where did I take a stance on either side of women's rights issues? I've given no opinion on the subject. FOR THE LAST TIME, I WAS MAKING AN OBSERVATION THAT IT STRUCK ME AS STRANGE THAT IN THIS DAY AND AGE THIS TOPIC WAS BEING DISCUSSED. Not that it was wrong to do so. Not that I had an opposite opinion and wanted to start an argument. I'll be very candid, I'm now of the belief that this is a sensitive subject among the membership here. You look for conflict when there is none. You perceive I have an agenda, when I have none. You're the one's looking for an argument not me. It's just very strange that a subjective, one sentence comment, that says absolutely nothing about who I am, what I believe, or what I stand for, could cause such an outrage. The shooting of toes off doesn't make any sense to you, because I haven't shot anybody's toes off. Any manner of shooting from me, has been defensive, not offensive. I've been under attack here for 2 pages. Mostly because I stated this forum was exclusionary and elitist, and hurt some feelings. Not because of anything to do with women in the workplace. But I don't guess you read those other posts, and are still hung up on the women's issues. I'm guessing that Mookie might have a different perspective on this than you or I. I'm aware of her gender. I sense there's some conflict of opinion whether I'm a women's rights activist or a male chauvinist pig. Of course a public flogging inflicts more pain when you can attack the subject from both sides. Now that's actually kind of funny. You've just now embraced the victim person full bore. To me you don't seem like a women's rights activist or a male chauvinist pig. In fact, no one but you has even said that. You seem like someone who just enjoys the attention of saying "everybody's picking on me". Oops! Did that sound patronizing?
BLS53 Murphy Siding BLS53 Mookie I disagree that your opening observation was benign. You came across, to me, as entering the forum looking for an argument. Other than trolls, I enjoy seeing new people or 'readers only' post. You know, counselor, you could have stated your case a little better as to why you are disagreeing with how the subject of women and jobs is being treated. I, for one, would have been interested in what your reasoning was. Instead you were so busy shooting toes off, you just didn't make any sense to me. Where in the heck did i say I was disagreeing with anything? Where did I take a stance on either side of women's rights issues? I've given no opinion on the subject. FOR THE LAST TIME, I WAS MAKING AN OBSERVATION THAT IT STRUCK ME AS STRANGE THAT IN THIS DAY AND AGE THIS TOPIC WAS BEING DISCUSSED. Not that it was wrong to do so. Not that I had an opposite opinion and wanted to start an argument. I'll be very candid, I'm now of the belief that this is a sensitive subject among the membership here. You look for conflict when there is none. You perceive I have an agenda, when I have none. You're the one's looking for an argument not me. It's just very strange that a subjective, one sentence comment, that says absolutely nothing about who I am, what I believe, or what I stand for, could cause such an outrage. The shooting of toes off doesn't make any sense to you, because I haven't shot anybody's toes off. Any manner of shooting from me, has been defensive, not offensive. I've been under attack here for 2 pages. Mostly because I stated this forum was exclusionary and elitist, and hurt some feelings. Not because of anything to do with women in the workplace. But I don't guess you read those other posts, and are still hung up on the women's issues. I'm guessing that Mookie might have a different perspective on this than you or I. I'm aware of her gender. I sense there's some conflict of opinion whether I'm a women's rights activist or a male chauvinist pig. Of course a public flogging inflicts more pain when you can attack the subject from both sides.
Murphy Siding BLS53 Mookie I disagree that your opening observation was benign. You came across, to me, as entering the forum looking for an argument. Other than trolls, I enjoy seeing new people or 'readers only' post. You know, counselor, you could have stated your case a little better as to why you are disagreeing with how the subject of women and jobs is being treated. I, for one, would have been interested in what your reasoning was. Instead you were so busy shooting toes off, you just didn't make any sense to me. Where in the heck did i say I was disagreeing with anything? Where did I take a stance on either side of women's rights issues? I've given no opinion on the subject. FOR THE LAST TIME, I WAS MAKING AN OBSERVATION THAT IT STRUCK ME AS STRANGE THAT IN THIS DAY AND AGE THIS TOPIC WAS BEING DISCUSSED. Not that it was wrong to do so. Not that I had an opposite opinion and wanted to start an argument. I'll be very candid, I'm now of the belief that this is a sensitive subject among the membership here. You look for conflict when there is none. You perceive I have an agenda, when I have none. You're the one's looking for an argument not me. It's just very strange that a subjective, one sentence comment, that says absolutely nothing about who I am, what I believe, or what I stand for, could cause such an outrage. The shooting of toes off doesn't make any sense to you, because I haven't shot anybody's toes off. Any manner of shooting from me, has been defensive, not offensive. I've been under attack here for 2 pages. Mostly because I stated this forum was exclusionary and elitist, and hurt some feelings. Not because of anything to do with women in the workplace. But I don't guess you read those other posts, and are still hung up on the women's issues. I'm guessing that Mookie might have a different perspective on this than you or I.
BLS53 Mookie I disagree that your opening observation was benign. You came across, to me, as entering the forum looking for an argument. Other than trolls, I enjoy seeing new people or 'readers only' post. You know, counselor, you could have stated your case a little better as to why you are disagreeing with how the subject of women and jobs is being treated. I, for one, would have been interested in what your reasoning was. Instead you were so busy shooting toes off, you just didn't make any sense to me. Where in the heck did i say I was disagreeing with anything? Where did I take a stance on either side of women's rights issues? I've given no opinion on the subject. FOR THE LAST TIME, I WAS MAKING AN OBSERVATION THAT IT STRUCK ME AS STRANGE THAT IN THIS DAY AND AGE THIS TOPIC WAS BEING DISCUSSED. Not that it was wrong to do so. Not that I had an opposite opinion and wanted to start an argument. I'll be very candid, I'm now of the belief that this is a sensitive subject among the membership here. You look for conflict when there is none. You perceive I have an agenda, when I have none. You're the one's looking for an argument not me. It's just very strange that a subjective, one sentence comment, that says absolutely nothing about who I am, what I believe, or what I stand for, could cause such an outrage. The shooting of toes off doesn't make any sense to you, because I haven't shot anybody's toes off. Any manner of shooting from me, has been defensive, not offensive. I've been under attack here for 2 pages. Mostly because I stated this forum was exclusionary and elitist, and hurt some feelings. Not because of anything to do with women in the workplace. But I don't guess you read those other posts, and are still hung up on the women's issues.
Mookie I disagree that your opening observation was benign. You came across, to me, as entering the forum looking for an argument. Other than trolls, I enjoy seeing new people or 'readers only' post. You know, counselor, you could have stated your case a little better as to why you are disagreeing with how the subject of women and jobs is being treated. I, for one, would have been interested in what your reasoning was. Instead you were so busy shooting toes off, you just didn't make any sense to me.
I disagree that your opening observation was benign. You came across, to me, as entering the forum looking for an argument. Other than trolls, I enjoy seeing new people or 'readers only' post. You know, counselor, you could have stated your case a little better as to why you are disagreeing with how the subject of women and jobs is being treated. I, for one, would have been interested in what your reasoning was. Instead you were so busy shooting toes off, you just didn't make any sense to me.
Where in the heck did i say I was disagreeing with anything? Where did I take a stance on either side of women's rights issues? I've given no opinion on the subject. FOR THE LAST TIME, I WAS MAKING AN OBSERVATION THAT IT STRUCK ME AS STRANGE THAT IN THIS DAY AND AGE THIS TOPIC WAS BEING DISCUSSED. Not that it was wrong to do so. Not that I had an opposite opinion and wanted to start an argument.
I'll be very candid, I'm now of the belief that this is a sensitive subject among the membership here. You look for conflict when there is none. You perceive I have an agenda, when I have none. You're the one's looking for an argument not me. It's just very strange that a subjective, one sentence comment, that says absolutely nothing about who I am, what I believe, or what I stand for, could cause such an outrage.
The shooting of toes off doesn't make any sense to you, because I haven't shot anybody's toes off. Any manner of shooting from me, has been defensive, not offensive. I've been under attack here for 2 pages. Mostly because I stated this forum was exclusionary and elitist, and hurt some feelings. Not because of anything to do with women in the workplace. But I don't guess you read those other posts, and are still hung up on the women's issues.
I'm guessing that Mookie might have a different perspective on this than you or I.
I'm aware of her gender. I sense there's some conflict of opinion whether I'm a women's rights activist or a male chauvinist pig. Of course a public flogging inflicts more pain when you can attack the subject from both sides.
Now that's actually kind of funny. You've just now embraced the victim person full bore. To me you don't seem like a women's rights activist or a male chauvinist pig. In fact, no one but you has even said that. You seem like someone who just enjoys the attention of saying "everybody's picking on me". Oops! Did that sound patronizing?
Issues resolved. Game over
Seems like I get into trouble when I yell @ trolls or figure there may be someone nice for once. Oh well, at least youse guys can't get to me to pinch me! Neener, neener. Too bad, too - I have some really dynamite smelling cologne....
Paul_D_North_Jr zugmann . . . If bad humor got you kicked off of here, I would have been given the boot years ago. . . . Naah - we have a thread for that ! - PDN.
zugmann . . . If bad humor got you kicked off of here, I would have been given the boot years ago. . . .
Naah - we have a thread for that !
- PDN.
I shall never be bound by thread limitations!
Ulrich I haven't seen anything here that I would call offensive.. some comments were a little patronizing, but that's hardly anything to get upset about. And the plumber/urologist joke was funny.. even my wife thinks so. I agree with you about some comments being patronizing.. but as I stated earlier, knowing the poster, they weren't intended as such. Relax and have fun.
I haven't seen anything here that I would call offensive.. some comments were a little patronizing, but that's hardly anything to get upset about. And the plumber/urologist joke was funny.. even my wife thinks so. I agree with you about some comments being patronizing.. but as I stated earlier, knowing the poster, they weren't intended as such. Relax and have fun.
The joke was what do you call a male plumber, anyhow. And it isn't like a male who plumbs, but a someone who plumbs a male, oh forget it... no use explaining a bad joke.
If bad humor got you kicked off of here, I would have been given the boot years ago.
But I hereby apologize to all plumbers, urologists, and all gender identities. The joke was made in bad taste, but not intended to offend anyone. Zugmann is regretful and sorrowful and asks for your forgiveness.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.