Reference no: EM133237587
The following article was written by Joseph Truckster and is found in the May 2016 issue of Construction in Canada magazine.
Construction work is hard, backbreaking labour. Men on the construction site put in long hours of heavy lifting and hard, hot, and dirty work. There's been a lot of discussion recently about attracting more women to enter a career in construction. The Canadian Association of Women in Construction exists for the sole purpose of getting more women in construction careers. There is even talk that there should be a "hire women quota" for construction companies, especially those who are using government funding. Now, I'm not sexist, and I'm all for equal rights, but I believe some jobs are for men and some jobs are for women. A construction site is not the place for women to be: It's a man's domain.
It is well known that women are more sensitive than men. Sensitivity is an important skill: Teachers, nurses, and social workers all need to be sensitive. That's why women dominate these fields. However, there is no room for sensitivity on a construction site. No one on the site cares if you're feeling down or having troubles at home or if your friend slighted you in some way. These typical conversations that women have are not welcome on the construction site, and they lead to a lack of productivity on the site. We are there to work and to work hard, not to gossip and chit chat about our day. Our conversations are solely about the work we are doing, and our conversations are full of obscenities. I don't want to have to edit my language just because there's a sensitive woman on the site. Sensitivity has its place in our world, just not on the construction site.
It's also not sexist to admit that men are stronger than women. Everybody knows this: It's a biological fact. The construction site is not an easy place to work; the construction worker is strong and able to lift heavy boards and equipment. Women simply aren't strong enough to do the job on the site. I don't want to have to spend my time helping a woman lift something that a male worker would be able to lift on his own. Women on the site will ensure that everything will take twice as long if all the men are spending their time helping instead of doing their own work. There are many careers where heavy lifting and strength are not needed, and women should look for jobs in these areas.
Finally, it's not being sexist to point out that women have babies. How is a pregnant women supposed to work on the construction site? Pregnant women can't do anything but sit with their feet up. Is the job supposed to go on hold for nine months (plus a year maternity leave!)? Are the men on the site supposed to willingly do everything for the pregnant woman? Again, the job will take two or three times longer than it's supposed to take. Another fact is that once the baby is born and the woman returns from maternity leave, her mind is no longer on the job. She's too preoccupied wondering how her toddler is doing at day care. Or, she's leaving work early because her child is sick. Some jobs can accommodate the needs of a pregnant person and the needs of a mother. The construction site is not one of these careers. It is not the place to be preoccupied; it's far too dangerous and people could get killed. Women should seek out employment that is childbearing and mother friendly.
In the end, the construction site is not the place for women. They are too sensitive, not strong enough, and too preoccupied with their children. We shouldn't encourage "Hire Women Quotas," and we shouldn't be trying to attract women to a career in construction. In fact, we should be doing the opposite: discouraging women to enter a career in construction. There are many jobs --teachers, nurses, social worker -- that are far more suited to women's skills and talents. The construction site should be a women-free zone.
Read the following prompt, Women Free Construction Sites, and see if you can identify three logical fallacies present in it. Ideally, you will find an example of each, but if you find, for example, three hasty generalization fallacies, you'll be fine.