EPThttp://www.fbijobs.gov/11131.asp
FBI Exercises
| Blogs > EsX_Raptor |
|
EsX_Raptor
United States2802 Posts
http://www.fbijobs.gov/11131.asp | ||
|
DeathByMonkeys
United States742 Posts
| ||
|
NonFactor
Sweden698 Posts
| ||
|
RoieTRS
United States2569 Posts
| ||
|
Gliche
United States811 Posts
| ||
micronesia
United States24743 Posts
edit: not sure but I doubt I'd do well XD | ||
|
BanZu
United States3329 Posts
On June 01 2009 13:35 micronesia wrote: Why are there different standards for females than males? Do they have different job responsibilities? edit: not sure but I doubt I'd do well XD Women typically lack the athleticism that men have. Just how it is. :/ Sit-ups: 3 300m: 10 Push-ups: 5 1.5 mile: 10 The running is easy for me but I suck at sit-ups and push-ups | ||
|
Avidkeystamper
United States8556 Posts
| ||
|
Mista
Singapore1022 Posts
| ||
|
thunk
United States6233 Posts
You guys can also take a look at the SEAL ones too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEALs * 500 yd (460 m) swim using breast or side stroke in under 12:30 with a competitive time of under 10:30 * At least 42 push-ups in 2 minutes with a competitive count of 79 or more * At least 50 sit-ups in 2 minutes with a competitive count of 79 or more * At least 6 pull-ups from a dead hang (no time limit) with a competitive count of 11 or more * Run 1.5 mi (2.4 km) in boots and trousers in under 11:30 with a competitive time of 10:20 or less | ||
|
micronesia
United States24743 Posts
On June 01 2009 13:41 BanZu wrote: Women typically lack the athleticism that men have. Just how it is. :/ Sit-ups: 3 300m: 10 Push-ups: 5 1.5 mile: 10 The running is easy for me but I suck at sit-ups and push-ups Then why are women hired for the FBI if they are worse at the physical aspects of the job? Isn't that putting them and others in danger? Obviously I'm not trying to suggest that the FBI shouldn't hire women, but this issue in general is one that frustrates me. | ||
|
DownMaxX
Canada1311 Posts
| ||
|
Gliche
United States811 Posts
On June 01 2009 13:59 micronesia wrote: Then why are women hired for the FBI if they are worse at the physical aspects of the job? Isn't that putting them and others in danger? Obviously I'm not trying to suggest that the FBI shouldn't hire women, but this issue in general is one that frustrates me. Because not everyone who is looking to work for the FBI is male, and not everyone who is qualified in non-physical aspects is male. | ||
|
JeeJee
Canada5652 Posts
i'll do this whole sha-bang tomorrow and post my results, instead of just estimating though ^____^ actually i won't be able to do the 300m sprint without going out of my way for it, so i'll just assume 0 points on that or something | ||
|
XoXiDe
United States620 Posts
| ||
|
overpool
United States191 Posts
On June 01 2009 14:07 Gliche wrote: Because not everyone who is looking to work for the FBI is male, and not everyone who is qualified in non-physical aspects is male. I don't think you understand. It doesn't make sense to have different standards for men and women because there's no reason that an unfit man could not do the same job as a fit woman. These tests exist because the FBI believes their "Special Agents" need to be fit enough to, e.g., run 1.5 miles in under 12:24. If it's not the case that ALL of their Special Agents need to be able to do this, what is the point of administering this test? If it is the case that all of their Special Agents need to do this, why are women who will not be able to perform on the field allowed to pass the test? | ||
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
| ||
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
On June 01 2009 14:07 Gliche wrote: Because not everyone who is looking to work for the FBI is male, and not everyone who is qualified in non-physical aspects is male. That doesn't explain why women could get the job with a lowered physical requirement. Then they should either lower the physical standards or make the standards same for both men and women. People should be judged by merit. | ||
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
| ||
|
decafchicken
United States20078 Posts
| ||
|
overpool
United States191 Posts
On June 01 2009 14:35 Kennigit wrote: lol women are physically weaker than men. Obviously they have lower standards. I apologize if I'm not making myself clear enough. If the goal of the fitness test was to accept the top 5% of all men and the top 5% of all women, it would make perfect sense to have lower standards for women. However, I assume the test is meant to measure the amount of physical fitness that would be required in an emergency scenario. Since there is no reason to expect that women would need to be less strong in an emergency scenario, it illogical, not "obvious", to have different standards for women and men. | ||
|
Vivi57
United States6599 Posts
which is a higher score than my roomate's friend's halo score after a 1v1 to 50 | ||
JWD
United States12607 Posts
1-minute sit-ups: probably 58+, but honestly I haven't done this since high school so I'll be conservative and say 50, which gives me 6 points. 300 m sprint: wack distance...I have no idea. I'm not a very fast sprinter so I guess I'll say 4 points here. push-ups: 10 points. 1.5-mile run: 10 points. ~30 points total...come on guys, 12 can't be that hard. I mean, you get 5 just for being able to do 50 push-ups. | ||
|
anTi_
United States499 Posts
| ||
|
xhuwin
United States476 Posts
300 M: 7 Push ups: 7 1.5 Mile: 5 or 6 | ||
|
Valio
Finland77 Posts
| ||
|
Gliche
United States811 Posts
On June 01 2009 14:40 overpool wrote: I apologize if I'm not making myself clear enough. If the goal of the fitness test was to accept the top 5% of all men and the top 5% of all women, it would make perfect sense to have lower standards for women. However, I assume the test is meant to measure the amount of physical fitness that would be required in an emergency scenario. Since there is no reason to expect that women would need to be less strong in an emergency scenario, it illogical, not "obvious", to have different standards for women and men. I get what you mean. The system operating at 100% efficiency should have one standard to test for physical viablility as a field agent, because the important thing here is not to piss off women wanting equal hiring opportunities, but to have fully qualified field agents. The double standard here seems to violate this efficiency. I'm thinking that the real standard is equal to the minimum standard for women, but they're just not telling us. With the minimum standard being so low (way too low imo), men should have no problem with the bar set a little higher for them because men are just physically more capable than women overall. If it's really just for looks and political reasons, then thats just -_-. | ||
|
CharlieMurphy
United States22895 Posts
| ||
|
Jibba
United States22883 Posts
On June 01 2009 19:31 Gliche wrote: I get what you mean. The system operating at 100% efficiency should have one standard to test for physical viablility as a field agent, because the important thing here is not to piss off women wanting equal hiring opportunities, but to have fully qualified field agents. The double standard here seems to violate this efficiency. I'm thinking that the real standard is equal to the minimum standard for women, but they're just not telling us. With the minimum standard being so low (way too low imo), men should have no problem with the bar set a little higher for them because men are just physically more capable than women overall. If it's really just for looks and political reasons, then thats just -_-. It might be, but the physical attributes are a very minor part of being an FBI agent. My guess is the physical requirements are there specifically so they can weed out people not in the top % of each sex, but they just don't explicitly say that. It's not like FBI agents actually run and jump and chase down criminals like in movies. They're mostly investigators. | ||
|
Frits
11782 Posts
I don't see anyone failing this test with very little practice, the whole thing seems pointless. | ||
|
ZeeTemplar
United States557 Posts
| ||
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
| ||
|
XoXiDe
United States620 Posts
On June 01 2009 22:28 Jibba wrote: It might be, but the physical attributes are a very minor part of being an FBI agent. My guess is the physical requirements are there specifically so they can weed out people not in the top % of each sex, but they just don't explicitly say that. It's not like FBI agents actually run and jump and chase down criminals like in movies. They're mostly investigators. Basically what Jibba said, I think generally the point is simply to see if you are fit enough and healthy enough by their standards to your respective gender and you are not going to die on the job exerting yourself lol. There are also other requirements to being an agent that are probably far more important than the physical test and that should warrant more attention. There are many different fields an agent might be a part of, I am sure in the few that will certainly require physical activity (maybe counter terrorism) the women probably have to be able to perform on par. But a lot of an agents time is probably spent behind a desk and dealing with paperwork, investigations, accounting fraud etc. like other law enforcement officers. | ||
|
cujo2k
Canada1044 Posts
On June 01 2009 13:59 micronesia wrote: Then why are women hired for the FBI if they are worse at the physical aspects of the job? Isn't that putting them and others in danger? Obviously I'm not trying to suggest that the FBI shouldn't hire women, but this issue in general is one that frustrates me. Well to be fair, I'm sure that there are some types of undercover jobs where being a good looking female would be more useful than being a guy. | ||
|
zzzzsleepyhead
United States103 Posts
On June 01 2009 14:39 decafchicken wrote: They should make lower mental requirements for women since men are smarter too. LOL. I'd get around 12ish, give or take 2.... School really takes the conditioning right out of ya. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24743 Posts
On June 01 2009 15:18 JWD wrote: ~30 points total...come on guys, 12 can't be that hard. I mean, you get 5 just for being able to do 50 push-ups. I just noticed this and... 50 pushups isn't that easy for everyone lol. If you have a decent sized frame and don't work out a fair bit then that's impossible without changing it up and doing a lot of strength training. | ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
On June 01 2009 14:35 Kennigit wrote: lol women are physically weaker than men. Obviously they have lower standards. It's not really relevant though cause some of the fastest and hardest people i know are girls. If they can hold their own then people shouldn't care. but see women also more useful than men becaues they have vaginas | ||
|
evanthebouncy!
United States12796 Posts
| ||
|
h3r1n6
Iceland2039 Posts
| ||
|
Clasic
Bosnia-Herzegovina1437 Posts
On June 01 2009 13:29 Gliche wrote: I actually expected it to be a little harder. Everything looks easily trainable except for the 300 meter dash. 1-2 months routine exercise and almost everyone can hit 12 points easy. 3 Weeks. | ||
|
Clasic
Bosnia-Herzegovina1437 Posts
On June 04 2009 10:25 evanthebouncy! wrote: but see women also more useful than men becaues they have vaginas Epic going on sig. | ||
| ||
