|
Post by lizardgirl on Mar 7, 2005 10:48:42 GMT -5
That's because there is no such thing as a "female helmet". A hard hat is a hard hat, no matter who wears it. They come in different sizes, but that's the only difference. pitbulllady Um, sorry, but you kind of missed the point. I didn't say that there wasn't a female helmet, I said that they didn't have any females WEARING helmets, because monsters who wore helmets (most likely scare assistants) seem to work on the Scare Floor, apart from Scarers. See? So, since there wasn't any females caught in that particular shot wearing helmets which signify that they are Scare Assistants on the scare floors, then, as far as we can tell, there weren't any female scare assistants.
|
|
|
Post by pitbulllady on Mar 7, 2005 14:23:19 GMT -5
That little thing Mike talks to, the one that just seems to consist of two tentacles and a pair of eyes(kinda looks like a sea cuccumber, only the "face" is in the middle), has on a hardhat. I think we've established that her name is Marge, after all, which means she is a female. In one scene, she is seen waddling towards a door station on Scare Floor F, wearing a hard hat, so she must be a Scare Assistant.
pitbulllady
|
|
|
Post by RandallBoggs on Mar 7, 2005 15:03:09 GMT -5
Yes. In my Employee Database, that is Marge.
Funny. I, and even Randall himself, have wondered how she actually got the job.
|
|
|
Post by lizardgirl on Mar 8, 2005 11:25:15 GMT -5
Okay then, makes sense. ;D
|
|
tmazanec1
Randall's Head Servant (300-799)
Posts: 463
|
Post by tmazanec1 on Sept 20, 2006 23:36:35 GMT -5
I heard a theory that humans have tended to be selected by evolution for a "women and children first" mentality in times of danger. A human tribe (or hominid band) that loses most of its males can quickly repopulate. One that loses most of its females is in trouble. And scaring creatures who are believed to kill with a touch, have laser vision, mind control powers and all the other garp human kids are believed to have is definitely hazardous duty.
|
|
|
Post by RandallBoggs on Sept 21, 2006 13:52:20 GMT -5
Wouldn't that be considered sexist ^_^
|
|
|
Post by lizardgirl on Sept 21, 2006 14:45:25 GMT -5
Technically, yes, but it's still our natural instinct to put women and children first.
|
|
|
Post by RandallBoggs on Sept 21, 2006 14:48:12 GMT -5
Hehehe ^_^
|
|