Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utcsrgv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!dave
From: dave@utcsrgv.UUCP (Dave Sherman)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Women's natural superiority at sympathizing
Message-ID: <2464@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 13-Oct-83 01:17:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: utcsrgv.2464
Posted: Thu Oct 13 01:17:25 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 13-Oct-83 12:07:33 EDT
References: <2461@utcsrgv.UUCP>
Organization: The Law Society of Upper Canada, Toronto
Lines: 19

Now wait a minute, Dave Mason!

I never for a moment suggested that women are any less "natural"
at "deciding/thinking/advising/estimating ... in the world of work".
Being better at X does not imply being worse at Y, particularly when
X and Y are in totally different spheres.

My wife, for example, is a chartered accountant (==CPA in the U.S.).
She is highly competent at her job - deciding/thinking/advising/estimating,
or whatever you want to call it. That has nothing whatever to do with
gender. When it comes to certain interpersonal things, however, she
has certain traits/abilities which I lack. Yes, I know, that's only one
person. But the point is that by acknowledging that women have certain
natural abilities I am in no way denigrating their ability to compete
with men in other spheres.

Dave Sherman
-- 
 {cornell,decvax,ihnp4,linus,utzoo,uw-beaver}!utcsrgv!lsuc!dave