Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site tektools.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!tektronix!daemon!tektools!barbaraz
From: barbaraz@tektools.UUCP (Barbara Zanzig)
Newsgroups: net.singles
Subject: Re: Dividing line - girl/woman
Message-ID: <158@tektools.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Mar-85 16:13:24 EST
Article-I.D.: tektools.158
Posted: Thu Mar 14 16:13:24 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Mar-85 03:34:39 EST
References: <779@uwmacc.UUCP>
Reply-To: barbaraz@tektools.UUCP (Barbara Zanzig)
Distribution: net
Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR
Lines: 23
Summary: 

Hey, folks:

What is all this stuff about setting up some (male, usually, but
external in any case) standard for deciding when a girl is really
a woman??  I think one of the main points of feminism is that
it isn't your business to impose your standards on us!!

A girl becomes a woman when *she* thinks she's a woman.  There *is*
no meaningful standard that can be imposed.  This begs the question
of what to call her, of course - why don't you ask *her* what she prefers?
If you think of yourself as a man, grant her the same courtesy of deciding
for herself which she is.

The generic problem that's causing all the flames and that has been
sidestepped in postings so far is the mental attitude of both men and women
who think of *all* females as immature, therefore girls.  This generic
problem is why feminists have trouble with the term "girl", and it's
also why you'll hear some 50-year old females refer to themselves as
girls.  If you have the above opinion, you have an attitude problem.  If
you don't, all you really have is a semantic problem.

Barbara Zanzig
{allegra, ihnp4, decvax, ucbvax, ...}!tektronix!tektools!barbaraz