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 tekecs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!hao!hplabs!tektronix!orca!tekecs!jeffw
From: jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow)
Newsgroups: net.women,net.flame
Subject: Re: now is the time for all good men...
Message-ID: <5393@tekecs.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 1-Jun-85 19:25:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: tekecs.5393
Posted: Sat Jun  1 19:25:12 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 3-Jun-85 04:36:03 EDT
References: <749@oddjob.UUCP> <880@mnetor.UUCP>
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR
Lines: 33
Xref: linus net.women:5058 net.flame:9414

>>Your first mistake, beth, JB, giant, or whatever it is you call yourself, was
>>to stoop to a snide, name-calling tack.  If you want to discuss this topic
>>man-to-man, grow up.  You can save your childish backbiting for sorority-house
> ^^^^^^^^^^  ^^^^^^^                     ^^^^^^^^                ^^^^^^^^
> 
>>meetings or wherever it is that kind of thing is deemed acceptable.  Your second
>>mistake, beth@sphinx, was to completely misunderstand my proposal.  I proposed
>>that grownup females be referred to as men.  This constitutes a significant 
>>departure from the current use of the English language.  You claimed that 
>>I proposed that no change be made.  Clearly, simple logic escapes you.  I'd say
>> you have a lot to learn.
>> 
>>                                             Cheryl Stewart
>
> AHA, now we come to the crux of it!  women are men until they misbehave at
> which point they are women (or girls) again.   Being female is an immature
> state and being male is a mature one.  You are not proposing to stay with
> the status quo, you are actually proposing we go back to the way things 
> were 100 years ago.   Well, Cheryl, no deal.  It's been tried before and it
> didn't work.  I feel sorry for you that you were born in the wrong century,
> but there are probably enough men around you who wished they were still
> there that you can probably live happily ever after.

I'm sure Cheryl can speak for herself, but I can't resist...

Nice try, Sophie, but it won't wash. Cheryl's use of "man-to-man" is only
consistent with her proposal; "childish" does not refer to either sex, and
"sorority" would remain in the language as an association of a certain type
of men. Nowhere does Cheryl imply that misbehaving men are to be called women.
Why did you think she did?

					wanna fight? :-)
					Jeff Winslow