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 orca.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!ariels
From: ariels@orca.UUCP (Ariel Shattan)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Life Expectancy
Message-ID: <1517@orca.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 21-May-85 12:37:43 EDT
Article-I.D.: orca.1517
Posted: Tue May 21 12:37:43 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 23-May-85 03:12:56 EDT
References: <2244@decwrl.UUCP>
Organization: sixes and sevens
Lines: 21


 
> It is interesting to note that in at least one very important way nature has
> the opposite bias [that is, against men instead of against women].  Namely,
> the life expectancy of females is roughly 10% greater than that for males.

Actually, longer life expectancy for women is fairly recent.  About
a hundred years ago, men were expected to go through at least 2 wives (no
divorce).  Women died young, mostly of childbirth and complications
relating to pregnancy and childbirth.  This began to change with Pasteur
and the advent of antiseptic practices. Then Margaret Sanger came
along with birth control information for the masses, and women were
freed from conceiving and bearing too many children too close
together.  

So "nature" (before modern medicine) did not gift women with longer
lives.  It took modern medical advances and women deciding to control 
their own bodies.  

Ariel (historical perspective helps) Shattan
..!rektronix!orca!ariels