Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site timeinc.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!vax135!timeinc!greenber From: greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) Newsgroups: net.women Subject: Re: PMS and incompetence Message-ID: <324@timeinc.UUCP> Date: Wed, 17-Jul-85 15:40:55 EDT Article-I.D.: timeinc.324 Posted: Wed Jul 17 15:40:55 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 21-Jul-85 03:24:03 EDT References: <993@ubc-vision.CDN> <202@ihlpl.UUCP> <282@timeinc.UUCP> <206@ihlpl.UUCP> <592@mtung.UUCP> <173@whuts.UUCP> Reply-To: greenber@timeinc.UUCP (Ross M. Greenberg) Organization: Time, Inc. - New York Lines: 53 In article <173@whuts.UUCP> amc@whuts.UUCP (COHILL) writes: (Quoting Julia Harper): >> >> Women can at least tell >> better where in their cycle they are, and plan around it. > > >In *my* experience, the biggest problem women have with PMS is not >the physical/psychological side effects, but just plain 'fessing up >that there *are* some side effects.... > Well, it looks like the rules of the game have changed somewhat: many of the women in this group use the idea that 1) it is okay to have physical/psychological side effects due to their menstrual cycle, 2) that they are somehow better off than men, since they can "recognize" these side effects, 3) that these side effects have no effect on their work or personal performance or that they can *keep it under control*. I certainly agree with 1). I ask for *any* proof that men have *any* kind of cycle as per 2), and feel that a person that has to exert *any* effort to keep something under control is somehow less efficient in other concerns during that time. An interesting question: Let's assume that a women were to run for President, Prime Minister (Hi, Maggie!), or whatever. Should her PMS (or lack thereof) be taken into consideration? No flames here, please, but since *some* women get VERY weird due to PMS, and these women (if elected to office) would conceivable have their emotions doing weird things during some important decision process, shouldn't this be taken into account? This is a serious question! Given that we coulda had Geraldine in office, this hidden and lets-not-even-talk-about-it subject does have bearing on *my* life today. Before answering with letter bombs and denying that any women gets weird: please realize that I'm not attacking *all* women or even those that have strong PMS. I'm just wondering if such a thing should be taken into effect, and how does one go about "testing" for such things (I wouldn't take the word of a politician for *anything*!)? -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Ross M. Greenberg @ Time Inc, New York --------->{vax135 | ihnp4}!timeinc!greenber<--------- I highly doubt that Time Inc. would make me their spokesperson. ---- "I was riding a wombat this morning, 'till it broke its leg. I had to shoot it" -- Ranger on Camel