Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihu1m.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!mhuxv!mhuxh!mhuxj!mhuxn!ihnp4!ihu1m!gadfly
From: gadfly@ihu1m.UUCP (Gadfly)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: PMS and incompetence
Message-ID: <532@ihu1m.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 20-Jul-85 13:01:46 EDT
Article-I.D.: ihu1m.532
Posted: Sat Jul 20 13:01:46 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 24-Jul-85 21:05:54 EDT
References: <993@ubc-vision.CDN> <202@ihlpl.UUCP> <282@timeinc.UUCP> <206@ihlpl.UUCP> <592@mtung.UUCP> <173@whuts.UUCP> <324@timeinc.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 25

--
> 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? 
> 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?
> 
> Ross M. Greenberg

Oh boy--more misogyny.  First off, this did not seem to deter the
British, Israelis or Indians from electing women, who certainly 
did not manifest any such problems carrying out their duties.  
Second, I'd take a woman's possible once a month weirdness to a man's
permanently fragile ego, which loves to get into wars to "prove" its
"manhood", any day.  Third, just look at the string of male leaders
we've had--how could it get any worse?
-- 
                    *** ***
JE MAINTIENDRAI   ***** *****
                 ****** ******  20 Jul 85 [2 Thermidor An CXCIII]
ken perlow       *****   *****
(312)979-7753     ** ** ** **
..ihnp4!iwsl8!ken   *** ***