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!mhuxt!houxm!mtuxo!mtunh!mtung!mtunf!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!ariels
From: ariels@orca.UUCP (Ariel Shattan)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: PMS and incompetence
Message-ID: <1628@orca.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 23-Jul-85 11:42:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: orca.1628
Posted: Tue Jul 23 11:42:55 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 25-Jul-85 07:46:12 EDT
References: <993@ubc-vision.CDN> <202@ihlpl.UUCP>
Organization: sixes and sevens
Lines: 18

> --
> > 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

Consiering the age of national leaders, both male and female, PMS is
no longer a factor.  50 is considered young for a head of state, and
most women have gone through menopause by then.  And, like Ken Perlow
says, how can women do worse than men have?

Ariel Shattan
..!tektronix!orca!ariels