Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 12/4/83; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!cmcl2!seismo!rlgvax!guy
From: guy@rlgvax.UUCP (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re:  fish without a bicycle
Message-ID: <1988@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 4-Jun-84 03:41:49 EDT
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.1988
Posted: Mon Jun  4 03:41:49 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 6-Jun-84 04:23:32 EDT
References: <7838@watmath.UUCP> <1141@ihuxl.UUCP>, <526@ihuxt.UUCP>, <950@ihuxq.UUCP> <144@mako.UUCP> <314@masscomp.UUCP>
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 22

> > "A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle."

> This statement is as valid and useful as

> 	"A man without a woman is like a fish without a bicycle."

> In my opinion, it's not valid and not useful at all.
> I also think that anyone who offers it as wisdom is a fool.

Well, if taken literally, it can be picked apart easily; however, the
intent is simply to say that a woman doesn't need a man, and a woman
without a man is OK.  Perhaps we should come up with an alternate
phrasing - "A woman without a man is like a woman without a bicycle."?
After all, a man or a bicycle may be convenient, but many women do without
one or the other with no trouble.

I suspect the hyperbole of the statement originated from some amount of
anger at people who were insisting that a woman without a man is missing
something necessary.

	Guy Harris
	{seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy