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