Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/3/85; site ukma.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!cbosgd!ukma!edward
From: edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: Re: Women and the consumption of toilet paper.
Message-ID: <1919@ukma.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 27-Jun-85 20:00:25 EDT
Article-I.D.: ukma.1919
Posted: Thu Jun 27 20:00:25 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 29-Jun-85 02:23:25 EDT
References: <1898@ukma.UUCP> <302@sdcc12.UUCP> <2484@randvax.UUCP> <401@moncol.UUCP>
Organization: U of Kentucky, Mathematical Sciences, Lexington KY
Lines: 51

In article <401@moncol.UUCP>, john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) writes:
> 
> First of all, I believe the correct (or intended) verb is to "have a
> handicap" rather than to "be a handicap". The connotations are *much*
> different.
> 
	I must agree with you here. I was only reusing to verbiage of
whomever posted originally.

> Secondly, Edward, you are right, everyone does deserve an even break. I had
> always assumed, however, that since the net was something of an anonymous
> medium, everyone got one. It doesn't matter if I am an Adonis or a
> one-eyed, hunchback leper with VD provided my articles are "acceptable".
> 
	"Acceptable" doesn't mean much anymore. Just look at net.flame. :-)

> No one has said that handicapped individuals can not write good articles.
> The question is, however, if the net is so anonymous, how do you know
> someone is handicapped unless they point it out in a posting?
> 
	Exactly. I never pointed out anything. You're making unjustified
assumptions.

> A person who is handicapped, however, would tend to take away from his
> credability by repeating that he is handicapped over and over in posting
> after posting. If you read net.singles, then you should be familiar with
> the Jeff Seargent "I am a nothing. No one loves me since I can't love
> myself syndrome." You may get some sympathy at first, but then people get
> bored with it.
> 
	Again, I never pointed out or admitted anything. Just because I take
someone's side doesn't mean that I fit into the group. Are all the people on
here who argue for Affirmative Action members of minorities? I think not.
Beyond having the message in my .signature I never mentioned the handicapped.
Your implication of my "repeating that he is handicapped over and over" is
completely unfounded. 

	And no, I'm not saying "You're calling me handicapped and I can't
handle it". If I am handicapped, so what? If I'm not, so what? You'll just
have to wonder...;-)
> 
> Name:		John Ruschmeyer

	And since nobody seemed to like my old .signature, here's a new one.

-- 
	{decvax,ihnp4,mhuxt,seismo}! -+-> cbosgd! --> ukma!edward
    	{clyde,osu-eddie,ulysses}! ---|

		"Sensor readings Mr. Spock. What is it?"
		"Unknown, Captian."