Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ttidcc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!ttidca!ttidcc!regard
From: regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Sunny's PMS comments
Message-ID: <662@ttidcc.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 12-Aug-85 11:53:50 EDT
Article-I.D.: ttidcc.662
Posted: Mon Aug 12 11:53:50 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 14-Aug-85 01:11:57 EDT
Organization: TTI, Santa Monica, CA.
Lines: 37


>It makes me think twice about taking Sunny Kirsten's
>opinions on comparative hormonal evils seriously.

>I seems biologically improbable that an individual
>could experience, at separate times, the full effects of both
>maleness and femaleness. Any female-to-male transsexuals
>out there to refute or concur?
>-todd jones

Not to pick on you alone, todd, because this has been said before, BUT--

seems one can't win for losing.

Had someone (female) said something about testosterone poisoning and how
men react to women in group situations, undoubtedly someone (male) would
have remarked that she knew not whereof she spoke.

We've already had some people (males) being told by others (females) that
they haven't the faintest idea what they are talking of.

So we finally get a comment from someone who may have dual insight and the
first thing we do is say "NAH!  Obviously wrong!"

I'm not suggesting that we automatically suppose that Sunny knows how the
world turns, and could she all show us the way, but automatic rejection based
on nothing but uninformed prejudice seems unnecessary, doesn't it?  What
about looking at what was _said_?

After all, I know PLENTY of men who respond just as Sunny pointed out, when
a woman walks by -- not ALL men, not when ALL women walk by and not ALL the
time, but it certainly occurs, and they aren't schoolboys either.

But, hey, I'm female, and therefore, by definition, don't know what I'm
talking about.  Right?  Yeh.

Adrienne Regard