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