NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/rec/boats/8031

Text File | 1992-11-21 | 5.7 KB | 107 lines

Newsgroups: rec.boats
Path: sparky!uunet!europa.asd.contel.com!emory!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!saimiri.primate.wisc.edu!ames!network.ucsd.edu!mvb.saic.com!ncr-sd!ncrcae!prodplan!scott
From: [e-mail] (Scott Bridges)
Subject: Re: A social problem
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Nntp-Posting-Host: prodplan.columbiasc.ncr.com
Organization: NCR Corp, E&M-Columbia, Columbia, SC
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 92 16:44:31 GMT
Lines: 95

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Andy Bereson) writes:
>> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Brian Smith) writes:
>> |> In rec.boats, [e-mail] (John F. Hughes) writes:
>> |>
>> |>     Any suggestions? Any ideas *why* these people cannot imagine a healthy woman
>> |>     in her 30's rowing a boat?
>> |>
>   [much social discussion deleted]

>This thread has gone quite a bit far afield for rec.boats; I am not sure it
>belongs here any more.  But, since it is here, let me put on my nomex foul
>weather gear and get ready for the fire storm.  :-)
>
>Lighten Up!  This society's current obsession with sexism is getting in the way
>of far too many people feeling good about themself and enjoying life.  When
>people go around with a chip on their shoulder looking for things that they
>can cite as examples of something they think should upset them, they have lost
>some of the joy in living.
>
>If I read this posting correctly, the fact that someone comments about a woman
>rowing a boat and the man going along for the ride somehow puts the woman in
>a subservient position.  Does this imply that it is subservient for someone
>to ride?  I doubt if the galley slaves felt that way!  :-)
>
>From my experience, most women want to (and do) ride most of the time.  On the
>other hand, few women that are around boats have never rowed.  I seriously
>doubt if anything other than good-natured humor is intended by a comment about
>a woman ferrying a man around.  The fact that offense was taken says something
>about the outlook of the people involved.  As far as being concerned about what
>someone else might consider offensive, one can't be responsible for someone elses
>feelings.  People come from all kinds of places emotionally, and if one gets very
>concerned about how someone else is going to feel about something, they eventually
>loose track of how they feel about things themselves.
>
>I feel that men and women are different, and I am glad of it.  Women look differnet
>than men, and think differently than men.  Rather than try to surpress or deny these
>differences, why not try to understand them so that they can be used for
>mutual benefit?  The bottom line is, peopel (regardless of sex) should be able
>to do what they want and have the ability to do. It is just as wrong to say a
>woman can't row because she is a woman as it is to say that she must row to prove
>that she is equal to a man.
>
>A little personal antidote (I am not sure how it applies).
>
>When my wife and I were racing dinghys, I wanted her to be the skipper.  The reasons
>for this were that she weighs half of what I do, so it would be better to have
>my weight forward, and I could hike out harder.  Besides that, I am somewhat stronger
>(but not nearly twice as strong) :-)  and so I could do the hard work of crew better.
>Also, as skipper, she would be watching the sails (particularly going to weather) so
>I could pay more attention to the tactical situation (which she was not much
>interested in doing).  In spite of all of these good reasons for her being the
>skipper, she didn't want to do it - so she didn't.  The point is that it would have
>been just as wrong for her to have skippered to prove that she was equal to a man as
>it would have been for me to skipper because I was a man.  Beyond that, it would have
>been of no consequence what anyone said in either case; we could take any comments
>good naturedly because we knew where we were coming from.
>
>On the other hand, my older daughter has been struggling with this equality thing
>for years.  However, as she is getting older and more secure with herself and who
>she is, she is learning to accept things without feeling threatened - and is enjoying
>life a lot more.
>
>So, let's try to understand and celebrate the differences between the sexes instead
>of trying to deny they exist.  A woman or man should be able to do (or attempt)
>what ever they want without feeling either that they can't do somehting, or must
>do something because of their sex.
>
>Jeff Huntington
>

I have three comments on this subject, if anyone cares to hear them.

1.  Jeff Huntington is a very perceptive individual.  My wife and I (if I can
presume to speak for her) divide our responsibilities, ashore and afloat,
based on what makes sense for us, not to prove that we are "equal".  Sometimes
they fall along traditional male-female lines, sometimes they don't.  My
helmsmanship skills tend to be more advanced than my wife, due to more
practice.  But, I freely admit that she has a cooler head in a crisis (a
valuable asset to have on a boat, no matter the sex of the person).

2.  If you go around looking for things to offend you, you'll end up
spending much of your time offended.

3. It's time to move on to other important social problems, like how to
keep the beer cold on a long cruise :).

Scott Bridges


--
Scott Bridges                               Phone [phone]
NCR Corp-MCPD Columbia                      Fax [phone]
3325 Platt Springs Rd                       [e-mail]
West Columbia, SC 29170