From: AMBAN 

In article , CE says...
>
>On Mar 29, 7:34 am, "Joseph Meehan" 
>wrote:
>
>>     When I was in pre-med it was about 40% women (back in the 60's)
>>
>> > The last graduating class from the same school had over 50% women
>> > graduates.
>
>The percentage of doctors who are women is not relevent to this
>discussion because the claim I made was that even in today's society
>it is still the man's role to defend and provide for women and
>children.
>
>Doctors heal. They nurture. In the process of doing that, yes, they
>save lives. So does the baker when he or she provides bread for people
>to eat. Without food, we'd all perish. But that doesn't make baking an
>act of defending people or providing for them since the bread is sold.
>
>In the occupations where there is a clear mandate to defend the
>population from danger, such as among police officers, firefighters
>and soldiers, the overwhelming majority of people who hold those jobs
>are men. This is a clear indication that the men gravitate towards
>these occupations and women shy away from them because it is still
>seen as the man's role to defend women and children.

Ah but how many more would like to be but are stopped because of antiquated
social mores?

Do you remember answering Alan?

> How many medical personnel are women?  Who do you expect to save your
> life after you are pulled from a fire?

I`m not sure I expect anyone to save my life after a fire since the
probability of death is pretty high. Should I survive a fire, I`d expect a
human being to save my life, regardless of whether or not that person is
woman or a man.

*******************

Well if you can use that justification (using your logic) I can say I have never
had a fire and I have never had a police officer defend my life so your argument
is specious.

AMBAN


>

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag