Hyerdahl wrote:
> John Templeton wrote:

[A pig sometimes comes up with a gem...]

> > How many products/inventions have women come up with by themselves
as
> > opposed to men?
>
> Why do you expect me to do your homework for you?  What difference
> would it make anyway?  Most folks don't blame women for the
oppression
> of men, Steve.  Most people understand that women have accomplished
> quite a bit in the short time they have enjoyed equal rights.

I remember back in the early days of PC asking someone why
there wasn't a men's history month.  He replied, intending
to be PC, that society constantly recognized men's
accomplishments (implying women's were swept under the rug).

The fact is that not all men were born with a silver
spoon in their mouth either.  They didn't make
excuses for failure quite as quickly as you do for women.

> > >  Not so> for women.  Take two scientists:  Iscaac Newton and
Marie
> > > Curie.  Both> are famous.  Both worked hard.  Yet Newton was a
> loner,
> > > Marie had a> husband.  Some women probably sense a threatening
tone
> > in this> article.  Relax.  I am just starting to develop this
theory.
> > >
> > > Well,  it would be nice if you actually had some facts to back
you
> > up,> dear, but here are many single female scientists:  I'll give
you
> a
> > few > and you can look up more yourself.  Let's do keep in mind
that
> today > women need not marry to work for equal pay, so keep you eyes
> open as> the female scientists of today razzle and dazzle you.
> > >
> > > Hildegard of Bingen 1098  (She was a nun)
> > >
> > > Barbara McClintock  1902Born 1902, Brooklyn, New York
> > > B.A. 1923, Cornell University
> > > Ph.D. 1927, Cornell University, Botany
> > > 1927-1931, Instructor in Botany, Cornell University
> > > 1931-1933, Fellow, National Research Council
> > > 1933-1934, Fellow, Guggenheim Foundation
> > > 1934-1936, Research Associate, Cornell University
> > > 1936-1941, Assistant Professor, University of Missouri
> > > 1942-1967, Staff member, Carnegie Institution of Washington's
> > > Department of Genetics, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
> > > 1967-1992, Distinguished Service Member, CIW Department of
> Genetics,
> > > Cold Spring Harbor
> > >
> > >
> > > Henrietta Swan Leavitt,
> > > b. July 4, 1868, d. December 12, 1921
> > > A deaf, female scientist-over 100 years ago!
> > >
> > > Annie Jump Cannon
> > >
> > > http://www.mada.org.il/website/html/eng/2_1_1-31.htm
> > > Annie Jump Cannon was the eldest of three daughters of Wilson
> Cannon,
> > a
> > > Delaware shipbuilder and state senator, and his second wife, Mary
> > Jump.
> > > Annie's mother taught her the constellations and stimulated her
> > > interest in astronomy...Cannon also published catalogs of
variable
> > > stars (including 300 she discovered). Her career spanned more
than
> > > forty years, during which women in science won grudging
acceptance.
> > She
> > > received many "firsts" (first recipient of an
honorary doctorate
> from
> > > Oxford, first woman elected an officer of the American
Astronomical
> > > Society, etc.). At Harvard she was named Curator of Astronomical
> > > Photographs, but it was only in 1938, two years before her
> > retirement,
> > > that she obtained a regular Harvard appointment as William C.
Bond
> > > Astronomer.
> > > 1944, Member, National Academy of Sciences
> > > 1945, President, Genetics Society of America
> > > 1967, Kimber Medal
> > > 1970, National Medal of Science
> > > 1981, Lasker Award
> > > 1983, Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine
> >
> > These *female* scientists are remarkable. That's exactly the point.
> > Male scientists with equal or greater achievements are hardly
> > remarkable.
>
> These female scientists are all SINGLE WOMEN, Steve; they need not
> account for male oppression; they rose above it.

Actually, it appears they exploited it.

One woman was the daughter of a senator and capitalist.
Fiddle dee dee, it's so oppressive to be born
with a silver spoon in her mouth...

Nothing wrong with that, of course, but the fact is that
men accomplished far more with less making a "men's history
month" superfluous.  Not only that, but the common
man also financially supports two parent families
all without special government handouts and socialism.

Whether we look at exceptional men, or unexceptional men,
it's the norm for them that they achieved what they did
without having to resort to crying like a girl.

> The point here is
> that women should not have to do everything men WHILE OPPRESSED, but
> they...
> ...have.  :-)

The "history" months come across as kind of a way of tossing
a bone to people who want to feel included.  It's like a
"special" award.  Why, women scientists are "special".
They're handicapable. :-)

regards,
Mark Sobolewski



--- UseNet To RIME Gateway {at} 3/30/05 4:47:46 PM ---