wrote in message
...

big snip

Willie boy, talking with you is about like stomping on cockroaches.
You are zigzagging this way, you're zigzagging that way.

Not so. I speak directly to the issue at had which is how modern-day
sailboats are designed, to the detriment of what counts most - the
ability to sail well, because the design includes what women think a
boat is all about which is being a floating nest for all their womanly
wonts.

Furthermore, I pointed out that this is NOT the case with the Farr as
the design team's priorities stress sailing performance attained at the
expense of the type of accomodation women like.

If you call this zig-zagging then perhaps you're gazing at that big
doobie with the zig-zag paper wrap???


If you take the time to read the message you will see that I said was
"As an aside, the first Farr 40 my wife saw didn't impress her one
little bit. No back on the cockpit and a stupid little one burner
stove?"

Nonsense, it wasn't an 'aside;' it was your main point. The boat was not
enough of a floating home to satisfy her. So you overlooked a boat that
sails well and is a competent, fast voyager because it wasn't what the
little woman would be comfy with.


You immediately went into your tirade about women - and how they
effected sail boat design. From your remarks you didn't appear to know
what a Farr 40 is as you preceded to describe a boat that is almost
exactly the opposite to a Farr design.

What some call a tirade others might well call fact gleaned from
experience and verified by numerous observations. The Farr 40 is a fast
boat designed with racing in mind. The same qualities that make a
competent offshore racer also make for a damned good voyager provided
the crew doesn't have as it's first priority a comfy and well-appointed
accomodation.


Which differences I then took the trouble to explain to you so you
wouldn't make such a ass of yourself again by mistaking a Farr racing
boat for a family cruiser.

And you failed to understand that the Farr 40 would make a fine voyager
for a MAN. A man is thrilled with a fast, weatherly, seaworthy sailboat
and doesn't much care about an accommodation only a woman would love
that looks like a floating home and weighs almost as much. Could this be
because you are too in touch with your feminine side being the helpmate
of a woman when God intended it to be the other way around?


And how do you repay my kindness in trying to make you look just a
little bit less like a fool?

Your kindness? Don't make me laugh there, buster. Since when has
inattentiveness become kindness?

Willie boy, with all your anti-female ranting and raving I'm having a
little bit of trouble in getting a handle on your preferences ......

It should be clear to you by now that the only type of woman I desire is
one who looks like a woman (as opposed to some fat hog), acts like a
woman (realizes her role in marriage is as a helpmate as explained by
God in the Bible) and does not begrudge her rightful place in the
relationship. Because you've apparently compromised and settled for less
doesn't mean real men who hold true to God's directives are difficult to
understand. Rather, it means you perspective is *******ized by the
teachings of modern-day feminism. You seem to think my valid
observations are 'anti-female.' Simply not so. I expect females to be
females and not male-wannabes which is how you and the feminist agenda
proffer them.

Wilbur Hubbard