|
Boat Size, sailing, cruising, handling
Honestly guys, I gotta laugh at some of this advice. Many claim you can't
handle larger yachts without huge crew, exotic gear, and mega wallets. How many folks here have lived on, sailed, docked, bought, or maintained 50 footers, 60 footers, or 70 footers? Look at the 60's racing non-stop around the world by little girls. |
Bryan wrote:
Honestly guys, I gotta laugh at some of this advice. Many claim you can't handle larger yachts without huge crew, exotic gear, and mega wallets. How many folks here have lived on, sailed, docked, bought, or maintained 50 footers, 60 footers, or 70 footers? Look at the 60's racing non-stop around the world by little girls. That's what most of us do. Look at 'em. BTW, do _you_ do anything different? -- Good luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://home.comcast.net/~kerrydeare |
"Bryan" wrote:
Honestly guys, I gotta laugh at some of this advice. Many claim you can't handle larger yachts without huge crew, exotic gear, and mega wallets. How many folks here have lived on, sailed, docked, bought, or maintained 50 footers, 60 footers, or 70 footers? Look at the 60's racing non-stop around the world by little girls. Two people isn't a huge crew. Going non-stop on a state of the art racing boat is a vastly different type of sailing from going in and out of a strange marina or anchorage every night with a second hand heavier boat. And Ellen McD. deserves not to be called a little girl. How condescending. We have a boat which is called a 44, but really measures 50 feet. We've lived on and docked and maintained this boat. It is really a bit big for us to handle - can be done alone, but very difficult, especially the docking part and especially with wind and/or current.. I don't think you need exotic gear and a mega wallet but IMO 50 feet is the maximum that an older couple can handle themselves without help, not to mention that the whole thing becomes way more expensive. grandma Rosalie |
Madame, I am 30 and my usual crew is younger. I do not consider myself
"older". I think 50 ft is aproaching the top limit. (I sail a CR38). Of course, I do not think people buy 60 foot boats with the intent of "downgrading" when they get "older". But at any rate. (I hope I do not sound offended. I've read your postings with great respect.) I do not think you have to consider what boat is too big for a crew of two to handle. I think any "crew of two" should be able to at least hobble somewhere single-handed. Things do not happen in isolation: if something happens which disables one of your crew, chances are it also may have disabled some part of your boat. Chances are the winds are stiff and the seas are high. Chances are sea spray may have disabled those push-button winches (did we replace those cables before we left dock last time or did some head issue take precedence?) Racing is another story altogether. I (used to) go four-wheel-driving in remote places. A lot of 4wd people like to point at the stuff racing cars, winners of derbys etc, put on their cars. I learned then: racing equipment is designed to last as long as the race, and no longer. Racers cannot afford the extra weight associated with heavily-built, long-lasting equipment. When racing, your objective is not to get from point A to point B. (Many cruisers have done so, after all.) Your objective is to get ther first. What happens afterwards does not matter. When cruising on the other hand, it is not sufficient to get to poitn B. You plan to then be on your way to point C, point D, etc. (How many racers live on their boats?) (I do not mean to distract from the racers. I just hope to show that the objectives are differnet, the equipment are more different. (note here that another objective of racing is to make money, if only enough to fund your next race. Cruisers do not expect to make money on their cruisng.) And Ms. Ellen McD. has won very much respect from me, fwiw.) But to my original point: when all is well and all your crew is at 100%, then we all may be able to handle a 60-footer with a crew of two. But most crusing folks I've talked to, from 30 to I-don't-dare-guess, have a story of an illness: Crew 1 had a bad shoulder; Crew 2 was feverish. Crew 1 got seasick; crew 2(autopilot/vane) gave up; I've myself been both feverish and seasick. M. Bryan, I would be very interested to know of your acquaintances who live aboard, and cruise, aboard a 50, 60, or 70 footer. I hope to be able to do so; I hope to learn something from them. Always learning. -Y |
The OP was Bryan, and I thought it was his first name and I assumed he
was a male person because most of the people here are. He was the one who said I gotta laugh at some of this advice. Many claim you can't handle larger yachts without huge crew, exotic gear, and mega wallets. How many folks here have lived on, sailed, docked, bought, or maintained 50 footers, 60 footers, or 70 footers? Look at the 60's racing non-stop around the world by little girls. I was disputing that. So I'm confused as to whether you are disagreeing with me or with Bryan? It sounds like you agree with me. You aren't an older couple, but you seem to agree with me that racing is not the same as cruising and that 50 ft is approaching the top limit. "mickey" wrote: Madame, I am 30 and my usual crew is younger. I do not consider myself "older". I think 50 ft is aproaching the top limit. (I sail a CR38). Of course, I do not think people buy 60 foot boats with the intent of "downgrading" when they get "older". But at any rate. (I hope I do not sound offended. I've read your postings with great respect.) I do not think you have to consider what boat is too big for a crew of two to handle. I think any "crew of two" should be able to at least hobble somewhere single-handed. Things do not happen in isolation: if something happens which disables one of your crew, chances are it also may have disabled some part of your boat. Chances are the winds are stiff and the seas are high. Chances are sea spray may have disabled those push-button winches (did we replace those cables before we left dock last time or did some head issue take precedence?) Racing is another story altogether. I (used to) go four-wheel-driving in remote places. A lot of 4wd people like to point at the stuff racing cars, winners of derbys etc, put on their cars. I learned then: racing equipment is designed to last as long as the race, and no longer. Racers cannot afford the extra weight associated with heavily-built, long-lasting equipment. When racing, your objective is not to get from point A to point B. (Many cruisers have done so, after all.) Your objective is to get ther first. What happens afterwards does not matter. When cruising on the other hand, it is not sufficient to get to poitn B. You plan to then be on your way to point C, point D, etc. (How many racers live on their boats?) (I do not mean to distract from the racers. I just hope to show that the objectives are differnet, the equipment are more different. (note here that another objective of racing is to make money, if only enough to fund your next race. Cruisers do not expect to make money on their cruisng.) And Ms. Ellen McD. has won very much respect from me, fwiw.) But to my original point: when all is well and all your crew is at 100%, then we all may be able to handle a 60-footer with a crew of two. But most crusing folks I've talked to, from 30 to I-don't-dare-guess, have a story of an illness: Crew 1 had a bad shoulder; Crew 2 was feverish. Crew 1 got seasick; crew 2(autopilot/vane) gave up; I've myself been both feverish and seasick. M. Bryan, I would be very interested to know of your acquaintances who live aboard, and cruise, aboard a 50, 60, or 70 footer. I hope to be able to do so; I hope to learn something from them. Always learning. -Y grandma Rosalie |
Well, Isabelle and Ellen are little girls, so is my wife, she weighs 120
pounds. They do not bench 350 pounds and will never be stronger or bigger than most guys. That said, they are great sailors with substantial acomplishment, more than I will ever achieve. They also sail very large boats with no power winches, huge rigs, in very demanding conditions. So if these girls can sail large boats, why can't a couple cruise a 50, 60, or 70 footer as a team? When cruisng you have the benefit of going in good weather versus racing when you leave when the race starts. What exotic gear is on a Vendee that is not on a typical cruising boat? "Armond Perretta" wrote in message ... Bryan wrote: Honestly guys, I gotta laugh at some of this advice. Many claim you can't handle larger yachts without huge crew, exotic gear, and mega wallets. How many folks here have lived on, sailed, docked, bought, or maintained 50 footers, 60 footers, or 70 footers? Look at the 60's racing non-stop around the world by little girls. That's what most of us do. Look at 'em. BTW, do _you_ do anything different? -- Good luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://home.comcast.net/~kerrydeare |
I don't think you need exotic gear and a mega wallet but IMO 50 feet
is the maximum that an older couple can handle themselves without help, not to mention that the whole thing becomes way more expensive I tend to agree. My wife and I are presently living and cruising on a 50 footer. I wouldn't want to handle or maintain a boat much larger, and frankly don't see any need to, unless you have professional crew to house or a large family. |
Most of the information on this thread is interesting.
I do not mean to insult anyone but age has nothing to do with your capabilities to handle a large size boat. I would suggest that it should read "depending on your skill and physical condition". I have seen seventy years of age and older couples handling, in calm and heavy weather, large boat better than 30 years old couples. wrote in message oups.com... I don't think you need exotic gear and a mega wallet but IMO 50 feet is the maximum that an older couple can handle themselves without help, not to mention that the whole thing becomes way more expensive I tend to agree. My wife and I are presently living and cruising on a 50 footer. I wouldn't want to handle or maintain a boat much larger, and frankly don't see any need to, unless you have professional crew to house or a large family. |
"Bryan" wrote:
Well, Isabelle and Ellen are little girls, so is my wife, she weighs 120 pounds. They do not bench 350 pounds and will never be stronger or bigger You can call your wife a girl if you want to, but I don't think Isabelle and Ellen are actually little girls. They are little or small or petite women. I don't see what benching 350 lbs has to do with anything. I don't think my husband can do that either, and neither can most men (or boys). than most guys. That said, they are great sailors with substantial acomplishment, more than I will ever achieve. They also sail very large boats with no power winches, huge rigs, in very demanding conditions. So if these girls can sail large boats, why can't a couple cruise a 50, 60, or 70 footer as a team? When cruisng you have the benefit of going in good If something happens to one of the team the weaker member should be able to handle the boat alone. weather versus racing when you leave when the race starts. What exotic gear If you are doing a long passage, you probably are going to run into weather regardless of when you leave or how carefully you watch the weather. is on a Vendee that is not on a typical cruising boat? They have better communication gear and someone is monitoring their progress. "Armond Perretta" wrote in message ... Bryan wrote: Honestly guys, I gotta laugh at some of this advice. Many claim you can't handle larger yachts without huge crew, exotic gear, and mega wallets. How many folks here have lived on, sailed, docked, bought, or maintained 50 footers, 60 footers, or 70 footers? Look at the 60's racing non-stop around the world by little girls. That's what most of us do. Look at 'em. BTW, do _you_ do anything different? -- Good luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://home.comcast.net/~kerrydeare grandma Rosalie |
"Denis Marier" wrote:
Most of the information on this thread is interesting. I do not mean to insult anyone but age has nothing to do with your capabilities to handle a large size boat. I would suggest that it should read "depending on your skill and physical condition". I have seen seventy years of age and older couples handling, in calm and heavy weather, large boat better than 30 years old couples. I agree, and I also do not think that power assisted gear is necessary at least for a 50 foot boat. We don't have a power windlass, and we don't have any power winches either. If I was going to single-hand, I'd probably want a power winch to sail her, but probably I would get a smaller boat instead. wrote in message roups.com... I don't think you need exotic gear and a mega wallet but IMO 50 feet is the maximum that an older couple can handle themselves without help, not to mention that the whole thing becomes way more expensive I tend to agree. My wife and I are presently living and cruising on a 50 footer. I wouldn't want to handle or maintain a boat much larger, and frankly don't see any need to, unless you have professional crew to house or a large family. grandma Rosalie |
"Rosalie B." wrote in message ... "Bryan" wrote: Well, Isabelle and Ellen are little girls, so is my wife, she weighs 120 pounds. They do not bench 350 pounds and will never be stronger or bigger You can call your wife a girl if you want to, but I don't think Isabelle and Ellen are actually little girls. They are little or small or petite women. I don't see what benching 350 lbs has to do with anything. I don't think my husband can do that either, and neither can most men (or boys). Well Rosalie, Girls are girls and boys are boys and symatics are symantics. When I spoke of the fairer sex I spoke in terms of brute strength, girls (sorry, gentle ladies) are not as strong as boys (Ooops, gentleman) in general but as witnessed by the success of girl (Darn, gentle lady) sailors that does not matter when sailing. If I miss a spot please feel free to substitute girl with any of the following lady/woman/madam/Miss/Mrs/Ms/gentle lady....... than most guys. That said, they are great sailors with substantial acomplishment, more than I will ever achieve. They also sail very large boats with no power winches, huge rigs, in very demanding conditions. So if these girls can sail large boats, why can't a couple cruise a 50, 60, or 70 footer as a team? When cruisng you have the benefit of going in good If something happens to one of the team the weaker member should be able to handle the boat alone. I agree completely but what does the size of the boat have to do with handling it? Gear is sized accordingly and none of us can bench 350, well most of us. weather versus racing when you leave when the race starts. What exotic gear If you are doing a long passage, you probably are going to run into weather regardless of when you leave or how carefully you watch the weather. If you are on a larger faster boat your chances of sailing in bad weather are greatly reduced. is on a Vendee that is not on a typical cruising boat? They have better communication gear and someone is monitoring their progress. So? You still have to sail the boat not the guy (sorry gentleman) on the other end of the radio. I doubt Herb is coming to help. You sound like fun Grandma Rosalie! "Armond Perretta" wrote in message ... Bryan wrote: Honestly guys, I gotta laugh at some of this advice. Many claim you can't handle larger yachts without huge crew, exotic gear, and mega wallets. How many folks here have lived on, sailed, docked, bought, or maintained 50 footers, 60 footers, or 70 footers? Look at the 60's racing non-stop around the world by little girls. That's what most of us do. Look at 'em. BTW, do _you_ do anything different? -- Good luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://home.comcast.net/~kerrydeare grandma Rosalie |
"Bryan" wrote:
"Rosalie B." wrote in message .. . "Bryan" wrote: Well, Isabelle and Ellen are little girls, so is my wife, she weighs 120 pounds. They do not bench 350 pounds and will never be stronger or bigger You can call your wife a girl if you want to, but I don't think Isabelle and Ellen are actually little girls. They are little or small or petite women. I don't see what benching 350 lbs has to do with anything. I don't think my husband can do that either, and neither can most men (or boys). Well Rosalie, Girls are girls and boys are boys and symatics are symantics. When I spoke of the fairer sex I spoke in terms of brute strength, girls (sorry, gentle ladies) are not as strong as boys (Ooops, gentleman) in general but as witnessed by the success of girl (Darn, gentle lady) sailors that does not matter when sailing. If I miss a spot please feel free to substitute girl I think that you have to be there to appreciate how condescending it sounds to call grown women "girls". I don't think you would address a black man as "boy" would you? And making it seem like someone is making a big fuss over nothing is one of the ways that people resist changing their terminology and their basic attitudes. *I* can call another woman a girl. You can call your wife a girl. And I don't go with calling a chairman a chairperson because that's a bit silly. But to me a little girl would be my 5 yo granddaughter. A big girl would be my college age granddaughter. And anyone older than that would surely no longer be a girl. with any of the following lady/woman/madam/Miss/Mrs/Ms/gentle lady....... than most guys. That said, they are great sailors with substantial acomplishment, more than I will ever achieve. They also sail very large boats with no power winches, huge rigs, in very demanding conditions. So if these girls can sail large boats, why can't a couple cruise a 50, 60, or 70 footer as a team? When cruisng you have the benefit of going in good If something happens to one of the team the weaker member should be able to handle the boat alone. I agree completely but what does the size of the boat have to do with handling it? Gear is sized accordingly and none of us can bench 350, well most of us. weather versus racing when you leave when the race starts. What exotic gear If you are doing a long passage, you probably are going to run into weather regardless of when you leave or how carefully you watch the weather. If you are on a larger faster boat your chances of sailing in bad weather are greatly reduced. Not that much unless it is a REALLY fast boat. I hear this all the time, but really - what chance did any boat in the Gulf have of outrunning Katrina? And where would they have had to go to get out of the way? is on a Vendee that is not on a typical cruising boat? They have better communication gear and someone is monitoring their progress. So? You still have to sail the boat not the guy (sorry gentleman) on the I used to call the male persons that went to college with me guys because I didn't think they were men yet and didn't want to call them boys. Guys doesn't seem as fraught. And anyway, I'm not one. You can call them guys-- if they don't object, I won't because it is not my place to do so. other end of the radio. I doubt Herb is coming to help. Yes but you asked what differences there are and that is one that I could name without being really aware of what the big race boats have in the way of equipment. Come to think of it they probably also have better, newer and more high tech sails and maybe more of them (different kinds). They are probably also more homogeneous in the equipment that they carry as there are all varieties of cruising boats. \ You sound like fun Grandma Rosalie! I like a little discussion from time to time. "Armond Perretta" wrote in message ... Bryan wrote: Honestly guys, I gotta laugh at some of this advice. Many claim you can't handle larger yachts without huge crew, exotic gear, and mega wallets. How many folks here have lived on, sailed, docked, bought, I do agree that you don't need huge crew, exotic gear etc. We have a manual windlass and no electric winches. Bit if I were to want to single hand (as I've said elsewhere), I would get a smaller boat. or maintained 50 footers, 60 footers, or 70 footers? Look at the 60's racing non-stop around the world by little girls. That's what most of us do. Look at 'em. BTW, do _you_ do anything different? -- Good luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://home.comcast.net/~kerrydeare grandma Rosalie grandma Rosalie |
In Rosalie B. writes:
"Bryan" wrote: "Rosalie B." wrote in message . .. "Bryan" wrote: Well, Isabelle and Ellen are little girls, so is my wife, she weighs 120 pounds. They do not bench 350 pounds and will never be stronger or bigger You can call your wife a girl if you want to, but I don't think Isabelle and Ellen are actually little girls. They are little or small or petite women. I don't see what benching 350 lbs has to do with anything. I don't think my husband can do that either, and neither can most men (or boys). Well Rosalie, Girls are girls and boys are boys and symatics are symantics. When I spoke of the fairer sex I spoke in terms of brute strength, girls (sorry, gentle ladies) are not as strong as boys (Ooops, gentleman) in general but as witnessed by the success of girl (Darn, gentle lady) sailors that does not matter when sailing. If I miss a spot please feel free to substitute girl I think that you have to be there to appreciate how condescending it sounds to call grown women "girls". I don't think you would address a black man as "boy" would you? And making it seem like someone is making a big fuss over nothing is one of the ways that people resist changing their terminology and their basic attitudes. *I* can call another woman a girl. You can call your wife a girl. And I don't go with calling a chairman a chairperson because that's a bit silly. But to me a little girl would be my 5 yo granddaughter. A big girl would be my college age granddaughter. And anyone older than that would surely no longer be a girl. with any of the following lady/woman/madam/Miss/Mrs/Ms/gentle lady....... than most guys. That said, they are great sailors with substantial acomplishment, more than I will ever achieve. They also sail very large boats with no power winches, huge rigs, in very demanding conditions. So if these girls can sail large boats, why can't a couple cruise a 50, 60, or 70 footer as a team? When cruisng you have the benefit of going in good If something happens to one of the team the weaker member should be able to handle the boat alone. I agree completely but what does the size of the boat have to do with handling it? Gear is sized accordingly and none of us can bench 350, well most of us. weather versus racing when you leave when the race starts. What exotic gear If you are doing a long passage, you probably are going to run into weather regardless of when you leave or how carefully you watch the weather. If you are on a larger faster boat your chances of sailing in bad weather are greatly reduced. Not that much unless it is a REALLY fast boat. I hear this all the time, but really - what chance did any boat in the Gulf have of outrunning Katrina? And where would they have had to go to get out of the way? is on a Vendee that is not on a typical cruising boat? They have better communication gear and someone is monitoring their progress. So? You still have to sail the boat not the guy (sorry gentleman) on the I used to call the male persons that went to college with me guys because I didn't think they were men yet and didn't want to call them boys. Guys doesn't seem as fraught. And anyway, I'm not one. You can call them guys-- if they don't object, I won't because it is not my place to do so. other end of the radio. I doubt Herb is coming to help. Yes but you asked what differences there are and that is one that I could name without being really aware of what the big race boats have in the way of equipment. Come to think of it they probably also have better, newer and more high tech sails and maybe more of them (different kinds). They are probably also more homogeneous in the equipment that they carry as there are all varieties of cruising boats. \ You sound like fun Grandma Rosalie! I like a little discussion from time to time. "Armond Perretta" wrote in message ... Bryan wrote: Honestly guys, I gotta laugh at some of this advice. Many claim you can't handle larger yachts without huge crew, exotic gear, and mega wallets. How many folks here have lived on, sailed, docked, bought, I do agree that you don't need huge crew, exotic gear etc. We have a manual windlass and no electric winches. Bit if I were to want to single hand (as I've said elsewhere), I would get a smaller boat. or maintained 50 footers, 60 footers, or 70 footers? Look at the 60's racing non-stop around the world by little girls. That's what most of us do. Look at 'em. BTW, do _you_ do anything different? -- Good luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://home.comcast.net/~kerrydeare grandma Rosalie grandma Rosalie Looks like some people think that sailig is a game of brute force. I would say, that it is more a game of brains and in most cases the lack of brute force can be compensated by using brains, but it is much more difficult to compensate for the lack of brains with brute force. We know that we should spare rare commoditities, looks like some people lack more brains than muscle. Of course there has never been any shortage of stupidity, so it can be used quite freely. - Lauri Tarkkonen |
Dave wrote:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 00:16:29 GMT, Rosalie B. said: I think that you have to be there to appreciate how condescending it sounds to call grown women "girls". I don't think you would address a black man as "boy" would you? Bad analogy. His use of the term had nothing to do with race. A rational Sex discrimination and race discrimination are BOTH discrimination. So the analogy was to discrimination. Not to race discrimination. person would address whether use of the term "boy" to refer to an adult male, regardless of his race, is offensive. Problem is that when you I don't think so. It wouldn't be offensive for me as a senior citizen to call a younger male (non black) person such as a college age or high school age male a boy. Depending on when you think a person becomes an adult. So if you don't like the analogy to 'boy', how about calling a short male person "a little man"? It would be accurate wouldn't it? approach it in that fashion the argument isn't very persuasive, since it doesn't drag in the irrelevant and emotionally charged issue of discrimination on the basis of race.. And making it seem like someone is making a big fuss over nothing is one of the ways that people resist changing their terminology and their basic attitudes. Not a matter of "seeming." I do resist changing my terminology. Nothing wrong with my basic attitude. (With my only child's being a daughter I have a personal interest in non-discriminatory treatment of women.) I'm simply irritated by folks who insist on jumping on a soap box for their favorite cause at the least excuse. Some terminology changes ARE just really silly. Like chairperson for chairman or post person for postman. And this isn't one of my favorite cause either. Most of the time I personally find it sort of funny, and I sometimes use the prejudices of people to my advantage. Sometimes people look at me and see a fat old woman and assume I'm also stupid. I didn't disabuse them of this attitude when I was working as an inspector (although I have been charged with entrapment - IMO they trapped themselves) because it made my job a little easier. It just hit me wrong that Bryan was calling Ellen a 'little girl'. Dave (Who still starts his business letters to corporate recipients with "Gentlemen:") grandma Rosalie |
Watch the films made by and about Ellen to see some differences in these
boats. Also, for being a little "girl", Ellen has some big cajones!! ;) Gordon "Rosalie B." wrote in message ... Dave wrote: On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 00:16:29 GMT, Rosalie B. said: I think that you have to be there to appreciate how condescending it sounds to call grown women "girls". I don't think you would address a black man as "boy" would you? Bad analogy. His use of the term had nothing to do with race. A rational Sex discrimination and race discrimination are BOTH discrimination. So the analogy was to discrimination. Not to race discrimination. person would address whether use of the term "boy" to refer to an adult male, regardless of his race, is offensive. Problem is that when you I don't think so. It wouldn't be offensive for me as a senior citizen to call a younger male (non black) person such as a college age or high school age male a boy. Depending on when you think a person becomes an adult. So if you don't like the analogy to 'boy', how about calling a short male person "a little man"? It would be accurate wouldn't it? approach it in that fashion the argument isn't very persuasive, since it doesn't drag in the irrelevant and emotionally charged issue of discrimination on the basis of race.. And making it seem like someone is making a big fuss over nothing is one of the ways that people resist changing their terminology and their basic attitudes. Not a matter of "seeming." I do resist changing my terminology. Nothing wrong with my basic attitude. (With my only child's being a daughter I have a personal interest in non-discriminatory treatment of women.) I'm simply irritated by folks who insist on jumping on a soap box for their favorite cause at the least excuse. Some terminology changes ARE just really silly. Like chairperson for chairman or post person for postman. And this isn't one of my favorite cause either. Most of the time I personally find it sort of funny, and I sometimes use the prejudices of people to my advantage. Sometimes people look at me and see a fat old woman and assume I'm also stupid. I didn't disabuse them of this attitude when I was working as an inspector (although I have been charged with entrapment - IMO they trapped themselves) because it made my job a little easier. It just hit me wrong that Bryan was calling Ellen a 'little girl'. Dave (Who still starts his business letters to corporate recipients with "Gentlemen:") grandma Rosalie |
On 22 Sep 2005 09:19:02 -0500, Dave wrote:
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 00:16:29 GMT, Rosalie B. said: I think that you have to be there to appreciate how condescending it sounds to call grown women "girls". I don't think you would address a black man as "boy" would you? Bad analogy. His use of the term had nothing to do with race. // (With my only child's being a daughter I have a personal interest in non-discriminatory treatment of women.) I'm simply irritated by folks who insist on jumping on a soap box for their favorite cause at the least excuse. Dave (Who still starts his business letters to corporate recipients with "Gentlemen:") 1) I suggested to a teacher list that it is always acceptable to label a visibly immature female as a girl, a visibly mature female as a young woman, and a female over 21 as a woman. 2) I have taken to starting business memos with Folks, yada, yada. This is thje south-west, after all.... Brian Whatcott Altus OK |
Grandma R wrote It just hit me wrong that Bryan was calling Ellen a 'little
girl'. Maybe it's just an age thing. Often when racing, a call for consensus comes up and a common phrase is: "Well boy's, what do we want to do here". The crew is all grown men but when on board it feels like a boys club. Regardless of my terminology. Ellen and Isabelle have proven what can be done on large yachts with a minimal crew of petite ladies. Better or stuffy? You are fun Grandma R, I'll bet you would have fit right in the Isabelle and Ellen mold in your day. Bryan "Rosalie B." wrote in message ... Dave wrote: On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 00:16:29 GMT, Rosalie B. said: I think that you have to be there to appreciate how condescending it sounds to call grown women "girls". I don't think you would address a black man as "boy" would you? Bad analogy. His use of the term had nothing to do with race. A rational Sex discrimination and race discrimination are BOTH discrimination. So the analogy was to discrimination. Not to race discrimination. person would address whether use of the term "boy" to refer to an adult male, regardless of his race, is offensive. Problem is that when you I don't think so. It wouldn't be offensive for me as a senior citizen to call a younger male (non black) person such as a college age or high school age male a boy. Depending on when you think a person becomes an adult. So if you don't like the analogy to 'boy', how about calling a short male person "a little man"? It would be accurate wouldn't it? approach it in that fashion the argument isn't very persuasive, since it doesn't drag in the irrelevant and emotionally charged issue of discrimination on the basis of race.. And making it seem like someone is making a big fuss over nothing is one of the ways that people resist changing their terminology and their basic attitudes. Not a matter of "seeming." I do resist changing my terminology. Nothing wrong with my basic attitude. (With my only child's being a daughter I have a personal interest in non-discriminatory treatment of women.) I'm simply irritated by folks who insist on jumping on a soap box for their favorite cause at the least excuse. Some terminology changes ARE just really silly. Like chairperson for chairman or post person for postman. And this isn't one of my favorite cause either. Most of the time I personally find it sort of funny, and I sometimes use the prejudices of people to my advantage. Sometimes people look at me and see a fat old woman and assume I'm also stupid. I didn't disabuse them of this attitude when I was working as an inspector (although I have been charged with entrapment - IMO they trapped themselves) because it made my job a little easier. It just hit me wrong that Bryan was calling Ellen a 'little girl'. Dave (Who still starts his business letters to corporate recipients with "Gentlemen:") grandma Rosalie |
Rosalie B. wrote:
Dave wrote: On Thu, 22 Sep 2005 00:16:29 GMT, Rosalie B. said: I think that you have to be there to appreciate how condescending it sounds to call grown women "girls". I don't think you would address a black man as "boy" would you? Bad analogy. His use of the term had nothing to do with race. A rational Sex discrimination and race discrimination are BOTH discrimination. So the analogy was to discrimination. Not to race discrimination. person would address whether use of the term "boy" to refer to an adult male, regardless of his race, is offensive. Problem is that when you I don't think so. It wouldn't be offensive for me as a senior citizen to call a younger male (non black) person such as a college age or high school age male a boy. Depending on when you think a person becomes an adult. Maybe it's not "my place" to have an opinion on this since I'm "not one," but I've always found this sensitivity on some women's part to the term "girl," to be silly. Seems to me that there's nothing pejorative about the word, and that the terms "girl" and "woman" are not mutually exclusive....in my eyes anyway, an adult female is (hopefully) both. And speaking on behalf of us guys if I may, I don't think we would ever take offense at being referred to as "boy," I don't know, it doesn't bother me and I know I'm a man too. Kind of a mix of characteristics of both depending on the situation. At the office or taking care of my kids, I'm pretty much a grown-up and a man, but when zooming around on my waverunner or screaming my head off at a rock concert, say, hopefully I'll always be that little kid at heart as they say. richforman |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:24 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com