In article et, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"N2EY" wrote:

The days when the nests were all
empty by the time Mom and Dad
hit 50 are long gone, Dwight. And
that's in "typical" America.

That may be typical in your world.

It's typical in much of the USA.

However, I haven't met a single 40 or
50 year old recently with a young child.

Do *you* have reason to meet such people, Dwight? How many "parent's nights"
have you spent recently at the local elementary school?

In fact, I only remember meeting
one in my entire life - a couple with an adopted child. Whatever the case, I
haven't seen it to be commonplace.

But you've spent a good part of your adult life outside the USA, haven't you,
Dwight?

Why does that matter? You may have
noticed that I don't talk about my
domestic situation here.

It matters only in the context of the discussion - how many in our age
group have young children.

Just among my family, friends and acquaintances, the number of families
with at least one parent over 40 and at least one child under 10
exceeds 40%.

Suppose, just suppose, that I have 5
children ranging in age from toddlers to
teenagers. (I don't, but that's not the
point). Would you then say I was right
and Kim's call was inappropriate?

Have those supposed children also talked to Kim on the radio, hearing her
callsign and making something out of it?

You're avoiding the question.

Lets not discuss hypothetical
situations, Jim.

Why not?

Anything can be justified or condemned using that.

Not true at all.

And your source is?

Fifty years of life, meeting thousands in that period.

My 49+ years has resulted in meeting a lot of 40+ parents of small children.

Do you consider that to be "old"?
I don't. I consider it to be "middle
aged".

Forty or fifty is certainly not young.

Not old either.

Both. I say neither is appropriate.

Appropriate for what?

Appropriate for the amateur radio service, which should be G-rated.

As I said earlier, it's not my job to decide what is
appropriate for others in this world, or demand they conform to my ideas of
what is appropriate.

Either a call such as Kim's is appropriate for the ARS or it isn't. If you have
no objection to it, you're saying it's appropriate, and therefore the rest of
us should accept it. Well, I don't. Period.

You and Kim keep using the term
"vukgar"

actually, "vulgar"

rather than addressing
whether it's "appropriate".

I've addressed the issue of appropriateness several times.

And you think it is.

73 de Jim, N2EY