In article , Dwight Stewart
writes:


"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:

With all due respect to your XYL, she is not
qualified to judge me. She has no idea how
I relate to women in person. (snip)


Since you're basing your objection on how it reflects on women ("a vulgar,
sexualized, and demeaning connotation which reflects poorly on YL radio
amateurs everywhere"), she is, as a woman, qualified to judge the weight of
that argument. She has done so, and feels your argument lacks substance. She
is, as a woman, also able to say whether Kim's callsign is offensive to her.
She says it is not.

Dwight:

Well, if that's the case, then I guess my "due respect" for your XYL is no
longer deserved.

Your argument lacks substance, Larry. Three women have disagreed with your
position (my wife, Kim, and Dee). While two of the three have reservations
about Kim's callsign (they wouldn't choose it), none find it outright
offensive.

Men once used shame and ridicule to force women to comply with their
domination. That time has passed, Larry. Women are not ashamed of their
bodies anymore, nor are they embarrassed by the mere mention of some part of
that body. Would we (men) really want it any other way?


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

My intention is hardly to "dominate" Kim or any other woman, Dwight.
However, I'm curious as to why that thought occurred to you! In reality,
Kim's call sign tends to encourage men to think of her in that way, but,
then again, that's undoubtedly her intent. Not the kind of behavior I would
expect from a married woman and/or a mother, assuming she has any
children.

Like all men, I have a very deep appreciation for the female body, and I
enjoy the image of an attractive woman as much as anyone else. However,
I also have very traditional moral values, and know that the proper place
for such demonstrations of sexuality should be confined to the private
lives of committed, monogamous intimate partners. If you think that
sounds hopelessly old-fashioned, then thank you, very much!

73 de Larry, K3LT