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


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.


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? Lets not discuss hypothetical
situations, Jim. Anything can be justified or condemned using that.


And your source is?


Fifty years of life, meeting thousands in that period.


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


Forty or fifty is certainly not young.


Both. I say neither is appropriate.


Appropriate for what? 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.


You and Kim keep using the term
"vukgar" rather than addressing
whether it's "appropriate".


I've addressed the issue of appropriateness several times.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/