SCUBA-SE Archives

October 2000

SCUBA-SE@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reef Fish <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
SouthEast US Scuba Diving Travel list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 14 Oct 2000 22:07:25 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (61 lines)
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 19:22:36 -0400, Lee Bell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Reef Fish wrote:
>
>> You must not have read the rest of that post to start comment here.
>> That's why she's my SOB.  I would need a hose 100 ft long to reach
>> her at times.  No thanks.  ;-)
>
>I suppose in the midst of reading of buddies much deeper, I missed
>discussion of one much shallower.  I presume from your response that you
>believe that Sue is sufficiently competent to, for all intensive purposes,
a
>solo diver.

That is, for all intent and purposes, the meaning of a SELF RELIANT
diver.  All my SOBs are self-reliant divers, so why should Sue be
any different?  Besides, she has had much more diving experience under
a variety of very difficult conditions than most divers I know.  So
what's your point?


>It's a status that, historically, few women achieved.
>Fortunately for them and the sport, women are advancing to this level more
>and more.

You might have meant well in those statements, but they are non sequitur
as well as sexist -- "in my way of thinking", as Strike might say.  :-)
>
>> You have a fixation on the LONG HOSE.
>
>No more so than you have a fixation on a short one.

Wrong, Long Hose Breath.  You don't hear ME potificating about the
short hose simply because *I* have given consideration to the
alternatives and chose to keep it that way.

YOU, on the other hand:

>I considered the
>benefits and the drawbacks, there are a couple of them, and decided on a
>long primary hose for my diving.  There are those that are fixated on it
and
>on the rest of the DIR configuration.  They're the ones that insist that
>anyone who doesn't reach the same conclusion they did are fools, those they
>refer to as "Stokes."  I don't agree with them

Then why are you pontificating about YOUR long hose and not accept MY
considered opinion/conclusion about the length of MY hose?

Lee, again I must discontinue this line of discussion with you.
You KNOW, as well as I do, this kind of "discussion" between you and
me is an exercise in futility.

I don't challenge YOU reason for choosing to use the long hose.

So, don't waste your breath, my time, and bandwidth by arguing why
I should abandon my 3 ft hose when I have ALREADY gone through my
decision process and had chosen not to do so.

-- Bob.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2