Time for another..."Guess That Quote"
-
"We are a generation of men raised by women; I'm thinking, is another woman really what we need?" good luck to all Nick
Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt) saying that to 'Jack' (Edward Norton) in the movie "Fight Club". <--Signature begins here--> I am... Currently: A Programming Student/Intern. Working on an outside project: A game for the GamePark32 (GP32) portable gaming console. GamePark32 English(Engrish) site[^] Wishing to better learn: Graphical programming with C++. P.S. I'm not good with HTML, so don't expect something fancy in my sig. But I'm working on it, OK?
-
"We are a generation of men raised by women; I'm thinking, is another woman really what we need?" good luck to all Nick
-
Tyler Durden (Brad Pitt) saying that to 'Jack' (Edward Norton) in the movie "Fight Club". <--Signature begins here--> I am... Currently: A Programming Student/Intern. Working on an outside project: A game for the GamePark32 (GP32) portable gaming console. GamePark32 English(Engrish) site[^] Wishing to better learn: Graphical programming with C++. P.S. I'm not good with HTML, so don't expect something fancy in my sig. But I'm working on it, OK?
DING DING DING WE HAVE A WINNER: NSSONE thanks to all who participated till next time Nick
-
Gengis Khan :cool: Chris Meech "what makes CP different is the people and sense of community, things people will only discover if they join up and join in." Christian Graus Nov 14, 2002. "And when you need to hire a programmer to do mostly VB programming, it's not good enough to hire a VB programmer, because they will get completely stuck in tar every time the VB abstraction leaks." Joel on Software Nov 11, 2002.
Chris Meech wrote: Gengis Khan A generation of men raised by women? The Mongols? If that implies a generation of sissies, then, er, I think not. Although as I recall, it was his mother who taught the lesson of breaking the arrows. Chistopher Duncan Author - The Career Programmer: Guerilla Tactics for an Imperfect World (Apress)
-
Chris Meech wrote: Gengis Khan A generation of men raised by women? The Mongols? If that implies a generation of sissies, then, er, I think not. Although as I recall, it was his mother who taught the lesson of breaking the arrows. Chistopher Duncan Author - The Career Programmer: Guerilla Tactics for an Imperfect World (Apress)
Christopher Duncan wrote: If that implies a generation of sissies, then Actually, I was trying to imply more of a society where 'mothering' was considered to be just as important as any other 'occupation'. It was also a pretty goofy guess. Things are a bit slow today. Chris Meech "what makes CP different is the people and sense of community, things people will only discover if they join up and join in." Christian Graus Nov 14, 2002. "And when you need to hire a programmer to do mostly VB programming, it's not good enough to hire a VB programmer, because they will get completely stuck in tar every time the VB abstraction leaks." Joel on Software Nov 11, 2002.
-
Christopher Duncan wrote: If that implies a generation of sissies, then Actually, I was trying to imply more of a society where 'mothering' was considered to be just as important as any other 'occupation'. It was also a pretty goofy guess. Things are a bit slow today. Chris Meech "what makes CP different is the people and sense of community, things people will only discover if they join up and join in." Christian Graus Nov 14, 2002. "And when you need to hire a programmer to do mostly VB programming, it's not good enough to hire a VB programmer, because they will get completely stuck in tar every time the VB abstraction leaks." Joel on Software Nov 11, 2002.
Chris Meech wrote: Actually, I was trying to imply more of a society where 'mothering' was considered to be just as important as any other 'occupation'. In that case, I couldn't agree with you more. (I may get banished to the soapbox for this one...) I have very strong feelings about the direction that society, at least in America, is going with regards to women and careers. On the one hand, girls are taught that they should have careers and that it's "demeaning" to deny them this, to expect a woman to stay at home with the kids and housework and let the man have the glamour of the career and bring in the income. The feeling is that a stay at home mother is little more than an indentured servant and she is somehow cheated in life. As such, "housewife" is now considered an insulting term, which is why politically correct replacement phrases have arisen. And yet, on the other hand, I'm constantly inundated with how important "family values" are. "The children" are supposed to be our most precious and valuable resource. And on and on. Therefore, how could it be insulting to be a homemaker? [Note that the following does not apply to single mothers, who have no choice in the matter, or to families where the roles are reversed, the woman has the career and the househusband raises the kids & does the housework.] Girls, if you want children, stay home and raise them. If you want a career, don't reproduce. If "family values" and "the children" are truly so important and valuable, then the position of mother and housewife should be one of the most honored roles in society. How can that be demeaning? So, which is it? You can't have it both ways. Women who want to "have it all", meaning they want a full time career and want to have children too, are cheating the children and abandoning them to be raised by the strangers in day care. Why? To satisfy their own selfish desires at the expense of their families. But of course, lots of women are buying into this philosophy since it's justfied as "equality". Nonsense. Equality is about opportunity without prejudice, and equal pay & respect for equal work. There is no true equality in the workplace. Women who work should be treated as peers in every single way, and they're not. However, that's a completely separate issue to that of women who want to work and have children at the same time. If you're going to have children, one of you should stay home and raise them. Anything less is selfishness at the expense of children, who
-
Chris Meech wrote: Actually, I was trying to imply more of a society where 'mothering' was considered to be just as important as any other 'occupation'. In that case, I couldn't agree with you more. (I may get banished to the soapbox for this one...) I have very strong feelings about the direction that society, at least in America, is going with regards to women and careers. On the one hand, girls are taught that they should have careers and that it's "demeaning" to deny them this, to expect a woman to stay at home with the kids and housework and let the man have the glamour of the career and bring in the income. The feeling is that a stay at home mother is little more than an indentured servant and she is somehow cheated in life. As such, "housewife" is now considered an insulting term, which is why politically correct replacement phrases have arisen. And yet, on the other hand, I'm constantly inundated with how important "family values" are. "The children" are supposed to be our most precious and valuable resource. And on and on. Therefore, how could it be insulting to be a homemaker? [Note that the following does not apply to single mothers, who have no choice in the matter, or to families where the roles are reversed, the woman has the career and the househusband raises the kids & does the housework.] Girls, if you want children, stay home and raise them. If you want a career, don't reproduce. If "family values" and "the children" are truly so important and valuable, then the position of mother and housewife should be one of the most honored roles in society. How can that be demeaning? So, which is it? You can't have it both ways. Women who want to "have it all", meaning they want a full time career and want to have children too, are cheating the children and abandoning them to be raised by the strangers in day care. Why? To satisfy their own selfish desires at the expense of their families. But of course, lots of women are buying into this philosophy since it's justfied as "equality". Nonsense. Equality is about opportunity without prejudice, and equal pay & respect for equal work. There is no true equality in the workplace. Women who work should be treated as peers in every single way, and they're not. However, that's a completely separate issue to that of women who want to work and have children at the same time. If you're going to have children, one of you should stay home and raise them. Anything less is selfishness at the expense of children, who
-
Chris Meech wrote: Actually, I was trying to imply more of a society where 'mothering' was considered to be just as important as any other 'occupation'. In that case, I couldn't agree with you more. (I may get banished to the soapbox for this one...) I have very strong feelings about the direction that society, at least in America, is going with regards to women and careers. On the one hand, girls are taught that they should have careers and that it's "demeaning" to deny them this, to expect a woman to stay at home with the kids and housework and let the man have the glamour of the career and bring in the income. The feeling is that a stay at home mother is little more than an indentured servant and she is somehow cheated in life. As such, "housewife" is now considered an insulting term, which is why politically correct replacement phrases have arisen. And yet, on the other hand, I'm constantly inundated with how important "family values" are. "The children" are supposed to be our most precious and valuable resource. And on and on. Therefore, how could it be insulting to be a homemaker? [Note that the following does not apply to single mothers, who have no choice in the matter, or to families where the roles are reversed, the woman has the career and the househusband raises the kids & does the housework.] Girls, if you want children, stay home and raise them. If you want a career, don't reproduce. If "family values" and "the children" are truly so important and valuable, then the position of mother and housewife should be one of the most honored roles in society. How can that be demeaning? So, which is it? You can't have it both ways. Women who want to "have it all", meaning they want a full time career and want to have children too, are cheating the children and abandoning them to be raised by the strangers in day care. Why? To satisfy their own selfish desires at the expense of their families. But of course, lots of women are buying into this philosophy since it's justfied as "equality". Nonsense. Equality is about opportunity without prejudice, and equal pay & respect for equal work. There is no true equality in the workplace. Women who work should be treated as peers in every single way, and they're not. However, that's a completely separate issue to that of women who want to work and have children at the same time. If you're going to have children, one of you should stay home and raise them. Anything less is selfishness at the expense of children, who
You said it brother. I agree with all of it. My friend, a stay-at-home mother, always feels that people look at her with pity when she says she works at home raising her son. I feel that she and her husband are lucky to be in the position to be able to have one of them care for their child. It's not an easy job, and shouldn't be looked down on. BW "In a world full of people, only some want to fly,Isn't that crazy?" - Seal
-
Chris Meech wrote: Actually, I was trying to imply more of a society where 'mothering' was considered to be just as important as any other 'occupation'. In that case, I couldn't agree with you more. (I may get banished to the soapbox for this one...) I have very strong feelings about the direction that society, at least in America, is going with regards to women and careers. On the one hand, girls are taught that they should have careers and that it's "demeaning" to deny them this, to expect a woman to stay at home with the kids and housework and let the man have the glamour of the career and bring in the income. The feeling is that a stay at home mother is little more than an indentured servant and she is somehow cheated in life. As such, "housewife" is now considered an insulting term, which is why politically correct replacement phrases have arisen. And yet, on the other hand, I'm constantly inundated with how important "family values" are. "The children" are supposed to be our most precious and valuable resource. And on and on. Therefore, how could it be insulting to be a homemaker? [Note that the following does not apply to single mothers, who have no choice in the matter, or to families where the roles are reversed, the woman has the career and the househusband raises the kids & does the housework.] Girls, if you want children, stay home and raise them. If you want a career, don't reproduce. If "family values" and "the children" are truly so important and valuable, then the position of mother and housewife should be one of the most honored roles in society. How can that be demeaning? So, which is it? You can't have it both ways. Women who want to "have it all", meaning they want a full time career and want to have children too, are cheating the children and abandoning them to be raised by the strangers in day care. Why? To satisfy their own selfish desires at the expense of their families. But of course, lots of women are buying into this philosophy since it's justfied as "equality". Nonsense. Equality is about opportunity without prejudice, and equal pay & respect for equal work. There is no true equality in the workplace. Women who work should be treated as peers in every single way, and they're not. However, that's a completely separate issue to that of women who want to work and have children at the same time. If you're going to have children, one of you should stay home and raise them. Anything less is selfishness at the expense of children, who
Things aren't as tough as they used to be for your opinion. Alarmism is on the decline. Political Correctness is on the decline. Sure there are still sacred cows that cannot be mentioned in public, but a vast population is muttering about them. I find it interesting that the very people who were crying for free speech in the '60s are now trying to shut up anyone who disagrees with their opinion. Sure, they don't step on your throat with a boot, but calling you a racist, sexist, misogynist, or bigot work just as well -- not to mention their cries of victimization. I think 10 years ago things were much worse. The public at large just soaked up any unprovable statement. Ozone, smog, inequality, global warming, Alar, logging, tuna fishing, oat bran, egg whites, egg yolks, red meat, carbohydrates, fatty acids, saturated fat, unsaturated fat, poly-unsaturated fat, starving kids, obese kids, fur, nuclear powerplant radiation... the list goes on, of course. People are finally turing around. This crap is getting too old and tiresome to listen to. Thanks for sharing your opinion.
-
Chris Meech wrote: Actually, I was trying to imply more of a society where 'mothering' was considered to be just as important as any other 'occupation'. In that case, I couldn't agree with you more. (I may get banished to the soapbox for this one...) I have very strong feelings about the direction that society, at least in America, is going with regards to women and careers. On the one hand, girls are taught that they should have careers and that it's "demeaning" to deny them this, to expect a woman to stay at home with the kids and housework and let the man have the glamour of the career and bring in the income. The feeling is that a stay at home mother is little more than an indentured servant and she is somehow cheated in life. As such, "housewife" is now considered an insulting term, which is why politically correct replacement phrases have arisen. And yet, on the other hand, I'm constantly inundated with how important "family values" are. "The children" are supposed to be our most precious and valuable resource. And on and on. Therefore, how could it be insulting to be a homemaker? [Note that the following does not apply to single mothers, who have no choice in the matter, or to families where the roles are reversed, the woman has the career and the househusband raises the kids & does the housework.] Girls, if you want children, stay home and raise them. If you want a career, don't reproduce. If "family values" and "the children" are truly so important and valuable, then the position of mother and housewife should be one of the most honored roles in society. How can that be demeaning? So, which is it? You can't have it both ways. Women who want to "have it all", meaning they want a full time career and want to have children too, are cheating the children and abandoning them to be raised by the strangers in day care. Why? To satisfy their own selfish desires at the expense of their families. But of course, lots of women are buying into this philosophy since it's justfied as "equality". Nonsense. Equality is about opportunity without prejudice, and equal pay & respect for equal work. There is no true equality in the workplace. Women who work should be treated as peers in every single way, and they're not. However, that's a completely separate issue to that of women who want to work and have children at the same time. If you're going to have children, one of you should stay home and raise them. Anything less is selfishness at the expense of children, who
Christopher Duncan wrote: A full time, dedicated mother is the most honorable and noble pursuit in human society. Anyone who dilutes that or tries to convince women otherwise has something to sell. The 'something to sell' part. Did you mean this literally or figuratively in that some agenda is being pushed? I ask because I think the 'demeaning of motherhood' has occurred mostly as a result of completely infantile advertising. On a personal note, of my three daughters, I raised our first daughter till she was about 14 months old. At which point she was looked after by a close personal friend while both my wife and I were working. But when we had our second and third child, my wife stayed home with them both till the youngest was about 30 months old. Again though the youngest went to stay with a close personal friend when my wife returned to work. I agree with you that mothering is a most honourable and noble pursuit. But I'd also assert that achieving career oriented goals while still mothering can occur without detriment to the raising of children. And that applies equaly to males as it does to females! The rearing of children and the growing of a family should be the responsibility of both parents, but balancing personal goals with this resposibility is a big, and most rewarding, of challenges. Chris Meech "what makes CP different is the people and sense of community, things people will only discover if they join up and join in." Christian Graus Nov 14, 2002. "And when you need to hire a programmer to do mostly VB programming, it's not good enough to hire a VB programmer, because they will get completely stuck in tar every time the VB abstraction leaks." Joel on Software Nov 11, 2002.
-
Christopher Duncan wrote: A full time, dedicated mother is the most honorable and noble pursuit in human society. Anyone who dilutes that or tries to convince women otherwise has something to sell. The 'something to sell' part. Did you mean this literally or figuratively in that some agenda is being pushed? I ask because I think the 'demeaning of motherhood' has occurred mostly as a result of completely infantile advertising. On a personal note, of my three daughters, I raised our first daughter till she was about 14 months old. At which point she was looked after by a close personal friend while both my wife and I were working. But when we had our second and third child, my wife stayed home with them both till the youngest was about 30 months old. Again though the youngest went to stay with a close personal friend when my wife returned to work. I agree with you that mothering is a most honourable and noble pursuit. But I'd also assert that achieving career oriented goals while still mothering can occur without detriment to the raising of children. And that applies equaly to males as it does to females! The rearing of children and the growing of a family should be the responsibility of both parents, but balancing personal goals with this resposibility is a big, and most rewarding, of challenges. Chris Meech "what makes CP different is the people and sense of community, things people will only discover if they join up and join in." Christian Graus Nov 14, 2002. "And when you need to hire a programmer to do mostly VB programming, it's not good enough to hire a VB programmer, because they will get completely stuck in tar every time the VB abstraction leaks." Joel on Software Nov 11, 2002.
You seem to have a better grip on this than most. If you ever make it out to Hotlanta for a beer, I'll give you the full rant, but largely this is part of my overall mourning of the loss of feminine culture in my country. Half of the world population is a bunch of overly aggressive, macho jerks, making a lot of noise and blowing things up whenever possible. The feminine nature is the only thing that lends grace and beauty to an otherwise beer & tractor pull kind of planet. Unfortunately, there's been a growing trend since the 60s that started as equality but has ended up with women being brainwashed into believing that in order to find fulfillment and equality, they must prove how much of a man they can be. This is easily seen in masculine clothing, haircuts, mannerisms and a philosophy they've been sold (there's the selling reference) that it's degrading and demeaning to be gentle, yielding and feminine - you won't have respect unless you can shave your head like Demi Moore in GI Jane and prove that you're a man. Great. Now we'll have tractor pulls across the entire planet. I'm an old fashioned romantic and idealist. I don't want women to be equal. I want them to have the same opportunities, compensation and respect as any male. That part is equality, their birthright as it should be. But I also want to hold doors open for them, watch my language when I'm around them, lift heavy objects so that they don't have to, slay the occasional dragon and maybe even lay my coat across a puddle so they don't get their feet wet in crossing. That's not equal. That's preferential treatment. Unfortunately, it's also no longer in fashion. Today, it's considered to be caveman mentality and insulting. Maybe they call me a corporate barbarian for a reason. When all the women of the world have successfully proven how much of a man they can be, we'll have a nice androgynous little planet. Not my kind of neighborhood. I like girls who want to be girls, and make no apologies for it. And of course, motherhood is one of the many noble aspects of being a girl... Chistopher Duncan Author - The Career Programmer: Guerilla Tactics for an Imperfect World (Apress)
-
"We are a generation of men raised by women; I'm thinking, is another woman really what we need?" good luck to all Nick
Brad Pitt/Tyler Durden in Fight Club? ------------------------------------------ "I had no interest in trying to actually drive [in Italy], that would have been suicide. It would have been comitting my body entirely to game with indistinct rules, playing with a nation of opponents who are professionals at the sport."
-
Chris Meech wrote: Actually, I was trying to imply more of a society where 'mothering' was considered to be just as important as any other 'occupation'. In that case, I couldn't agree with you more. (I may get banished to the soapbox for this one...) I have very strong feelings about the direction that society, at least in America, is going with regards to women and careers. On the one hand, girls are taught that they should have careers and that it's "demeaning" to deny them this, to expect a woman to stay at home with the kids and housework and let the man have the glamour of the career and bring in the income. The feeling is that a stay at home mother is little more than an indentured servant and she is somehow cheated in life. As such, "housewife" is now considered an insulting term, which is why politically correct replacement phrases have arisen. And yet, on the other hand, I'm constantly inundated with how important "family values" are. "The children" are supposed to be our most precious and valuable resource. And on and on. Therefore, how could it be insulting to be a homemaker? [Note that the following does not apply to single mothers, who have no choice in the matter, or to families where the roles are reversed, the woman has the career and the househusband raises the kids & does the housework.] Girls, if you want children, stay home and raise them. If you want a career, don't reproduce. If "family values" and "the children" are truly so important and valuable, then the position of mother and housewife should be one of the most honored roles in society. How can that be demeaning? So, which is it? You can't have it both ways. Women who want to "have it all", meaning they want a full time career and want to have children too, are cheating the children and abandoning them to be raised by the strangers in day care. Why? To satisfy their own selfish desires at the expense of their families. But of course, lots of women are buying into this philosophy since it's justfied as "equality". Nonsense. Equality is about opportunity without prejudice, and equal pay & respect for equal work. There is no true equality in the workplace. Women who work should be treated as peers in every single way, and they're not. However, that's a completely separate issue to that of women who want to work and have children at the same time. If you're going to have children, one of you should stay home and raise them. Anything less is selfishness at the expense of children, who
Christopher Duncan wrote: Girls, if you want children, stay home and raise them. If you want a career, don't reproduce. You can do both, it's not an either/or choice. I'm a mother, but based in the UK. Before I had my children, I was Development Manager, and I enjoyed my career. I still do, but now I work (not as a Manager) part-time to fit around the children. They take priority before my job: if they are sick I have time off to look after them. I am lucky in that I can work hours (9.30-2.30, 4 days a week) that allow me to walk my children into school and pick them up when they leave. I don't aspire to climb any higher up the career ladder while my children are at school, but I do enjoy the work I do, and I challenge anyone who would say that my working is detrimental to my children's wellbeing. They certainly have a happier mother than they would have if I was at home all day! It is easier to balance parenthood with a career in the UK now than it ever has been. It's not perfect, and there has to be a balance between employer and employee's needs, but for instance, if you are a primary carer you are legally entitled to (unpaid) time off if a dependent is ill. My company are sympathetic to my circumstances and it's a give and take relationship, so we both benefit from the arrangement. Debbie
-
Christopher Duncan wrote: Girls, if you want children, stay home and raise them. If you want a career, don't reproduce. You can do both, it's not an either/or choice. I'm a mother, but based in the UK. Before I had my children, I was Development Manager, and I enjoyed my career. I still do, but now I work (not as a Manager) part-time to fit around the children. They take priority before my job: if they are sick I have time off to look after them. I am lucky in that I can work hours (9.30-2.30, 4 days a week) that allow me to walk my children into school and pick them up when they leave. I don't aspire to climb any higher up the career ladder while my children are at school, but I do enjoy the work I do, and I challenge anyone who would say that my working is detrimental to my children's wellbeing. They certainly have a happier mother than they would have if I was at home all day! It is easier to balance parenthood with a career in the UK now than it ever has been. It's not perfect, and there has to be a balance between employer and employee's needs, but for instance, if you are a primary carer you are legally entitled to (unpaid) time off if a dependent is ill. My company are sympathetic to my circumstances and it's a give and take relationship, so we both benefit from the arrangement. Debbie
You make a good point, but I'll stand by the line you quoted since, with respect, what you have right now is not a career but just a part time job working a few hours a week. People with careers in this business (or most others) put in 20 hours of overtime a week. The thrust of my previous tirade was that the social occupation of staying at home, raising the children, cooking the meals, cleaning the house, feathering the nest and in general doing all of the often hard work of caring for and nurturing the entire family has been declared "demeaning". It is not. Women who pursue this path are not "cheated" in life. People also claim that it's not a career. Again, I disagree. It is a career, and an all encompassing one one at that. In fact, it's precicely because it is a full time job with frequent overtime that I object to women who take on yet another full time career in the business world. There's no way you can have two such demanding careers without doing a half assed job on one of them. And because the boss can fire you but the household can't, it's not hard to guess who gets short changed. Consequently, I don't see that your situation applies. Debs wrote: They certainly have a happier mother than they would have if I was at home all day! If you can keep up your full time job as a housewife and still have time for a hobby (most full time homemakers also have hobbies), then by all means, enjoy the part time job. :-) Chistopher Duncan Author - The Career Programmer: Guerilla Tactics for an Imperfect World (Apress)
-
You make a good point, but I'll stand by the line you quoted since, with respect, what you have right now is not a career but just a part time job working a few hours a week. People with careers in this business (or most others) put in 20 hours of overtime a week. The thrust of my previous tirade was that the social occupation of staying at home, raising the children, cooking the meals, cleaning the house, feathering the nest and in general doing all of the often hard work of caring for and nurturing the entire family has been declared "demeaning". It is not. Women who pursue this path are not "cheated" in life. People also claim that it's not a career. Again, I disagree. It is a career, and an all encompassing one one at that. In fact, it's precicely because it is a full time job with frequent overtime that I object to women who take on yet another full time career in the business world. There's no way you can have two such demanding careers without doing a half assed job on one of them. And because the boss can fire you but the household can't, it's not hard to guess who gets short changed. Consequently, I don't see that your situation applies. Debs wrote: They certainly have a happier mother than they would have if I was at home all day! If you can keep up your full time job as a housewife and still have time for a hobby (most full time homemakers also have hobbies), then by all means, enjoy the part time job. :-) Chistopher Duncan Author - The Career Programmer: Guerilla Tactics for an Imperfect World (Apress)
Christopher Duncan wrote: with respect, what you have right now is not a career but just a part time job working a few hours a week I don't see that my current circumstances are particularly compatible with career progression, and I am happy with that: it's my choice. It doesn't mean that someone cannot/should not have a career and be a mother, which was your original statement. I intend to return to work full time as soon as my children are older. I would not term motherhood/housewife etc. as a career, per se. It's more of a vocation. I certainly do not see it as demeaning. The individual is the one who should listen to their heart and do what suits both them and their family best. It isn't always as cut and dried as the media (or indeed, other people) would have us believe. Debbie
-
Christopher Duncan wrote: with respect, what you have right now is not a career but just a part time job working a few hours a week I don't see that my current circumstances are particularly compatible with career progression, and I am happy with that: it's my choice. It doesn't mean that someone cannot/should not have a career and be a mother, which was your original statement. I intend to return to work full time as soon as my children are older. I would not term motherhood/housewife etc. as a career, per se. It's more of a vocation. I certainly do not see it as demeaning. The individual is the one who should listen to their heart and do what suits both them and their family best. It isn't always as cut and dried as the media (or indeed, other people) would have us believe. Debbie
It seems we agree in more areas than we disagree... :-) Chistopher Duncan Author - The Career Programmer: Guerilla Tactics for an Imperfect World (Apress)