Originally Posted by northoceanbeach
Soooo if I used your name to minimize your accomplishments and try to make you feel unqualified to speak on a certain topic that's not a slam? Perhaps you regret this but wont own your mistake.
As sad above. Without knowing those women's history I would guess they were raised on the water by their parents. Like the Dutch girl that at 16 attempted to circumnavigate but lost her boat in SE Asia. It's easier I you were raised with your father teaching you sailing. I had only ever been on a boat, not even a sailboat until I was 16 once, fishing on a lake in Iowa, an at 16 a ferry across the English Channel. If I had co parents I probably would have circ. by now.
I'm not subtle. If I intended to slam you, it would be far, far more apparent.
The fact that you feel slammed does not mean that a slamming occurred or was intended by this author, who, once again, was. not. slamming. you. HTFU.
Now, moving on to the rest of your post above ("as sad above" is the most appropriate freudian typo I have read today), as I mentioned in my post to minee where he (also incorrectly) described my post as a slam, I pouinted out that you could substitute MY NAME or his name, or larry Ellison and the point would be the same- the chicks have lapped the planet. I haven't, he hasn't you haven't....
and AC winner larry Ellison hasn't either. That was my point, now well and truly lost- that simply because one has not won the AC is not proof of lack of competence or ability, and not proof positive of equality either. That is akin to arguing that since a woman has not won the Masters that women are lousy golfers.
Are we clear on this now, or do you plan to keep slamming me by casting negative aspersions on my motives and accusing me of bashing which does not exist?
btw, for the record, I hope that you do manage a circ one day, if that is your wish.