HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kamchar@ibm.cl.msu.edu (SunCat)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Slack for Eustress (was: Re: Sex Insurance)
Date: 2 Sep 92 18:02:02 GMT
Organization: Michigan State University

In article <1992Sep1.210024.21073@u.washington.edu>  
hamton@byron.u.washington.edu (MrEuStress) writes:
> Duane Hentrich writes
> > [MrEuStress`] "rants" remind me of Holy Hubert 
> > on Sproul Plaza in Berkeley. High on vitriol, 
> > low on information. Vanishingly low.
> > . . . I see no advancement by using StressedOut's 
> > technique of constantly lashing out.
> 
>    Am I a devil?
> 
>    How more concrete can I get?
>    I suggested sex insurance!
>    This suggestion is not "lashing out"
>    -- it's "advancement."
> [...]
As I understand it, Mr. Eustress has been legally raked over the coals by  
his ex.  I believe it.  It's a big world.  On bad days I think I've seen  
too much of it.  Bad things have happened to me and it makes me upset as  
well.  Let's cut Mr. Eustress some slack.
===============================================================
"...You can't blame the innocent,                 | kamchar@ibm.cl.msu.edu
they are always guiltless.                        | SunCat
All you can do is control them or eliminate them. | 
Innocence is a kind of insanity."                 |
--Graham Green, *The Quiet American*              |
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: buick@belay (Patrick D. Buick)
Subject: Re: Women as Crazy as Men Behind Wheel (sorta long)
Organization: Belay Enterprises Inc. Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 05:00:54 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.114046.4185@linus.mitre.org> cgates@mitre.org (Curt Gates) writes:
>Copyrighted material published in Boston Herald, Aug. 27.  Reproduced 
>without permission.
>
>If you ve been tailgated, run off the road or been given the middle finger 
>by a surly young female driver lately, the following will not come as a 
>surprise: Women aged 16-24 are becoming as aggressive as their male 
>counterparts behind the wheel.
>
>They re committing the same bad-driver behaviors as young men do -- they 
>speed, they re discourteous and they may use vehicles as outlets for anger 
>or expressions of power, says James Malfetti, who is studying gender 
>differences among young drivers for the American Automobile Association 
>Foundation for Traffic Research ...
>
>In two of nine states Malfetti studied, young female drivers loss-ratio 
>rate -- the amount of money insurance companies receive in premiums vs. 
>what they pay out in claims -- exceeded that of young men.
>
>Malfetti suspects several causes: Women are driving more, they re driving 
>to and from places where alcohol is served, and women s roles have changed 
>-- they re doing more things they used to depend on males to do...
>

Great, a study, just as we institute legal approval of the Insurance
Industries discrimination against males in automobile insurance... 
oh well, I'm past that, but I hope it gets straightened out before
my kids (don't have any *yet*) get to the driving age...

Patrick
-- 
==========================================================
Patrick D. Buick EMT, EET  | Internet: buick%belay@uunet.uu.net
Belay Enterprises Inc.     | Internet: buickp@cuug.ab.ca
Calgary, Alberta, Canada   | UUCP:...!calgary!pixel!belay!buick
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,alt.child-support
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: Adults, Children and sex
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 20:26:10 GMT

In article <1992Aug30.142513.12433@cbnewsc.cb.att.com> chapin@cbnewsc.cb.att.com ( Tom Chapin ) writes:
>ljf writes:
>>I may
>>have been able to say no to a babysitter I scarcely knew.  I wasn't to
>>a man I loved like a father.
>
>I know what it means to be physically and emotionally abused
>long-term by a beloved family member.  Although the abuse was
>not sexual, I still feel it was analogous enough for me to
>understand the complex emotional interplays.  I would not want my
>abuser to suffer abuse, even in retaliation for my own.

What do you mean about your abuser suffering abuse?  I know that I
wouldn't want the man who molested me to be put in prison and raped,
beaten, even killed.  But I wish he had received treatment to see the
errors of his ways.  I have no idea if he abused other children.  I
hope he didn't.

>If those who were not scarred were to give up sex, would that heal
>those who were scarred?  If men who are not rapists were to give up
>sex with women, would their sacrifice protect women from rape?  No,
>because the problem is not the sexual activity, but the coercion
>used to get it.  Which is why women say rape is an act of violence,
>not one of sex.  Asking people to give up desired acts will not
>protect them from coercion.  Only direct work against coercion will.

I think you're using rhetoric here to cloud the issue.  There are two
parts to child molestation, the coercion, force, and betrayal and the
sex itself.  You seem to be saying that the sex is fine if no coercion
is used.  I don't agree with that.  If a 4 year old is asked (not
coerced) into fellating an adult man, no harm is done?

>>Remember too, that it's easy for you whose right to say no was
>>respected to label those of us who weren't respected as stereotyping
>>sexual abuse.  You saw the good side of adults asking children for
>>sex, we saw the bad.  Whose experiences are the stereotypes?
>
>Stereotyping is s superstitious activity.  When an event occurs with
>very powerful consequences, we tend to universalize the event and
>turn it into a stereotype.  If we are stung by a wasp, we tend to
>fear all flying insects, even those which are harmless.  Traumatic
>events create stereotypes, while innocuous events do not.

If every time you've been approached sexually, said no, and not been
harmed or traumatized, you may assume a stereotype of adults not
harming children.  I'll repeat that I know a few men who speak of
initiating sex with adults when they were 11-13.  I know of no people
speaking of initiating sex with adults when they were 4.

Please note, too, that I haven't called you a child molester, etc.  I
find your views disturbing because they do seem to give adults the
right to approach any child at any age sexually.

Newsgroups: soc.men
From: carlo@wg.estec.esa.nl (CDfreak)
Subject: Re: Chiro-quackery (was: Backrubs and Body Massages)
Organization: WG/ESTEC, Noordwijk, The Netherlands
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 14:54:15 GMT

What I have read in the soc.men News group about Chiropractors is not always
true. I have had pain in my neck and back due (possibly) to a fall while
cycling. I went to a CP which was pointed out to me by a colleague and I must
say that I was perfectly cured. The CP I have been to *is* a real trained
doctor who solved my problem in less then 5 weeks. Please note that from what
I have read there are about 8 different types of chiropractice. The one I have
experienced has the following characteristics:

1. Very mild. In other words not one of those painfull and crackling things I 
have heard about. 
2. The aim of the doctor was to bring my back to a proper state not only to   
solve a local problem (like neck or shoulder). This might require a longer    
treatment period (up to 5 weeks) but it has payed off.
3. No medication was used. None at all. It might happen (but it was not my    
case) that an Xray is requested in order to understand the cause of the       
problem fully.

Moreover I know now at least four other people who have been to the same CP
and are very satisfied.

If you want to know more e-mail at the address below.
Carlo

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Scaramelli                             | Damn it, I am not a number!
European Space Agency                     | I say: I am a man!
Noordwijk, The Netherlands                | - Bob Seger -
E-mail: carlo@wg.estec.esa.nl             |
Tel. (+31) 1719 83731                     |
Fax. (+31) 1719 84192                     |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Xref: sparky soc.men:15726 talk.rape:2367
From: robert@informix.com (Robert Coleman)
Newsgroups: soc.men,talk.rape
Subject: Re: Men's Issues Newsbrie
Date: 28 Aug 92 21:25:07 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:

>In article <1992Aug25.124923.20482@zooid.guild.org> Will Steeves
><goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:

>>Don't you just LOVE gender-specific legal judgements?

>I haven't seen any recently.

	Have you looked at draft registration legislation lately?  

Robert C.
-- 
----------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: My company has not yet seen fit to
	    elect me as spokesperson. Hmmpf.
From: dswartz@redondo.sw.stratus.com (Dan Swartzendruber)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Men's Issues Newsbrief
Date: 29 Aug 92 19:50:28 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <Btr1zD.59@cs.psu.edu> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
>In article <1992Aug29.040317.18445@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:
>>A man is wounded in war action and is virtually brain-dead.  All
>>high-order brain functioning is lost.  Low-order brain functioning is
>>intact.  Everyday, on numerous occasions, the man gets an erection.  A
>>nurse, who works with this man, notices the erection and devises an
>>intricate little plot.  She wants to have a child, but does not want to
>>have a relationship with a man.  She is a staunch feminist, and frankly
>>does not respect men and their suffering.  Anyway, one evening, the man
>>gets his usual erection and the woman mounts him and has sex with him to
>>ejaculation.  Whether she repeats this numerous times is unknown.
>>However, eventually she conceives adn no one knows who the parent of her
>>child is.
>>
>>Is this rape?  He never consented.  He was not penetrated.
>
>
>I don't know if it's rape or not, but it would make a great story line!
>
>;-)

Yup.  I'm sure that's what the writers of The World According to Garp
thought, when they wrote that scene in.

>Don
>-- 
>beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged


-- 

Dan S.
Xref: sparky soc.men:15921 soc.women:16138 alt.feminism:586
From: 9125113g@lux.latrobe.edu.au (Mitch Davis)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Feminists ignore Cosmetics?
Date: 4 Sep 92 04:55:35 GMT
Organization: La Trobe University

In article <1992Sep2.114831.11458@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> crussel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Carol A Russell) writes:
>
>It is nice to hear from those men in this group that care about more than the
>surface stuff.

What really amuses me is the thought that you women (rash generalization, 
I know!) need a BOOK (Naomi Whatever) to tell you you don't need to look 
like the cover of Cosmopolitan to be loved and to be lovable.

Face it, about 90% (rough unsupportable guess) of women manage to attract
a long-term mate (in the biological sense).  You really think that if women
stopped acting like performing seals with the makeup and the shoulderpads
and the "I'm so fat" routine, that the number of successful pairings 
would go down?

Any man who thinks that the value of a potential mate is solely
reflected in their physical appearance, can't be considered a sensible
choice by smart females.

Get a life.  Give up the "new clothes every month" syndrome, and put a
down-payment on a clue.

Mitch.

(Who believes that the "empowering of women" is an act of revenge, and
would simply be the same as what women get now, with-the-words-"men"
crossed-out-and-the-word-"Women"-written-on-with-crayon.  Let's ditch
the "empowerment", and have a bit of rational equality.)
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: boserj@netcom.com (Jeffrey Boser)
Subject: Re: Adults, Children and sex
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 92 21:04:10 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

rfs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (richard.f.j.soyack) writes:
>What a bunch of self-serving bullshit.  By these asshole's
>reasoning, there is no rape.  A child's only problem when
>approached by someone so deranged that they see a lone
>child, or children playing away from adults as a sexual
>opportunity is, how shall that child turn down sex without
>hurting the other.  If you are so emotionally damaged that you
>need to have sex with children, then you should lock yourself
>up.

Boy richard, sure know how to lay on the insults eh?  No,
according to their reasoning, they know the definition of
rape.  rape is sex without consent.   they are saying that
they had experiences where such consent was denied, and no
sex took place.

how the hell does that equate to rape?  or abuse?

>Am I angry about this, yes, as angry as a woman who had been
>raped might be when reading how when a rape attempt is made
>her only problem is avoiding the sex without hurting the other
>person.

Where did you get this idea?  They were saying that they
had situations where there was no force, no power, where they
werent afraid of saying know, and didnt want to hurt the other
person.

Women do it every day of their lives.  Its called letting
them down easy.  And I dont see a damn thing here that has
to do with rape.

.....jeff

Newsgroups: soc.men
From: schultz@unixg.ubc.ca (Stewart Schultz)
Subject: Re: Some Politically Incorrect questions
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 17:42:45 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.202019.23360@news.nd.edu>
slarsen@schumann.helios.nd.edu (susan larsen) writes:

>I would agree with the contention that men are more subject to 
>the *expectation* that they perform the breadwinner role however
>this certainly does not mean that women are somehow unwilling 
>to act as the breadwinner.  

Women are less willing, on average, as shown by several lines of
evidence.

>In looking at the lower and middle class marriages, there are 
>myriad examples of women as higher, primary, and sole wage 
>earners in their families. 

Well if it's a myriad of women, then it's a myriad X 20 of men.  Unless
these women are somehow hiding from the Census Bureau.

>>>BTW, this lower class woman spent four years supporting a husband 
>>>and child.  It happens and it happens a heck of a lot more often 
>>>than your physician stats would suggest.  
>>
>>Hmmm.  And just above you said these families are 'vanishing.'
>>Now I'm confused.  ;^>
>
>Vanishing and extinct are not the same thing :)

But vanishing = myriad, eh?

>I'm confused.  Are you claiming that men are forced into being 
>breadwinners or are you claiming that they are willing volunteers?

I'm imagining a young unmarried man who desires to be a stay-at-home
father and primary nurturer of his (yet unborn) children.  What
obstacles does he face?  Some that women also face, some that women
don't face.  The most important obstacle that is not symmetrical is the
extreme rarity of women, regardless of their financial prospects,
-willing- to financially underwrite his goal.  The main reason for the
rarity (IMO) is the abundance of women who happen to have the -same-
goal, more or less (this fact is reflected in the stats I quoted, and
in numerous psychological studies and surveys).  As a result, men who
desire this role find it considerably more difficult to achieve than
women.

Now I think I know how Copernicus felt.  :-)

-S. Schultz
Newsgroups: soc.men
Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.config
Subject: Re: Alt.feminism
From: Nelson Broat <NMBCU@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Date: Monday, 31 Aug 1992 10:55:24 EDT
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

In article <MRMIKE.92Aug27174020@michelotti.ae.ge.com>,
mrmike@michelotti.ae.ge.com ("Mr. Mike" Passaretti) says:
>Perhaps, then, you can explain this:
>
>Path:
>rdsunx.crd.ge.com!crdgw1!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!
news.claremont.edu!ucivax!gateway
>From: tittle@alexandre-dumas.ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle Moore)
>Newsgroups: soc.feminism
>Subject: Re: Preventing Female Children - in India
>Message-ID: <2A9D2E41.13106@ics.uci.edu>
>Date: 27 Aug 92 19:34:25 GMT
>References: <9208170853.AA00858@score.aic.co.jp>
><1992Aug27.003136.22261@zip.eecs.umich.edu>
>Lines: 49
>Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu
>Nntp-Posting-Host: alexandre-dumas.ics.uci.edu

>I will be the first to go out on a limb here and note that of
>all the s.f moderators, CTM is the only one who I have noted
>approving her own posts, but she does it quite often.  I
>cannot, in fact, recall a message of hers in the last 2 months
>which she did _not_ approve.

First: I HAVE allowed the groups creation at my site.

Second: How do you know she has written something that she was about to
        post but then decided against it? Or for that matter lets not
        dicuss the written work, how about the ideas which are on her
        mind which she decides to put into words but at the last minute
        decides not to?


                                                         Nelson
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,soc.couples,alt.dads-rights,misc.legal
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Love love can turn Jekylls into Hydes
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:05:56 GMT

>In article <1992Aug25.014720.22434@cbnewsk.cb.att.com>, 
>noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:
>> P.S.  Ted, one question:  Would you still want to become a lawyer if you
>> knew the average income for such people was, let's say, $20k per year?

I'm probably going to lose money by the decision to go to law school.
I could've worked for three years computer consulting at a higher 
salary than I'm going to make for the first year or two out of law school 
clerking for judges, as opposed to the negative cash flow I have now.
Whether I make money after that depends on whether I choose to work
eighty hours a week for a big law firm or whether I choose a more normal
life working for a public interest group or the government (or, with
any luck, in academia), and even then, it's far from guaranteed that
I'll end up outpacing the non-law school option in net present value.  
This summer, I'm making a third of what I made as a sophomore in college 
(having turned down jobs making two-thirds of what I made as a sophomore 
in college so I could work as a research assistant).

Would I work as a lawyer for $20k a year?  Probably not -- why would I
spend four times that in costs and opportunity costs (even with the
merit scholarships and fellowships that I have that are helping me work
my way through law school) to make the salary of a high-school graduate?
But then, I can't imagine any jobs I'd take for $20k a year, so I'm not
sure what it is you're aiming at.
-- 
             ......................................................
             ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu | std disclaimers
             the university of chicago law skool, chicago, illinois
             it's log!  log!  log!  it's big, it's heavy, it's wood
Xref: sparky soc.men:15790 soc.women:16024
From: benjamin@rice-chex.ai.mit.edu (Benjamin Renaud)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Cosmetics and the Homeless
Date: 1 Sep 92 17:30:14 GMT
Followup-To: soc.men
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory

>In article <1992Aug27.161015.1@mdcbbs.com>, rivero@mdcbbs.com says:
=-
=-  As to the economy, consider this. Last year, American women spent
=-50 billion dollars on beauty products and services, at a time when
=-their fellow human beings, including other women were sleeping in alleys
=-and eating out of trashcans (dinner at McDumpster's).  

So fucking what? Let me rephrase this. Would you have the same sort of
objection about the billions spent on music? entertainment? Nice
things for kids (that they don't -really- need) on ART? NO of course
no. Why? because all these are things that improve one's life and to
put beauty in your life is a marvelous thing. Lots of people think
that being beautiful is an important thing, just like living in a
beautiful place is. Of course homelessness and poverty is obscene and
vile and the shame of our society. BUT IT HAS NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO
WITH HOMELESSNESS.

=-That 50 billion
=-dollars worth of human labor and raw materials did NOT improve our schools.
=-It did NOT repair our bridges, nor did it keep our emergancy rooms open.
=-No products resulted from that 50 billion that can be sold internationally at
=-a profit. No new industries or jobs were created from the 50 billion dollar
=-investment. that 50 billion dollars is gone forever, literally washed down
=-the drain.

So is a performance at the opera or the madison square gardens

=-  Coincidentally, that 50 billion would clean up the mess from the S&L
=-meltdown, not to mention help clean up the mess we'll have next year
=-when the main commercial banks start dropping like flies.
=-  In the years since Reagan first took office, this non productive
=-expenditure adds up to roughly half a trillion dollars. That's 1/7 of the
=-total National Debt right there.
=- We spend more on beauty than we spend on Space Exploration, the Environment,
=-or AIDS Research.
=-  That SERIOUS enough for you man?

You (and I) are upset at the system. Let me look good if i want and
let's do a revolution.

Newsgroups: soc.men
From: twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin)
Subject: Re: What is Wrong with this picture?????
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 02:27:32 GMT

In article <10581@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> pepke@ds1.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke) writes:
>In article <stricher-030992174513@stayman.ocean.fsu.edu> stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul) writes:
>>I can't tell the difference between the anti-feminist right, and the
>>radical feminists.
>
>Bingo!
>

Well, I can. 

The anti-feminist right hates women and has contempt for men. 

The radical feminists have contempt and hatred for both men and women. 


I'm a feminist, and I respect men and women and expect better of both 
of them. 

--Barbara 

"Bingo!" yourself.  Lotto! 


Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.child-support
From: hamton@byron.u.washington.edu (MrEuStress)
Subject: Re: Bob is NOT the benefactor that he claims to be.
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 23:20:59 GMT

Woody Muller writes
> What you really ought 
>to be doing is working out a compromise settlement, negotiating some
>visitation to increase over time, and learn to be a dad.

  Go fuck yourself.

   Taking care of kids is wonderfull.
   Intimate contact is wonderful.
   Forced "intimate contact" is * * *  R A P E  * * *.
   Your (majority) intentions to force
   me to be a father is SLAVERY and RAPE.
From: rfs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (richard.f.j.soyack)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Adults, Children and sex
Date: 2 Sep 92 13:02:20 GMT
Organization: AT&T


Actually you can't answer any questions about the story you
told.  The only thing you know about this from personal
experience is that a 17 year old told you a story.  You don't
know if the story is true, so you couldn't possibly answer any
questions about motivation, harm, etc.
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,alt.feminism