HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: quirke_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Women, Cats, & Chocolate
Date: 22 Dec 92 16:13:03 NZST
Organization: Welligton City Council, Public Access.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: kosmos.wcc.govt.nz

jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond) writes:
:drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max) writes:

:    Naw, I don't do that - I'm allergic to cats - but if you don't mind I'll 
:    bring my ferret. He's so good at uh ferreting out all the loopholes in the 
:    pre-dinner contract.
 
: I guess I'll have to bring my badger.  They are very good a badgering
: folks until they pay the bill...

   I myself would bring a duck, just in case the bill's total sent me into a
fowl mood.
   
Tony Q. ('scuse me while I beat my head against a wall)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Subject: Re: on the job
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 92 07:52:35 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Keywords: pretty co-worker dammit!


If she's not in your working section, go for it. If she says no, let
it drop then and there.
Try lunch first, or coffee after work.
r.
From: loosemore-sandra@cs.yale.edu (Sandra Loosemore)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Females have it easy!
Date: 28 Dec 1992 21:40:38 -0500
Organization: staff hacker @ Yale Haskell project
	<1992Dec28.183540.1181@bnlux1.bnl.gov> <1hoa7gINNmn1@uwm.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: functor.systemsz.cs.yale.edu
In-reply-to: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu's message of 29 Dec 1992 01:38:56 GMT

markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:

   Cory Everson is perfection.  Cindy Crawford
   looks too much like a frail girly woman.

   Brinkley and Crawford are most certainly not perfect.

This is interesting.  I have absolutely no clue as to who any of the
people being discussed in this thread are, or what they look like.....

-Sandra the hopelessly clueless
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 20:07:33 EST
From: Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Any Available Jewish Men Out There??

Aigh! Aigh! Aigh!

"Hypocracy" is the rule of syringes; "hypocrisy" is the failing of character.

Graydon, who can only cope with so much.
From: jsmt@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Julia Smith)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: What would you do if...
Date: 21 Dec 92 20:05:23 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

In article <1992Dec17.215603.5119@ttinews.tti.com> scott@soldev.tti.com (Scott Taylor) writes:
<deleted>
>First a little background. I have been seeing a woman for 
>about 6 months now, who is really a great person. We have had
>some really fun times together and really enjoy each others
>company. I am not in love with her, nor is she in love with
>me, but we really enjoy being together.
>
>About a month ago I met someone else, whom I now also date.
>They both know about each other and are free to ask me 
>anything about one another. I thought that I could make this
>work, since I am completely honest about the extent of
>the relationships. However, it seems like they are now trying
>to compete for my time and attention. I think of it as a kind
>of jealousy, and it is not appealing to me.
 
Scott, you have left out some useful information - WHY do you think
they are competing for your time and attention?
Without knowing that, the following are simple speculations:
1)  You are spending your time with one talking about how amazing the other
    one is.
  SOLUTION:  Stop doing that.  It is impolite and rude to show people up
             by showing them their own weaknesses and/or pointing out
             other's strengths.  Everyone likes to feel special.
  
2)  You are not particularly reliable about when you are getting together
    with either one, so both are working harder to make you make time for
    them.
   SOLUTION:  Start being more consistent and predictable about when you 
              will call/get together.  Uncertainty KILLS, especially because
              it fosters neurotic behavior in otherwise non-neurotic people
              as they try to get more predictability out of you.
  
3)  You are being distant with both, and each figures it is because of the
    presence in your life of the other one.
   SOLUTION:  Spend alittle honesty-time talking about all the other things
              going on in your life that have nothing to do with the other
              person absorbing your time.  Maybe if you get across the idea
              that every lapse in emotional committment is NOT caused by Other
              Person, the focus can shift back to the normality of friendships.
  
 
>I don't want to dump either one of them, as I get a lot of
>enjoyment from each of their company. I have tried to discuss
>this with both of them and they both deny that there is a 
>problem.
 
Then, maybe, it is you who is having a problem?  Is it possible that YOU 
are fostering a distance between yourself and both of them, and blaming
it on their apparently non-existant feelings of being threatened?  It is at
least an avenue of thought worth exploring, especially since in the final
analysis, you can ONLY change yourself -- you can't change either of them.
  
--j
Xref: sparky soc.singles:34642 soc.women:21823 soc.men:21671
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.women,soc.men
Subject: Re: Vasectomies (was Re: Pre-Sex Contract)
Date: 22 Dec 92 18:20:41 GMT
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1gtlagINNqvd@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> ci022@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Richard Kirby) writes:
 
|Hmmm.  That gives me an idea.  Usenet terminals in the bathrooms
|to discourage grafetti.

You mean there aren't terminals in the bathrooms already?  I figured that's
where a lot of the articles posted recently were coming from.

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rossi@mtu.edu (Rossi)
Subject: Re: Women, Cats, & Chocolate
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 18:18:35 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.171759.1@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz> quirke_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>rossi@mtu.edu (Rossi) writes:
>
>>>Tony Q. ('scuse me while I beat my head against a wall)
>> 
>>    Don't miss!  I'd like to look at the picture when you're done.
>
>   That's *IT*, I'm taking you off my Christmas Card List !
>
>Tony Q. (mainly 'cos you're not housetrained properly, and the addresses 
>are hard enough to read at the best of times...)

   Oh no you missunderstand me.  I'm purely interested in the aesthetics
involved here.  Personally it didn't have to your head.  It could have
been anyones.  You volunteared.  I took you up on it.  And I'm quite
glad I'm off your list for whatever reasons.  The idea of killing
even more nesting places for me and my kind in this season shivers
me timbers.  And I will never be housetrained so that when I
fling it (those rare times that I do do) I never have to look back.
:)

   songbird  *chirp!*

PS.  But you're not a bad chap a(all)ll.
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.men,soc.women
From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: Duck and Jive (was Re: Pre-Sex Contract)
X-To: ROBERT THURLOW
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 21:05:00 GMT

thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes...
>In <1992Dec18.085047.23945@netcom.com> rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster)
>sez to Desiree:

>>     I would rather die than fuck you.  I saw you at the party and
>>although you are physically pretty, I think that, overall, you are an
>>extraordinarily ugly bitch.

>Best news I've heard in some time!  I won't have to compete with you
>for the smart, eloquent women who aren't afraid to speak their minds.
                ^^^^^^^^

Not that I'm singling anyone out for criticism, Robert, but there *is*
a difference between what we normally call "eloquence," and some messages
consisting of nothing but 100-300 lines of insults which are better off
in private e-mail, on the Netcom local groups, or in alt.flame.

Again, not that I'm singling anyone out in particular, but I've seen little
else from about four of five particular Netcom people, and I just wish that
they would either cool their heels and make up, post in private e-mail, or
put each other in their KILL files.

Also, since I seem to be the only person showing displeasure with this, I am
sure to be the next person to receive 100-300 lines of endless insults per
day.

Believe me, I'll live...

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876

"Gravity: It's more than just a fragrance.  It's the LAW!"
   - Will Steeves, President, GOiDS "R" We, Inc.

 * SLMR 2.1a * Captain! We're hit!  Damn! And I just waxed the hull!
From: sethb@panix.com (Seth Breidbart)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Females have it easy!
Date: 4 Jan 93 01:49:44 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: not in this newsgroup!

In article <1992Dec29.223307.12173@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:

>Trygve   (I suppose it's more confusing this way, having my standards
>          of beauty developing to center on whomever I'm involved with.)

Yes, but it also makes life much more enjoyable.  Of course, if you
get involved with several (physically very different) people at the
same time, then life _does_ get very interesting...

Seth		[read the damn header to find me]
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster)
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Organization: The Tickle Palace - Moonyvale, CA
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 06:29:22 GMT

In article <102594@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
>
>The big evening arrives.  He asks her to drive to the restaurant and meet
>him there (she lives quite far away).  Fine.  They meet at the restaurant,
>and she discovers that another couple will be joining them.  She knows the
>man in the other couple pretty well (call him Joe), and they're friends, so
>she's a bit surprised but thinks it's fine.  They eat dinner.  The check
>comes.  Joe pays for himself and his date.  Sam, however, only pays his
>half of the bill, leaving Jane to pay her half.  
>
>They get to the concert.  "By the way," says Sam, "the ticket is $40." 
>(Joe, meanwhile, has paid for his date.)  So Jane pays that, too.
>
>POP QUIZ:  
>1) When Sam asked Jane out again a couple of weeks later, what do
>you think her response was?  
>

     No, I will not go out with you.

>2) Do you think Jane thought to herself:
>	
>	a. "That Sam, what a prince of a guy!"
>  
>	b. "Sure hope he asks me out again!"
>
>	c. "I feel like a total scumwad and intend to join a convent.
>	    But first I hope he gets incurable hives."
>

     c.

-- 
"Blind faith in your leaders or anything will get you killed." B. Springsteen
                                         +---------------------------------+
  +-----------------------------------+ /  On Vacation:  12/21 to 12/27   /
 /   // Mr. Tickle Monster   // Amiga ++---------------------------------+
|  \X/   W. David Rohwer   \X/  3000  /  Internet: rohwerwd@netcom.COM  /
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
From: jis@panix.com (Jack Szwergold)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Meeting women in clubs
Date: 3 Jan 93 19:45:44 GMT
Organization: Panix, NYC

In <0ioswB1w165w@momad.li.ny.us> frackas@momad.li.ny.us (George Frackas) writes:


>What does one say to a girl in a club, when one wants to meet her?
>I can never think of a single word to say to them.  Sometimes I might 
>make a futile attempt to start a conversation by asking for a light, or 
>for the time, or some stupid crap like that, but after I get the 
>light/time or whatever, it's back to "Duh, I don't know what to say" and 
>I never meet anyone.

Either Yoda or Ben Kenobi said it, "Trust your feelings...."  Go with your
instincts.  Anything that you do for yourself, and that feels good to you,
is fine (as long as it is within reasonable bounds).  Don't act anxious or
spazzy.  That's a definite way to repel people.   Rather, be as honest as
you can.....

>Also, how does one approach a girl he's interested in, when she is 
>hanging around her friends?

I try to avoid this as much as possible, since it is a situation in which
I am usuallu "outnumbered"
Again, trust you instincts, and do what feels right.  If that is as stupid
as saying "Hi, I don't know what to say, but I think your attractive etc,
etc." then do it.

The only definite advice I can give you is DON'T do it if it feels wrong....

There is nothing worse in the world than being fake....

And fakeness wreaks worse than Pepe Le Pew.....

Be honest (as sappy and AfterSchoolSpecialis as that may sound).....

--
Jack
jis@panix.com
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder)
Subject: Re: Females have it easy!
Organization: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 18:35:40 GMT

In article <JMD.92Dec28111514@lion.bear.com> jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond) writes:
>
>In article <1hiaj3INN5n9@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:

>   I think it's time to let you in on a few secrets.  Men don't consider Christie
>   Brinkley attractive.  One, she's married (last I heard).  Two, she looks too
>   much like a TV spokesmodel, family-oriented platonic beauty in all its
>   blandness.  Three, women are the only ones I ever hear referring to her as
>   attractive, which just goes to prove that you really have to be a man to know
>   what turns on a man.

>Right.  Christy Brinkley looks like a piece of plastic.  So perfect as
>to be boring.  Same holds for Cindy Crawford.  Another bland barbie
>doll, manufactured to fit the ideals of as many people as possible.
>Yuck.


Add one more vote for
Men-Who-Don't-Find-Christie-Brinkley-or-Cindy-Crawford-Attreactive-Because 
They-Look-Too-Much-Like-Vaccuum-Formed-Foam-Dolls.  There is a very
precise difference between "beauty" and "near-physical perfection".
Brinkley and Crawford have (for the most part) perfectly developed
features, clean, white teeth, flat stomachs and shiny hair.  This
dosen't make them particularly attractive to me.  How about Kelly (don't
hate me because I'm beautiful) LeBrock?  Perfect features.  Attractive?
Not.

Beauty, on the other hand, is completely subjective.  I'll avoid any
cliche phrases heer that sum up the concept.  I happen to be attracted
to women who are short, and a little on the "plump" side.  Is this the
western ideal of physical beauty?  No, but it's what floats _my_ boat,
and what else matters?  Nothing.  Only what attracts _me_ is important
to _me_.  Everyone else has their own outlook. More power to them.

So, basically, girls, don't assume that men are looking for the Cindiy's
and the Christie's of the world.  They might be looking for _you_.  I
hate to admit it, but about two weeks ago, I saw an episode of Donahue
in which a panel of men decsribed what physical attributes they looked
for in a woman.  Their answers: an overbite (this guy wouldn't even
consider dating a woman without an overbite), a big butt, a certain kind
of hair, overweight women, etc.  Very interesting stuff.  Who can say
what drives us to look for one particular body type over another?  Let's
just be glad that there truly is someone for everyone.  Now, _finding_
them is up to you!


-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Schroeder  		|  If this .sig causes dizziness or  
schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov         |  vertigo, dicontinue use and consult    
Brookhaven National Laboratory  |  your physician. 
Xref: sparky soc.singles:35106 alt.romance:15580 soc.penpals:4971 alt.romance.chat:22583
From: wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Patrick Chester)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.romance,soc.penpals,alt.romance.chat
Subject: Re: Do you have a good pickup line?
Date: 31 Dec 92 20:50:40 GMT
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX


At a tae kwon do class:

"Would you mind removing your foot from my throat, Miss?"

Okay, I made it up. But I think it sounds funny (and would probably happen
to me if I tried full contact sparring against a female student anyway. Whether
I liked it or not.)



-- 
Patrick Chester           |---------------------------------------------------| 
wolfone@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu|"The earth is too fragile a basket in which to keep|
Politically Incorrect     |  all your eggs." Robert A. Heinlein               |
Future Lunar Colonist     |"The meek can *have* the Earth. The rest of us are |
claypigeon                |  going to the stars." Robert A. Heinlein          |
Many other stupid titles  |---------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: carl@sscl.uwo.ca (Carl Kaufmann)
Subject: Re: on the job
Organization: Soc.Sci.Comp.Lab., U.West.Ont.
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 14:43:48 GMT

In article <BzJFsx.6Ew@hpuerca.atl.hp.com>, krb@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Kevin Barnes) writes:
> 
> Go for it, really what is the worst that can happen!

You can get hit with a sexual harrassment complaint.
It happened to me, but she dropped it at the first hearing.
 
> don't worry; be happy!

Good advice! :-)

^ ^
CatGuy-----
||  ||
*****************************************************************************
* See how the heart reaches *  Carl Kaufmann   * No one has to do anything, *
* out instinctively, for no * Soc.Sci.Comp.Lab * except bear consequences.  *
* reason but to touch.      *    U.West.Ont    *                            *
*       -Kate Bush          * carl@sscl.uwo.ca *       -Me                  *
*****************************************************************************
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor)
Subject: Re: Any Available Jewish Men Out There??
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 07:17:59 GMT

In article <93002.200733SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>Aigh! Aigh! Aigh!
>
>"Hypocracy" is the rule of syringes; "hypocrisy" is the failing of character.
>
>Graydon, who can only cope with so much.

Sorry, Graydon. forgot how these things get on your nerves.
--
      I'm in a phone booth at the corner of Walk and Don't Walk.
                                    -- Unknown
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.men,soc.women,alt.flame
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: Duck and Jive (was Re: Pre-Sex Contract )
Keywords: wholly an asshole
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 13:58:13 GMT

In article <bboH02L02f7V01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> jjh00@diag.amdahl.com writes:
>In article <1992Dec18.085047.23945@netcom.com>, 
>rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster) 
>
>>>	The subject is dead.  Leave it there.  Understand?
>>
>>     And you lost, bitch.
>
>
>Wotta maroon.
 
Yea he's a purple. Wotta blue.
 
>
>Reading postings like this makes me sympathetic to those
>women who claim that most men are swine. 

 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
                                 doh#0000000005
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: gds@york.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner)
Subject: Re: Financial first-date negotiations
Originator: gds@york.cs.ucla.edu
Reply-To: gds@cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner)
Organization: in your face!
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 00:00:21 GMT

In article <102845@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
>Well, I asked around a little bit this weekend on this topic, and
>wasn't able to uncover a single opinion like the ones I'm hearing in
>this group.  Most people I talked to -- male and female -- expressed
>some degree of amazement, confirming my theory that this is a
>cross-planetary discussion.

Perhaps this is because some of us, instead of accepting traditional
roles, have chosen to question those roles and define roles for
ourselves more to our liking.

>Either that, or it's a generation gap (the people I talked with were all
>in their late 20s, early 30s; I suspect some of the folks who've responded
>to this thread are a bit younger and possibly still in school).

I suspect not.

>At any rate, it's been enlightening.  The main point I've gotten out of it
>is that Keith, Greg and Ray should hook up with Pooh and Teri.  Me, I'm
>happy with my anachronistic old Martian of a sweetie.

I'm happy that you're happy.

I thought from postings of yours in other newsgroups that you might
be more sensitive to some of these issues.

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Boring attempted flame.
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 16:30:46 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.032327.13653@netcom.com> aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine) writes:
>I got the following piece of e-mail a few days ago, in response to a
>post I made using foul language (the predecessor to this article if you
>use a threaded newsreader); my reply is underneath it.  For those of you
>who query the propriety of posting e-mail, all I can say is that I gave
>the guy a chance to respond.
>
>Oh, and if anyone wants to respond to this, ah, being, you can reach him
>at thiggins@ttsi.lonestar.org (Thomas Higgins).
>
>>        Your message has shown a deep intollerance for other people.  This
>>        may be caused by your limited number of years  (still  wet  behind
>>        the  ears).  It  could  also be due to a lack of real intelligence
>>        (not schooling).  In either case as you grow up mentally  you  may
>>        learn to accept not only the views of others but also their faults
>>        without becoming irate.
>> 
>>        In some cases an attitude like yours  develops  because  a  person
>>        is  totally  self  centered,  caring  only for that which benefits
>>        them directly.  The world does not look to them for  salvation  or
>>        guidance.  This  group  is  the least likely to be of help because
>>        everything they do depends on what they can gain by their actions.
>>        If  you are in this category you have the least chance of maturing
>>        and becoming a benefit to yourself or others.
>> 
>>        In any case  when  you  'flame'  on  the  net  instead  of  to  an
>>        individual  you  show your extreme immaturity to a great number of
>>        people.  If you have been on the network for more than a few  days
>>        you should have realized that most people do not want the sig used
>>        for anything other than its intended  purpose.  Flames  belong  in
>>        the alt.flame sig.
 ????????????
>> 
>>        One  last note.  This is a flame.  Did you notice no screaming, no
 
One of the lamer flames I have ever scene. I apologize to Aahz for this cheap
imitation of a flame. It's embar"ass"ing. That's what it is. For shame.
We should all be embar"ass"ed.

>This smacks of an automated reply, created by 'grep'ing through the news
 
It does read like a form letter.

>
>Virtual anniversary: 4 days and counting

 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
                                 doh#0000000005
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles