HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: horwath@rtsg.mot.com (George Horwath)
Subject: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 13:31:34 GMT

pw@panix.com (Paul Wallich) writes:

>Perhaps this is a problem. Why doesn't anyone seem to voice much
>discontent with boys' stereotypes? Why shouldn't there be a protest
>against a G.I. Joe doll that says "I don't like poetry"? As a matter
                    ^^^^
>of fact, why is it that G.I. Joe, a soldier, is considered the male
>counterpart to Barbie, a more-or-less generic young woman?

Excuse me?!?! Girls play with dolls. Boys play with action figures.

NOTE---->  :):):):):)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
In my eyes and ears the organ        |    
will ever be the King of Instruments |  I speak for myself, not my employer
                    - W. A. Mozart   |   horwath@rtsg.mot.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
From: firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Violent Di Batters Charles
Keywords: Poor Little Princess!n
Date: 9 Oct 92 12:17:51 GMT
Organization: Software Engineering Institute

In article <1992Oct8.210659.24204@plx.com> asgard@plx.com (J.R. Stoner) writes:

>And lycanthropy.
>
>Remember, that Garlic is number four on J.R.'s list of the four food groups.

No, no: wolfsbane for lycanthropes; garlic for vampires.  Otherwise, your
trip to Transylvania may not have a happy ending (at least, not for you;
I'm sure the average lycanthrope considers "tourist" to be one of the
four food groups).
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: The Politics Of Appeasement
Date: 12 Oct 92 20:11:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bw0yrK.Az5
Distribution: usa

In article <1992Oct12.184519.24813@sei.cmu.edu> firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth) writes:
>In article <1992Oct12.181923.5528@javelin.sim.es.com> biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel) writes:
>
>>There are simply no significant population differences between
>>different racial or ethnic groups, and anyone who doubts this is
>>a prejudiced bigot.
>
>Absolutely!  For example, the fact that no three-toed sloths have won
>the Nobel Prize for Physics is proof of systematic institutionalised
>discrimination against the differently metabolically abled.  They
>were all probably given barbie dolls that say "Phys is tough", too.

Now wait a minute!  History is full of Nobel Prizewinners who
are extremely metabolically challenged.

Then again, they were probably a member of the privileged, 
metabolically able group at the time they got the award.

But I think it insensitive at best to call their contributions vital.

Don                              }:-+
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Xref: sparky soc.men:17595 soc.women:17579
Organization: University of Maine System
Date: Saturday, 10 Oct 1992 14:03:40 EDT
From: <IK20050@MAINE.MAINE.EDU>
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: INTERFAITH MARRIAGES

Hi!
I wanted to ask a question of all you netters out there.
DO interfaith marriages usually work?  (By interfaith, I
mean, two different denominations of Christianity, say...
Catholic and Protestant..or Catholic and Mormon?)  What if
your spouse "bashes" your religion and won't allow you to attend
the church of your choice, because she or he believes that only
their church is right (religious bigotism)...What do you do then?
How do you get the other person to respect your faith and to love
you for what you are, regardless of religion?

i need help on this urgently!!!  Thanks......me.
From: kamchar@ibm.cl.msu.edu (SunCat)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: 2nd International Men's Conference
Date: 15 Oct 92 19:08:43 GMT
Organization: Michigan State University

The 2nd International Men's Conference will be held in Austin Texas USA  
October 16-18.
Asa Baber
Herb Goldberg
Gordon Clay
Warren Farrell
Sam Keen
Nathaniel Branden
Michael Kimmel
Baba Olatunji
Haki Madhabuti
Berni Zilbergeld
and others
$195
call (512) 945-9112
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Choice for men: moving beyond anti-feminism
From: pilcher_p@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Date: 8 Oct 1992 02:17:41 GMT
Reply-To: pilcher_p@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
 <1992Oct03.233831.23985@microsoft.com>,<6791@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>
Organization: Wellington City Council (Public Access), Wgtn, Nz
NNTP-Posting-Host: kosmos.wcc.govt.nz

In article <6791@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>, mxsst1+@pitt.edu (Michael   Stroucken) writes:
>How about this to control human population: Every woman, who has had one
>child, will have her tubes tied. Unlike male sterilization, where there's
>a possible change in ejaculate (with psychological side effects), females
>will experience no change in sexuality, and can fornicate to her hearts content
>
>


why is always the woman who has to suffer, ie have chemicals like the pill put
into them, and possibly do damage to their bodies, or have major operations
just to stay infertile when all the guy has to is put on a condom and take some
responsibility for a change


so there!
Xref: sparky soc.men:17524 soc.women:17527 soc.singles:27382
From: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Book Rec.: _Bodies: Overcoming the Tyranny of Perfection_
Date: 9 Oct 92 16:20:27 GMT
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin

In <1992Oct7.030259.19883@walter.bellcore.com> dl@cockatoo.bellcore.com (Daniel Liebster) writes:

>In article <BRUCE.92Oct6180738@suprenum.uxb.liv.ac.uk>, bruce@uxb.liv.ac.uk (Bruce Stephens) writes:
>|> >>>>> On 6 Oct 92, kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) said:
>|> 
>|> > The four food groups are actually Pizza, Chocolate, Ice Cream, & Barbecue.
>|> 
>|> WHAT?  No garlic?  Or is that included with chocolate?
>|> --
>|> Bruce


>I must heartily agree with the previous post. After being attacked by 
>vampyres on three seperate occaisions, I shall never leave home without
>this life saving subterainian biomass.


	Ah!  I see you've met Trygve then! (*GRIN*)
From: baba@samadhi.Tymnet.COM (Duane Hentrich)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Andre Marou
Date: 8 Oct 92 18:05:02 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)

In article <1992Oct7.234601.19956@u.washington.edu> zzz@byron.u.washington.edu (Sample) writes:
>  Is Marou on the ballot in Washington State?
>  Is he on all 50 states?

As I said to you in reply to your mail, which was an exact copy of your post,
register to vote. If they don't send you a packet containing info on who 
and what's on the I can't help you cause I don't know.

Please stop sending me copies of posts.

-- 
d'baba Duane M. Hentrich	baba@Tymnet.Com

We have yet to learn that the thing uttered in words is not therefore affirmed. It must affirm itself, or no forms of logic or of oath can give it evidence. 
The sentence must also contain its own apology for being spoken. - R.W.Emerson
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris)
Subject: Re: Recent Bill Clinton quote regarding child support
Organization: Motorola, CCR&D, CORP, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 20:51:03 GMT

In article <Oct.7.09.59.47.1992.1945@gandalf.rutgers.edu> shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan) writes:

)And what is that choice?  Bush?  The man that trashed this country
)without blinking an eye,

Cthulu for president in 92!  Why vote for the _lesser_ of two evils?

)Clinton wants to enforce whatever decisions are made by the courts.
)He didn't say that he assumes that moms always deserve to get custoday

He came as close to it as politicians ever do.
From: erik@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Erik Lode)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:15:01 GMT
Subject: Seminars for Men poster?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: soc.men

  The infamous "Seminars for Men" poster appeared here at work, and I
thought I would whip out a similar version for women--just to see if
people exhibit a different reaction.  I seem to recall someone posted
the poster's contents a while ago, but the note has slipped off my
notesfeed.  I would appreciate it if someone would email that file to
me (as well as any suggestions of "corollary" seminars for women).

  (The poster here is taped, and I'm not sure I could remove it to
photocopy without tearing it.)


	Erik Lode		HP MCSY (Measurement Control System Division)
	erik@hpfcrom.hp.com	Phone (303) 229-6903
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: bhjelle@carina.unm.edu
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,misc.kids
Subject: Re: Mattel on women
Keywords: Targetting females once again.
Date: 9 Oct 92 14:14:22 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Oct9.133325.6516@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
>>
>>>Any ideas for nice things a 'Barbie' _could_ actually say about math? 
>
>Nothing.
>>
>[What Barbie could say:]
>>Math is interesting!
>
>Why should she lie?  Math is boring and absurd.  :-)  At least
>I though so, and I've done fairly well in life without it thank you.
>
Uh-oh, another "people person", eh? 

I guess we could all be salepeople, or maybe lawyers. Yeah,
that's it. We can run our economy by just suing each other
and maybe selling each other Big Macs.

I've got news for you. The world needs people who are good
at math, and has an abundance of people who can't do it.
A girl (or boy) would do well to consider math-intensive careers,
and most will not benefit from additional encouragement to
avoid math.

Congratulations on your success in your math-avoiding career.
Just don't come near my daughter with your career advice, please.

Brian
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: CONDOMS! and AIDS
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 23:52:47 GMT

In article <Bvu6qD.743@cs.psu.edu> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu
(Don Beaver) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.225316.18307@fid.morgan.com> sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
>>In article <6509@grus.cs.nps.navy.mil> shimeall@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil (timothy shimeall) writes:
>
>>>However, the latex used in condoms is also known to tend to have
>>>channels penetrating it that are 5-10 times the diameter of HIV (HIV is
>>>much smaller than sperm). Hmm, sounds nice and "safe" doesn't it...
>>
>>Last time I checked, HIV virii were much larger than water molecules.
>>How come condom water balloons don't leak?
>
>You probably are aware that air-filled balloons leak pretty quickly.

How quickly do air-filled condom balloons leak?  And how much of that
is through the knot, rather than through the surface?

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
Xref: sparky soc.men:17453 soc.singles:27187 soc.women:17471 soc.penpals:2710
From: christin@cae.wisc.edu (Christine Haas)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.singles,soc.women,soc.penpals
Subject: MAN LOOKING FOR WOMAN TO CORRESPOND WITH
Date: 7 Oct 92 23:57:21 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering

Hi,

I am posting this for my brother who is looking for a female
with which to correspond by U.S. mail (he does not have computer
access.)

He is 29 years old, brown hair, brown eyes, 6' tall, and being
his little sister, I have no clue how much he weighs.  

He wants to write letters to someone on the basis of a friendship.

If you are interested, please e-mail me and I will tell you more
and give you his address.

Thanks.

Chris.  :)
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Andre Marou
Date: 8 Oct 92 22:42:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.1992Oct8.224234.4037
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

Actually, Bill Clinton is not the only candidate for President to have
'credibility problems'; Andre Marrou, the Libertarian, has a few of
his own. There was a discussion of this in Liberty magazine a few months
back. One of the problems seems to be that Marrou *is* one of those
"deadbeat dads," or so people say.

I realize that this may actually help him WIN a few votes from this
newsgroup!  :)

-- 
  
        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - sheaffer@netcom.com
  
 Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!

       "Beware when the great God lets loose a thinker on this planet.
        Then all things are at risk. It is as when a conflagration has
        broken out in a great city, and no man knows what is safe, or
        where it will end."
                               - Emerson: Essay, "Circles"
From: carroll@cs.uiuc.edu (Alan M. Carroll)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: individual men vs. "patriarchy" and individual women vs. "feminism"
Date: 14 Oct 92 22:54:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: m.1992Oct14.225400.26500
Organization: Technophiles Inc. - Engineers with Attitude

In article <1992Oct13.210729.16966@Veritas.COM>, rdh@Veritas.COM (Robert Hartman) writes:
> The context for her statements below is Mara's view that a woman who is
> genuinely upset over something (say, a pin-up) has enough to deal with
> with just expressing herself on that.  [...]
> Her view on this is that the man is indeed entitled to that [an explanation], but that
> he should not expect to get either the explanations or the emotional
> support from the particular woman raising the issue. 
>>[Mara, presumably] They are perfectly clear about needing to separate any particular
>>man-- or even "men" in general-- from "patriarchy," but they
>>continue to hold women, and feminist women in particular,
>>responsible in what I think are unsuitable ways.

When I say I don't want to be confused with the "Patriarchy", I mean
"don't hold me responsible for what _other people_ think". When a
woman object to something but won't explain why, she is saying "don't
hold me responsible for what _I_ think".

I'm curious as to how the HR person is supposed to be able to explain
the problem unless one assumes that the HR person and the complaintant
have effectively identical reactions.

-- 
Alan M. Carroll          "Weren't there yams involved, too?" - J. Ockerbloom
Epoch Development Team   
Urbana Il.               "I hate shopping with the reality-impaired" - Susan
Xref: sparky soc.men:17833 soc.women:17827
From: garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: CONDOMS! and AIDS
Date: 17 Oct 92 01:44:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.Bw8suM.IIn.2
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

In article <1992Oct15.154030.12654@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris) writes:
#In article <Bw1q3s.Bsw.2@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
#)
#)I don't understand the mindset that is required to argue that
#)people should not use any available protection.  
#)It's easier to understand the denial in the "Hey, it's hard
#)for het men to get HIV" mindset, as well as the misogyny in
#)the "I'm sure not wearing a condom to protect my parter"
#)types.  
#)

#I think I see a small problem here.

Maybe you could explain the problem to me.  I don't get it.

#If we generalize protection to 'both sides wearing full rubber scuba
#suits', do you think your generalizations still apply?

In a way, they do.  I believe the studies that show it is much
easier to transmit HIV from a male to a female than vice versa.

I have not heard women saying "it's hard for het women to get
HIV."  It's not at all true.  I haven't heard women say, "I
refuse to wear a (female) condom or allow my partner to wear
one."  (I'm speaking of heterosexual women here - it's not
just a gender issue.  I have heard lesbians say that they
won't practice safer sex because "it's hard for lesbians
to get HIV."  I've heard these same women say that they accept
that some women won't want to have sex with them because of this.)  

If I heard lots of straight women saying that they refused to
use any form of protection and HIV were easily transmitted
from women to men, then, yes, I would think they were
being misandric.  If I heard them denying the possibility
of getting HIV from unprotected sex, I would think that
they were practicing denial.

I still don't understand the mindset that leads someone to 
discourage condom usage.  Did you have any input on this, or
is this just an exercize in trying to detect sexism?

Susan
Xref: sparky soc.men:17437 alt.child-support:3444 alt.politics.clinton:8894
From: zzz@u.washington.edu (Sample)
Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.child-support,alt.politics.clinton
Subject: Re: Recent Bill Clinton quote regarding child support
Date: 7 Oct 92 20:44:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Oct7.204423.24947
Reply-To: zzz@u.washington.edu (Sample)
Organization: University of Washington

John Miller writes
> . . . my dad was a "deadbeat" dad.

> As far as I'm concerned, paying for a kid is an important aspect of 
> parenting, and if one parent can't pay for the kid, then that should be a 
> significant qualifier of that parents ABILITY to raise the kid.  Taking 
> away the NCP's livelyhood, motivation to work, and perental rights is 
> certainly NOT the solution.

  Good post
From: mikep@hpmwtd.sr.hp.com (Mike Powell)
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 20:34:58 GMT
Subject: Re: Reproductive Rights for Men, updated version
Organization: HP Santa Rosa Site (SRSD MWTD)
Newsgroups: soc.men

	
	Really great article Dave....  well presented.

	Thanks...

	-Mike-

Xref: sparky soc.men:17544 soc.women:17542 soc.singles:27420
From: markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Book Rec.: _Bodies: Overcoming the Tyranny of Perfection_
Date: 9 Oct 1992 22:14:07 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <ewillims.718647627@unix1.tcd.ie> ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:
>>I must heartily agree with the previous post. After being attacked by 
>>vampyres on three seperate occaisions, I shall never leave home without
>>this life saving subterainian biomass.
>
>
>	Ah!  I see you've met Trygve then! (*GRIN*)

No Emma.  You are mistaken.

(*RIPS OFF MASK*)   It is I!!  (*bares fangs*)

------------------------------------------------------------

I'm having my monthly period: the moon is getting full again.
Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.dads-rights,alt.politics.clinton
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Subject: Re: Recent Bill Clinton quote regarding child support
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 17:45:45 GMT

In article <Oct.7.09.59.47.1992.1945@gandalf.rutgers.edu> shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan) writes:
>kolassa@bio1.bst.rochester.edu (John Kolassa) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Oct6.011133.14186@Warren.MENTORG.COM>, tal@Warren.MENTORG.COM (Tom Limoncelli) writes:
>
>
>>May I remind you that alimony is not the same as child support?  The
>>bluring of the distinction, and the assumption that it's only moms
>>that do or should get custody and the assumption that all deadbeat
>>parents are fathers are two of the things that made my election choice
>>clear.
>
>And what is that choice?  Bush?  The man that trashed this country
>without blinking an eye, the man who ...
>... wins your support
>because of something that *YOU* *INFERRED* from a quote taken out
>of context?
>
>Clinton wants to enforce whatever decisions are made by the courts.


Clinton wants to do much more.  You probably know about credit ratings
and would consider them enforcement.  Try the following suggestion
(no inference necessary) from Clinton, 5/21/92:

  ... putting the name and social security number of a father 
  on a birth certificate if a mother shows up to give birth 
  without a father -- thus shifting the burden to the man 
  to disprove his heritage ...

In other words, guilty/liable until presumed innocent.  This goes
beyond "decisions made by the courts."

It doesn't suggest to me that Clinton is interested in enforcing
"visitation" or equality in custody decisions, either.  (Not that
any politicians seem to be.)


>Bush did spell it out for you.  He's been spelling it out for 4 long
>years.  This is what he's spelling " I D-O-N-'-T C-A-R-E "

I don't doubt Clinton would spell "deadbeat" this way: "D-A-D".

It's a pretty straightforward conclusion from his choice of words,
especially his use of pronouns.  His inconsistent attempts at
gender-neutrality are about as believable as not inhaling.

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Xref: sparky soc.men:17769 soc.women:17767
From: forbes@aries.scs.uiuc.edu (Jeff Forbes)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,alt.activism.d
Subject: Re: LABOR: STUDY: 1 in 3 Semiconductor Workers Suffer Miscarriages
Date: 16 Oct 92 14:26:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: aries.forbes.719245591
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris) writes:

>(BTW - This was from our company mandated OSHA required training course.  A
>bit of a joke, as the instructor asked what acids we were exposed to, and I
>muttered under my breath 'acetic'.  That Orange Juice in the moringings,
>don't you know :-). 
That would be citric acid in the orange juice and acetic acid in pickles.

> Also there was not that much info on male reproductive
>hazards in the course.  The biggest concern in our area was to be sure to
>wash your hands after any soldering because of lead, which was known to
>cause problems for both men and women.)

Of course lead vapor can be a problem to.


-- 
Jeff Forbes

"....I have not failed. I've just found 10,000 ways that won't work."
			Thomas Edison
From: julie@eddie.jpl.nasa.gov (Julie Kangas)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Book Rec.: _Bodies: Overcoming the Tyranny of Perfection_
Date: 13 Oct 92 14:10:44 GMT
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA

In article <92013@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
>In article <BRUCE.92Oct6180738@suprenum.uxb.liv.ac.uk> bruce@uxb.liv.ac.uk (Bruce Stephens) writes:
>>
>>> The four food groups are actually Pizza, Chocolate, Ice Cream, & Barbecue.
>>
>>WHAT?  No garlic?  Or is that included with chocolate?
>
>
>You've just hit on the all-time worst food combination after grapefruit
>and toothpaste.  Anybody else ever eaten a garlicky dinner, followed by a
>chocolate dessert, and then burped all evening?  It boggles the mind.  Not
>to mention what it does to your friends.

Never had chicken or turkey mole have you?  Mole is a sauce made from
chocolate, garlic, and chiles.  Pure heaven.

Julie
#include "std_disclaimer.h"
#include "witty_sig.h"
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: cep@taligent.com (Christophe Pettus)
Subject: Re: Catharine MacKinnon, Playboy and feminist propaganda (Was: Value of...)
Organization: Taligent, a little subsidiary of two really big companies.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 01:06:05 GMT

In article <BvHJvK.Fx@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>I wondered this when I discovered that MacKinnon agrees with Susie
>Bright on a number of issues of womens' sexuality.

I'm certain that she does.  She also contributed a great deal to the
legal theory behind modern sexual harrassment law.  However, her
attempt to use civil lawsuits to control pornography is one of the most
dangerously wrong-headed ideas that has been sprung in the whole
sexual-legal arena, and I don't care if she does a concern tour with
Annie Sprinkle:  It's still a stupid, dangerous idea.
--
-- Christophe

"He presented it with a length of string, and then passed on to the
Statue of Corrupted Endeavor, there to await the arrival of autumn."