HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (Piglet)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: This is a post.
Keywords: Whatever.
Date: 25 Jan 93 18:14:53 GMT
Organization: the house on the corner

In article <+aj382@rpi.edu> safarj@rs6323.ecs.rpi.edu (Jonah Emanuel Safar) writes:
>... I used to live near Newark.  Still visit my father
>ever now and then in Wayne, when I am not visiting my mother in
>Boston that is.  

Wayne?  WAYNE?  You mean that town that if I spit from the edge of
my back lawn, I'd hit it?  The one where I go for my library books
because my town's library is smaller than my personal library?
Whoa!  So when will you next be in the neighborhood?

How does a North NJ soc.bi party sound?  Anyone?  Anyone?


Piglet, Haledon resident...
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: crisp@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Badvoc)
Subject: Re: Bisexuality and androgyny
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 08:38:23 GMT

In <1k6sdtINN9td@umbc5.umbc.edu> ac999273@umbc.edu (ac999273) writes:
>>I don't like men who look very masculine. They make me feel uncomftable.
>>Alough I find the feminine look very attractive I prefer women who don't
>>look so feminine. I don't know. This might just be me being strange.
>>
>
>	I don't know, perhaps I am strange, but I like feminine women 
>and masculine men.  I have never liked feminine men.... that's ick to me.

Well, I don't know how a man could be feminine without being "ick". But a
less masculine man...

- Badvoc.

-- 
crisp@dcs.warwick.ac.uk | Acid on the floor so she walks on the ceiling.
csukf@csv.warwick.ac.uk | - Andrew Eldritch.
main(){char a[7];t(a,82480129);puts(a);}t(a,c)char
*a;{if(c)t(a+1,c>>5),c&=31,c+=c-1?'a':'A';*a=c;}
From: zen@death.corp.sun.com (d   (415) 336 0742)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Ethics...
Date: 26 Jan 93 00:44:30
Organization: savage hackers
NNTP-Posting-Host: death.corp.sun.com
In-reply-to: cvadrgez@vmsb.is.csupomona.edu's message of 23 Jan 93 23:29:11 PST


In article <1993Jan23.232911.1@vmsb.is.csupomona.edu> cvadrgez@vmsb.is.csupomona.edu writes:
>Is it ethical to one day just stop talking to a friend (permanently), and to 
>NEVER even try to explain why?

  Depends on the situation or your code of ethics, I guess.  If it saved
someone's life or something, it might sway your decision...

 -- d
From: rsr@soda.berkeley.edu (Roy S. Rapoport)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Clueless hetboys and bi's
Date: 27 Jan 1993 07:29:05 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu

In article <1993Jan26.133805.10985@news.acns.nwu.edu> Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde) writes:

->>I'm not sure what elle@midway.uchicago.edu meant, but *I* read the
->>issue as being not that they just want to watch, but that they are
->>"clueless"...  that they assume that they way to go about getting to
->>just watch to women is to come into soc.bi and (without getting to
->>know us) post a personal ad wanting to watch "hot bi babes".

I read what she said as equating voyeurism with cluelessness.  I suspect now
that I may have been wrong.

->(Though I remember the last thread where Roy and I were talking about
->lesbians -- maybe I should keep quiet ;)

*blink* We talked about lesbians? What'd we say? (short-term memory shot to
hell).  Is this OK? Will anyone object to us discussing lesbians? :) :) :)

->However, the situation Roy describes sounds rather benign even if one
->applies an ideological test -- are you sure you aren't going
->vanilla on us Roy ;) ;).

*choke* Me? Vanilla?

Sure, go ahead and call me heterosexual while you're at it! Sheesh!

-roy, who really doesn't wish to boast of his incredible weekend more than he
 has already (Yeah, rright).
-- 
Roy S. Rapoport     internet: rsr@soda.berkeley.edu      bitnet: rsrsoda@ucbocf
anonymous mail: wi.5836@n7kbt.rain.com        androphile, gynophile, kerryphile
"What I used to think is me / is just a faded memory." -NIN
"No mayonnaise in Ireland"
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde)
Subject: Re: Ever wonder...
Followup-To: soc.bi
Originator: lunde@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Reply-To: Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde)
Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 13:56:22 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.072630.2876@Princeton.EDU> datepper@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (David Aaron Tepper) writes:
>Is there any such thing as bi erotica, or do erotica manufacturers
>just assume we'll look at anything and everything out there? Are
>there different standards/tastes for bi-women and bi-men?[...]

I would put in a word for "Libido: The Journal of Sex and Sensibility"
which features a mix of men and women, het and homo, and so forth.

While it isn't afraid to be a bit kinky, it "objectifies" both
men and women in about equal proportions and takes queer sexuality
seriously.

(And unlike "mainstream" porn -- the people actually *touch* instead
of being posed for the best camera angle.)

-- 
 Albert Lunde         | Interfaith  |     *Y*Y*      "A branch on the
 Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu |  Bisexual   |      *Y*        tree of life"
                      |  Feminist   |.......|.........................
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: vdijk@io.tudelft.nl
Subject: Re: Ethics...
Organization: TU Delft, Faculty IO
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 11:31:32 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.211523.12775@news.cs.brandeis.edu>, st891487@pip.cc.brandeis.edu (Schwartzberg, Queen of Spades) writes:
> In article <1993Jan26.201953.22346@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>, dwells@lonestar.utsa.edu (Darren . Wells) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan23.232911.1@vmsb.is.csupomona.edu>
>> cvadrgez@vmsb.is.csupomona.edu writes:
>>>Is it ethical to one day just stop talking to a friend (permanently), and to
>>>NEVER even try to explain why?
>>> [...]
> The answer is NO. If somebody does this to you kick up a ruckus. 
>   [...]
> Are there any opposing viewpoints? Does anybody care?
> 
>   -Schwartzberg

It might be an enlightening exercise to image why you would ever do such a
thing yourself - and if you could justify it.  (Me,) Myself, I can think
of several reasons:

1) The former friend has made me inexplicably angry, and I know that
restraining myself from pounding would cause me to splutter and stutter
instead of fluently explaining why I am mad.
2) The former friend has made me dead tired by failing to understand
repeated explanations.  However, I normally would tell hir to avoid the
subjects that we cannot agree upon.
3) The friend turns me on in the extreme, but has a happy relation that
I do not want to disturb.  Since I would not want to embarrass hir by
excessive drooling whenever we meet, I might avoid hir.  Again, I would
normally explain this situation anyhow - but that depends how serious
I am about not disturbing this friend's other relations.

I do care a lot about these things, having an oversized sense of duty.
However, some situations can trap you.  As a philosophy prof. once pointed
out to me: it is impossible to live without getting dirty hands (conf. Sartre).

Casper

Casper G.C. van Dijk               "Broken words,
Delft University of Technology      never meant to be spoken"
the Netherlands                                    Bob Dylan
From: zzaascd@hpa.ee.man.ac.uk (Colin Dente)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: grumble
Date: 25 Jan 93 12:15:04 GMT
Reply-To: colin@manchester.ac.uk
Organization: Electrical Engineering Dept Manchester University

In article <memo.881936@cix.compulink.co.uk>, cliveg@cix.compulink.co.uk (Clive Grace) writes:
|> In-Reply-To: <7236@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> zzaascd@hpa.ee.man.ac.uk (Colin Dente)
|> 
|> > Ooh - that reminds me - I must tell Dave & Alex that I'll be going to their
|> > party...
|> > 
|> > Colin
|> > (Taking a break from trying to convince himself that renormalisable gauge
|> > theories are *not* deeply philosophically suspect...)
|> 
|> Nice to see you back on the net colin

It's *so* nice to be appreciated - especially by someone like Clive.

|> <hugs> to you you sig sweetie...

What's a "sig" sweetie?  Are you referring, perhaps, to my furriness?
Well - <hugs> back, anyway

|> |[...]
|> |  --                              Tanais - friend to all furkindred|
|> +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
|> |cliveg@cix.compulink.co.uk | Bisexual knitter of quality since 1992|
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I assume I missed all the "If I give you the wool, will you knit me one?"
jokes...

Colin

P.S.  In case you're interested - I've come to the conclusion that
      renormalisable gauge theories *are* deeply philosophically suspect...
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: ktfizazi@burst.Princeton.EDU (Kamal Tayeb Fizazi)
Subject: Re: Are most of us Hetero guys really that insensitive?
Originator: news@nimaster
Organization: Princeton University
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 03:51:41 GMT

In article <1k28mb$f79@agate.berkeley.edu> mlloyd@ocf.berkeley.edu (M. Lloyd) writes:
>dms4s@uvacs.cs.Virginia.EDU (Sailor on the Seas of Fate) writes:
>[the above subject line]: Yes.
>Whether you are is a separate issue [lack of classic Lloydian diatribe erased]
>...the current western male role: deeply insensitive and with far more 
>emphasis on power than understanding.
>It's as true as it ever was: a good man is hard to find.
>Mike, feeling some of the poignancy of that statement just now.
*HUGS!* Mike don't feel so down, please??? :)  You've only just moved; you'll
meet someone soon.  I'm disappointed that I didn't get to meet you while you
were out East you "Retro-hippy, music nut, bi and backrubber of devotion" you!
Damn!
Kamal (cursing his luck, and echoing someone else's lamentation -- Darren? --
why is this country to goddamn BIG!?!)
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-| Dunya => the world
Desperately seeking person to make my baraka virulent :^) | Hanyah=> is easy
(would someone help me rouse it? anyone??? anyone???)     | Sma'  => the sky
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-| Safyah=> is pure
From: bethan@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Bethan Davies)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: grumble
Date: 23 Jan 93 00:10:43 GMT
Followup-To: soc.bi
Distribution: soc.bi
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

In article <1993Jan19.140230.9446@dcs.warwick.ac.uk> kay@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Kay Dekker) writes:
>In article <7236@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> colin@manchester.ac.uk writes:
>
>Colin! you're still in existence, then? <huggly-hug!>

More <snuggles> from further north.... (to both of you)

>>Ooh - that reminds me - I must tell Dave & Alex that I'll be going to their
>>party...

Hmmm.... I _must_ get organised on that one.... Having missed the last
event, I'm determined to get Cambridge-wards (missing all you wonderful
people...)

>suspect.  Imho.  But hey, we can argue about this at the PARTY!!!
>(Shouldn't I tell you that I'll be bringing some latex gloves :)?)
>
>				Kay

If you try and monopolise Colin, Kay, I shall get _very_ annoyed.......
And you wouldn't like me when I'm angry ..... <grin>

                               Bethan

>-- 
>the Crisco Kid: quiet, shy, mono, Armani-suited.  Not.  idx009@uk.ac.cov.cck

How about **NOT**     ...?
From: mjw19@cl.cam.ac.uk (M.J. Williams)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Odd passage from a book in 1937...
Date: 24 Jan 93 18:17:17 GMT
Reply-To: MJW19@phx.cam.ac.uk
Organization: The National Society for the Inversion of Cudddly Tigers

In article <1993Jan21.183043.29563@infodev.cam.ac.uk> SA121@phx.cam.ac.uk writes:
>(Spot who's been to too many AI and Logic lectures recently....)

Oh, I've been to one AI lecture, which I count as too many.

AI: "Data Structures and Algorithms with lots of hand-waving".

I won't attribute that quote in case he gets into trouble! Of course if Clive
wants to admit saying it then he can here.

Oops. 8-)

Mike.
--
____________________________________________________________________________
\  /  / Michael Williams                     Part II Computer Science Tripos
|\/|\/\ MJW19@phx.cam.ac.uk                          University of Cambridge
|  |(__)Cymdeithas Genedlaethol Traddodiad Troi Teigrod Mwythus Ben I Waered
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: ebail@ctp.com (Erik Bailey)
Subject: Re: Gender and Bi Groups
Organization: Cambridge Technology Partners
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:21:36 GMT

In article <C16E4C.BLu@panix.com> erover@panix.com (Elizabeth Rover) writes:
>I took a speech class in which a friend of mine was givent he ad lib topic
>of "the most important thing about me is...". She finished the sentence
>"that I am bisexual," and left most of the class open-jawed. See, she was
>getting married to a man later that month, and it didn't quite jibe with
>people's ideas of what "bisexual" ought to be.  She went on to explain that
>she was, in general, more attracted to women than to men, (jaws dropped
>further). 
>
>Her explanation, which made tremendous sense to me, (and still does) was
>that love is gender-blind, and that she is marrying the *person* she loves
>the most, not the *man* or *woman*.
>
>Just my long-winded way of saying that I agree; we are all sexual.

Hi honey -- welcome to soc.bi!!! *HUGS & KISSES & LICKS & SLURPS*

(for the rest of the world -- Liz is my NYC-based snugglebunny SO...)

--Erik

-- 
Erik Bailey   | Cambridge Technology Partners      | The usual disclaimer
              | 304 Vassar St., Cambridge MA 02139 | applies: this post is
ebail@ctp.com | (617) 374-8418                     | mine, not my employer's.
      /earth is 98% full; please remove any excess inhabitants.
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: miket@hermes.tcs.com (Michael Turner nmscore Assoc.)
Subject: Re: Odd passage from a book in 1937...
Organization: Teknekron Communications Inc.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:06:44 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.164214.1337@harlqn.co.uk> daveb@harlqn.co.uk (Dave Berry) writes:
>elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg) writes:
>>      Who knows if the time will not also come one day, when the
>>   highest class of people will be ambisexual,
>>                  - Dr. Johann Rutgers, 1937.
>>
>>   Of course, Rutgers didn't get EVERYTHING terribly accurate.
>
>I don't think that even the quoted text is accurate, at least not literally.
>We're not a "higher class of people" just because we're bisexual.
>
>Dave.

Yes, but...(haughty sniff)...it IS an important contributing reason.
---
Michael Turner
miket@tcs.com
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: an2839@anon.penet.fi (Archer)
Subject: Re: soc.bi orgies (was Re: Why I read a.s.a.r)
Organization: Anonymous contact service
X-Anonymously-To: soc.bi
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 06:37:12 GMT

muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
> *smile*...a couple from out of town who didn't know me were brought
> along to my last party by a close friend.  Before arriving, they asked
> him if it would be a problem if they were publically affectionate...
> *grin*.  He said "uhh...I *don't* think so," while carefully controlling
> bursts of laughter.  They came in to find all three couches piled with
> people - mostly having conversations...*grin*.  (I've decided that a
> pile is an ideal way to have a conversation with about 6 people -
> everyone is close enough to be heard by all the others...*grin*.)

[etc, etc]

damn damn damn damn damn.  If someone holds one of these in my area,
I'll go, anonymity or no anonymity.

I think it's time for a hug break.

-"Archer"
damn damn damn damn damn  ;)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: kay@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Kay Dekker)
Subject: Re: Lovely film, I cried
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:36:53 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.195529.3232@dcs.warwick.ac.uk> crisp@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Badvoc) writes:
>In <1993Jan26.193710.2950@dcs.warwick.ac.uk> kay@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Kay Dekker) writes:
>>Here, dear, I'm afraid.  But my darling assures me that this
>>must be some television reference: apparently RA does Barclaycard
>>(a credit card of Barclay's Bank) adverts on television; snakebite
>>is a mixture of cider and lager, renowned for inducing drunkenness
>>in students; alas, I can do no better than that.
>
>I think the snake bite is a reference to the Barclycard advert where Rowan
>finds someone who is suffering from a snake bite

A bite of a snake or the effects of a 'snakebite'?  Anyway, thanks: not
being a television-watcher the adverts had escaped my notice.

>- Badvoc.

Ooooo... haven't seen you around here before... a*noth*er local muffin?
If so... wanna be *pounce*d? :)

				Kay
-- 
the Crisco Kid: quiet, shy, mono, Armani-suited.  Not.  idx009@uk.ac.cov.cck
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: dwells@lonestar.utsa.edu (Darren . Wells)
Subject: Re: A philosophical question...spawn
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 01:23:41 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.190116.1@vmsb.is.csupomona.edu>
 cvadrgih@vmsb.is.csupomona.edu writes:
>You are right, a lover is a lover, but, does it hurt more to be left for a
>member of the opposite sex, or for a member of the same sex?  As a special
>consideration, if you think that your boyfriend is gay (assuming, of course
>that you are a guy), and you've spent the last 4 months (i.e. the entire length
>of your relationship trying to convince him of such), does it hurt more if he
>leaves you for another guy, or for a girl?

Yikes.  Spending four months trying to "convince" someone (especially a SO)
that he is gay . . . If that's where you are soming from, I believe you
will get to answer that one for us pretty soon, if you can't already.

Whatever reasons you have for thinking your boyfriend is gay, and whether
or not he is gay or bi, there is no better way to encourage him to leave
you than insisting that he is something he says he isn't (ie gay).

Better luck next time, buddy.  *hug*

Darren

Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Subject: Re: Party Face, Net Face was Appearances on and off the net
Reply-To: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk
Organization: U of Cambridge Comp Lab, UK
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 15:48:17 GMT

In article <1993Jan23.112220.16955@thelema.uucp> STella@thelema.uucp (STella) writes:
>In article <1993Jan19.121946.14730@infodev.cam.ac.uk> Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk writes:
>>In article <C10tJ8.HD0@demon.co.uk> gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:

>>>that people are expected to respect your space and no-one is expected
>>>to do anything they don't want to, but the fact is that soc.bi events
>>>seem to always take on an overtly sexual nature.  Don't get me wrong,
>
>How is this different from any other part of life except, perhaps,
>working?  

Eh?  How does doing the shopping or cleaning the house take on "an
overtly sexual nature"?  (The mind boggles...)



--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk
From: rsr@soda.berkeley.edu (Roy S. Rapoport)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Clueless hetboys and bi's
Date: 27 Jan 1993 07:35:15 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu

In article <MJB.93Jan25222817@motmot.doc.ic.ac.uk> mjb@doc.ic.ac.uk (Matthew J Brown) writes:

->It's worth our time remembering that women *can* be as clueless as men
->about this - it's rarer, I believe, but not by any means unknown.

Why do you think it's rarer? I think women generally express these fantasies
more rarely, but from what I've seen women talk about their sexual fantasies
less than men anyway ... 

->Like Roy, I'm willing to make an admission - yes, the thought, and the
->actuality, of watching two women having sex does turn me on. So, too,

*blink* *gasp* Ooooh, you hetboy you! :)

->do most other combinations - but then I'm bi, and the straight man
->is probably less interested in watching men. Plus, I can see part of
->another reason for the fascination - sex between two women is an act
->in which a man is physically incapable of taking part - watching some
->other sexual combinations may be less exciting because of the
->*possibility* of taking the place of one of the participants.

Whoa, that's really interesting, because IMHO, they're attracted to it for
exactly the _opposite_ reason -- that they _can_ imagine themselves doing it
... in other words, the average heterosexual man can imagine himself going
down on a woman, and as such can see another woman doing that, but would
never imagine going down on a man (or how much fun it is), and as such would
be slightly grossed out by another man doing it (not to mention how he would
feel about buggery).

This would also explain, IMHO, some of the attitudes I've seen of women who
have thought that gay men together are hot, but got rather uncomfortable
thinking of themselves and a woman.

-roy
-- 
Roy S. Rapoport     internet: rsr@soda.berkeley.edu      bitnet: rsrsoda@ucbocf
anonymous mail: wi.5836@n7kbt.rain.com        androphile, gynophile, kerryphile
"What I used to think is me / is just a faded memory." -NIN
"No mayonnaise in Ireland"
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 15:24:47 EST
From: Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Gender and Bi Groups
 <C16E4C.BLu@panix.com> <1993Jan26.153539.782@harlqn.co.uk>

In article <1993Jan26.153539.782@harlqn.co.uk>, daveb@harlqn.co.uk (Dave Berry)
says:
>
>erover@panix.com (Elizabeth Rover) writes:
>>Just my long-winded way of saying that I agree; we are all sexual.
>
>But what does this mean?  Aren't heterosexual and homosexual people
>also sexual?  How does "sexual" get across your attraction to more than
>one sex?  I'm not being rhetorical (well, a little, I suppose), I really
>have problems understanding what is the attraction of this phrase.
>
>Dave.

What I like about the phrase is that it doesn't have a predictive
aspect, while acknowledging that sexual behaviour is of interest.

What carbonates my hormones has changed over time; if I define myself
as 'straight' or 'vanilla', I'm making those limits-of-interest a
part of my self creation/self definition, and putting constraints
on what I _can_ get interested in.  In the fullness of time, those
constraints may come to constitute arguing with reality, and I'd then
have to re-create my constraint set, which would probably be a lot
of work, since it would involved re-creating who I think I am.

If I regard myself as 'sexual', I've acknowledged that sexuality
is of interest, and can go on to identify what I happen to be
interested in at present.  This avoids constraining myself not
to change, which seems like a good idea.

Graydon
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
saundrsg@               "Praise then Darkness and Creation unfinished"
   qucdn.queensu.ca                   - U. K. LeGuin