HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel)
Subject: Re: H. Biesel and catheterization
Keywords: cut out the middleman, Dr. Benway
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 17:16:49 GMT

litow@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (bruce e litow) writes:

>H. Biesel, in a recent posting, suggested surgical alterations in
>men and women (sic) in order to equalize lavatory utilization stress,
>both in the larger societal sense, and in the ever-menacing personal
>hygiene one. His suggestion is a swell one (to steal a phrase) but
>Dr. Benway (always thinking about somatic improvements) has proposed
>a more radical approach. Following his motto, `cut out the middleman',
>Benway would simply attach a venting tube from the bladder with an
>external nozzle. This eliminates that annoying urethra and, with a
>CO2 assist, could provide for spectacular voidings. The idea is
>literally too good to be true, no?

I fully support this noble effort toward egalitarian solutions to
sexual inequities. Dr. Benway's radical approach, which gets to the
meat of the problem, also promises to make women fully the equal of 
men in pissing contests. It also provides a shot in the arm for the
languishing colostomy industry.

Regards,
       H. Biesel
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: jlinder@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Jeffrey S Linder)
Subject: Re: Freshm*n
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 12:35:28 GMT

English is essentially a Germanic Language.  "Man" (in German) is not gender
specific.  The term "freshman" in English is not gender specific.  Those who 
say it does are grasping at straws so try and demonstrate some systemic sexism 
in Western culture my looking for "MAN" in every word and then assumming that 
excludes female.  My advice to these people: try a serious issue or you won't 
be taken seriously.

Jeff.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: Proposed Massachusetts legislation H.5194
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 03:06:06 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <MUFFY.92Aug25162520@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>In article <36=n#gd.payner@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug24.205430.16309@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> clavazzi@nyx.cs.du.edu (The_Doge) writes:
>>>In article <6y=nxng.payner@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>>>Whatever may have happened is not important, it is what this means
>>>>as seen by the communist party, or in this case, the feminist party.
>                                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>I see a similarity in the idealism, and the way it is being expressed.
>>>Second, there is no "feminist party".  
>>So, who claimed that there was?
>
>Umm...you did.  Right up there.

Opps, so I did. I apologize for any misunderstanding this may have caused,
and let me clarify that I am aware that there is no "feminist party".
 
>>Your imagination does you great credit,
>>but your attempts to foster your imaginings as my words or intent do us
>>both a disservice.
>
>Well, I wouldn't exactly call reading what someone wrote "imagination."
>Perhaps it was your imagination that you did not write that?  Try
>reading your post over again...

The rest of his post was not in response to what I posted, as far as I could 
tell. I made an error, would you care to show that my entire response was 
equally in error?
 
>Muffy
>Muffy Barkocy | muffy@mica.berkeley.edu | wi.4636@wizvax.methuen.ma.us

Rich

payner@netcom.com
From: muller@noao.edu (Beatrice Muller)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Freshm*n
Date: 3 Sep 92 17:15:27 GMT
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, USA

In article <1992Sep3.123528.23642@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> jlinder@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Jeffrey S Linder) writes:
>English is essentially a Germanic Language.  "Man" (in German) is not gender
>specific.  The term "freshman" in English is not gender specific.  Those who 
>say it does are grasping at straws so try and demonstrate some systemic sexism 
>in Western culture my looking for "MAN" in every word and then assumming that 
>excludes female.  My advice to these people: try a serious issue or you won't 
>be taken seriously.
>
>Jeff.

Well, Jeff, German feminists and linguists would not agree!
They use now man/frau (man comes from Mann).

Beatrice
From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Some examples (Was Re: Winning by Violation (was: new group?))
Date: 4 Sep 92 15:01:38 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

I've just read the examples --to some extent I have difficulty
making out the context -- but it seems to me that the moderators
had reason to reject them on the grounds of irrelevancy or
because they contain personal attacks.  I've had articles of my
own rejected on these grounds, but it doesn't make me feel that
I have to install someone antagonistic to the idea of feminism
as a moderator.

Hillel, are you aware of the difference between attacking
someone personally and disputing their ideas?
-- 
 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde)
Subject: Re: Feminism & Women's Studies
Followup-To: alt.feminism
Originator: lunde@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Reply-To: Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde)
Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 03:07:06 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.162229.4646@thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu> mackenzi@McRCIM.McGill.EDU (Paul Mackenzie) writes:
>Carol A Russell wrote regarding a question by Seth Meyer:
>|> I'm not saying *you* don't care, or that you don't support feminism.  
>|> But you're up against the old adage of "how to prove a negative", 
>|> in this case that you're *not* anti-feminism.
[...]
>How should a man go about 'proving' he's not anti-feminist?  Does he have to
>agree with everything a feminist says?  Is he does not, does that mean he
>is anti-feminist?

The problem is you *can't* absolutely "prove a negative" (in general). In real
life one relies on the preponderence of evidence -- if trust is not assumed
then it will have to be earned gradually.

IMHO, support for feminism is not mindless agreement with anything; it
is taking some of the principles of feminism, and women's experience
seriously.

-- 
 Albert Lunde         | Interfaith  |     *Y*Y*      "A branch on the
 Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu |  Bisexual   |      *Y*        tree of life"
 alunde@nuacvm.bitnet |  Feminist   |.......|.........................
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: equality by regression?
Reply-To: 70465.203@compuserve.com
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Distribution: alt.feminism
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 01:31:02 GMT

osiris@athena.mit.edu writes:

> People have been talking about how women favor opressing men.  Well,
>there is a flaw.  Women ARE oppressed.  Andrea Dworkin made a
>wonderful speech (I want a 24 hour truce) about how you will find NO
>women saying (and really believing) that if women went out and raped
>men every three minutes then everything would be alright.  As long as
>women have the threat of rape as a form of sexual slavery, they can 
>not be equal.  As long as men are taught that men have to be dominant
>in a relationship, there can be no equality.  As long as men think it
>acceptable to make comments about a woman they do not know, there can
>be no equality.  The ERA amendment would force men to reconsider the
>status that women are relegated to in our society.  It would not bring
>the equality that is necessary.

*I* have no problem with the views expressed above. What people object to
is when the proposed *solutions* to the problems amount to *assuming*
that men *wiil* oppress and dominant unless forcibly restrained from
doing so.

One of the great unheralded tragedies of our culture is that the
attitude that "men have to be dominant" is damaging to many *men*.
Stop and think what kind of life this leaves for a man who *isn't*
"dominant". (hint: how many relationships do you think gets started
by "passive" males as opposed "active" or "dominant" ones) Or better,
watch what happens to a "non dominant" male child. (hint: being called
"sissy" is only the start)
-- 
Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/51	 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: awerling@nmsu.edu (WERLING)
Subject: Re: Sexist studies... was(Re: Feminism & Women's Studies)
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<AWERLING.92Sep1232252@dante.nmsu.edu> <xqkn+8p.payner@netcom.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 21:44:19 GMT

In article <xqkn+8p.payner@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:

>  In article <AWERLING.92Sep1232252@dante.nmsu.edu> awerling@nmsu.edu (WERLING) writes:
> >
> >Women's Studies in and of itself is *not* sexist.  It is a study that
> >focuses on a particular group of people.  

> No, you are playing games with words, it focuses on a particular
> -sex-. 

Yes, and meteorology focuses on a particular aspect of natural
phenomena.  I don't understand your point.

> >                                           Just because it is not
> >called "Gender Studies" does not make it sexist.  It is not sexist to
> >wish to understand.  To strive to understand.  To create a program to
> >*help*others* understand.

> You might clarify what you mean by "gender". But regardless, "Womens
> studies" are based upon diferentiation by -sex-, not gender, so unless
> you claim that they are equivalant, I do not understand what you are
> saying.

In my vocabulary sex = gender.  Am I missing some distinction?  In my
vocabulary sexist does not equal "focusing on a particular sex," it
means unfair discrimination based on sex/gender/whatever word you wish
to use here.

--
Andrew Werling    awerling@nmsu.edu    yip@acca.nmsu.edu
From: hillyard@msc.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: ERA question
Date: 27 Aug 92 04:12:17 GMT
Reply-To: hillyard@msc.cornell.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: Cornell-Materials-Science-Center
Originator: hillyard@tiger.msc.cornell.edu

From article <MUFFY.92Aug26152636@remarque.berkeley.edu>, by muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy):
[...]
> 
> Honestly, are you afraid of unisex bathrooms?  Doesn't it seem rather
> ridiculous to vote against a proposed law on this basis?  Would you vote
> *for* the ERA if there was a stipulation that bathrooms remain
> segregated?  As far as the draft goes, I would think that men would
> *like* the fact that it implies that women should be drafted, too.  Or
> that it woudl give women more reason to fight against the draft.
> 
> Muffy

You misinterpret me.  I would generally be for an ERA.  Of course, there is
this little problem of interpretation--anti-discrimination laws didn't
help blacks for a long while, and in today's climate and court it is quite
okay to discriminate against white men in hiring.

Here's another gray area, and is a subject that has been mentioned in a
couple other posts in this group--athletics.  Does the ERA make it possible
for me to compete in the LPGA (womens golf).  If the answer is no because
there already is a mens league, could I try out for the Cornell volleyball 
team?  There is no men's intercollegiate team.  (It already works in the
other direction.  You occasionally see newspaper stories such as a female
high school wrestler or football player, and one of the NHL teams just 
recently gave a female goalie a try out)

SEH
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: olmstead@sail.uwaterloo.ca ()
Subject: Dworkin
Originator: olmstead@sail.uwaterloo.ca
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 16:53:46 GMT

RE: Dworkin

>Intercourse, she declares, "is the pure, sterile, formal expression
>of mens contempt for women." The fact that a woman might enjoy sex
>makes it even more degrading. Dworkin contends that material depicting
>women as enjoying sex is worse than the Nazis' treatment of the
>Jews:"The Jews didn't do it to themselves and they didn't orgasm....
>No one, not even Goebbels, said that the Jews liked it.

I started reading this group for some insight into women's thoughts.  I
firmly believe in systemic discrimination (I believe it exists I mean)
and I also feel that we are all sold a bill of goods when it comes to
beauty...I don't have to read the beauty myth...I am also infuriated
that women don't feel safe because of asshole men stalking the streets.

What type of feminist theory is Dworkin's?

How would any two people have sex without occupying one another at least a
little bit?

Would there be a single holocaust survivor that would agree with
Dworkin's comparison here?

Do men intercourse women, vice versa, or is something they do together?

If society were to become matriachal tomorrow and Dworkin was president
and intercourse was illegal would there not be women and men of all
beliefs stealing away in dark places to intercourse together?  I know
its a stupid and absurd example but it would make a good movie if it
could be done without the usual mysogeny.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Olmstead		| 	olmstead@sail.uwaterloo.ca            
Civ Eng Undergrad	|----------------------------------------------
University of Waterloo  | "No one knows where it started it and no one
Waterloo, Ontario	|  knows where it will end.  The fighting con- 
CANADA			|  tinues, women vs. men"...Daved Byrne
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky alt.feminism:207 talk.bizarre:27772
From: g8231233@cc.uow.edu.au (Andrew Warner)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: FEMINIST/DYKE JOKES WANTED
Date: 28 Aug 92 07:57:18 GMT
Organization: University Of Wollongong


A joke, for want of a better decription, was posted recently and resulted in
a couple of critical posts.

I think I should point out that, while many would find the joke in poor
taste and even offensive, it is a real expression of some
view/philosophy/mis-spent youth etc. As such it is dangerous to remove it or
restrain people in their expression of it.

If we might think for a moment of the feminist philosophies expressed in this
group. Some of them may be considered by some to be invalid or perhaps
offensive to ones sensibilities. However, we would not consider for an
instant keeping them quiet. Can one in fairness then restrain other people's
expression, however abhorrent we may find it.

g8231233@wampyr.cc.uow.edu.au
or
warner@davinci.sci.uow.edu.au

Andrew Warner
Dept. of physics
Uni. of Wollongong
Wollongong
N.S.W. 2519
Australia
From: honna@cs.concordia.ca (SEGEL honna)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Sexuality and Human Evolution - query
Date: 3 Sep 92 18:53:18 GMT
Organization: Computer Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec

In article <1992Aug29.105416.5417@news.acns.nwu.edu> Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde) writes:
>In article <1992Aug29.001740.42643@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu>
> miner@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu writes:

"Dominance" is dogmanance...it's an entirely subjective term, with connotations
out the wazoo and nary a denotation.  It's like "love"...'what the hell are we 
talking about, anyway?'






HS/ Michael
-- 
***************************************************************
honna segel
department of computer science
concordia university  *****************************************
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
Subject: Re: What's the purpose here?
Reply-To: mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Meir I Green)
Organization: Columbia University, New York
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 03:54:38 GMT

In article <MUFFY.92Aug26181314@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>In article <ATAYLOR.92Aug26154422@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (brainless) writes:
>><In article <MUFFY.92Aug24152039@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>>>In article <fb-ngrn.tyger@netcom.com> tyger@netcom.com (Kitty in the Middle) writes:
>><>*THE* feminist view of things?  If you ever *read* soc.feminism, you
>><>might have found that there is not *one* feminist view of things.  In
>><>addition, you would have found much criticism of feminism, to the point
>><>where some people complain that it seems to be a group more for the
>><>anti-feminists.  Why don't you read what you criticize before you
>><>comment on it?
>>Looks like "kinder, gentler" Muffy doesn't like it
>>when her net.club is criticized...
>Darling!  No one every, to my knowledge, claimed that *I* was "kinder"
>OR "gentler."  Where *did* you get that idea?  I'm *forced* to be nice
...

Look, could you people *please* send these personal comments via email or,
better yet, actually learn to send flames to /dev/hell on occasion!?

Thanks.

 * * * * *  =================== Internet address is  mig@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu
* * * * * * == Meir I. Green == Amateur Packet Radio N2JPG@W2XO.PA.USA.NOAM
 * * * * *  = mig@columbia.edu= Amateur Packet Radio N2JPG@K2KJC.NY.USA.NOAM
* * * * * * =================== Amateur TCP/IP       N2JPG@uhm.ampr.org
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,talk.politics.misc
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Racism and Rodney King (Was: Dworkin...)
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<1992Aug29.175416.6446@leland.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Aug31.071149.15854@news.columbia.edu>
	<1992Aug31.194731.20698@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 00:29:16 GMT

<In article <1992Aug31.194731.20698@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:

<   I don't believe people should give up their ideals, but there are also
<   realities.  Racism in this country is a reality.  I think the Rodney
<   King beating proved how easy it is for whites to cast a black man into
<   a role of a berserk, out-of-control animal who was treated fairly by 4
<   white police officers.  The Sumi Valley jurors claimed they weren't
<   racist and were horrified by being considered such. 

	Farthing cannot make this claim without having access to
	ALL the evidence that the jury saw.

	It would appear that he is basing his opinion solely
	on what the media allowed him to see....

	Note that the jury was not "all white" as is often
	claimed...

Followup set to talk.politics.misc.
From: zen@death.corp.sun.com (d)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Freshm*n
Date: 3 Sep 92 16:03:32
Organization: savage hackers
	<AWERLING.92Sep2203602@dante.nmsu.edu>
	<1992Sep3.145755.3704@spider.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: death.corp.sun.com
In-reply-to: ivan@spider.co.uk's message of 3 Sep 92 14:57:55 GMT


In article <1992Sep3.145755.3704@spider.co.uk> ivan@spider.co.uk (Ivan Reid) writes:
>   PS. I wonder if Muffy will axe this article? If so, "rejectees"
> should be mailed, as a courtesy at least, perhaps with guidelines for
> articles/reasons for rejection. - this relates to the ongoing debate at
> present about censorship on his group.

  Why should she care about your post?  She is one of the moderators of
soc.feminism -- alt.feminism is anarchy :-) You can get the guidelines
of soc.feminism by reading the periodic postings in the group or mailing
to the moderators, and they will always inform you (assuming they get
the post) why your post was nuked.

 -- d
From: kkidman@vx9000.weber.edu (Kent Kidman)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: equality
Date: 25 Aug 92 18:35:00 GMT
Organization: Weber State University ComSci Department
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1

In article <1992Aug25.060539.24643@mr.med.ge.com>, bednarek@picard.med.ge.com (Dennis Bed writes...
> 
>Well since my posting became a arguement on strenght (not what I intended)
>let me voice my ideas.  
> 
>You cannot call an individual physically weak because of there sex, however
>if there were not differences then both male and female olimpians should
>compete together not seperatly by sex.  The Army should have only one physicial
>fittness test with the same scoring standards for both sexes. These ideas
>are a laugh to think they will ever happen. 
> 
>Yes I do believe that equal opertunity should exist between sexes, as long
>as the prerequisits are the same regardless of sex, race, or anything else
> Equality in opertunity is a good goal in my mind but standards must remain
>the same for both sexes, or you have reverse discrimination.
> 
>Dennis

The Army should probably have many tests, since there are many different jobs
and not all would require the same strength or skills.  I agree that standards
should exist and be the same for both sexes, but there should not be artificial
standards that keep anyone from doing a job that they are capable of.

As far as Olympians are concerned, I think it was Newsweek (I could be wrong on
this) that compared current female Olympic times for swimming and running to
men 20 - 30 years ago, and the current women won.  Maybe the reason women
aren't as fast as men (at least in the Olympics) is that they have been
discriminated against for so long that they are just behind.  Maybe they will
catch up if they are allowed to try.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kent Kidman                  kkidman@cc.weber.edu
Department of Mathematics    Weber State University   Ogden, Utah
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: ehudon@reed.edu (Elizabeth Hudon)
Subject: Re: The Feminist Joke
 
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 20:56:42 GMT
Distribution: USA

I'm responding to the postings asking that jokes about feminists not
be posted to alt.feminism.

The joke in question went something like this:

Q:Why do Sumo wrestlers shave their legs?
A:To distinguish themselves from the feminists.

In Rachel's posting, she asks that posters

>. . . MAINTAIN SOME
>KINDNESS WITH RESPECT TO OTHER PEOPLES POINTS OF VIEW AND LIFESTYLES.

To me, this implies that the joke was cruel and disrespectful, which
I simply don't think is the case. It's humor, it's poking fun at the
*stereotypical* feminist. And, unless this group is simply meant to be
a cheering squad for feminism instead of an open discussion, the joke
is not out of place here. This joke is no more hurtful to feminists
and the feminist community than cynical references to *military
intelligence* are to soldiers.

Instead of crying "Foul!" and demanding isolation, laugh for a moment
(if you find the joke amusing) or dismiss it as crude (if you don't
find the joke amusing).

Elizabeth


Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: ed@venuscmc.ca (Ed Antosz)
Subject: Re: Jewish feminists
Reply-To: antosz@scorpio.ic.cmc.ca
Organization: Canadian Microelectronics Corporation
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 14:09:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep2.162436.21391@midway.uchicago.edu>, wag5@quads.uchicago.edu (john peter wagner) writes:
|> 
|> 	To any of you feminists ot there with names like
|> Goldman, Holzman, etc.-
|> Have you thought of changing your names to 
|> Goldperson, Holzperson, etc.?
|> 
|> 				J. Wagner
Close, but if we're to get into name changes perhaps Goldperdaughter,
Holzperdaughter, Goodperdaughter might be appropos.


Ed