HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Responses to people dying
Date: 20 Aug 92 15:15:17 GMT
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison


In article <1992Aug20.031627.28817@plts.uucp> tal@plts.uucp
(Tom Limoncelli) writes:

>I'm still upset about Rob's death, but I am also happy
>because it makes us realize that this world is full of
>people that can touch us enough that we do miss them.  I
>don't know if that even makes sense.

Makes perfect sense to me.  I miss Rob terribly, I miss my
mom terribly, and their deaths have underscored in a way
that mere imagination couldn't have how important they were
to me.

>Maybe on the next "Day Without Art" we should try to get
>everyone to not post to soc.motss / soc.bi in honor of all
>the net.folks that have past away.  It could be a "Day
>Without Posts".  (I'm sure it'll be a struggle for some.)

I'm not opposed to the suggestion in any way, and anything
that would honor the memory of Rob and others departed would
find favor with me.  Btw, I didn't know there was a "Day
Without Art" (because this is about Rob, I'll pass up some
of the opportunity for wry comments on how that's
distinguished from garden-variety days).

At any rate, a good condidate date for ceremonially
remembering Rob would be either March 9 (birthday) or August
13 (deathday).

>Yes, with network delays and cross-posting it wouldn't 100%
>work, but Rob et.  al.  would would appreciate it, if they
>can scan the net from where ever they are now.

Two alternatives come to mind.  One is, I fancy that Rob
himself would rather like the idea of people carrying on
with their lives, important business, fun, and just plain
old LGB stuff, in the usual fashion, rather than making an
all-day event of it.

A kind of middle course might be to designate a certain day
(Rob's birthday seems an obvious choice) on which the cohort
would devote special energy to remembering not only Rob, but
every LGB person whose loss has affected them deeply.
Postings on that day could concentrate (rather then being
limited to) on topics like: what people who've died from AIDS
meant to us, what been pivotal in our lives arising from
facing our grief, what we think of a (generally uncaring,
unresponsive, or even hostile society around us), ways to
make the world a better place in which certainly PWA might
expect better care and greater understanding, and so forth.

-- 
Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin
Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson
NeXTmail w/attachments: anderson@yak.macc.wisc.edu  Bitnet: anderson@wiscmacc
Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888
From: mattm@Apple.COM (Matthew Melmon)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Snaps (no, not *that* kind, Elizabeth) (was Re: New queer terminology) (was Re: The media, again)
Date: 21 Aug 92 20:42:42 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson) writes:

>In article <1992Aug17.192110.24090@macc.wisc.edu> 
>anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
>Oh, it's not their grasp of the issues and modalities that I
>question (or question all that much).  It's their grasp of what
>I would argue, pace Nelson, is our shared history and culture.  
>I don't know how to explain this.  It's almost as if they respond 
>to the obvious jokes as if this were a farce, when what they're
>looking at is actually a comedy of manners in which *everything*
>is loaded and funny.

>Arne

These rantings will be posted twice, and that's the way it goes, as
I'm not in the mood to wait for our beloved goofy to start it's newsfeed
yet once again.  This pompous, withered prune of an asshole is coddled
entirely too much on this group.  First, we get some absurd explanation
of what it is to *snap*.  No, no, you silly little young things - sayeth
the Prune - you don't know *why* you are snapping, and therefore cannot
be allowed to *snap* in peace.  The Prune - as his wizened state shall 
testify - is aged and experienced, and he *knows* why we snap.

We snap because of some B-grade flick made ages and ages ago.

So there you have it, only cinematic freaks may *snap*.  All others must
clap.  

But tell me, Wise Guru, why do we *clap*.  I mean, can we all *clap* in good
faith not knowing which bad movie it is that started the ritual?  Oh, 
excuse me.  I suppose there was the *clap* before there was the *movie*.  
Do your memories go back that far?  Why, oh why, do we *clap*.  And why
did they (whoever they are) name a disease after it.  Perhaps your
experience is sufficiently vast to encompass both?

On the subject of generational failings, yes - 'tis true our underachievements
are many.  No Flower Children revolutions.  No naked rampages in stagnant
fields listing to bad rock stars.  No followers of Timothy Leary, moaning
about the ecstasies of LSD and pot and 'shrooms.  No "Me" "Me" "Me". No
burning the American flag (Berkeley students don't count).  No hippie-
yuppie conversion into stock-dealing lizards bankrupting the nations
economy as surely as it's 'social institutions' with junk bonds and bank
fiascos.  

Surely, we must hang our heads in shame.

But one thing we will do - Lord Arne - and one thing that shall earn us
the undying gratitude of generations to come (and the envy of that
generation which proceeded your own, and which was the first to get
grapped on by your Boom Fuck legions):

We're going to bury you.


Matthew Melmon
If my opinions we're Apple's, I'd be driving a shiny car, too.
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: AH.PBL@forsythe.stanford.edu (Mark)
Subject: John-Boy vs. Bart
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: net
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 22:35:13 GMT


  Since Bush and Quayl(e) are determined to run their
  looney-tunes campaign against single T.V. mothers and
  cartoon characters (not to mention gays & lesbians),
  The Simpsons will be fighting back (maybe tonight,
  Thu 08/20).  Bush's second favorite family will be watching
  George bad-mouth them on T.V. with his "Families should
  be more like the Waltons instead of the Simpsons"
  remark, and Bart will respond with, "But we *are* like
  the Waltons: we're waiting for the Depression to end, too".

Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Subject: Re: the kiss
Organization: insert anything here
Distribution: world,local
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 02:54:04 GMT

stevenz@milori.ccit.arizona.edu writes:
>I mentioned at a discussion group here some time ago that it surprised
>me that I was surprised by seeing two men kissing at a gay bar.  I
>mean, all of a sudden I just had this nagging feeling that I shouldn't
>be surprised, but I kinda was.  I felt like I shouldn't really have
>taken note of it at all, but there it was.

	This couldn't have been at the Venture-N...  I mean I saw
a LOT more than kissing going on there...  :-)  And BOY do I miss
playing darts!

>(-; Come to think of it, I have several times of late done a good deed
>or two wrt desensitizing other people to male-male kissing in public
>(i.e. I have been known to do some serious face-sucking with a recent
>ex-stranger in one or two of the bars in town).  Next time any of you
>are in Tucson, let me know if you'd like to further the cause. ;-)

	Steven and his cohorts are among the friendliest and most
fun people I have meet!  If ya'll are down that way, do yourself a
favor give this cute bear a call!  (Actually I find both Tucson
and Phoenix to be really friendly to strangers...)

BBC wishing he had more
reasons to go to Tucson
this year...

P.S.  Smooches to you and to John, Ernie, Glen and Mati!
From: adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: New queer terminology (was Re: The media, again)
Date: 16 Aug 1992 16:55:24 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu

In article <1992Aug16.225820.13089@reed.edu> 
nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) writes in response
to Ron Lussier's amusement over the change in gay
terminology:

[...]
> gay is from a different era, the time of civil rights, Vietnam, women's
>   lib, gay lib.
> queer is new, challenging. The time of AIDS, Ronald Reagan, Jesse Helms

Honey, GLF's zaps in the early, early '70s were outrageous and 
challenging and took a hell of a lot more courage to do than what 
QN does today.  I mean, setting up a picket line in front of a gay 
club that doesn't allow drag queens in 1992 is just not in the same 
ballpark as staging a sit-in/kiss-in in the mayor's office in 1971.  

> gay is a lifestyle

AAARRRGGGHHHH!!!

> queer is a philosophy - we have our own literature, our own literary
>   analysis, our own political understanding.

Heavens.  Queerdom strikes me as little more than a '90s take
on camp, but without understanding it.  Queerdom is singularly
humorless and, what's worse, history- and traditionless.  Do the
queers who snap their fingers in unison rather than applaud know 
what they're doing?  (Hint: Kim Novak.  Pyewacket.)

Arne
From: John_Graves@cellbio.duke.edu
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Presumption
Date: 17 Aug 92 14:53:26 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Duke University Medical Center

In article <1992Aug15.213108.12621@amhux2.amherst.edu>
twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>In article <4443@news.duke.edu> John_Graves@cellbio.duke.edu writes:
>
>>I agree with Romanovsky and Phillips who I quote here from their song, "Give
me
>>a homosexual"
>>
>>"How straight can they be when they're down on their knees!"

This song works because so many people have recognized the problem of trying to
identify by sexual acts, sexual identities.  It also works because many folks
are acquainted with gay men who say that they want to have straight men only
for sexual activity. If you want to deny that the term straight is often used
as a homophobic device for having homosexual sex and not harming one's own
constructed view of oneself or as a means of dealing with internalized
homophobia epitomized by the thinking of a gay person that to have sex with
another gay person is not empowering, if that is deniable, then we would have
no questions about the motivations of the use of the term straight with regard
to one's sexual partner.   


>This is getting really interesting.  Not only do you object to Jess'
>labeling these people "straight" -- assuming that is what he was doing
>-- but you object to them labeling themselves "straight."  Is there
>anyone who you think deserves the label "straight?"  If so, who
>deserves to apply that label?  Them?  Me?  You?

If those labels meant anything which was consensually agreed upon by members of
this group or any other group, and if there were an essence of "straight" and
we could rationaly judge the confluence of a person who exhibits the essence of
straight" with the understood definition of straight, or any other of the
sexual identity identifiers, then theoretically we all would be able to apply
the label to someone in the same way.  In the absence of any such essence the
terms may be both applied and challenged by any and all.  Since I believe that
there is no essence of straight there can only be usages which are agreeable to
the community in which one converses.  If the community, or communities, to
which one belongs do not have an agreed upon definition, and it may be
impossible to ever agree on labelings of sexuality and sexual identity, then it
may be better to not use such words at all.  Motss is an example of an agreed
upon identifier. It's use has not be convoluted and politicized in the ways
that homosexual, queer, Lesbian, dyke, gay, straight, and bisexual have been.  

>
>>The Fool (i.e. the Court Jester)
>
>Well, we figured that out on our own.

Who are the we you speak for?  

>
>-- 
>____ Tim Pierce                / "Bisexual just means you pay for it."
>\  / twpierce@amherst.edu      /  
> \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /   -- Rock Hudson

Your signature in its parody is closer to an understanding of what I'm talking
about than your posting is.
>
From: adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Huntsville? Hmmmm.... (was Re: Introduction)
Date: 20 Aug 1992 14:09:11 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu

In article <1992Aug20.190938.19489@infonode.ingr.com> 
norris@infonode.ingr.com (Jeff Norris) writes:
> adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson) writes:
...
> >(Huntsville?  Oh dear, what did I say in Huntsville?)
>
> Oh puhleeze!  Surely the Motss Grand Faggot has never ventured to Huntsville,
> Alabama?!

Well, no.  I've never ventured to Huntsville, Alabama.  But it's
just remotely possible I might swing by someday on my way to visit 
a friend who's about to start teaching at dread Auburn University.

> To quote _Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary_ :
>
>      dulls-ville n [dull + -sville (as in Huntsville)] slang
>       : something that is dull or boring; also : BOREDOM

*Remotely* possible I might swing by.  But surely the arrival
of the Motss Grand Faggot to your humble village would occasion
days of feasting and celebration in his honor?

> >> jeff - who's feelin kinda woozie~~~
>                                    ^^^
>                                    NOTE: These are *NOT* sarcasm flags!

I feel faint~~~

> >Would you like another sip?
>
> I really shouldn't...  I'm in danger of becoming an Arneholic.

Oh heavens, the dangers of Arneholism (I like the sound of that)
are vastly exaggerated.  

Open wide.

Arne
From: nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Gay Republicans
Date: 18 Aug 92 22:41:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Aug18.224114.5796
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

In article <1992Aug18.153314.24649@tc.cornell.edu> shore@tc.cornell.edu writes:
>I find it absolutely astonishing that any gay, lesbian, or bisexual
>person could even consider being a member of the Republican Party.
>The party has taken an unequivocal stand against equal rights for all
>of us.

Me too, Melinda. I see plenty of reasons to dislike the Republican
Party - economics, foreign policy, etc. But these are points that we
can disagree on.

But I just don't see how one can be gay and have an allegiance to the
Republican party. Especially now.

How are the gay Republicans doing in California since Pete "Pete" Wilson?

(a lot of news after the first day of the convention is talking about
gay Republicans. Local TV stations here interviewed some Log Cabin
types (including my friend Eric Brown, the one who told me that
juggling dildos in front of children is wrong).

There was even an article in the Oregonian today about gay
Republicans. From the Newhouse news service.

Does this mean we're winning, that we're an issue? I think so.
-- 
                __
nelson@reed.edu \/                       Shop as usual and avoid panic buying
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton)
Subject: Re: musical finale
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 07:19:11 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

I'd offer a couple of choices.  Hell, (so to speak), let's have a big
concert and do them all: 

  Requiem, Listz
  The Chambered Nautilus, Mrs. H. H. A Beach 
  Te Deum, Bruckner
  Liebestod, Wagner 

I'm surprised the Liebestod isn't performed at memorial services all the
time.  

Maybe we could have the orchestra play the Immolation Scene from Twilight
of the Gods if I end up being cremated (my preference). 


-- 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Hamilton   jfh@netcom.com   P. O. Box 281107   SF, CA   94128-1107
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: pink@Rosie.UH.EDU (Pink is Slack)
Subject: Houtson Police break up ACT-UP  protest.
Reply-To: pink@Rosie.UH.EDU
Organization: University of Houston
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 04:10:18 GMT

This is information is based on watching tonights news a few minutes 
ago....
 
The Houston police department decided to break up ACT-UP's protest this evening
by charging into the crowd on horseback.  The protest was originally scheduled
as a march to the Astrodome and then a rally.  The end of the march was 
blocked by a line of police who then tried to get the crowd to disburse
wiothout finishing the march.  The line of people ended up bunched into
a circle on North Stadium Drive, where apparently the protests continued.
The anger of the crowd escalated as George Bush was burned in effigy.
Protest signs were added to the fire and eventually the flag was burned.
(Despite the ruling of the supreme court, it is still illegal to burn
the flag in Texas)  Apparently the police decided this was a good ttime
to break things up and about 15-20 of them on horseback charged into the crowd.
Due to the geography of this area, the crowd had nowhere to go (buildings all
around) and some people added police baracades to the fire.  More horses arriv e
and foot patrols start distributing "justice".  I saw a horss'es hoof land on
a person's shoulder-blade and another individual on his/her knees with thir
hands over hir head trying to fend off the bully clubs of two police... pigs
who apparently learned their method from the Rodney King beatings.  In another
shot, a policeman was about to strike someone with their club, when the camera
was jerked away.  About six people were arrested, and the crowd was dispersed
riding horses through it.. making people dash for cover and try to get away.
One of  the reporters said there were "unconfirmed" reports that a protestor's
skill was broken by police clubs.  I saw at least two bottles thrown at police
on horses...but most people were trying to get the hell out of the way.
 
 
After over a hundered thousand innocent americans killed by AIDS while
the government (including the asshole mayor of houston, Bob "We need a 
strong police force" Lanier) does nothing, its time a few "innocent"
government officials lost their positions.
 
At what FUCKING point is violence justified?  
 
The actions I've talked about here are those that I saw, except where
noted... 
--
   /\     '       Pink@Jetson.UH.edu          Box 66231 Houston 77266-6231      
  /_/.    `                          
 /  //\/< '  Life is what happens when you're busy making other plans. --Lennon

Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Subject: Re: Gay Homophobia & Allan Williams
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 09:16:36 GMT


In article <1992Aug23.090133.27563@macc.wisc.edu>
anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:

>In article <1992Aug23.033436.18138@microsoft.com>
>bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:

>>many of my friends [...]

>Wherever do you find them?*

* Sorry, forgot to give Dorothy Parker her credit.

-- 
Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin
Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson
NeXTmail w/attachments: anderson@yak.macc.wisc.edu  Bitnet: anderson@wiscmacc
Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: the "oh" experience
Organization: Amherst College, Amherst MA
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 20:39:59 GMT

Besides the "oh" and "ah-hah" experiences, there are countless more.
When I came out to my friend Jason in New York, I said, basically,
"Well, I couldn't come into the city last weekend because I went up to
Boston -- the Boston Gay Pride Parade was that weekend, and I wanted
to march because I'm bisexual."  Jason's response was, and I quote,
"Ooh!"

(You kind of have to know Jason to decipher that comment.  It means,
all at once, "Oh!" "Neat!" "Cool!" "Well, how about that?" and a
number of other wordless things.  Jason is an interesting character.)

My roommate's response was, "Oh. Okay!"

I could probably come up with a dozen other distinct reactions, but I
bet they would be redundant.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / "Bisexual just means you pay for it."
\  / twpierce@amherst.edu      /  
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /   -- Rock Hudson
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: AH.PBL@forsythe.stanford.edu (Mark)
Subject: Re: Gay Republicans
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:51:30 GMT

In article <l9579bINN96s@news.bbn.com>,
levin@bbn.com (Joel B Levin) writes:
>In article <92232.131641IO81409@MAINE.MAINE.EDU> IO81409@MAINE.MAINE.EDU (Ailsa N.T. Murphy) writes:
>|well, i've considered registering republican, although i've
>|never done it.
>
>You might want to think twice about this.  I did it to vote for John
>Anderson back in (when the hell did he run, anyway?), and I've been
>intermittently getting junk mail from Ronald Reagan ever since.

  All the more reason.  When I get junk mail from the fundies
  or the Republicans (same thing), I stuff the return envelope
  full of what they sent me (minus my name and address) and
  drop it in the mailbox.  They pay for it.

  (John Anderson was an independent for President in 1980 - why would
  you have to register as a Republican?)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: amz@iguana.cis.ohio-state.edu (Arnold M Zwicky)
Subject: Re: Introduction
Followup-To: soc.motss
Summary: let it pass, hunh?
Organization: out in lingistics, etc.
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 04:02:57 GMT

this is silly.  ok, so donald is a sweet and earnest young gay man
without a lot of knowledge about gay life before he came out a few
years ago.  he posts some rather sentimental, romantic, hallmark-card
stuff to soc.motss.  (donald: i'm sure you *hate* this
characterization of your postings, but hang on.)  this is not a lot of
people's sensibilities - it's not mine - but it's very far from a
threat to our lives, or even a good target to puncture.

quite the contrary: this was a lot of us when we were (roughly) in
donald's shoes.  (maybe not you, arne, but dammit, we *didn't* all run
just the same course in our lives.  read what i've said about *my*
life, and try to imagine what i was like - oh dear - when i was 20.
i have some sense of you in your teens, and admire that person,
but not everyone could have been as forthright about their lives
as you, assuming that they *understood* their sexuality so clearly.)

arne, you're telling donald to grow up, but only by saying he's
still a kid, not by giving him anything useful to go on.  what
is he supposed to do, go to the gay osmosis clinic?

my general scheme here is simply to ignore hallmark cards.  donald
will read on, and learn (or not learn) various lessons.

donald, you're asking too much from other people.  

  arnold (wanting *specific* feelings, not general takes)



Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: wearing symbols
Organization: Amherst College, Amherst MA
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 21:56:12 GMT

What the hell is this?  Invade-Soc-Motss Week?

In article <1992Aug13.205911.11111@tcsi.com> chuckm@claiborne.tcs.com (Chuck Meares) writes:

>In article <1992Aug13.184931.19649@watson.ibm.com> jakec@ralvmm.vnet.ibm.com (Jake Coughlin) writes:
>>amz@cis.ohio-state.edu (Arnold M Zwicky):
>>> shucks, they don't understand the symbols you flash at them and
>>> then come all unglued at minor bits of jewelry.  how *are* we
>>> going to get them educated?
>>
>>kill them and start over.  hell, it worked for God.
>
>Jason,
>
>Sometimes I think you are worse than the homophobes!  You sir, are a heterophobe
>in the first order.

Do you understand "heterophobe?"

Do you understand "homophobe?"

Do you understand "hyperbole?"

>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Opinions expressed here are mine, mine, all mine ... I was never good
>at sharing.
>------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apparently not.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / "Bisexual just means you pay for it."
\  / twpierce@amherst.edu      /  
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /   -- Rock Hudson
Newsgroups: soc.motss