HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: robertl@luciano.Stanford.EDU (Robert Lodenkamper)
Subject: Re: Utopia (was Re: mandatory service)
Organization: Stanford University
	<ROBERTL.92Aug13201459@luciano.Stanford.EDU>
	<1992Aug14.043153.27273@macc.wisc.edu>
Date: 15 Aug 92 15:05:51

In article <1992Aug14.043153.27273@macc.wisc.edu> anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:

   In article <ROBERTL.92Aug13201459@luciano.Stanford.EDU>
   robertl@luciano.Stanford.EDU (Robert Lodenkamper) writes:

   >and the positive aspects of human nature rule out the
   >simple distopias (on ethical grounds).

   Recalling that the root meaning of utopia is "noplace," the
   antonym would be "everyplace" (the AHD does not have an
   entry for either distopia or dystopia, btw).

I misspelled dystopia (should have realized dys- was a more logical
prefix than dis-), but it is a real word.

dys.to.pia \(')dis-'t<o^->-p<e^->-<e>\ n (ca. 1950)
 [NL, fr. dys- + -topia (as in utopia)]
    1: an imaginary place which is depressingly wretched and whose people 
    lead a fearful existence
    2: ANTI-UTOPIA 2-- dys.to.pi.an \-p<e^->-<e>n\ adj

   I'd say distopia *is* everyplace, and rather than being ruled out,
   it is universal. 

In other words, you take it to be reality.  Fair enough.  I had in
mind something significantly worse than reality --- examples include
the societies depicted in "1984" and "Brave New World".

- Bob
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: katbea@auto-trol.com (Kathy Beatty)
Subject: Re: Gay names
Organization: Auto-trol Technology Corporation -- Denver, Colorado
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 18:55:18 GMT

In the Lesbian Community (tm) here, Jan seems to be *the* dyke name.


Kathy
From: b_blumberg@macsch.com (Bryan J. Blumberg)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: THE LIVING END: NuArt Theatre Sat 8/22 -- NOT!!!
Date: 21 Aug 92 16:38:32 GMT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA25575; Fri, 21 Aug 92 08:38:50 -0700
X-Received: by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com; id AA14772; Fri, 21 Aug 92 08:38:48 -0700
X-Received: from [72.1.3.22] by macsch.com (5.61/SMI-4.1-06)id AA08784; Fri, 21 Aug 92 08:38:35 -0700
X-To: Ron Buckmire <buckmr@rpi.edu>
X-Cc: soc.motss.usenet, gaynet@athena.mit.edu, bisexu-l@brownvm.brown.edu,

X-        la-motss@pompei.usc.edu

>Subject: THE LIVING END: NuArt Theatre Sat 8/22
>Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 01:51:31 -0400
>From: Ron Buckmire <buckmr>
>
>
>Well, if anyone is interested, I'm trying to get a bunch of people together
>to go see the new ``irresponsible movie by Gregg Araki'' called THE LIVING
>END at the NuArt theatre on Saturday night/afternoon.

No!  Ron!  We just discussed this 2 hours ago and I thought you wrote it
down!

The Living End is playing at the NUWILSHIRE, not the NuArt.  (It's also
playing at the Cineplex Odeon Showcase on Melrose and La Brea.)

Ron, Dean, Guy and I are planning on going to the NuWilshire performance at
7:40 p.m. on Saturday, August 22, 1992.  We'd love to have more net people
there.

The NuWilshire is located at 1314 Wilshire Boulevard in Santa Monica
California.  Take the Santa Monica Freeway (Interstate 10) west to
Cloverfield.  North on Cloverfield to Wilshire.  Left on Wilshire,
then seven blocks.


========================================
Bryan  J. Blumberg, The MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation
815 Colorado Boulevard, Los Angeles, California  90041-1777
(213) 259-4914, B_BLUMBERG@MACSCH.COM
From: daniel@nstn.ns.ca (Daniel MacKay)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Jeans (was Re: Rob Bernardo)
Date: 21 Aug 92 20:22:42 GMT
Organization: NSTN Network Operations Centre, Nova Scotia, Canada

In <2-!nahj.jfh@netcom.com> jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) writes:
>I remember a discussion we had once, in a gas station, about blue
>jeans.

My only pair of blue jeans; there's a mixture of loving remembrance and
pain to wear.  The last time I was in California, Rob had extended his
extraordinary hospitality, and had offered to take myself and another
motsser visiting -- it was Interop '90, in the fall -- from the UK out to
supper, then to a bar.
   "You'll have to wear jeans," he said.  I didn't own a pair of jeans.
   "Umm- OK, I can buy a pair after the show today.  What kind?"
   "Levi 501s."  No problem.  I went to the giant jean store on Church
St and bought a pair that felt wonderful and (I thought) looked *great.*
I met Rob later at the restaurant.  
   "What do you think of the jeans?  Perfect, eh?"
   "Nope.  Wrong colour."

I had bought the light blue, soft prewashed jeans to go to the C&W bar.

I think of Rob every time I put 'em on.
--
Daniel MacKay					daniel@nstn.ns.ca
Homo habilis
From: adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: sarcasm
Date: 20 Aug 1992 10:52:29 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu

In article <1992Aug20.013907.17135@cis.ohio-state.edu> 
amz@iguana.cis.ohio-state.edu (Arnold M Zwicky) writes:
> no, we do *not* need a sarcasm flag. 

And we do *not* need smileyheads (unless they're *real* *big*).

> ... if you want to get the extra effect of sarcasm, then
> be prepared for various kinds of failures.

Tell me about it.

Willy Loman (AKA Arne)

Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: chuckm@claiborne.tcs.com (Chuck Meares)
Subject: Re: wearing symbols
Organization: Teknekron Communications Inc.
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 20:59:11 GMT

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.

All I ever hear from you is seperatism and alienation.  If you choose to 
surround yourself with only GLB people fine.  Please, leave me out of your
closed minded bigotted little world.  I LIKE having strayt friends. I LIKE
having GLB friends.  In fact, until given a reason to change my opinion I
pretty much LIKE everyone.

You sir, I definitely do NOT like.  

Chuck


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chuck Meares                               |
Systems & Network Administration           | PHONE: (510) 649-3649       
Teknekron Communication Systems            | INTERNET: chuckm@tcs.com
2121 Allston Way                           | 
Berkeley, California, 94704                |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Opinions expressed here are mine, mine, all mine ... I was never good
at sharing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: jakec@ralvmm.vnet.ibm.com (Jake Coughlin)
Subject: Re: musical finale
Originator: jakec@ralvmm.vnet.ibm.com
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 92 15:37:31 GMT
Organization: IBM T. J. Watson Research

Furr@cup.portal.com (George Dalton Madison):
> (I tend to prefer
> _Into The Groove_ or _Express Yourself_ for dancing... ;-)

_express yourself_ would work, but somehow, _into the groove_
would be *too* morbid for a funeral... :-)
-- 
Jason Coughlin ( jakec@ralvmm.vnet.ibm.com )
Queer Without A Cause!
"I find myself suddenly in the world, and I recognize that I have one
right alone: that of demanding human behavior of the other." -- Fanon
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: coren@osf.org (Robert Coren)
Subject: Re: sexual attraction and paraphilias
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 14:38:32 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.054548.14755@unlinfo.unl.edu>, cbe@unlinfo.unl.edu (cbe) writes:
> 
> My understanding of the situation is that there are fixed preferences 
> that we all have, that are not at all rational, and that are 
> immutable.

I would agree, with the possible exception of the word "immutable" --
I think it's perfectly possible for these preferences to change over
time. If, as I suspect, you mean that they can't be changed by
conscious effort, I am in full agreement.


> Apparently some have
> many paraphilias and others, strangely, don't.

"Strangely"? My point is that the whole set of phenomena is "strange",
in the sense that I haven't the slightest idea how it comes about. I
would hesitate to say that having few paraphilias is "stranger" than
having many. (In fact, I can hear George's hackles rising at the
suggestion even from 3,000 miles away.)

> So it would seem 
> that trying to debate this issue is futile.

And, indeed, I don't think any of us are trying to "dispute" it. I'm
trying to explore it. George, if I read him right, is warning against
making value judgements about people's tastes (especially his! :-)).
  Robert
From: stevenso@Apple.COM (David Stevenson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Deeper Master!  Take it Bitch!
Date: 18 Aug 92 19:35:08 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

jns@wam.umd.edu (J. N. Shaumeyer) writes:
>
>Actually, I thought that exchange would make a 
>wonderful subject line.
>
But what is the subject?
Gardening and vegetables?  No, that has its own thread.
Gerbils?  No, that's already made its semi-annual appearance.
Must be stomach pumps of the rich and famous.
From: emcmanus@gr.osf.org (Eamonn McManus)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Irish and Irish-American
Date: 21 Aug 92 13:03:05 GMT
Organization: Open Software Foundation Research Institute, Grenoble

oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil) writes:
>>>power.  There's nobody Irish that is as horrifying as Buchanan.
>Ronald Reagan?  

Well, my point is that neither Buchanan nor Reagan is Irish.

[John Cavallino:]
>>I apologize to Eamonn and to any others who were offended by my words.

I'm not offended; it's just that, being Irish in the sense of coming
from Ireland, I'd rather not be lumped in with people like Buchanan
who are Irish in the disputed sense of having a few ancestors who came
from Ireland.

If nothing else, it appears that the Irish-Irish are more tolerant
than the Irish-Americans, or at least those of the latter that we hear
about here.  While Ireland is woefully backward in many ways (divorce,
abortion, and male gay sex are all illegal), there is nevertheless a
certain generosity of spirit among most people.  (And, though so bad,
Ireland is at least moving in the right direction socially.)  For
instance, a recent editorial in the Irish Times newspaper condemned in
strong terms the recent Vatican letter to American bishops urging them
to oppose gay-rights legislation.  A good deal of correspondence
followed, nearly all of it agreeing.  Hard-right Catholics are in
general regarded with either distaste or amusement, and there are few
powerful politicians of that bent.

My mother sent me some of the correspondence I referred to above.
Here's a particularly good letter:

  Sir,

  The recent Vatican instruction on homosexuality, making it "not only
  licit but obligatory" to discriminate, reminds us once again that
  sex equals sin in the eyes of an exclusively male, celibate
  hierarchy.

  Whether it be among women who are sources of contamination to those
  deemed "holy", or among gay men or Christian lesbians, the flesh is
  inherently sinful outside the iconic "family".  Here is a
  spirituality that refuses to face reality and recognise that all
  people are made in the image of God.

  "We would all be Christians", said Gandhi, "were it not for the
  Christians."

  -- Mary Blackwell, Glasnevin

,
Eamonn
From: markm@ogicse.ogi.edu (Mark Morrissey)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: OR-9 text.
Date: 22 Aug 92 18:57:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.41819
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute (formerly OGC), Beaverton, OR

In article <1992Aug22.161223.26713@spdcc.com> rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:
> [lots of good stuff, go read the article]

I think that Bob brings out a very good point.  How will individuals who are
supposed to implement Measure 9 enforce it and what would happen if a
department or division within the State or local government decided not
to enforce the measure?

Personally, I have met more people in government who get off on being able
to exert control over people than I have met outright phobes.  I think that
this measure gives those power hungry people another outlet for control
over people's lives.  I think that phobes are only one category to worry
about.  Power hungry busy bodies are another.  There has already been
some noise at the Tualatin Valley Recreation Center about keeping HIV+
people from using the pool or shower facilities.  Since it is a public
facility, the phobes and the 'control' people would be able to keep
HIV+ people out (Mabon has indicated that restricting rights for HIV+
persons was a natural outgrowth of this measure).

But what about a disinterested state government?  Since the measure is
an amendment to the state constitution, the OCA would likely force the
state to do its bidding in court.  I am unsure if an enacted amendment
can be ruled unconstitutional when it is, in fact, part of the constitution.

A friend sent me email saying that some OCA storm troopers were recently in
Seattle where they claimed that Measure 9 would allow employers to fire
people for being homosexual.  They further claimed that if someone was
fired for being homosexual, they would not be eligible for unemployment
benefits since they were fired for engaging in undersireable activities.

Does anyone from Seattle have any information on OCA activities up there?
Apparantly, they were even in the audience for a local (Seattle) talk
show recently.

--mark
--
Mark Morrissey           One Hatred to rule them all.  One Hatred to find them.
markm@cse.ogi.edu        One Hatred to bring them all and in the darkness bind
                         them.  In the land of Bigotry where the Shadows lie.
From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: sexual attraction and paraphilias
Date: 17 Aug 92 11:29:23 GMT
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison


In article <1992Aug17.043906.25427@spdcc.com> dyer@spdcc.com
(Steve Dyer) writes:

>Nelson Minar writes:

>>ObDish: What's there in common between Sim Aberson and
>>Robert Coren?

I skipped the chance to dish this earlier, but now I can't.

>Nelson, you DO get around, don't you!  Such energy!  Such
>stamina!

Honey, don't tell me you passed up the opportunity to revel
in, ah, stamina when you had it?  :-)  Nelson may slip up (ha
ha) once in a while, but he's clearly putting his stamina to
good use.  After all, that's what slutiness is *for*!

-- 
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: jontom@HQ.Ileaf.COM (J.T. Kittredge)
Subject: Queers Terrify Republicans
Reply-To: jontom@ileaf.com (JT Kittredge)
Organization: Interleaf, Waltham, Mass
Posting-Front-End: GNU Emacs 18.52.65 of Mon Apr 22 1991 on kontrol (berkeley-unix)
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 21:17:45 GMT

The following article I originally posted yesterday to the Interleaf
internal "Social Commentary" bulletin board.
_____

I suspect that many gay people, like me, are feeling awe mixed with
dread, and even a little incredulity, as we realize that *we* are
shaping up to be a major issue in this campaign (see the front page of
Thursday's _New_York_Times_). "Look, Ma, there I am in the national
spotlight, right up there with Education, the Environment, and the
Economy!"

It's scary to realize that we are so feared that a party in trouble
would choose gay-bashing as one of the lynch-pins of its campaign. But
even if we lose in this election, it shows progress. Twenty years ago
this tactic wouldn't have worked because neither party supported gay
rights. Ten years ago this tactic wouldn't have worked because gay
people were still largely invisible to the national consciousness.
Even if the Republican gay baiting gains them votes, I still believe
that we are now too strong and too ubiquitous to be a push-over for
any party trying to go after us (OK, I'm an inveterate optimist).

But I don't think this tactic is going to work. The public may not
like gay people, but they are unlikely to be distracted from the
economy. And think if the Republicans lose in November: it will be
seen as a very public endorsement if the electorate looks at the
candidate labeled "pro-gay" and doesn't flinch.

Of course, that conclusion would be a gross simplification. Elections
paper over extremely ambivalent feelings. If you ask the public a
series of related questions:
   
   Should the government regulate what people do in their bedrooms?
   Should people lose their jobs or their housing just because of
   their sexual practices? Should the government promote
   homosexuality? Would you approve if your child had a gay teacher?
   Should same-sex marriages be legal? Should people be discriminated
   against because they're gay? Should the government fight
   gay-bashing?

You'll come up with divergent, but not necessarily inconsistent
answers. 

I'm highly encouraged at what I see as a change in terms of debate.
I'm encouraged because we are a recognized (if not accepted) part of
society in a way we weren't even a few years ago.
Yours, JonTom
-- 
"'Life is distracting and uncertain'
  she said, and went to draw the curtain" - The Eleventh Episode, Edward Gorey
From: johnf@uhheph.phys.hawaii.edu (John Flanagan)
Subject: Re: Introduction
Organization: University of Hawaii, Dept. of Physics & Astronomy
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 23:08:09 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.114705.24351@macc.wisc.edu> anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
>
>In 16 years, soc.motss will be 25.  Steve will be 52.  I
>will be 73.  Nelson and Johh will be 36.  Trey will be 34 (I
>think).  Guessing, I think Donald will be about 37.  George
>Bush, with any luck, will be in Fundy Heaven and 16 years
>out of office.

And I will be 44.

>But we can say with fair assurance, as Steve does, that
>today's chicken is tomorrow's tough old bird, and they will
>have their heels (long may they wave!) pecked at by pushy,
>brash people who are today only 4.  The fiction "queer" will
>be being shoved aside by people who have only the vaguest
>notion of what happened before they were born, if that.
>Various people who are today making spurious distinctions
>about "gay" will be yowling their heads off about the
>history they've finally managed to live through being
>slighted by a new generation of kids in god knows what kind
>of get-ups, as a new wave gathers itself to crash down on
>them.  And out to sea is the wave behind that one.
>
>In sum: situation normal, nothing to get excited about.

Sounds pretty exciting to me.

--John
-- 
John Flanagan                          ||"Pretty boys
johnf@uhheph.phys.hawaii.edu           || with the sunshine faces
U. of Hawaii, Dept. of Physics & Astro.|| <mumble mumble>..."
2505 Correa Rd., Honolulu, HI 96822    ||            -- My Bloody Valentine
From: kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca (Ken Dykes)
Subject: Re: Why Benson Hedges #2 gay cigarette?
Organization: Thinkage Ltd.
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 02:20:06 GMT

In article <Aug.14.15.06.35.1992.26701@math.rutgers.edu> bgonzal@math.rutgers.edu (Bil Gonzalez) writes:
>In article <Aug.14.14.52.08.1992.26250@math.rutgers.edu>, bgonzal@math.rutgers.edu (Bil Gonzalez) writes:
>> came in asking for the H&B DUL's. 
>Of course, I meant B&H DUL's - Benson and Hedges Deluxe Ultra Lights.
>

ultra lights? you mean people actually smoke aeroplanes?

-- 
   - Ken Dykes, Thinkage Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario, Canada    [43.47N 80.52W]
         kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca   postmaster@thinkage.com   thinkage!kgdykes
         harley-request@thinkage.on.ca             kgdykes@math.uwaterloo.ca
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: shore@dinah.tc.cornell.edu (Melinda Shore)
Subject: Re: mandatory service (was Re: Metzenbaum introduces Senate bill to end military ban)
Reply-To: shore@tc.cornell.edu
Organization: Cornell Theory Center
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 13:17:05 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.052914.7301@news.ysu.edu>, ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller) writes:
> There is no public university, anywhere in the U. S.,
> that can't be attended on govt. grants and loans. 

You're assuming equal access to public k-12 education,
which is a hell of an assumption to make.  I, personally,
would like to dump you on 63rd St. in Chicago and watch
you tell people there that they're either lazy or loosers
[sic].
-- 
       Melinda Shore - Cornell Theory Center - shore@tc.cornell.edu
From: chas@netcom.com (Chuck Fisher)
Newsgroups: soc.motss,ba.motss
Subject: Re: Jeans (was Re: Rob Bernardo)
Date: 21 Aug 92 14:00:05 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Aug21.062408.11535@amhux2.amherst.edu> twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>I remember a thread in which he mentioned that Wranglers are -- I
>believe -- an excellent rodeo jean, as they are among the more durable
>brands.  This conversation stuck out in my mind because being a city
>boy, I have always regarded Wranglers to be a poor man's designer
>jean, and Rob, for all that I disagreed with him, always seemed to
>have better taste than that.

I posted an article sevral months ago about a Consumer Reports rating
of the Wrangler 13MWZ jeans being the highest rated.  Rob complained
that I had beaten him to the post.  But then again, I had given him a
subscription to Consumer Reports as a gift in the first place...  :-)

Chuck
-- 
Chuck Fisher                                  Work: (800) 359-7997 
chas@netcom.com  IP address: 192.100.81.100   Home: (415) 964-2819
{apple,claris,amdahl,tandem}!netcom!chas 
Newsgroups: soc.motss,ba.motss
From: rhcohen@netcom.com (Robert Cohen)
Subject: Re: Robert Bernardo  (1952-1992)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 01:19:21 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

I'm very sad to hear the news.  I have fond memories of Rob and the
times we spent together.  It wasn't his analytical side I was most
enamored of :--)).  His barn, the hay, the fun we had there, yes, the tamales
at breakfast, his passion for living at the 'Ranch' (that I never understood -
I hated the short time I spent living in the area and never saw
what he did there). 

I'll miss him.  He had to be the hottest Jewish cowboy I ever did meet!!!

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Robert Cohen         rhcohen@netcom.com  <- preferred
                     rhcohen@PacBell.COM
                     tel.415.553.4033
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Robert Cohen         rhcohen@netcom.com  <- preferred
                     rhcohen@PacBell.COM
                     tel.415.553.4033
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: scott@bbx.basis.com (Scott Amspoker)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Why Benson Hedges #2 gay cigarette?
Date: 17 Aug 92 01:44:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: bbx.91
Organization: BASIS International, Ltd., Albuquerque NM USA

In article <1992Aug15.023218.24901@macc.wisc.edu> anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
>I used to smoke Home Runs or Gauloise (both unfiltered,
>short, strong).  Now (for the past 25 years or so), it's
>Camel straights (unfiltered, short, strong).
>
>Fuckin'-A, right?

Nah.  Camel unfiltered was my backup if Lucky Strike wasn't available (like
in a vending machine).

-- 
Scott Amspoker                       |    
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM |  Too bad ignorance isn't really
                                     |  bliss.  Then it could be outlawed.
scott@bbx.basis.com                  |