HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (rini)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Living in a State of Siege
Date: 23 Dec 92 16:56:42 GMT
Reply-To: mec6@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

holzman@d0gslb.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman) writes:
>muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:

>> No, the issue is that every time someone talks about the violence that
>> is practiced against women, some people here start shouting about the
>> violence that happens to men.  Not only do they not seem to want us to
>> work on the problem *we* are concerned about, but they further want us
>> to work on *their* problems.  
 
>Who is "we", Muffy?  

As I read it, "we" is "[those who] talk about the violence that is practiced
against women" and the "they" is "some people here [who] start shouting about
the violence that happens to men."

>Violence against women is *my* problem, not because I
>share biological structures with a portion of perps, but it touches the lives
>of a great many women whose well-being is important to me.  Violence against
>men is *my* problem because I am a target of it and because it touches the
>lives of a great many men whose well-being is important to me.  Thus, I 
>work on both.  Thus I have cause to discuss both.  

This is a well taken point.  I believe the point that Muffy was making is
that we can't even *DISCUSS* violence against women, because people raise
the big, red SEXIST flag and level accusations of misandry.  It would be
*NICE*, IMO, to actually discuss BOTH.  Especially, since this is 
alt.feminism, about how both relate to feminism and sex roles in society.
But everytime we try to discuss EITHER, we just enter these meta-discussions
like the one you are having here and we never get to the issue.

>Personally, I think I have enough time to deal with both.  If you can 
>only deal with one, don't be surprised if a bunch of people decide that 
>they only have time for their problem and to hell with you and yours.  
>This does not seem an effective tactic.

Well, I'm glad you are interested in working on both.  Next time there's
a thread about violence against [gender], I look forward to seeing your
ideas on the topic and we maybe we can get around the "But what about
violence againt [other gender]?????"

rini
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: Violence
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 22:14:56 GMT

In article <63047@mimsy.umd.edu> biow@cs.umd.edu (Christopher Biow) writes:
>In article <1992Dec23.165058.4990@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>
>>...you are in a state of denial...
>
>What ever happened to the words "deny" and "disagree." They 
>seem to have become phrases, without any increase in semantic
>content.

Nonononono, here in alt.feminism, disagreement is not allowed. What happens
is that you simply accuse whoever you >disagree with/disagrees with you< of
misinterpreting your post. Optionally one can hint at some hidden political
agendas, or that as a member of the oppressor class, <whoever> simply does 
not get it.
 
>[in a state of disagreement]

No, you are upset (and rightly so) at my misintrepretation.

BTW, this effectly eliminates any chance of real communication happening,
and at the same time removes any responsibility for your own posts. Neat all
the way around.

>   Chris


Rich

payner@netcom.com


Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: michael@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Michael)
Subject: Re: Violence
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:39:39 GMT

In <1992Dec20.171803.22588@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>In article <1992Dec15.134838.27623@cs.cornell.edu> jean@cs.cornell.edu (Jean M. Petrosino) writes:
>>                                            I think the men here have to stop
>>directing their anger at feminists who call attention to violence issues, and
>>re-direct their anger at the men who are committing these violent acts.
>Yes, when women are angry, their anger is valid. But when men voice their
>anger, they are misdirected. This explains a lot.

That is not what she just said.  But I suppose its easy to make fun of
someone just after you stuff words in their mouth.

    Michael Stanley (michael@glia.biostr.washington.edu)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: asgard@plx.com (J.R. Stoner)
Subject: Re: Violence
Keywords: n
Organization: Heironamous Botch's Murk Works
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 00:57:23 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.152429.2331@cs.cornell.edu> jean@cs.cornell.edu (Jean M. Petrosino) writes:
>asgard@plx.com (J.R. Stoner) responded to my post about violence with:

>He continues:
 ^^

Telling assumption.

Petrosino and assumes without basis that since I do not with agree with
Petrosino's argument that I must be "one of _them_" therefore my arguments
can be discarded out of hand.
-- 
In 1911/and strident voices raised high/Votes! Votes for women, was the cry.
The Titanic was sinking/and death was nigh/Boats! Boats for women, was the cry.
J.R. Stoner, DWMIT - asgard@plx.com - sun.com!plx!plxsun!asgard
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: Why are many low-income women fat? (was Re: Separate but Equal?)
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 21:04:42 GMT

In article <Bzq9q5.78w@news.cso.uiuc.edu> levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine) writes:
>Some of these people are actively dating, but most of them are over 30.
>You're right, that people's tastes, both culinary and sensual, do
>change with age.

	Agreed.


>Nowadays, I prefer sushi to sweets. I also find character plays a
>larger role in physical attraction, than it did when I was young.  


	A lot of people pay this lip service, because
	it's the in thing to do (and, for men, the only
	safe thing to do around women).  Still, I'll take
	it at face value.

>>	Not the type of boycott I'm referring to.  The type of boycott
>>	I'm referring to (feminists marching outsode the building spreading
>>	subversive "evidence" of sexism) is sad and immoral--it's right
>>	up there with Operation Rescue and Lambs of Christ in terms
>>	of sleaze.
>
>>	Using force and manipulation to push the views of an otherwise
>>	uninvolved minority onto the people involved.        ^^^^^^^^^
        ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^

>The difference between the Montgomery bus boycott, and the feminist
>boycotts you describe, is in the goals, not the tactics.

	Perhaps so, perhaps so.  Perhaps, also, the validity of the
	goals. (That is, how valid are they next to the rights that
	they trample).


>If you want me to comment on the *goals* of a *specific* boycott,
>you have to describe them.


	Take a look at the feminist actions against a that radio 
	station in Canada for playing a beatles song--boy, those
	people would make Terry Randall proud.

>Lenore Levine
>levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu


-- 
	"If you can't eat sand, why the hell are you living in a desert?"
			Equality is a delusion.
	     Rule 1:  "Don't have more children than you can feed."
	  	  Nuclear redevelopment for a better world!
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: quilty@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Humberto Humbertoldi)
Subject: Re: The White Feather Campaign
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 22:29:48 GMT


>In article <Bzp7zu.GM1@nic.umass.edu> quilty@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Humberto Humbertoldi) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec22.171402.13149@midway.uchicago.edu> mec6@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>>DPIROT@vm.ucs.UAlberta.CA writes:
>>>Hmm.  I don't know.  They had a thing about this on NBC Nightly
>>>News last night.  They had a soldier who described in detail how
>>>he raped ten women and killed six of them; how the Serbs run
>>>'bordellos' filled with the female prisoners.  Both the rapes and
>>>the murders, he claims, were committed 'under orders.' They also 
>>>interviewed a young woman who was pregnant from being held captive 
>>>in one of these 'bordellos'.  Didn't strike me as particularly 
>>>ficticious.

>>Hmmm... my assumption was always that NBC Nightly News is precisely a
>>work of fiction.  Their sole purpose seems to be making up interesting
>>stories which, if true, would serve the interests of the working
                                                           ^^^^^^^
>>class.  For those of you wondering why these stories of "rape camps"
>>and all are being *FABRICATED* by the news media, I have but two
>>words:  "Grosse Deutchland." 

Oooopp! I sure did fuck up right there.  No doubt it's some kind of
freudian slip.  Obviously, I meant to say "the RULING class" -- or
something like this (I think I was working on writing something like,
"to convince the working class", but it didn't quite get there).
Thanx, steve, for correcting me.  The propoganda point, which steve
mentions is what I was getting at though.  It's really easy to get
someone to say whatever you think is newsworthy if you just hold a
camera up to them, or look like an official reporter.... especially if
you're not to particular about checking that your source really is in
a position to know what s/he claims to know.

Steve Russel:
>My opinion is that if these stories are propaganda, the slavs make such
>interviews available and the std sleazy journalist, eager for a story
>beyond all else gobbled up the bait the way their collegues did with
>the irqui -soilder-babykiller stories
-- 
    _/_/_/_/ THIS MESSAGE WAS BROUGHT TO YOU BY: Postmodern Enterprises _/_/_/ 
   _/_/      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  _/_/ 
  _/_/  The opinions expressed here must be those of my employer...     _/_/ 
 _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Surely you don't think that *I* believe them!  _/_/ 
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: Mysogynist Bullshit
X-To: LENORE LEVINE
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 18:17:00 GMT

levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine) writes...
>sfjr@wam.umd.edu (Steve Russell) writes:

>> And, how do I maintain an
>> erection while I am raping someone?

>...Unfortunately, this is not a problem for all male humans.


FYI: Lenore, the above quote was actually from Heiner Biesel, s.N.a (!),
not from Steve Russell.

(So it was *you* who came up with the "s.N.a." designation, I hear... Why?)


>(Read the rather graphic case reported in today's Chicago Tribune. It
>unmade my whole day. :-( )

If you don't mind my asking, what happened?

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876

"Gravity: It's more than just a fragrance.  It's the LAW!"
   - Will Steeves, President, GOiDS "R" We, Inc.

 * SLMR 2.1a * Still assimilating... nothing outlasts a Borg...
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: holzman@d0gslb.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman)
Subject: Re: Living in a State of Siege
Organization: Fermi National Accelerator Lab
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 23:29:47 GMT
X-Posted-From: d0gslb.fnal.gov
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1992Dec22.172703.13719@midway.uchicago.edu>, 
mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (rini) writes:
> So if I give money to an aid organization for Estonia, and don't write
> a check of comparable magnitude to Care's program in Somalia, do you
> think I'm implying that I don't give two hoots about starving Africans?

No, but if you bring up Estonia every time someone mentions starving Africans
as if we should drop everything and pay attention to Estonia, you do give the
impression that you don't give two hoots about starving Africans.

> Hmm.  I have an idea.  If I think it is important to tutor illiterate 
> adults, I can do that.  If you think it is more important to spend your 
> time tutoring illiterate teenagers, you can do that.  And if someone 
> else thinks it is even *more* important to tutor kids before they go 
> to school, *they* can do *that*.   Now as I see it, we're all doing
> Good Things.  Why do we have to argue about who really needs the 
> tutoring most?

I'd love to not to have to argue about it.  So how come whenever I bring up
tutoring illiterate teenagers, someone else asks how I can spend my time and
energy on that with all these illiterate adults running around.

-- 
Daniel B. Holzman                    | Eight Words the Witch's Rede Fufill:
HOLZMAN@FNAL.BITNET                  | An It Harm None, Do What You Will
HOLZMAN@FNALC.FNAL.GOV.INTERNET      |
                                     | All Acts of Love and Pleasure are
Love doesn't subtract,               | Her Rituals
   it multiplies    - Heinlein       |
                                     | Speak the Word.
Disclaimer:  Fermilab's far too large to have an opinion, let alone mine.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine)
Subject: Re: Damned Souls (was Re: Version Five)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 22:04:02 GMT

payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:

>In article <C08roy.JFG@news.cso.uiuc.edu> levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine) writes:
>>gazit@duke.cs.duke.edu (Hillel Gazit) writes:
>>
>>>In article <C058Hz.Fq2@news.cso.uiuc.edu> 
>>>levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine) writes:
>>
>>>>I am only defending the idea that affirmative action is *sometimes*
>>>>reasonable. I would by no means defend all current uses of affirmative
>>>>action.
>>
>>>Which one would you defend?
>>
>>If you are talking about affirmative action to give preference to groups
>>of people (as opposed to individual evaluations of people that are in
>>part based on their specific background), the best example is the
>>Alabama State Trooper case.
>>
>>For many years, black people were not allowed to be Alabama state
>>troopers. Note this is the sort of occupation that many black Americans
>>choose. In any case, when this period of discrimination ended, there was
>>a very large pool of black Alabamans who wanted to be state troopers,
>>who could have performed the job acceptably, who had been passed over due to
>>the previous policy of discrimination.
>>
>>The government of Alabama was ordered to institute a *temporary* policy
>>of affirmative action, to amend for previous discrimination. This order
>>was upheld by a Republican-dominated U.S. Supreme Court. 

>Let me get this straight, there is a large number of -qualified- black
>Americans just waiting to be Alabama State troopers? So why is AA needed
>for them to get jobs? I could see of they were marginally qualified, or
>marginally unqualified, but if there -were- qualified, what is the problem?

>I really do not understand this example Lenore.

Yet the facts were as I gave them. I don't remember much more about the
case. Would anyone help us out?

Lenore Levine
From: mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (rini)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Why are many low-income women fat? (was Re: Separate but Equal?)
Date: 22 Dec 92 04:37:33 GMT
Reply-To: mec6@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:

>levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine) writes:
>
>>>Wonderful, I am happy for you. I am not fat, and also look a lot younger
>>>than I am (it seems to be about 10-12 years, people often ask when I seem
>>>too knowledgable and experienced my visual age, I have started asking for
>>>their guess as a condition for an answer), so this looks more like a 
>>>matter of genetics. I am curious as to wether it means that one will live
>>>longer as well.
>
>	Hate to burst your bubble, but I wouldn't put too much 
>	faith in this "I look younger than I am bit".  *Especially* 
>	if such comments are coming from men.
> 
>	Early on, lesse--it must have been 13 or 14 for me--most
>	men learn to li --*always*--to women about certain subjects.

You should know that you fucked up the attributions and that your
replies are to a man's text, not a woman's, as you assumed.

Furthermore, I guess I don't think much of the "all men are liars" tenet 
you are putting forward here.  (Is that really the point you wanted to
make?)

rini
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: biow@cs.umd.edu (Christopher Biow)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Violence
Date: 23 Dec 92 20:58:55 GMT
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742

In article <1992Dec23.165058.4990@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:

>...you are in a state of denial...

What ever happened to the words "deny" and "disagree." They 
seem to have become phrases, without any increase in semantic
content.

[in a state of disagreement]
   Chris
From: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Damned Articles
Date: 29 Dec 92 17:51:15
Organization: Natural Language Incorporated
	<725509230@lear.cs.duke.edu> <1992Dec29.201053.8237@panix.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: gcf@panix.com's message of Tue, 29 Dec 1992 20:10:53 GMT

In article <1992Dec29.201053.8237@panix.com> gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
>gazit@cs.duke.edu (Hillel) writes:
>| The following article was rejected from soc.feminism. ...

>I think if your articles are going to wear this badge of
>honor, we ought to have the citation as well.  That is, it
>would seem fair -- and would satisfy our curiosity -- if we
>could know what reason the moderators gave.  Even though what
>the reason must have been often seems all too obvious.

Oh, Gordon...you're so obtuse.  Don't you understand that *any*
rejection of Hillel's articles, which, of course, are always completely
relevant, interesting, and non-inflammatory, is further evidence of the
great feminist conspiracy which has focused on him and real men like him
in an attempt to shut him up?  He, being that real man sort of man,
cleverly and at great personal risk circumvents this massive effort at
censoring his worthy ideas by posting them here, despite all the efforts
(precisely none) of the evil feminists to stop him, thus striking
another blow for freedom of expression.

Muffy
--

Muffy Barkocy                      | ~Can you tell me how much bleeding/it
muffy@mica.berkeley.edu            |  takes to fill a word with meaning and/
"amorous inclinations"? Aha! I'm   |  how much how much death it takes/to give
not "not straight," I'm *inclined*.|  a slogan breath?~ - Bruce Cockburn
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: quilty@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Humberto Humbertoldi)
Subject: Re: The White Feather Campaign
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 06:14:16 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.171402.13149@midway.uchicago.edu> mec6@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>DPIROT@vm.ucs.UAlberta.CA writes:
>>It is likely, judging from the lack of confirming evidence and from
>>the opinions of aid workers in Bosnia that the reports are greatly
>>exaggerated, that the stories have been made up in order to stir up
>>sympathy for a Balkan war. 
>
>Hmm.  I don't know.  They had a thing about this on NBC Nightly
>News last night.  They had a soldier who described in detail how
>he raped ten women and killed six of them; how the Serbs run
>'bordellos' filled with the female prisoners.  Both the rapes and
>the murders, he claims, were committed 'under orders.' They also 
>interviewed a young woman who was pregnant from being held captive 
>in one of these 'bordellos'.  Didn't strike me as particularly 
>ficticious.

Hmmm... my assumption was always that NBC Nightly News is precisely a
work of fiction.  Their sole purpose seems to be making up interesting
stories which, if true, would serve the interests of the working
class.  For those of you wondering why these stories of "rape camps"
and all are being *FABRICATED* by the news media, I have but two
words:  "Grosse Deutchland." 

-- 
    _/_/_/_/ THIS MESSAGE WAS BROUGHT TO YOU BY: Postmodern Enterprises _/_/_/ 
   _/_/      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  _/_/ 
  _/_/  The opinions expressed here must be those of my employer...     _/_/ 
 _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Surely you don't think that *I* believe them!  _/_/ 
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: Mysogynist Bullshit
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:05:03 GMT

In article <MUFFY.92Dec21114757@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>In article <1992Dec21.000615.154@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec10.142534.16313@cs.cornell.edu> jean@cs.cornell.edu (Jean M. Petrosino) writes:
>>>And Robert Shaeffer - don't give me that sociobiological crap about men being 
>>>innately superior to women because of testosterone.  We don't know the true 
>>>capacities of the female body because medical science finds it much more 
>>>interesting to study male anatomy and simply generalize their findings to
>>>female anatomy.  
>
>>Bullshit, it is just easier and simpler. No monthly changes to take into
>>account, and no pregnancies to complicate long term studies.
>
>So, what are you saying here, Rich?  That it is, in fact, true, that
>rather than studying women's bodies, scientists have simply generalized
>form men's bodies?  Do you think that that is adequate information to
>determine which is "suerpior"?

My point is different. Why do not physisists create proto-stars and examine
their collapse or use actual neutron stars in the lab instead of mucking
about the sky hoping to chance upon what they wish to observe. Simply 
because they cannot do these things in the lab, they are beyond experimental
science.

Similarly, long ago, medical science had similar limitations, at least as
I understand things.

Things have changed a -lot-, and it would make no sense to do today what
may have been necessary (or just expediant) yesterday. I am not sure I
agreed with the concept even then.

As for inferiority/"suerpior"ity :^), that is a value judgement, and 
evenyone will disagree. Do you thing that there is some absolute measure
of superiority? 
 
>Muffy
>--
>
>Muffy Barkocy                      | ~Can you tell me how much bleeding/it
>muffy@mica.berkeley.edu            |  takes to fill a word with meaning and/
>"amorous inclinations"? Aha! I'm   |  how much how much death it takes/to give
>not "not straight," I'm *inclined*.|  a slogan breath?~ - Bruce Cockburn


Rich

payner@netcom.com
From: jay@UUSERV.CC.UTAH.EDU (Jay Deuel)
Subject: Re: The White Feather Campaign
Organization: University of Utah Computer Center
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 20:11:35 GMT

>>what seems to be happening is that the feminists are prepared to
>>sacrifice the lives of young American men in order to protect the
>>virtue of women.
>
>Hey, bub, there's women in the Marines too.  
>-- 

And how many women are on the front lines of combat?  God I hate sexism!
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,misc.legal