HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Subject: Bobbie
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 11:57:44 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.041045.28703@microsoft.com>
bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:

>As another poster so keenly pointed out, half the postings
>to me & about me have single-handedly been generated by YOU,
>Jessie.

I must be having quite an effect on your heavily armored
psyche, Bobbie, if you can exaggerate my response to you to
that degree.  Have you counted up, actually?  You couldn't
have, for despite even your customary level of distortion
you wouldn't have overestimated my responses by a factor of
at least 2 and maybe 3 or 4.  I hope you're not in Msoft's
budget and planning division.  Bet you did intelligence work
for Uncle Sam, too.

(Now Bobbie, this is just for you.  [You others, don't
 look!]  I got email from that poster yesterday, apologizing
 for his rash remark.)

Now consider this, Bobbie.  My postings account for some
percent of the entire flux around here.  I can give you a
some numbers, if you like (but I'm sure you wouldn't like).
Since the advent of your particular form of dreariness, the
part that in *any* way related to you (almost none of it
*to* you) has risen by at most a couple percent.  Whereas,
100% of your drivel is all on the same topic, and a mighty
silly one it is, too: you.

See, you're like those phobes out there: overestimating in
wild fear, left and right.  Hold hands, we're flaunting it.
Ask for *some* rights, we want "special" rights.  Disagree
with Bobbie, we're a cabal.  Don't want to be like Bobbie,
we're trash.  And so on.

Wake up, Bobbie.  This could as well be about BS as the BSA:

<> [Regarding the BSA:] It's now somehow not the politically
<> correct thing to, God forbid, have an organization that's
<> still dedicated to instilling pre-teen and teenage boys
<> with proper religious and moral values.
<> -- Stan Krieger (smk@usl.com)
<> Yup, it's a darned shame they ever had to let in the Jews
<> and Negroes, too.  What's all this namby-pamby toleration
<> crap they're trying to brainwash our kids with?  Do they
<> want them to think for themselves or something?  Are they 
<> crazy? -- Dan Sissman (92dms@vax.cc.williams.edu)
-- 
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: rjwill6@pbsdts.sdcrc.pacbell.com (Rod Williams)
Subject: McNeil-Lehrer on the Pentagon Ban
Originator: rjwill6@pbsdts.sdcrc.pacbell.com
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Francisco
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 22:14:24 GMT


PBS's McNeil-Lehrer News Hour yesterday (9/2/92) showed a
report on the US's ban on gays and lesbians serving in the
military.  It was done by Bruce van Vorst, of Time magazine,
who often moonlights on McNeil-Lehrer.

I thought it was an excellent piece, covering most of the
recent developments, and clearly gay-positive.  Van Vorst did
interview some sailors who said homosexuality was "immoral
and undignified," and an invasion of straight sailors'
privacy, and who said they'd leave the Navy if gays were
allowed serve openly.  But much more air-time was given to
people like Tracy Thorne (the "top gunner" from Florida who
recently came out on ABC's "Nightline" and was summarily
kicked out of the Navy) and Margarethe Kammermeyer, the
former VA "Nurse of the Year" and decorated Vietnam vet who
was kicked out of Washington State's National Guard.  They
came across as highly competent and valued professionals
who were discharged unfairly for a trivial reason.

Van Vorst interviewed a spokesperson for the General
Accounting Office (GAO) who said that a recent study showed
that the Pentagon spent $28,000,000 last year merely to
recruit and train replacements for the >1,000 gays and
lesbians discharged because of their sexual orientation.

He also showed a recent editorial in The Army Times calling
for the ban to be overturned, and noted recent polls that
showed most Americans support the overturn of the ban.

The report showed the parallel between the claim that
straight military folk would be uncomfortable living in close
proximity to gays and lesbians, and the exact same claim made
in the 40s about white military being uncomfortable living
next to blacks.  It mentioned that Harry Truman removed that
ban "with the stroke of a pen," and then contrasted Clinton's
and Bush's positions on the gay/lesbian ban, showing Clinton
on MTV asserting that he didn't want to waste the talents of
any Americans, and Bush telling Barbara Walters that he
supported the Pentagon's current position.
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
rod williams -=- pacific bell -=- san francisco -=- rjwill6@pacbell.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: ricky@adx.adelphi.edu (Ricky Glass)
Subject: Re: Busy group, eh?
Organization: Adelphi University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:51:03 GMT

In article <083021531@home.more.often> stay@home.more.often writes:
>Where's all the posts?
>Well?
>
>--
>I.M. Hermit, Ph.D.
>stay@home.more.often
>(123) 456-7890

This *is* funny.  From the subject on down.  Great address. :-)

Ricky



-- 
 vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
 (Dr\.\ )?R(\.|(ic((hard)|(ky))))\ Glass  {
         printf("%s (%s)\n", "Ricky Glass", "ricky@adx.adelphi.edu"); }
 /* recursive (adj.) See recursive.  ("The Devils DP Dictionary") */
From: bonacci@ecf.toronto.edu (BONACCI  John)
Newsgroups: soc.misc
Subject: test
Date: 28 Aug 1992 17:04:36 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

test
bye
Newsgroups: soc.misc
From:  chorus@vntic.msk.su (ACADEMIC CHORUS BY S. STROKIN)
Subject: ALL'ATTENZIONE DEGLI UTENTI ITALIANI
Summary: ALL'ATTENZIONE DEGLI UTENTI ITALIANI
Reply-To: chorus@vntic.msk.su
Organization: AIST-VNTIC INFORMATION NETWORK
Date: Wed,  2 Sep 92 15:50:49 +0300 

             ALL' ATTENZIONE DEGLI UTENTI ITALIANI !

   Il Coro Accademico di Mo Sergio V. Strokin cerca collaborazione
e l'amicizia con i cori, orchestri, solisti italiani. Ed anche con
tutti amatori della musica classia, lirica, corale...

   Per la vostra richiesta posiamo spedirvi (via E-mail) il programma
del coro.

                                 S. Strokin -  direttore artistico
                                 B. Tarakanov - president
                                 A. Kadosov - direttore amministrativo



Newsgroups: soc.misc
From: stay@home.more.often (I. M. Hermit)
Subject: Busy group, eh?
Reply-To: stay@home.more.often
Organization: Cave Dwellers International
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 01:53:07 GMT

Where's all the posts?
Well?

--
I.M. Hermit, Ph.D.
stay@home.more.often
(123) 456-7890
From: bhattach@engin.umich.edu (Sayan Bhattacharyya)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: bashing feminism in soc.feminism
Date: 3 Sep 1992 22:06:05 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Aug31.200443.1765@Veritas.COM> rdh@veritas.COM (Robert Hartman) writes:
>
>I don't think that this should become a forum in which feminism itself
>is debated.  Articles in attack or defense of feminism seem to me to
>be out-of-place here.  
>
[...]

>  As I understand it, this is supposed to be a group for
>discussion of feminist issues, not a group for discussion of the issue
>of feminism.

While I agree with Robert's contention that articles 'bashing` feminism
are out of place in this newsgroup, I disagree with him that debating
about 'feminism itself' is also out of place.

Note that `bashing` is not the same as `debating` . The former is a name
for uninformed and prejudiced attack. `Debating' on the other hand is
a term for civilised and two-sided discourse.

By banning or censoring posts that call into question the
rationale behind feminist thought, this group would be doing itself
a great disservice . This would be tantamount to closing one's
ears to criticism and would circumscribe the terms of the debate
within this newsgroup to a considerable extent . Bear in mind that
in parliamentary democracy the opposition has as important a role 
to play as the government. If you ban the opposition, what you
get is a dictatorship.

-Sayan Bhattacharyya



-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: Ron Buckmire <buckmr@rpi.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Pat Robertson's definition of FEMINISM
Date: 27 Aug 1992 18:39:08 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

Taken from "The Globe And Mail" newspaper, Toronto, Wednesday, August 26, 1992

Page A14

SOCIAL STUDIES
  - A daily miscellany of information by Michael Kesterton

...WORD WATCH
  ...Feminism: is described in a fund-raising letter by U.S. evangelist
               Pat Robertson as "a socialist, anti-family political movement
               that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their
               children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and
               become lesbians."
---
RON BUCKMIRE, 11 Colvin Circle, Troy, NY 12180-3735. ``D.C., April 25 1993''
uunet!rpi.edu!buckmr||buckmr@rpitsmts.bitnet||buckmr@rpi.edu||+1 518 276 8910
"Jane." --Lily Tomlin, when asked "Who's your family in LA?" 


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: uunet!mailrus!gatech!meshugge.media.mit.edu!cindy@ncar.ucar.EDU (Cindy Blank-Edelman)
Subject: Re: feminism callous to m
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: M.I.T. Media Laboratory
Date: 1 Sep 92 23:48:13 GMT

CB>>I think the main problem is one of communication.  When men talk
CB>>to me about their concerns or issues (and in my entire life that
CB>>has only happened on soc.feminism), I hear them expecting me to
CB>>give up my issues because theirs are the *real* issues.  I hear
CB>>them blaming me for not working on their issues.

> As one of the only men who has spoken to you about his concerns on
> issues, I should add that I have never once claimed that you, or any
> other person concerned with women's issues, should "give up"
> anything.  Robert Coleman has not asked you *anything* of this sort,
> either, nor has Robert Hartman, and I can probably list others.

Please read my posting more carefully.  Unless my memory is totally
gone, I believe I explicitly stated that I was talking about what I
*hear*, not necessarily what men are trying to *say*.

I have tried to be very open-minded about men's issues, and I was
speaking on a personal level about why it is difficult to be clear on
what men are saying to me.  I hope that this clarifies my posting -- I
certainly did not mean to be accusatory in any way, and I don't think
I was.

--Cindy Blank-Edelman

--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: harelb@math.cornell.edu (Harel Barzilai)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: submission: WOMEN RADIO LISTENER ALERT!
Date: 27 Aug 1992 21:17:40 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

(note the email address for Womens International News Gathering
Service (either that or I'm pretty close; WINGS for short) below --
they should have more info
--Harel
Co-founder, Co-moderator, misc.activism.progressive)

[Via misc.activism.progressive from PeaceNet's media.issues]
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Topic 202       WOMEN RADIO LISTENER ALERT! 
ggundrey        media.issues     9:41 am  Aug 27, 1992 
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>From: George Gundrey <ggundrey@igc.org>
>Subject: WOMEN RADIO LISTENER ALERT!  
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>From wings Wed Aug 26 00:10:47 1992 
>Received: by igc.apc.org (4.1/Revision: 1.19 ) 
>        id AA24469; Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:10:45 PDT 
>Date: Wed, 26 Aug 92 00:10:45 PDT 
>From: WINGS <wings@igc.org>
>Message-Id: <9208260710.AA24469@igc.apc.org> 
>To: cnstaff, ggundrey, hmuskat, hrcoord, nlns, queerplanet 
>Subject: RADIO LISTENER ALERT - PLEASE RE-POST 
>Status: RO 

WOMEN RADIO LISTENER ALERT!     PLEASE POST IN NEWSLETTERS AND BBSes 
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
   "The National Women's Agenda: What Women Want and How They Plan 
to Win It" is a program being released to public and community radio 
stations via satellite on September 10 (at 2 p.m. Eastern Time). 
Please write or call your local stations and ask them to carry 
this program and when it will air. The show is sponsored by 
national women's organizations and features organizers and 
Congresswomen reviewing women's major legislation and how to 
make it central to the election. 
   Cassetttes will still be available after the release date from 
WINGS: Women's International News Gathering Service, PO Box 
5307, Kansas City MO 64131. (816)361-7161 
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *  
MORE INFORMATION IN PRESS RELEASE & ARTICLE FORM ARE AVAILABLE 


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: bhattach@dip.eecs.umich.EDU (sayan bhattacharyya)
Subject: Re: Preventing Female Children - in India
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor, MI
Date: 27 Aug 92 19:21:30 GMT

In article <9208170853.AA00858@score.aic.co.jp> jaya@aic.co.jp (Jayanthi Krishnamachari) writes:
>I am an Indian woman, and was active in women's groups in
>India 8 years ago, before coming to Japan.
>
>Yes, there is female infanticide and definitely foeticide,
>about which we had debated - what could be done to prevent
>this.
>
>The basic problem is this: there are people who do *not*
>want girls. How do you persuade them that not only should
>they have whatever girls they conceive, but also bring up
>these girls for a minimum of 18 years without discrimination?
>
>I really do not see what UNICEF can do: or how India
>signing some more conventions will help solve this problem.
>There are enough laws in India; many of them not followed,
>and there are not enough resources to see that people
>follow them.
>

[...]

>Beyond this, education at the grassroots level, that girls
>*can* be an asset, is necessary. This is the work of
>more than a lifetime.

I think that the problem is more related to poverty than to
lack of education. Traditionally, the girl child leaves the
family when she is married, while the male child will stay
in the family for ever and will contribute his earnings
to the family. Thus, it makes perfect economic sense for an
impoverished family to kill or neglect girl children, because
any investment made on the girl child is a waste of money .
It makes more sense to invest the already meagre resources
on the sons , for they are a good investment.

This is the ground reality in India and , I think, in many
third world countries.

A clear example of this is the traditional custom in Indian
households that the women of the family should eat last,
after the menfolk have eaten. Obviously, this doesn't matter
so much in affluent families where there is enough food to
go around for everyone. But one can well imagine what the
situation is like in impoverished families : often, it is
only leftovers, if that, which are left for the women. Once
again, this makes perfect economic sense.

The only way that the situation can improve is if economic
conditions improve.

-Sayan Bhattacharyya

--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: goid@zooid.guild.ORG (Will Steeves)
Subject: Re: excerpts from a new b
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Date: 31 Aug 92 16:15:54 GMT

dawn@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Dawn Owens-Nicholson)
DO> holzman@fnalno.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman) writes:

DO> >The 1990 census shows that fathers with joint custody are over
DO> >90% likely t pay the full ordered child support.

DO> This is an absolutely FALSE statement.  I work with the 1990
DO> census daily in my job, and I can tell you that there is NO
DO> question on the census, either the long or short form, that asks
DO> anything about custody arrangements (joint, sole, none, or
DO> otherwise) or about child support payments (court ordered, or not)
DO> with respect to whether or not they are paid in full.

Actually Dawn, Dan was incorrect in saying that the statistics are
from the census, but in fact they *do* exist, from an academic
research project (quoted in alt.child.support, I recall) which states
that there *is* a proportional visitation frequency and prompt, full
payment of child support.

With apologies for not knowing the exact reference...  FREE probably
has it, I would guess.

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * I was the kid next door's imaginary friend.

--
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: uunet!cos!tango!bob1@ncar.UCAR.EDU (Bob Blackshaw)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Abuse
Date: 25 Aug 1992 18:12:46 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

OK, just remembered what I forgot in the last post. It was a
statement attributed to Kathy McCloskey (forgive me if that
was not the case) about how men constituted a very great
portion of those commiting abuse.

I would really like to see some statistics on this, else it
simply goes down as blatant assertion. My experience has
suggested that, insofar as abusive parents go, the numbers
are about equal with mothers having a slight edge.

Ms. McCloskey, if this gets posted could you please come up
with some statistics?

Bob



-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Preventing Female Children - in India
Date: 27 Aug 1992 21:16:32 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

In article <2A9D2E41.13106@ics.uci.edu> tittle@alexandre-dumas.ics.uci.edu (Cindy Tittle Moore) writes:

>All this perfect economic sense is going to go out the window
>a generation from now, you know...
>
>I *don't* think the problem is *just* economic.  I think it is
>symptomatic of the continual dismissal of the value of the work
>that women do, which is true here as well as there.

Work done by women is just a "Merchandise". And, if it is dismissed, it is
an economic problem.
Now, the reason why women's work is dismissed here is not the same as why it
is dismissed in Third World countries.
In this country (USA), women's work is dismissed as a form of making labor more
and more cheaper.
In Third World countries, the value of women's work is not really dismissed,
but it is related to the "survival" form of economics that is neede just to eat
in those countries. There, large families are needed to work in the land, and 
women have, as a primary function, the care of the family. Daughters, then
will result in a burden for the family.

Saying that the dismissal of the work women do is symptomatic, also calls for 
two different kinds of analysis: That work is dismissed in the market, as a 
"merchandise" that can be sold, but it is not dsimissed as "labor" in so far 
that it is needed for the reproduction of the work that will be sold.
So, what I guess that it meant above is: the "market" value of the work that 
women do.
However, in some Third World countries, where the economy is in an early
stage of development, markets work in a different form as they do in 
capitalistic developed countries, such as the USA. Then, the analysis must be
divided. Moreover, the idea of "value" is not the same in both, and in some 
cases, it does not exist as such.



>
>--Cindy
>


AAP




-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.
From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: who "benefits" from  (1)
Date: 30 Aug 1992 16:49:46 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

Muffy writes...
MB> The more practical reason is that women often can't afford to have sex
MB> because of the risk of pregnancy.  Even now, there is not adequate
MB> access to birth control or information about it, nor is it 100%
MB> effective.  If she *does* get pregnant, the man can just leave, so it's
MB> not all that risky for him.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Hardly...  I'd say that the possibility of getting hit with a paternity suit
and being forced to support a child whom you may not want, for 18-24 years,
is a fairly significant risk.

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * Scott me up, Beamy.


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments may be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
news group is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.