HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew M. Solovay)
Subject: Re: A Strand of Bigotry
Organization: Smiley Abolition Front
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 03:19:32 GMT

In article <1992Nov23.014012.18065@macc.wisc.edu> anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
>
>In article <17132@umd5.umd.edu> jns@elea.umd.edu (J.  N.
>Shaumeyer) writes:
>
>>Clayton Cramer (cramer@optilink.UUCP) wrote:
> 
>>> The homosexual fascist lobby won't....
>
>>Excuse me.
>
>>That should be "*militant* homosexual facist lobby".
>
>Honey I don't know why you're goin' so easy on that dumb-ass
>pig-dog-fuck.  He means the militant homosexual fascist
>extremist special-interest child-molester lobby.

Damn right. We militant homosexual fascist extremist
special-interest child-molesters are FED UP with being
marginalized.  In fact, from now on, I *insist* that you stop
using the abbreviation GLBO. I demand that you start writing
GLB<MHFESICM>O.
-- 
Andrew Michael Solovay    

"When angry, count four. When very angry, swear."
                --Mark Twain
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: norris@infonode.ingr.com (Jeff Norris)
Subject: Re: Marky Mark and Calvin Klein
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 22:17:49 GMT

mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon) writes:
>
>In article <Bxtz9A.CM4@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu>, cssam@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Scott
>Minor) wrote:
>>
>> Ummm, pardon me, but I believe it was the devine Gilda Radner as Babawa
>> Wawa and guest star Madeleine Kahn (pardon the spelling) as Mawena
>> Deetweek.  I pretty sure about this, but it's possible I'm mistaken.
>
>Are you sure?  Isn't Tomlin the one who did the operator (One wingy
>dingy...  Two wingy dingy...)  I thought she was Babawa Wawa.  But,
>if not, I shall amend the statement: 
>
>  As per Gilda Radner's fabu spoof...
>
>*X*
>(Who was Rosane, Rosanna Danna?  I thought that was Gilda...)

Gilda was Rosane, Babawa, and a host of other great characters.
Lily is Ernestine (the operator), and a host of other characters.

-jeff [who thinks Gilda and Lily will be remembered for at least as long as
       Marlena OR Madonna.  (Can comidians be icons?)]
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: thaaang@cwis.unomaha.edu (John Dorrance)
Subject: Re: Can anyone tell me about this TV show?
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:15:11 GMT

nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) writes:

>You know, I was looking for an excuse to talk about hair, and here it is.

Excuse? What's that?

>What do I think about me being a redhead? Not on your *life*. No way,
>no how. Don't even think about it.

Doalingk, this is MOUSSE! It just washes right out. You *do*
wash your hair, don't you? Or are you too butch for hairstuff? ;)
Seriously, if I was youse, I'd run straight for a haiahshop and
buy tons of temporary colors and highlights and just go *wild*!
Try a poiple rinssse. Try streaks! It's be gobs of fun if youse
was me.

>I have resigned myself to let a
>couple of inches be trimmed off the bottom, get rid of three years of
>split ends. I just have to find someone to do it for me.

Hell, do it yourself. Shouldn't be that hard; you aren't exactly
doing the ultra-structured thing. Just wet it, pull it all back
into a sheaf, and cut straight across. Or use a FlowBee aircutter.
Or just go to a barber college and tell the kid to just take off
the split ends (make it clear that you'll avenge any unneccessary
shortening with violence). It'll only cost about 4 bucks and it'll
be fine. Trust me; if they fuck it up, I'll let you shave me bald.

>I haven't shaved in awhile - one of my periods of "you know, I really
>don't like shaving." My beard isn't really full (not much up on the
>cheeks), so I will want to shave it some time. But it has a sprinkling
>of red hairs in it, an effect I rather like..

I get the red beard action too. I can't wait to be able to grow a
full beard! I'm too estrogenous now, so I'm just making do with a
goatee-like event; basically just a moustache, a chin-covering,
and a little triangle of hair directly under the lower lip because
I can't make them all connect yet. Looks pretty good; I've gotten
compliments.

--
John Dorrance        * Sexyfunky Motherfuckerdiva *   thaaang@cwis.unomaha.edu

		I bet if you threw that ass into the air
			It'd turn into sunshine!
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Bear Crap
Date: 19 Nov 92 20:27:39 GMT
Followup-To: soc.motss
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <michaelh.722200488@Xenon.Stanford.EDU>,
michaelh@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Mike Hennahane) wrote:

> so what is selectively taking things out of articles with no
> context, george?

Why, them be the *bear* necessities, babbubulla...

*X*
(...the simple bear necessities, forget about your worries and your
strife.  Remember the bear necessities...)
Xref: sparky soc.motss:48382 talk.politics.misc:60821
From: cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: soc.motss,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Colorado Amendment 2: The First Fatality
Date: 18 Nov 92 20:00:12 GMT
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA

In article <Bxv7wx.Dx5@acsu.buffalo.edu>, pfohl@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Anne Pfohl) writes:
# ..and since, in fact, CO #2 *does* legalize discrimination, how 
# would one go about prosecuting an incident of gay bashing in 
# Colorado now?  Would it have to be tried as assault, with no 
# reference to it being a hate crime, or motivated by hatred of 
# gays?
# 
# If that's the case, gay bashing wouldn't exist in Colorado, 
# because the crimes could not be identified as such in order to be 
# prosecuted.
# 
# Sounds like gay bashers would have free reign to express their 
# hatred.  Sure, they might get caught and have assault charges 
# pressed, but there's no way for gays and lesbians in Colorado to 
# fight the specific instance and intent of violence against them 
# as gay men, lesbians and bisexuals now, is there?
# 
# Anne Pfohl

This suggests that making assault into a serious crime would
be worthwhile, wouldn't it?  Guess what?  Most Americans would
vigorously agree.  Mandatory six month sentence for assault,
regardless of intent, sounds good to me.  Mandatory five years
in prison for aggravated assault also sounds good to me.
That way it is IRRELEVANT whether the assault was because of
the victim's sex, race, wallet status, etc. -- as it should be,
because the victim isn't the cause of the assault, but the
assaulter.

Of course, liberals would have to give up their unconscionable
enthusiasm for violent criminals.
-- 
Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
"Foxes prefer rabbits with short claws." -- Nadja Adolf
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: paul@psych.toronto.edu (Paul Hastings)
Subject: Re: Parents
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:45:23 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.230828.10821@samba.oit.unc.edu> czmt@gibbs.oit.unc.edu (Season Marie Taylor) writes:
>This is really a follow-up to all the postings about Daniel's (is that
>right?) letter from his father.
>
>I really haven't had that much trouble with my father understanding.  In
>fact, he is usually more comfortable talking to me about my sexuality than
>I am.  I am, however, getting the impression that he thinks it's a phase. 

>Overall, he is very accepting, though.  He
>always wants to know about who I am seeing.  He says that it doesn't
>really matter to him as long as I'm happy and I don't get hurt.
>
>My mother, on the other hand, doesn't really know.  She approached (or
>perhaps accosted) me about it once, so I guess she has some idea, but I
>really don't feel that I can talk to her about it.  

Interesting.  That's the opposite of my folks.  My mom and I are cool
to talk about it, but it's not a subject that comes up with my dad.
However, my mom has said that she could never accept or deal with the
idea of my sister being gay (she isn't).  I wonder if my dad could?
(I doubt it.)  Mom's point was, as she understands finding men 
attractive, she can understand me.  As dad can't really find that
feeling within himself, he can't.  The positions would be reversed
for a daughter.

>(Background info:  My
>parents were divorced when I was 8 months old.  I've always lived with my
>dad, and I only visited my mom once a month, so I don't know her very well.)

'Course, that doesn't help make you feel comfortable talking to her
about the most intimate details of your now very public life ;-).

-paul

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Hastings    paul@psych.utoronto.ca          545 Dovercourt Road
University of Toronto      416-978-3990          Toronto, Ont.  M6H 2W5
M. Mark: I can teach you to dance with no intoxication.  (yeah, right!)   
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: ECL4JN2@MVS.OAC.UCLA.EDU (Jack B. Nimble)
Subject: Re: Individualism & the Common Weal
Date: 19 Nov 92 00:14:30 PST

In article <1992Nov11.181759.6528@sun0.urz.uni-heidelberg.de>, on 11 Nov 92 18:17:59 GMT,
gsmith@clio.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de (Gene W. Smith) writes:

>
>In article <1992Nov5.195018.13629@gordian.com> mike@gordian.com
>(Michael A. Thomas) writes:
>
>>  Good will. The opposite choice (which is force) is illegitimate,
>>and does not work.
>
>I've asked this before, but I will try again: since owning property is
>based on the use of force, why is force an illegitimate when it taxes
>property?  Stated in another way, without the government, you have no
>property except what you can defend with your own private force.
>Given that you would rather live where you are than in Bosnia, why is
>it looting when the government takes your property in taxes?  It is
>the government which defined that property as yours in the first place.
>"My property" is a *legal* definition, and without government, there
>are no laws and hence no legal properties.
>
Socialists are quite fond of making the claim that owning property is
based on force, but this is no more so than it is of life in general. If
somebody attacks you with intent to do you physical harm or worse, you
had better damn well be prepared to apply force in self-defense or die.
Likewise, if someone is prepared to steal your property, and you are
unwilling to defend it, you might just as well be prepared to die as
well, for you'll not have the means of survival in the real world.

Your right to property is a natural one and does not depend upon the
existence of governments to bestow upon you any such rights. Where
governments arise, they assume to themselves the monopolistic use of
force for the purpose of exacting punishment upon those violators of the
rights of individuals within their jurisdictions. Since they prevent
you from the exercise of your natural rights, they are obligated to
indemnify you by supplying the corresponding services of defense,
courts, and police. Whether they may legitimately do so through the
vehicle of taxation or whether they must do so through non-coercive
means is a controversial area among libertarians. However, this does not
negate the fact that the ninety percent or so exacted from the citizenry
for purposes other than those legitimate to government is definitely
theft.

>What I am saying in various was is, Render unto Caesar that which is
>Caesar's.  Or at least find an argument that it isn't Caesar's.
>
As happened often, the Pauline Christian Church, operating outside of
the context of 1st-century Judean culture, got the import of the message
wrong. To paraphrase the real meaning of the text: "Caesar
should go back to Rome where he belongs; the land of Judea belongs
solely to God and to the Jewish people."

        =Jack=
---

Jack B. Newsbaum             You have rights antecedent to all earthly
Library Information Systems  governments; rights that cannot be
University Research Library  repealed or restrained by human law.
ecl4jn2@mvs.oac.ucla.edu               - John Adams
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: fjvwing@cs.vu.nl (FJ!!)
Subject: Greg! (was Re: bear crap)
Organization: Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Distribution: soc
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:31:10 GMT

"ron ingelevics" <ron.ingelevics@canrem.com> writes:
>Hello Greg!

Oh great. Our collective name has become Greg!. Not something exotic
like 'Alexei', cryptic like 'FJ', usable for boths sexes as 'Max',
something as simple as 'John' or as valley as 'Melinda', no, we are
'Greg!'.

Of course, this does make life simpler in a way, instead of having to
write about the 'GLBO* on the internet' - wich makes leading a PC life
much more difficult as we have to keep track of which of those
abbreviations we have put first on the last occasions so we can rotate
LBO*G, BO*LG etc. correctly - we can write about 'Greg!'

I must say that I really hate that '!' on the end of 'Greg!' It is so
utterly pointless. Makes us look like we are immature and screaming for
attention. I want a vote to either take it off or make parodize it, by
using something bigger than one '!', maybe a '??' or something.

How did this come about, anyway? I didn't see anything on ~announce
about this. Was there a call for votes that I missed? Hey, I would have
wanted my vote to be heard on this one too, y'know.

Say, what are the people on misc.kids called, anyway? I mean, suppose I
barge in there and call them 'Melissa' when they really are 'Bud.'
Gawd, that would be so impolite. I'd hate to have to remember
talk.bizarre's name, it is bound to be something like
IU^&*FGTSDFGDVCBBNKJRT@#!@!@#$#%^&UIYHKJkjkjui. Is there a list
of names I can ftp from somewhere?

>I am new to Internet 

You're kidding.

>and read your message on soc.motss 
>and am just wondering if you receive this message.  I enjoyed reading 
>your message and that is why I am writing to you!

Well, with Greg! being around 80.000 people, someone was bound to post
something to appeal to you. I guess you'll be seeing lots more.

>Happy Thanksgiving!

This part of Greg! doesn't celebrate that, but thanks anyway. Same to ya.

>Ron
(Puts real friendly smile on)
Welcome Ron. I must say your demuffinization is quite original. Forgive
me for the above, but I just had to.
							FJ!! (I've met
							the enemy, and
							the enemy is
							Greg!)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: corwin+@CMU.EDU (Scott Safier)
Subject: Re: discrimination at CMU
Followup-To: soc.motss
Originator: scotts@MORPHEUS.CIMDS.RI.CMU.EDU
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University
	<CORWIN+.92Nov11120016@MORPHEUS.CIMDS.RI.CMU.EDU>
	<mattm-111192104825@mcmelmon.apple.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:17:11 GMT

In article <mattm-111192104825@mcmelmon.apple.com> mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon) writes:

   And CMU would not be asking the student to change his sexuality, in
   any case.  They are asking the student to change for the purposes
   and duration of a play.

You aren't paying attention, are you?

CMU is saying, "be gay, just hide it."  And they don't mean, hide it
on stage, but hide it in life.  It is kinda like reverse outing --
forcing someone to stay in the closet against under threat of being
"cut".

Scott
From: jf@threel.co.uk (John Fisher)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Can you tell me about this TV program?
Date: 23 Nov 92 12:41:43 GMT
Organization: 3L Ltd, 86/92 Causewayside, Edinburgh EH9 1PY, UK

In article <BxzIIE.ErC@cck.coventry.ac.uk>,
lsg001@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Graham Wilson) writes:

> In article <2b090762@ThreeL.co.uk> jf@threel.co.uk (John Fisher) writes:
>
> >There's a difference of perception here which is quite
> >interesting.  I agree with Michael.  I think it's a ghastly
> >show.
> 
> ** Nonsense. The show is wonderful. It should be taken for what it is
>    - satire. Nothing more, nothing less.

Satire on what?  And for what?

--John
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: jarvis@psych.toronto.edu (Brian Jarvis)
Subject: Re: Tired today for the right reasons
Organization: Dept. of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 06:54:15 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.204415.21649@psych.toronto.edu> paul@psych.toronto.edu (Paul Hastings) writes:
>
>Given that the most wonderful part of sex is immediately after, it's
>near tragic that the propensity of so many is to lunge for a towel
>or leap in the shower when the time could be (and was) taken to lie 
>shaking together while the spit and sweat and spunk congeals and
>cements the lovers into one, hands slowly caressing flanks and 
>ridges and grooves, lips seeking secret sensitive areas on the chin,
> [...and so on and so on...]

Well, I do suddenly feel a need to leap in the shower just now.  Cold,
I think.

Brian
-- 

Brian A. Jarvis,          Rm. 4026, Sidney Smith Hall, Dept. of Psychology,
jarvis@psych.toronto.edu  University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
System Administrator      M5S 1A1  (416) 978-3948
Xref: sparky soc.motss:48340 rec.skiing:7667
From: owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen Rowley)
Newsgroups: soc.motss,rec.skiing
Subject: Re: BOYCOTT Purgatory-Durango  (NOT!)
Date: 19 Nov 92 01:05:51 GMT
Followup-To: soc.motss

In article <22476@drutx.ATT.COM>, kpm@druhi.ATT.COM (Kevin Malloy (DoD #106)) writes:
> >>
> >>SHOW 'EM YOU CARE! BOYCOTT PURGATORY-DURANGO!!
> >>jim p.

> Please, please.  Durango voted _strongly_ AGAINST amendment #2, and San Juan
> county (where Purgatory is) also voted no (although not as strongly).  
> Perhaps pickets during the fascist ski week would be in order?  Maybe asking
> area businesses to put up signs saying "Colorado SAFE SPACE" or "HATE-FREE
> ZONE" signs would be better.

I think its good that somebody is thinking along the lines of *positive*
tactics, pro-active strategy, rather than just reactive measures.


Heres what I think.

Prop #2 was fielded by its proponents because momentum was starting to build
in the direction of equal rights for Queers*. ( note to no soc.motss readers
I am very queer myself, and use this term in its most positive sense)
Even if the prop had not passed
they would have accomplished a part of that aim because it caused us
to go on the defensive and diverted energy from the momentum.

Well one thing about winning is that now the energy can all go back to the
forward push. Towns where the measure did not pass can pass local
ordinances that fly in the face of Prop #2. Push on the bigots from
multiple fronts, making them defend their newly gained ground on all 
borders. Identify your area as freedom zones and push even further
to find ways to beat them at the same game. 
get an ammendment passed ( thorough your state legislature) that prohibits
denial of equal rights or status to anybody, make it retroactive.

One thing is very important to remeber though.
these propositions are getting support because ordinary folks think that
the militant homosexual agenda is  to get special rights for queers.

It MUST be made clear that this is not the case, word future amendments
to clearly state that equal means equal, nothing less, nothing more.

> I think that in-your-face stuff against the right-wing fundamentalist zealots
> is the thing to do, but, at least we here in Colorado should not punish
> areas of the state that voted _no_.  

Unfortunately, this IS a domestic problem for colorado.

perhaps strayt Coloradans will now realise that *moderation
in the pursuit of justice is no virtue*

Institutionalised homophobia is usually invisible to strayts
the CFV has painted it black and chained it to your front doorstep.

I know the tendency is not to look directly at it, to avert your eyes
as if it were somebody elses problem, but that luxury is gone now.

Big and ugly isn't it.

LUX ./. owen

--
D. Owen Rowley {uunet,fernwood,sun}!autodesk!owen

  " It will be a cold March 17th that I celebrate the imposition of
	Romes rule, on Pagan Ireland. Erin go ppphhhhhttttttt! "
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: zwicky@erg.sri.com (Elizabeth Zwicky)
Subject: Re: Seed-stealing squirrels
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, CA
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 23:22:29 GMT

In article <74282@apple.apple.COM> richard@Apple.COM (a flying squirrel) writes:
>>Item #3200: Squirrel Throne        $21.95
>>(Corn not included and not available for shipment to California.)

>Hmmm.  I wonder why one cannot purchase these things for use in our
>cheery, leery golden state?


I read that as meaning that corn is not included and *corn* is not
available for shipment to California. This makes perfect sense to me,
given the restrictions on import of agricultural items. I've never
been stopped at the California border by people demanding to know if
I've got any squirrel toys...

	Elizabeth Zwicky
	Sentences but not fish parsed on request.
	zwicky@erg.sri.com
Newsgroups: soc.motss,talk.politics.misc,ca.politics
From: glp@fig.citib.com (Greg Parkinson)
Subject: Re: A Strand of Bigotry
Originator: glp@merlin
Organization: Citibank IBISM
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:59:26 GMT


In article <mattm-171192134108@mcmelmon.apple.com>, mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon) writes:
|> In article <13208@optilink.UUCP>, cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer)
|> wrote:
|> 
|> > Remember: liberalism IS fascism.
|> 
|> You are in error.  Liberalism follows a totalitarian paradigm, but it
|> is not fascism.  Both are instances of the same class, which has no
|> particular name.  They invovle the glorification of _Law_, and the
|> compulsion of individual choice to 'acceptable' behavior, as dictated by
|> _Law_.  

What utter bullshit. 

The laws I see getting passed these days that concern me
are the ones that define me as a second class citizen without
the same rights or protections as my heterosexual brother.
I guess sodomy laws are the invention of liberals?

I apologize in advance for the adolescent insult this will
no doubt draw forth - or worse, a boring faux-intellectual
response.  Self-hatred is a sad and pitiful thing to watch
in action.  

-- 
Greg Parkinson                  Phone: 212-657-7814  Fax: 212-825-8607
Citibank,111 Wall Street        E-Mail: glp@fig.citib.com
New York, New York  10043
The opinions expressed are my own and not those of the big 'ol bank.