HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jcr@milton.u.washington.edu (Mr. EuStress)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,alt.child-support
Subject: Re: Sex Insurance
Date: 18 Aug 92 21:28:16 GMT
Reply-To: jcr@milton.u.washington.edu (Mr. EuStress)
Organization: University of Washington

karen dawn writes
> jcr@milton.u.washington.edu (Mr. EuStress) writes:
> 
> >  The government should use our tax money
> >  to insure people`s sexual contact.
> >  If a child is born then the insurer 
> >  (the government) should reward money
> >  to the primary care giver.  The Insurer
> >  would do its damndest to prevent conception.
> >  Thus men would not be made slaves to women.
> nonsense!

    Of course you say "nonsense!", you're a woman -- 
    the benefactor of injustices against men.

    If the minority can be enslaved then the majority
    will support it.
From: perez@mgr.hjf.org (Charles Perez)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: chauvinistic Posts
Date: 19 Aug 92 19:50:32 GMT
Organization: HJF AIDS Research Project, Washington DC

In article <HARKCOM.92Aug17164922@spinach.pa.yokogawa.co.jp> harkcom@spinach.pa.yokogawa.co.jp (Alton Harkcom) writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.203626.9230@u.washington.edu> jcr@milton.u.washington.edu
>   (Mr. EuStress) writes:
>
> =}Alton Harkcom writes:
> =}> It depends.  If he took the time to find a woman that will allow
> =}> him that choice then yes he does.  If he didn't and ended up with a
> =}> woman who refuses an abortion then he must face up to his responsibility.
> =}
> =} That's it -- blame the man for picking the wrong woman.
>
>   If the man picked the wrong woman then he deserves the blame for it...

So, if he misjudges her character and she ends up defrauding him, he
is to blame? "You shouldn't have trusted her, now *you* get to pay for
it." :-(

>
> =} Alton is a good example of "men who hate men".
>
>   I have said nothing to that effect.  There was nothing in my posts
>that implied this either.
>
> =} I don't suppose that Alton thinks she has a mind 
> =} of her own -- one that can change.
>
>   To the contrary.  And as I explained in email if she claimed that she
>would get an abortion before sex but changed her mind later then she
>should be entitled to nothing from the man.

Reasonable enough.

>
> =} Every poster who is against "Equal Male Choice"
> =} as demonstrated Male chauvinism.
>
>   Another generalization to try and cover your lack of an arguement
>that comes even close to being rational?
>
>   I have not claimed to be against "Fair Male Choice" [whether that
>is the same as Equal Male Choice is left open to debate] I have only
>claimed to be against those who made the wrong choice and don't want
>to face up to the results.

But that has been the issue all along - what are the *proper*
results, and what is merely legalized extortion?

>
> =} What about the child?  It gets abused because it's unwanted.
> =} Souldn't everyone have "unwanted-child" insurance?
>
>   Everybody knows insurance sucks.  But for those who lack foresight
>then it can come in handy...

Insurance sucks, but it comes in handy? Get your story straight.

>
>* If you want to carry on an intelligent discussion then please get over
>	the immature flaming bit...

Hear, hear.


-- 
==========================================================================
That which is necessary is never evil. If an evil seems necessary, look
to your context; that's where its root lies.  - Charles Perez
==========================================================================
From: stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Censorship, perhaps?
Date: 18 Aug 92 04:05:02 GMT
Followup-To: soc.men,soc.women,alt.censorship,sci.skeptic
Organization: Murasami Labs

Loren I. Petrich wrote:

> 	Melinda Shore posted a satire there recently calling for the
> Claytoon's fellow Optilink employees to ostracize him or be known as
> seeing nothing wrong with crude bigotry, if not actual supporters of
> it.

Satire? Or censorship? I get my ass toasted for suggesting that
"main stream" feminists might want to put some distance or even
out right comdemnation of some of the more bizarre and hateful
statements made by the "radical" feminists, or be thought of as
"seeing nothing wrong with crude bigotry, if not actual supporters
of it". [nice quote, BTW]

This is Political Correctness in it's pure state - think the way
we do, or else.

Disgusting. 

K'Char
Xref: sparky soc.men:15153 soc.women:15421
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Hating Men with Full Force
Date: 18 Aug 92 22:09:02 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

A few brief quotes from Houston _Chronicle_ reporter Jacsun Shah, as
reported in the Jan., 1992 issue of "Liberty" magazine, p. 78:

   "Yes, I am a man hater, yes, I am a feminist. and why not?
    Women are dying . They die every day, at the hands of men.
    Men ... beat them, rape them, dismember them. Hell yes, I
    hate men ... To all of you women out there, I say _hate_.
    You have every right to ... I knew the kindest thing I could
    do for the women of this world is to hate men with full force."

(entered exactly as published in Liberty).


-- 
  
        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - sheaffer@netcom.com
  
 Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!

       "Beware when the great God lets loose a thinker on this planet.
        Then all things are at risk. It is as when a conflagration has
        broken out in a great city, and no man knows what is safe, or
        where it will end."
                               - Emerson: Essay, "Circles"
From: mikep@hpmwtd.sr.hp.com (Mike Powell)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 04:55:55 GMT
Subject: Re: Better Late than Never
Organization: HP Santa Rosa Site (NMD MTA MWTD)
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: mandatory WIMPS
Date: 19 Aug 92 22:22:33 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <4940@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood) writes:
>
>I've seen some interesting mYn at womYn's rallies on ABC World News Tonight
>crying about how awful men are.  They have scruffy beards and quivering lips
>and would gladly have a sex change to be on the "winning side".
>
>Sheesh!  What WIMPS! ;-)

Do you recall the spate of newspaper stories a few months ago about
"Democratic Women, Republican Men"? It seems that is a quite noticable
trend in Washington, DC, and presumably elsewhere. I've recently become
aware of that trend in several individuals I know personally. Many 
women who are Politically Correct will not merely tolerate
men who are Incorrect as their lovers, but they actually EXPECT this to be the
case. In other words, they go out of their way to choose as lovers men
they know to have the balls to be Politically Incorrect. And when they
find out that a man they've met is Free from Doctrinal or Moral Error,
they suggest he kindly get lost.

I think you've put your finger on the reason *why*.

And that poor, simpering character you describe probably thinks he's
*increased* his attractiveness to women by such craven behavior!
If only he knew that he'd actually removed himself from competition.

This is *dangerous* knowledge, of course. So please help it to spread......


-- 
  
        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - sheaffer@netcom.com
  
 Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!

       "Beware when the great God lets loose a thinker on this planet.
        Then all things are at risk. It is as when a conflagration has
        broken out in a great city, and no man knows what is safe, or
        where it will end."
                               - Emerson: Essay, "Circles"
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
From: dmcanzi@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (David Canzi)
Subject: Re: Hating Men with Full Force
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 06:26:33 GMT

In article <Bm8RPB1w164w@cellar.org> revpk@cellar.org (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano) writes:
>Robert Sheaffer writes:
[..omitted..]
>     You know, I don't see the same sort of outrage from Sheaffer over

I went back to Sheaffer's article and reread it, figuring I must have
somehow missed his expressions of outrage the first time I read it.
Nope.  They aren't there.
-- 
David Canzi
Xref: sparky soc.men:14881 soc.women:15157
From: cam@castle.ed.ac.uk (Chris Malcolm)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Chiro-quackery (was: Backrubs and Body Massages)
Date: 12 Aug 92 14:05:30 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1992Aug8.133809.1@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:

>  All I know is that chiropracty worked where the conventional M.D.s
>did not. That's my 2 cents worth.

Some UK private medical insurance companies specify chiropracty for
back problems simply because they tend to get the sufferer fit and
back to work faster and cheaper.
-- 
Chris Malcolm    cam@uk.ac.ed.aifh          +44 (0)31 650 3085
Department of Artificial Intelligence,    Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK                DoD #205
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: Some Politically Incorrect questions
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 92 20:57:58 GMT

In article <1992Aug15.142110.2308@leland.Stanford.EDU> dkeisen@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dave Eisen) writes:
>Or Loren, do you know lots of women who would be happy to
>marry an unemployed man with few marketable job skills? Do 
>you know lots of women who are looking for a man they can 
>support for the rest of their lives?

Do you know lots of men who are looking for a woman they can support
for the rest of their lives?  I don't.  In fact, most of the hetero
men I know expect their wives to work and often express dismay that
the wives don't (or won't) make more money.

One of my female friends told me the following story of a man she was
dating.

Man:  So, how much do Ph.D.s in your field make?

Woman:  Something like $50-60K a year.

Man:  That's all?!  Well, I suppose you could do some consulting work
to make more money.

Xref: sparky soc.men:15280 soc.women:15556 alt.child-support:2823 alt.abortion.inequity:3199 alt.dads-rights:2039
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,alt.child-support,alt.abortion.inequity,alt.dads-rights
Subject: Re: Right To Not Support
Date: 21 Aug 92 05:18:40 GMT
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <BsuBLL.Ex8@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com> wreck@fmsrl7.srl.ford.com (R. Cage) writes:
>Show me the part which says that the government has the power
>to let another private party make me responsible for the results
>of their decision.  In NO OTHER SITUATION is this the case.  

Not true.  Check out the line of promissory estoppel cases in contract law.

Or, in torts, I believe some state courts hold a defendant fully liable 
if the plaintiff, for religious reasons, chooses to avoid proper medical
care.

Or, in torts, if X's negligence puts someone in danger, and a third party
is injured in attempting to rescue them, X would be liable to the third
party, even though the third party voluntarily exposed herself to the
danger by attempting the rescue.

And people in this country have been successfully prosecuted for murder for
driving their victims to suicide.
-- 
             ......................................................
             ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu | std disclaimers
             the university of chicago law skool, chicago, illinois
             you can't throw me to the lions -- i'm charlton heston
Xref: sparky soc.men:15340 soc.women:15619
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Women and makeup...
From: moselecw@elec.canterbury.ac.nz (C.W. Moseley)
Date: 22 Aug 92 20:10:58 +1200
Distribution: world
Organization: Electrical Engineering, University of Canterbury, New Zealand

lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
> 	Mike Rivero, why do you think that some men wear toupees?

Loren, you never read `101 uses for a dead cat' did you??

the toupee is worn as a symbol of respect for ones cat after it
has died.

MOZ
From: stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Hating Men with Full Force
Date: 20 Aug 92 14:18:40 GMT
Followup-To: soc.men,soc.women
Organization: Murasami Labs

Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano wrote:

> Robert Sheaffer writes:

> > A few brief quotes from Houston _Chronicle_ reporter Jacsun Shah, as
> > reported in the Jan., 1992 issue of "Liberty" magazine, p. 78:

> >    "Yes, I am a man hater, yes, I am a feminist. and why not?
> >     Women are dying . They die every day, at the hands of men.
> >     Men ... beat them, rape them, dismember them. Hell yes, I
> >     hate men ... To all of you women out there, I say _hate_.
> >     You have every right to ... I knew the kindest thing I could
> >     do for the women of this world is to hate men with full force."

> > (entered exactly as published in Liberty).

>      You know, I don't see the same sort of outrage from Sheaffer over
> such issues as genital mutilation, gang rape, forced prostitution, the
> sale of 'wives' from overseas, or-- closer to the point-- that
> derange-o who shot up a bunch of coeds in Canada about two years ago
> because he was 'sick of all the feminists.'

There is one minor little difference: this one is a reporter, a journalist.
Do you really believe this person will keep the anti-mail biast OUT of it's
journalism?

Futher, an outrage is an outrage. Do you assign them points, and get all
bent out of shape if they fall above a certain threshold?

K'Char
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: schultz@unixg.ubc.ca (Stewart Schultz)
Subject: Re: Some Politically Incorrect questions
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 06:54:22 GMT

In article <1992Aug22.205758.18945@leland.Stanford.EDU>
farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>
>Do you know lots of men who are looking for a woman they can support
>for the rest of their lives?  I don't.  In fact, most of the hetero
>men I know expect their wives to work and often express dismay that
>the wives don't (or won't) make more money.

I think this happens considerably more with the sexes reversed.
But regardless of who is doing the complaining, the end result
is far more social obstacles for stay-at-home fathers than for
stay-at-home mothers.

The current situation is illustrated by a recent study that found
that 64% of all married male MDs, and 0% of all married female MDs,
had spouses not in the work force (Social Science and Medicine 30:
373 (1990)).  This is from a random nationwide (U.S.) sample of 2000
subjects.  Similar numbers hold for Australia, Great Britain, 
Sweden, Canada, and for a wide range of professions.

-S. Schultz
From:  (kamchar@ibm.cl.msu.edu (SunCat))
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Some Politically Incorrect questions
Date: 15 Aug 92 18:22:03 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: The computer in the back row

In article <stricher-150892111258@stayman.ocean.fsu.edu>, stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul) writes:
> 
> Loren I. Petrich wrote:
> 
> > In article <1992Aug14.092235.1@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
> 
> > >  Seems like getting to stay home and play with the kids wasn't
> > >the unhealthy and streeful horror the feminists made it out to be.
> > 	Then why don't you become a househusband, if being a
> > house-spouse is such an elixir of life.
> 
> Because a lot of women still, somewhere, have the idea of having her man
> support her? And having a househusband is *not* in their game plan? Not
> to mention the fact it would be terrible if the courts had to award *him*
> custody and *alimony*.
> 
> K'Char
> 
> 
I would be terrified to take on the role of househusband.  Bad enough what the law
does to married men who work in the 9 to 5 world.  I could be fairly sure that I 
would receive no protection in case of divorce.  The law grew out of the simplistic
predudices of an earlier, fictive age--Jerry Falwell's.  

Sun the-antifeminist-right-is-more-man-hating-than-feminists-could-ever-be.Some-silly-
feminists-act-as-useful-fools-of-the-right Cat
kamchar@ibm.cl.msu.edu  
"Androphobia is the feminism of imbeciles"   --Robert Anton Wilson
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: pjb4288@ultb.isc.rit.edu (Pete - Toonatic - Boulay)
Subject: To Carol Hitchcock's sister!!
Originator: pjb4288@ultb
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 13:57:49 GMT

THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!!! (yes, I forgot her email address)

I hope you're seeing this, because you have introduced me to the greatest 
penpal/future SO that I have ever met (or hope to soon)
THANK YOU THANK YOU!!!!

Pete
-- 
Peter J. Boulay --17 Split Rock Road-Pittsford, NY 14534-The ToonAddict!
Email should be sent only to PJB4288@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Disclaimer: You don't like what I'm writing? Oh well.
"Well shut my mouth wide open!"- Tiny Toons HISMV
From: baba@samadhi.Tymnet.COM (Duane Hentrich)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Adults, Children and sex
Date: 21 Aug 92 18:13:13 GMT
Organization: BT North America (Tymnet)

In article <1992Aug19.165853.12848@cs.mcgill.ca> samurai@uriel.cs.mgill.ca writes:
>Sex is not like eating food. 
>
>Sex can mean power, and love, and the combination can mean 
>damage to formative people (ie: children).
>
>We've never heard of "eating related abuse of children" and
>we have heard of "sexual abuse of children."

Try "malnutrition". Ever heard of that? The point being that anything a child
needs, and this includes food, attention, love, affection, etc., can
be used to abuse them. Either by applying too much or too little.

In the case of adult/child sex I believe that the most people would
agree that a very young child should not be manipulated(seduced) by someone
who is their guardian. However, this relationship changes over
the years and at some point(maturity) the choice lies with the
individuals.

The problem is that the measure of maturity we use is biological age.
Which is not accurate in many cases. I would welcome a useful metric
in this regard that measures maturity rather than giving credit for
time spent, but alas, I dream.

>In any event, I assure you that Psychologists would think that 
>sex with one's mother at the age of 15 is not healthy behaviour.

And I assure you that Psychologists(tm) find it disturbing when a father
and son wrestle with each other on a Sunday morning in bed in pj's.
I could not disagree with them more. I don't buy into their "authority"
on very much.

-- 
d'baba Duane M. Hentrich	baba@Tymnet.Com

We have yet to learn that the thing uttered in words is not therefore affirmed. It must affirm itself, or no forms of logic or of oath can give it evidence. 
The sentence must also contain its own apology for being spoken. - R.W.Emerson
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Vicious woman bus conductor (China News Digest excerpt)
From: rivero@mdcbbs.com
Date: 19 Aug 92 16:37:24 GMT
Organization: Electronic Data Systems, Unigraphics Division, Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: marr

In article <9208181810.AA09140@ncsuvx.ncsu.edu>, PNCSPPC@CCVAX1.CC.NCSU.EDU writes:
> Subject:      CND-Global, August 18, 1992
> To:           Multiple recipients of list CNDUB-L <CNDUB-L@UBVM.BITNET>
>  
>               * * *  C h i n a   N e w s   D i g e s t  * * *
>  
>                               (News Global)
>  
> [Reuters 8/16/92] SHANGHAI -- A 24-year-old bus passenger, Dong Huibo, died
> in the street, after tangling with one of the city's dreaded woman bus
> conductors.   His nightmare began inside the bus when the ticketpuncher
> snarled an insult about the shape of his backside.   She swore at him,
> slapped his face and broke his glasses, made a grab for his testicles, then
> stood back and aimed a vicious kick at his private parts.  As he scrambled
> out of a window, the driver -also a woman- slammed her foot on the
> accelerator pedal and sent him flying. (From: Di Bi Cao)
>                         ____  ____  ____  ____
> 


  Here's another one. In Indiana, Pennsylvania, a 5 year old entrepeneur
was running a streetside lemonade stand while his father watched through a
window to make sure business went as planned. Not seeing the father, a woman
bought a glass of lemonade, then proceeded to talk the confused boy out of far
more change than she had paid him in the first place, making off with about
$5.00 before the father could figure out what was happening and intervene.

  Police, infuriated with the woman's crassness, issued a warrent for her
arrest.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero rivero@mdcbbs.com  Middle-Aged Mutant Ninja Animator   |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| "Oppression doth never prosper, for if it prosper, none dare call it   |
| Oppression!"  with apologies to Bill Shakespeare.                      |
|                                                                        |
| In the Middle East, women are raised to always cover their faces with  |
| viels. Modern feminists point to this practice as proof of how these   |
| women are oppressed. Yet here in the Western (so called) Civilized     |
| countries, women are raised to cover their faces with cosmetics, to    |
| the tune of 50 billion dollars a year. In this regard, American women  |
| are just as oppressed as their eastern sisters while having to pay far |
| more for the priviledge. Why do the feminists pay such scant attention |
| to this most visible abuse of women's skin, health, and wallet?        |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth)
Subject: Re: Part 2: Biological Determinism and Skepticus Maxiwuss
Organization: Software Engineering Institute
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 13:36:20 GMT

In article <mB9cPB6w164w@cellar.org> revpk@cellar.org (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano) writes:

> how can one reconcile ideals
>of  liberty and  self-determination  while simultaneously  maintaining
>that societies need to dominate the people within them?

One can't.  Ideals of liberty and self-determination cannot be
sustained over the long term, because they are incompatible with
a stable society.  That's why, throughout history, societies
based on hierarchy and dominance have endured for millennia,
while societies based on liberty and self-determination have
messily self destructed after a century or two.

We may not like that, but guess what: the world is what it is,
and it doesn't give a rotten fig for what we like or dislike.
Xref: sparky soc.men:15198 soc.women:15471 alt.child-support:2801 alt.dads-rights:2027