HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Subject: ARchtypes and visibility
Organization: insert anything here
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:16:50 GMT

stephena@netcom.com (Stephen Arrants) writes:
>Yep. George is right on this one (right on on this one?). I didn't think his
>"hystronics" were sexist and/or racist. There is a "look" that's popular
>right now, and Mr.Marky Mark fits it. What it is about body hair and beards
>that makes some folks gag?

	Furballs?  I mean I've coughed up a few in my time...  :-)

	Re: "that look" has it ever been 'unpopular'?  For all
intents and purposes "right now" could be from Classical Greece
to the present. (though there are some nice exmaples of homoursoerotica
in painted pottery of that time as well...)

	Without sounding whiny, esp. since everyone's heard the litany
before, it would be just nice to be represented witohut coming across
as some kind of fetish.

	It'snot that I have anything against smooth/muscle guys like
Marky or those who have walked the path before him...  it's the 
unspoken assumption that the one archetype speaks for all.
Fudge ripple is a great flavor of ice cream, but sometimes the tutti frutti
tastes good too.

	And to get off the bears thing - we can easily phrase it
in other ways!  Look at the struggle ethnic minorites have had
getting into modeling, or in this context gay porn/objectification.
Unless someone is trying to get "racially balanced" forget it.
Given the percentage of Asian and Hispanic people in the US,
the percentage of objectifiable models is woefully disproportionate.

	A lot of the often-neglected groups of the GBLO*-population
are only now, 20-25 years after Stonewall starting to claim their place.
While there is a lot of internal support for these people (e.g.
ethnic minorites, womyn, GBLO*-folx under 21, handicapped GBLO*-folx,
older GBLO*-people, people in interracial relaitonships, people in
intergenerational relationships, bears, faeries, etc.) a lot of
recognition comes in the form of visible iconery.  And until that
starts to happen in a more accpeting mode instead of the "oh,
let's show how diverse we are by adding one of them in there too",
sort of thing there's going to be friction,
not out of hatred, but mostly frustration.

>(xcuse typeos.....just back from ER with broken ankle and lots 'o painkillers).


	Hope you're feeling better.
BBC


Xref: sparky soc.motss:48595 soc.bi:15372
From: snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass)
Newsgroups: soc.motss,soc.bi
Subject: Re: Oprah 11/19
Date: 20 Nov 92 13:40:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: lclark.1992Nov20.134034.1822
Organization: Lewis & Clark College, Portland OR

In article <1992Nov20.040700.26375@col.hp.com> smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
>(This is from my wife, using my account...it's her first time using
>USENET, so cut her some slack...)
>
>I, too, watched Oprah today and continue to be amazed at how intolerant
>people can be of others just because of their sexual orientation.  As a
>mother of four, I don't understand how any parent could turn their back
>on their child just because of who their child is.  I confess that I am
>ignorant when it comes to understanding what makes some people a "four-
>leaf clover, when most are three."  (Oprah's analogy for gay vs. straight
>orientation.) 

She didn't say that.  Oprah was stating that most clovers are three leafed
and some are four leafed.  Four leafed clovers are supposidly looked
upon as being lucky...in a positive light.  Oprah was saying we just
are Gay, we are a little special.  It was clean and simple.  And
I really did appreciated her using it.  She also insisted a few times
that being Gay was NOT a choice!!!  And I could have kissed her on
the lips for that!

 Therefore, I would like to ask a couple of probably really
>dumb questions, but please believe me that I am sincere and only ask
>because I do care about other people and have a desire to understand.  So,
>1) I believe that whether a person is gay or straight depends on genetics.
>Therefore, when a person is born, it has already been determined...being
>gay is not "learned behavior that one can change" as the religious fanatics
>would have us believe.  Is this belief correct?

This is what I believe....

  2) During the Oprah episode,
>several "straight" individuals accused a couple of lesbians on the show of
>really wanting to be men since they chose to dress or "act" like most people
>think men should behave.  My question then is:  Like a heterosexual relation-
>ship, do homosexual relationships generally have male and female roles...the
>more dominant individual portraying a male role?

In my relationships no one acts we just are who we are.  Positioning depends
on the mood and desires of the couple.  I don't know about you but when I am
in bed there is a lot of rolling around and repositioning.  I have
heard that in heterosexual lovemaking the woman just lays there and fakes
it while the man uses her vagina.  That sounds really cold.  Is this true?


>
>Before I get crucified, I would like to explain that I was brought up in a
>religious cult-type environment where I was taught that being homosexual was
>evil and that God hated this behavior.  Luckily, I broke away from this
>situation about five years ago, when I was thirty.  I have never really
>felt that God would hate someone who is different.

We aren't different!  We are Children of God, just like you.  We are
not different in that light.  As indiviuals though we are very diverse.....

Bil Snodgrass III
From: Furr@cup.portal.com (George Dalton Madison)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Bear Crap
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 19:53:17 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Nov16.041138.8829@tc.cornell.edu>  
  <michaelh.721908229@Xenon.Stanford.EDU>  
  <1992Nov16.163852.19134@spdcc.com>
  <michaelh.721963181@Xenon.Stanford.EDU> <69735@cup.portal.com>
  <74461@apple.apple.COM>

richard@apple.COM writes:
>Furr@cup.portal.com (George Dalton Madison) writes:
>>() >How do the hypothalamuses of bears and twinks compare?
>>() Before we examine that question you first need to
>>() establish that twinks indeed have brains. 
>>()      -- Rob Bernardo
>
>Yep, whine about being disenfranchised by those who don't practice it against
>you, and then post the above at the end.

Indeed.  Of course, the above quote really has very little to do
with the argument over the painful lack of diversity of male images
in the gay media.

>How many ways can you spell the word hypocrite, GDM?  No one has been anti-
>bear in the Marky Mark postings until you growled, and then they've been
>anti-GDM, if anything.

I would tend to find the attitude that "if you don't find Marky
Mark hot, you're somehow defective" to be at least tangentially
anti-Bear, and that was something I was picking up from some of
the postings.

As for postings being anti-"me", well, so what *else* is new?
Lots of people don't like to think, and I like to rattle cages.

>When you stop drowning in the pool of your pity

Oh, *****PLEASE*****.

>and realise that some
>of us are just expressing our preferences for hard, hairless bodies much in
>the same way you want 'em hairy, we can "all get along".

Well, when people learn to express those opinions without
phrasing like "EVERYONE thinks [X] is hot!" that is insulting 
to those people who honestly do NOT find [X] to be hot.  I find
it interesting that when people use these phrasings for
personalities like "Marky Mark", nary an eyelash bats. When I 
use them [for effect] in reference to a Bearish type, all hell
breaks loose, with claims that I'm shoving my tastes down their
throats, blah, blah, blah, blah -- as if turnabout isn't fair
play.

>I can't help the fact that the media is so biased (gay or
>straight).

BZZZZZT!  Wrong.  As someone else pointed out, the problem in the
gay media goes beyond Bears; there's a serious lack of people of
ethnic backgrounds other than white, except of course in media
that specifically focusses on that factor. [The only video
company I know of that routinely has mixed-race casts for its
porno videos is Altomar.]  So -- what can you do?  At bare
minimum, you can write letters, like we do for any other
problem we perceive of this type.

>We cannot change the media

Well, if you can accuse me of wallowing in pity, I can call you
a defeatist.
 
() Either you have power or you don't. Either you drool or
() you don't. If you beg even a little, it's still begging.
()      -- Eric Holeman
-----
[> George D. Madison | NBCS: B8f+t+w-e+s+k+a!cv | Just say NO to razors! <]
[> It's a BEAR thing -- you wouldn't understand. <|> furr@cup.portal.com <]
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Mike Reaser)
Subject: Re: Care to flame a bigot?
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 16:20:19 GMT
Organization: a stone mountain of Kudzu

In <1992Nov22.171307.24438@news.duc.auburn.edu> jbibb@eng.auburn.edu (John S. Bibb) writes:

[ ... previous post deleted ... ]

>Not to promote stereotypes, but here it goes.......

   Too late.

>He is from W. Virginia.  Mountain people have their own way of doin' thin's.
>(now I'd like to introduce you to my sister-cousin Billie-Rae)

Being a ninth-generation West Virginian (if you include the time it 
was part of Virginia), I have to warn you that I'm related to _both_ 
the Hatfields and McCoys.  I also have the flintlock rifle used by 
my great-great-grandfather in the War of Northern Agression.

Yup, we have our own ways, even if we've moved ta tha big cittee.

Oh, and if you're going to use tired, old stereotypes, at least admit
that the proper title was sister-cousin-aunt.  And remember that the
novel and movie "Deliverance" (one of our more recent examples of
"family values") was set in Georgia, _not_ West Virginia.

>NOTE: It aint much better here.

Can you truthfully say you are your own third cousin?  I can.  :-)

--
=======================================================================
 Mike Reaser, Hewlett-Packard N. Amer. Response Center - Atlanta
 Internet:  mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com
 NBCS: B4 f w g+ k s-               I barely speak for myself, so
 #include <standard.disclaimer>       don't make me speak for HP
=======================================================================
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Letter from my father
Date: 18 Nov 92 04:21:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: spdcc.1992Nov18.042125.203
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA

Daniel,

I think it's a wonderful letter, full of vulnerability and awkwardness,
and sure, a little bit of denial, but quite generous, solicitous and sweet.
Would your father like to consider any honorary adoptees?  I can think of
hundreds of lesbian and gay people, myself included, who would be thrilled
to receive such a letter from their mother or father.  You should tell him
this, too.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
From: mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Surly French waiters
Date: 24 Nov 92 00:49:01 GMT
Followup-To: soc.motss
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Nov23.213139.27768@psych.toronto.edu>,
paul@psych.toronto.edu (Paul Hastings) wrote:
> 
> In article <mattm-231192102803@mcmelmon.apple.com> mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon) writes:
> >
> >Frenchman are surly.  Germans drink beer.  The English are all gay.
> >Swedes are all six-foot seven and named 'Sven.'  
> >
> 
> OH BOY!!
> Anyone out there of mixed English and Swedish heritage???
> YUM!!

Well, there *is* a waiter right next door to the establishment that
caused all this international-like fuss who *does* fit the six-foot
seven, blonde hair, Sven mold (though his name, phonetically, is
Pear)...

Very big.  Very beefy.  Very adorable.

Big *YUM*

*X*
(and a woman, also of Swedish descent, also at that venue, is one
hell of a knockout for our invisible lesbians (her name, phonetic-
like, is Victoria).
Newsgroups: soc.motss,alt.politics.homosexuality,co.politics
From: woods@claven.ucar.edu (Greg Woods)
Subject: Re: Colorado Amendment 2: The First Fatality
Organization: Scientific Computing Division/NCAR Boulder, CO
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:42:08 GMT

In article <Bxx8nJ.Kr5@fc.sde.hp.com> marc@hpmonk.fc.hp.com writes:
>In article <22472@drutx.ATT.COM> somebody wrote:
>: Second, [Romer] said that he thought that discrimination on
>: the basis of sexual orientation was wrong and he would not allow that kind of
>: discrimination in his employ 
>
>Curious, since the amendment specifically forbids him from doing anything about
>it - he is now constitutionally prevented from enforcing any such policy.

I don't see that. What #2 says is that an organization cannot be prosecuted for
discriminating against homosexuals, but there is nothing that says
they *must* do so. I don't see that #2 prohibits an employer from
establishing an anti-discrimination policy, and enforcing it
internally, if they choose to.

--Greg
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: jefu@nmt.edu (Jeff Putnam)
Subject: jojo?
Organization: The Museum of Differential Geometry
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 13:51:32 GMT

Could somebody mail me JoJo's current e-mail address?  

[non-ob motss:  "Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some
have greatness thrust within them." ]

-- 
jefu@jupiter.nmt.edu  -- Jeff Putnam, New Mexico Tech, Socorro, NM
"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always
so sure of themselves but wiser people are full of doubts." B. Russell 

Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Subject: Re: Marky Mark and Calvin Klein (was Re: Scott Masden)
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 04:01:30 GMT


In article <BxsBwH.EGF@queernet.org> rogerk@QueerNet.ORG
(Roger B.A.  Klorese) writes:

>In article <1992Nov15.162201.11450@wixer.cactus.org>,
>lazarus@wixer.cactus.org (Michael Lax) writes:

>>Some of us think he's a hunk, others think he's white trash.

>Some of us think he's both.

Would either or both of you care to tell us what "white
trash" is?  Other than racial (and possibly economic)
stereotyping, I mean.

Is it deep hip hop dope or something?

-- 
[Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin]
[Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson]
[Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888]
[---------> Discrimination, Bigotry, and Hate are not Family Values <---------]
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: cornell@inoc.dl.nec.com (C.J.K.)
Subject: Re: Sam Nunn (was Sam Num sucks and not well either)
Reply-To: cornell@syl.dl.nec.com
Organization: Not very organized
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 20:30:41 GMT

wrobboy@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (William Robboy) writes:

>I assume you're talking about Sen. Sam Nunn. He's not up for
>elective office. Clinton is considering him for his cabinet (Sec.
>of Defense?). Clinton was asked at his recent press conference about
>this discrepancy with respect to allowing gays in the military, and replied
>that his appointees don't have to agree with his policies in order to
>implement them, and that in fact it's a bad thing to have only appointees
>who agree with one on everything. Of course, Nunn's opinion suggests
>a larger set of attitudes towards LGB people, beyond just policy detail.

What exactly did Sam Nunn say?  On news reports, I keep hearing reference
to something he said about a problem with privacy protection if the
military ban were lifted.  What is the problem he stated?

--- Cornell
From: brent@syacus.acus.oz.au (Brent Davies)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Lesbian Visibility on Roseanne
Date: 17 Nov 92 03:44:13 GMT
Organization: Australian Centre for Unisys Software, Melbourne

TMCCART3@ua1vm.ua.edu writes:

>Does anyone else's radar go nuts whenever cute li'l Sara Gilbert
>(Darlene) walks in? Just wondering...

*My* radar goes berko, and I'm a queer *male*. 

But then, I have a lesbian sister. Maybe that's helping.

--Brent
From: Minotaur@cup.portal.com (A Frank Swilling)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: FAMOUS GAYS from GAYNET (fwd)
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 19:36:28 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <69672@cup.portal.com> <1992Nov17.062444.28771@reed.edu>

Nelson Minar sez:

>I've never has sex with Tom Selleck, and probably wouldn't even if I
>got the chance to. I don't know if he's gay or not (even with that
>moustache..). I have a hard time feeling nice towards him though since
>his lawsuit on the basis that being labelled gay is libelous.

What lawsuit?

>>And put Arnold Schwarzenegger on them?

>On the queer list? Bleah. He did pose for Honcho, though.

>nelson@reed.edu

I think we should, just to annoy him.  :-)

Now I saw that photo in Spy, but this is the first I've
heard about Honcho.  When did this happen?

(Looks like I'd better go to the supermarket and catch
up on the tabloids!)

Frank
Minotaur@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: kfj@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Kirk Johanning)
Subject: SUCKING on RIVER PHOENIX (was Re: Sucking on Keanu Reeves))
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 20:03:41 GMT
Organization: HP Response Center Atlanta

In <mattm-191192110617@mcmelmon.apple.com> mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon) writes:

>In article <Bxz59n.12w@hpuerca.atl.hp.com>, kfj@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Kirk
>Johanning) wrote:

>> P.P.S: I just finally had to change the subject line from "Sucking on
>> Keanu Reeves" since we are no longer talking about him, although I
>> certainly thought that, if nothing else, it was an attention grabber.

>Oh, pooh.  But now we're talking about River Phoenix, so why didn't
>you name the thread SUCKING on RIVER PHOENIX?!!  Which reminds me
>of an early scene in Private Idaho...

>*X*

I must have taken leave of ALL of my senses.  I hate it when that
happens!!  

BTW, I live for that scene!!  Just the thought of making River's eyes
roll back and then ... well I don't think that the rest needs any 
explanation (for those of you who have not seen the movie, GO SEE IT).


-- 
 ____   Kirk Johanning               ____    The opinions expressed above   ____
 \  /   HP Response Center Atlanta   \  /    are mine and may not reflect   \  /
  \/    kfj@hpuerca.atl.hp.com        \/     those my employer or anybody    \/
                                             else for that matter.
Newsgroups: soc.motss,soc.bi
From: glp@fig.citib.com (Greg Parkinson)
Subject: Re: Fundamentalists and the clitoris
Originator: glp@merlin
Organization: Citibank IBISM
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 14:36:05 GMT


In article <1992Nov16.212806.4163@netcom.com>, solovay@netcom.com (Andrew M. Solovay) writes:
 
|> It turns out that both of these organs are Good Things to have,
|> since they're fun to play with... but this was not a factor in
|> their evolution. Females of other specieas can have orgasms from
|> clitoral stimulation, yet their natural sexual positions almost
|> never produce this. (Must have been fun for the scientists to
|> determine this...) In this sense, female orgasm is also an
|> evolutionary accident, though a fortuitous one. I hasten to say
|> that evolution is not a moral arbiter. There is reason to believe
|> that language is also an evolutionary accident, but I'm glad we
|> have it.

I hate it when human sexuality gets compared to and
defined using lower animal behaviors.  Human sexuality
is a complicated and subtle thing, and human sexual desires
and needs and expression cannot be explained simply in
terms of the "functional" penis and "non-functional"
clitoris.  There are so many basic differences (a big
one being that human females do not change appearance
when they are in a fertile period) that comparisons
like this are specious.

And language is a virus from outer space according to
Wm Burroughs.  I'm inclined to agree.

-- 
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.
From: nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Sucking on Keanu Reeves
Date: 21 Nov 92 23:30:19 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Nov21.233019.16211
Reply-To: nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

In article <74515@apple.apple.COM> richard@Apple.COM (a flying squirrel) writes, in a completely different context:
>As a coworker says when referring to people being responsible for their
>own actions, "he's over 21."

Oh goody, does that mean that people who are under 21 aren't
responsible for their actions?

John, dear, we better take advantage of this while we can.. How about
we do an around-the-world trip, go be irresponsible in San Francisco,
New York, Amsterdam, Paris, Mykonos, New Delhi, Cairo, Moscow,
Beijing, Otago and Sydney.. All before we turn 21, of course.

Any of you responsible motssers want to fund us? We'll write e-postcards!

>I'm sure that even George Madison and I could have a good time
>argueing about single malt whisky.

not being 21, I'm sure I've never tasted single malt whisky. Well, OK,
but only once. And I did it right, too - wearing a kilt, taking a nip
of whiskey right before I tossed a caber.
                __
nelson@reed.edu \/                                        All things are true
From: mara@panix.com (Mara Chibnik)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Marky Mark and Calvin Klein (was Re: Scott Masden)
Date: 22 Nov 92 22:52:32 GMT
Organization: (getting there)

czmt@gibbs.oit.unc.edu (Season Marie Taylor) writes of this dubious
figure:

 >some of us even had to ask our roomates who the hell he is 

And some of us had the temerity to ask our fellow diners (who
included a visiting flying squirrel) who the hell he is.  Of course,
once somebody said "bus stops" it all became clear...


 >season, off to ask her roomate yet another strange question
Yes?  Anything we might be interested in hearing?


-- 

  Mara Chibnik
  mara@panix.com                Life is too important to be taken seriously.
Newsgroups: soc.motss,alt.politics.homosexuality,co.politics,co.general,talk.politics.misc,co.politics.amend2.discuss,boulder.general,csu.general
From: jyoder@nyx.cs.du.edu (Chris Yoder)
Subject: Re: Support the boycott (was Re: Don't boycott all of Colorado)
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 92 16:25:41 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.211913.18059@tc.cornell.edu> shore@dinah.tc.cornell.edu (Melinda Shore) writes:
>
>Lots of stuff seems to be illegal in Colorado.
>
>When the gay community in Chicago started stamping money
>in the early 1980s, an attorney looked into the legality
>of it.  As long as the serial number and denomination
>remain unobscured, it's legal.
	Actually it is a Federal Statute having to do with defacing federal
property, the fact that it was reported in the Colorado Daily has nothing
to do with the fact that it unlawful in the US to deface federal property.
I kinda wonder tho, since this is a government by the people . . .etc, how
can it be unlawful to deface our own property?
--
   jyoder@nyx.cs.du.edu  aka Chris Yoder | yoder_c@maui.hsc.colorado.edu
***HATE is !(a family value); Repeal Amen2.***
** Hail Eris, All Hail Discordia ** Voice: +1 303 270 7350
--If voting could change anything, it would be illegal.
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon)
Subject: Re: Sucking on Keanu Reeves
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 23:58:35 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Followup-To: soc.motss

In article <74451@apple.apple.COM>, richard@Apple.COM (a flying squirrel)
wrote:

> >Perhaps it had something to do with the dinner companion you had that evening.
> >Surly is as surly does.
> 
> Surly you jest!  Like all of us, Steve, he's a pussycat in person.  If
> anything, it is I who shoulders the blame for inflaming the waiter.


Oh, my *HEAVENS!!!*  *WHAT!* are you trying to do to my reputation,
snookums!??  You take that back THIS INSTANT!  A pussycat?  A pussycat
you say?  

I most certainly am *not* a pussycat!  Hiss!  Hiss!  Snit! Smack!  

(you are correct, however, about it being *your* fault the Frenchman
exhibited his natural inclinations towards French-ness...)

*X*
Newsgroups: soc.motss,alt.politics.homosexuality,co.politics,co.general,talk.politics.misc,co.politics.amend2.discuss,boulder.general,csu.general