HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: Re: What do you Am men think about Am women?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 21:06:52 GMT

In article <1992Nov4.044025.19483@nevada.edu> crail@nevada.edu (DONNA CRAIL-RUGOTZKE) writes:
>
>What is your defination of a "a large body of work?"  More important
>what is your defination of "male bashing?"  This is important because 
>it can be argued that the male-dominant media is guilty of female 
>bashing.  In action movies, who usually rescues whom?  Do male characters
>rescue female characters or vice-versa?  How are women usually shown
>in these movies?  Let's look at thrillers.  How many women-in-danger-
>movies have we seen the last couple of years?  It can be argued that 
>showing women as victims who need to be rescued by men is "female 
>bashing."

Well, check out the content of the virtually all-female form of (usually)
soft-core pornography known as "Romance Novels": written for women,
by women.  My understanding is that these books DO typically show 'women
in danger' being "rescued" by men.  If correct, this tells us that
"men rescuing women" is NOT "female-bashing",  but rather a kind of
fantasy shared both by women and men. Hence, the "rescue fantasy" is
probably very deeply grounded in both male AND female psychology. If
this is upsetting to YOU, of course you're free to tell any male who
attempts to rescue you to go piss off!  :)



-- 
  
        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: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: PRES DEBATE
Date: 8 Nov 92 15:30:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: convex.thurlow.721236644
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Nov3.194612.22248@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:

>In article <thurlow.720800324@convex.convex.com> thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes:

>>Don't you think it was unconscionable for the government to reduce
>>your taxes when it was running up huge deficits to be able to do so?

>Nope, actually it's unconscionable that the incredible misconception that
>lowered tax rates caused the deficit is still getting spread around

Hey, stop right there - I never made a comment about "cause".  I know
quite well that the real cause of the deficit has been reckless spending.

You also have a good point about government regulations and red tape
being a burden in some ways worse than the tax rates.

>Intuitively, it seems that our current level of taxation is far above the
>level that results in maximum revenues ... 

I disagree that aimlessly cutting taxes and hoping great things might
happen was the right thing to do, and I haven't seen data that would
convince me that it "worked" (though I'd accept a pointer to a source
that might confirm it).  We're lightly taxed compared to most other
countries, and growth seems to not be exclusively American.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com
"I get so tickled debunking bad personal philosophy." - Milquetoast
From: ADAM@EDEN.GARDEN
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: WHAT DO... AMERICAN WOMAN
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:18:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: candidus.DRG.92Nov5111830
	<1992Nov2.204017.21268@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>
	<1992Nov4.205350.13204@b8.b8.ingr.com>
Organization: Bull World Wide Information Systems, Billerica MA USA

American woman
get away from me
American woman
mama let me be
...
You're no good for me
I'm no good for you
From: keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: How would *you* react?
Date: 6 Nov 92 23:51:17 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: California-Nevada Methodist Homes

In article <1992Nov5.210835.27077@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
>When I was 12 to 13 age range Females 17+ were "old women" and unacceptable.
>When I was 16 to 17 age range Females 22+ were "old women" and unacceptable.
>Now that I'm in my 30's 15 to 50 is acceptable.  :)

Ain't it the truth!
--Keith

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jdnicoll@prism.ccs.uwo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: New Thread on meeting people
Organization: University of Western Ontario, London
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 17:15:03 GMT



	Odd.  If I am out in public, my mind edits people out of the
scenery, except as obstacles to be avoided. I suppose that's why I
don't make contact with people in lines at stores or at bus stops:
if I don't expect to be intereacting with people, they cease to exist
for me.  

	[At least one person trying to get my  attention blocked the
door to the convenience store we were  in, only to watch me duck around
him without noticing the 6 foot tall man in the door]

	About the only people to approach  me these days are religious
cultists, who I *deliberately* ignore, and tourists who mistake me for a
Mennonite, and who want me to do something ethnic in front of their cameras.
A real Mennonite could only use passive forms of dealing with pushy tourists:
I just grab the camera-waving idiots and fling them *and* those damn green
hats into the  path of a Kitchener Transit Vehicle.

								James Nicoll

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: puter@orphan.nashvil.ingr.com (PuterDude)
Subject: Re: Do you remember 1970 to 1980?
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 17:13:37 GMT

 GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu throws up survey #5195832735198734631652374

>      As part of an impromptu research project, I'd like to know what
>  YOU think the single most important ( dramatic, traumatic ) event of`
>  1970 to 1980 was.

The rise and fall of disco.   (Even typin' it makes my fingers ill)

-- 
(Puter is a deranged individual at puter@no1home.nashvil.ingr.com)
Heaven from all creatures hides the book of fate,
All but the page prescribed, their present fate.	-- Alexander Pope
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: girl/lady/female  boy/guy/male
Organization: Intergraph
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 21:53:43 GMT

In article <DANIEL.92Nov11213544@algol.clsi.COM>, daniel@clsi.COM (Daniel Barclay) writes:
> > Where do you meet "women who will lead you astray"?
> > ..
> > Straying men want to know.
> > Larry Billings
> 
> (Thinking to myself:
> Hmmm.  
> Why is it the stray_ing_ men who want to know?  Don't they already know the 
> "astray-leading" women?  I would think that (some of) the non-straying men 
> would want to know.
> 
> Damn, I must have missed another clue. ;-)  )
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Daniel S. Barclay			CAD Language Systems, Inc.
> 					Suite 101, 5457 Twin Knolls Rd.
> Why can't _I_ think of a signature?	Columbia, MD  21045  USA


Please modify my previous statement to read "straying-want-to-be men want to 
know."

Larry Billings
Most of us are sad, No one lets it show,
I've been shadows of myself,How was I to know?         Eagles
*******************************************************************************



Xref: sparky soc.singles:30323 alt.sex:35634 alt.polyamory:1746
From: rs87+@andrew.cmu.edu (Rebecca Ann Stallings)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.sex,alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: raising children
Date: 10 Nov 92 12:38:46 GMT
	<1992Nov10.091638.15965@deeptht.armory.com>
Organization: Sophomore, Architecture, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Steve Walz writes:
>Independent and enterprising? Single-parent children? Like hell they
>are. They tend to either be more shy and insecure or else boisterous
>and potentially a behavior problem.
	Single-parent chidren have as many individual personalities as
double-parent children do.  Making generalizations, either positive or
negative, about their behavior is unfair.

>Even at age ten my son confessed that the time he spent at home alone
>was the scariest time he recalls from his young life. And he only spent
>about an hour before both of us were home.
	Okay, that's the way your son felt.  At age eight, I loved the two
hours twice a week I spent alone while my mom went with my brother to
gymnastics class and my dad was at work.  I liked having the house to
myself, and I didn't find it frightening at all.

>The role models in the society are shit, but your
>kid is going to pick them up. If they have only a dad or only a mom,
>they are going to pick up an incomplete set with which to make
>improvements later. 
	As several other posters have said, being raised by a single parent of
one sex doesn't mean a child has no role models of the opposite sex.  An
example:  For a while, a single mother and her little girl lived next
door to my parents.  Kristi's primary role model was her mother, and
some other role models (her teacher, etc.) were female, but she spent a
lot of Saturdays hanging out in our backyard helping my dad in the
garden, and they talked about lots of different things and enjoyed
spending time together.  I'd say that made him a role model.

>With no dad, they aren't going to pick up on things that men know and
>they will either be lousy fathers, or else they will marry lousy
fathers. >With no mom they won't know what a woman is about.
	What things do men know?  What is a woman about?  I sense more
stereotypes here. . . .


		---'Becca at Carnegie Mellon
		(just another dancer with her eyes on the stars)

reBECCA ann stallings <rs87+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.singles,hsv.general,general
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: Nightline and Presidential Cantidates
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 13:31:45 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.194742.3823@microsoft.com> philco@microsoft.com (Phillip Cooper) writes:
>                                         Anyway, it is well known that
>most newspapers are owned by wealthy republican men (for example, William
>Randolph Hearst).

Not only has William Randolph Hearst been dead for more than 40 years, but
he was a Democrat.  His papers supported William Jennings Bryan in both
1896 and 1900, and Hearst himself was a potential Democratic nominee for
President in 1904.

-- Herb Huston
-- huston@access.digex.com
From: dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Global Warming
Date: 6 Nov 92 20:25:33 GMT
Reply-To: dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin)
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <1992Nov6.180703.26342@lamont.ldgo.columbia.edu> rickh@ldgo.columbia.edu (rick healy) writes:
>
>-Rick Healy
>
>Climate & Oceanography Research
>Lamont-Doherty Geoligical Observatory
>of Columbia University
>-- 
>Rick Healy
>NASA-Goddard Institute for Space Studies
>2880 Broadway
>New York, NY 10025

Someone from Climate & Oceanography Research posting on global warming?
I'm sorry, it's my job as net.cop to inform you that you're only allowed
to post on scientific topics in this group if you don't know what the
hell you're talking about.  If you're actually informed then it needs 
to go in one of the sci groups.  Well, actually, maybe not a sci group
either.  At least, none of the ones that I read.  Now then, go read the
FAQ and come back when you have something contentless, grumpy, and
ignorant to say.

An informative post.  Hmmph.  You'd never catch me making that mistake.

Dawn
"Then I check out that chick Leda with the swan pecking at her pink egg tempera
nipple.  Hey, what that swan be doing?  And why?  And how 'bout those plump
maidens, those hot cherubic babes being presented to Apollo, Dionysius,
Neptune or one of those other well hung gods?"  by Bongwater
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Re: What do you Am men think about Am wome
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 92 01:31:05 GMT

In article 19307@netcom.com, barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes:
>In article <1992Nov7.004907.18226@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> jsmt@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Julia Smith) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov5.204118.26325@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:
>>>[romance novels]
>>>From what I've seen, more women purchase these than men, so my conclusion
>>>would be (DRUM roll please) Not all women consider "being rescued by a man
>>>to be a bad thing.
>>>
>>Rather than a large rant and rave, which is what I had originally intended
>>for this space, let me reserve my observation to this:
>>  
>>Anyone who thinks that what one reads reflects what one desires is in
>>need of a very, very large clue.
>
>	Bingo! If only everyone realized this is equally true of porn
>for men.

Good topic! This thread hits on the fundamental psychological difference 
between the sexes, IMVHO:

Women look for love and find sex while men look for sex and find love!

dreas 


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Money and the Single World (was: Education and the Single World
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 20:37:48 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.022122.5197@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>, jsmt@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Julia Smith) writes:
> So long as we are venturing bravely into questions oft reconsidered...
>   
> How important is money to you in considering an SO?  Particularly
> if you are considering significant financial differences? 
>   
> Scenerio 1:  You find out the person you are interested in makes
>     *quite* a bit more than you do.  Does it make a difference to you?

Not A problem at all from my side.

>   
>   
> Scenerio 2:  You find out the person you are interested in makes
>     *quite* a bit less than you do.  Does it make a difference to you?
>   

Probabily will not present a problem, depending on my views af the person.
The only SO I've gone so far as to ask to marry me had no job or income, nor
did she want a job, and that was fine.  One lady I dated once (friend of a 
friend scenero) and only once made quite a bit less than I did and it had
some effect on my decision not to see her again.  On the first date, she 
makes it very clear that she would like to live in "Toney" (my small town,
not quite a suburb).  That along with several other hints gave me the 
impression she was interested in improving her lifestyle more than finding
someone compatible, or with similar interests.  
I bravely ran away!



>   
> Have you had someone break up with you over money issues?  Do you think
> that those of the opposite gender care more or less about money than
> your own affiliation?
>   

Not as far as I know.

> <inquiring minds want to know...>
>   
> --j

Larry Billings
Newsgroups: soc.singles,ba.singles
From: rohwerwd@netcom.com (W. David Rohwer)
Subject: Re: What is attractive
Organization: Netcom - San Jose, CA
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 04:23:05 GMT

>In <31365@hydra.Helsinki.FI> taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina) writes:
>
>What do you find attractive in MOTAS
>
>1. when you meet them?

      1. Hair style.
      2. Weight proportional to height.
      3. Overall Appearance.

>
>2. once you have known them awhile?
>
            AND 

>3. once you think you know them well?

      1. Intelligence.
      2. She shows that she can converse well.
      3. Humor sense.
      4. She has some interests that match up with mine.
      5. Non-Smoker.
      6. Takes care of herself.
      7. Pro-choice beliefs.
      8. Rejection of irrational Christianity.
      9. Believes in equality of the genders.
     10. Chemistry between she and I.
     11. Good communicator.
     12. Beliefs not based of irrational dogma.
     13. She likes to be physically close.
     14. Realistic goal setting.
     15. She does not possess human dependents.
     16. Good ethics.
     17. Hair style.
     18. Weight proportional to height.
     19. Overall Appearance.

-- 
       +----------------------------------------------------------------+
      /  Keep Abortion Legal and Safe.  Reduce the Deficit.            /
  +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
 /   //  W. David Rohwer   // Amiga       UUCP: apple!netcom.com!rohwerwd |
|  \X/       Go A's!     \X/ 3000UX   Internet: rohwerwd@netcom.COM      /
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ron@turing.toronto.edu (Ron Wessels)
Subject: Re: KILLING  a Poster rather than a Post
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Distribution: usa
Date: 5 Nov 92 14:38:20 GMT

martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>Now you see why Trygve is a millionaire.

Actually, didn't Trygve become rich by committing matricide?
After all, he did hit the mother Lode.

-- 
Ron Wessels		University of Toronto		ron@turing.toronto.edu
From: tps@jptcs.COM (Tim Sailer)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is attractive to women?
Date: 12 Nov 92 02:38:05 GMT
Reply-To: tps@jptcs.com
Organization: JPT Computer Solutions, Port Jeff Station, NY
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Sandra Loosemore (loosemore-sandra@cs.yale.edu) wrote:
: Hanging out in bookstores or libraries is a good sign!  :-)  I also
: tend to look for absence of bad signs such as wedding rings,
: cigarettes, alcohol, slobby appearance.  It's not 100% infallible, but
: I also consider wearing a suit and/or tie to be a bad sign (conformity).
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

ThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyou
ThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyouThankyou!

Tim
("Forever in Blue Jeans")

-- 
Tim Sailer
JPT Computer Solutions - SCO Sales/Consulting/Administration and Mangling
Port Jefferson Station, NY
(516) 331-9001
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: PRES DEBATE
Organization: my opinions only
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 20:35:12 GMT

In article <MARTINC.92Nov9131418@grover.cs.unc.edu>
martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:

>The problem with this game is that it can be played to excess.

For some games that isn't a problem.

(I just had to try to drag this thread back to some relevance to this
newsgroup.)

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: Married Men
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 13:35:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.173849.16840@cbfsb.cb.att.com> sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein) writes:
>                    If the guy is unhappy with the marriage, he should
>get out of it and devote himself fully to the new one.  If he cons the
>woman into believing he wants to (but never does), then I feel the affair
>is more of an ego trip for him, and a no win situation for the woman.
>In other words, she's being used.

However, humans, unlike gibbons, are mildy polygynous.  (Actually field
primatologists have never caught gibbons engaging in EMS, but DNA finger-
printing would tell the true story.  Geese turned out not to be as mono-
gamous as was once believed.)

-- Herb Huston
From: IO10725@MAINE.MAINE.EDU
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: WHAT DO... AMERICAN WOMAN
Date: 9 Nov 92 20:40:50 GMT
 <1992Nov2.204017.21268@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>
Organization: University of Maine System


  <1992Nov4.205350.13204@b8.b8.ingr.com>
 <DRG.92Nov5111830@candidus.ma30.bull.com>
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Argh! Total, Complete misery.
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 20:52:50 GMT

In article <1992Nov3.180041.15735@sol.UVic.CA>, atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik) writes:
> In article 24310@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu, tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
> >In article <1992Oct29.013848.1955@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA writes:
> >>In article 11941@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu, tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
> >>
> >
> >Yep, it's true--us nordic types are extremely practical.  We can cook, move
> >heavy things, and repair most household items--plus we're neat, inexpensive
> >to feed, and don't scratch the furniture.
> 
> So you make good pets. I prefer to remain out of captivity.
> 
> dreas
> 

Depend on who does the capturing....


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: being between "Just Friends" and "relationship" and "kill me".
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 14:39:17 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.224929.18514@bernina.ethz.ch> zeller@bernina.ethz.ch (Lukas Zeller) writes:
>I'm not asking you if this exists it does for me anyway. But it 
>seems to me that many people don't *believe* that it is possible. 
>There's an awful lot of fear and preoccupation around attacking every 
>relationship that doesn't fit into the single/couple scheme, making 
>it sometimes very hard to live it and sometimes even to keep 
>believing in it. Some get misused and this may break their belief, 
>leaving them with the sad and bitter "realisation" that "It was an 
>illusion".
 
*YAWN*
 
>
>To see that happen (again, just these days) makes me sad, and it's 
 
Boo Hoo.
 
>why I'm asking you for your opinions about this. I also think it 
>might be an interesting topic to discuss, as I haven't seen it here 
>in the last few thousand messages I've read :-)
>If I get answers by email, I'll post a summary later.
 
Could you? Could you really?
Which brings up another interesting topic. Why do you think (apart from the
fear and preoccupation) hamsters are usually brown on top and white on
the bottom? Do you think they believe in themselves or figure it's just
an illusion? I'll post a summary starlit night later. 


 
================================================================================
 Ipsissimus of the Inner Order of Sesquipedalian Fruitcakes - I set'r free.Nyuk
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Subject: WORLD of INSOMNIA ??
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 10:31:21 GMT


What the hell are we doing up so late.....and why are we still on
our computers ??????

I have a good excuse.....I just got in from visiting a friend.

"Well", I ask myself, "What the hell are you doing on your computer
at 5:30 in the morning"?

The ones with the questions are not necessarily the ones with the
answers.  

					Steve
From: jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Do you remember 1970 to 1980?
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:03:31 GMT
Organization: Bear, Stearns & Co. - FAST
In-reply-to: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu's message of 11 Nov 92 22:09:56 GMT


In article <9211112207.AA06353@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com> GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu writes:

	 As part of an impromptu research project, I'd like to know what
     YOU think the single most important ( dramatic, traumatic ) event of`
     1970 to 1980 was.

Er, my first orgasm?  ;-)

Seriously, I would think the signing of the Camp David accords between
Egypt and Israel is the most important event.  It showed us that the
possibility of peace exists in the world...

Amazingly, it took ten years for that spirit to get taken any further.

Spidey!!!



--
 /\ \  / /\  Josh Diamond                                          jmd@bear.com
//\\ .. //\\ AKA Spidey!!!                        ...!ctr.columbia.edu!ursa!jmd
//\((  ))/\\
/  < `' >  \                                              Do whatever it takes.