HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen Rowley)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Pro-Queer violence
Date: 22 Jan 93 18:41:55 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.125633.6833@macc.wisc.edu>, anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
> 
> In article <18432@autodesk.COM> owen@autodesk.com (D.  Owen
> Rowley) writes:
> >No, QN is the American version of the PRC's cultural
> >revolution.  By its nature it must be a short lived
> >phenomenon.
 
> I agreed with nearly everything else you said, but apart
> from being short-lived, I don't think QN has anything in
> common with the Cultural Revolution, neither in motive,
> effect, nor historical significance.

The things I see in common are methodological, and stylistic.
An emphasis on slogans and street action. A tendency for
high emotional involvement to push the boundarys of acceptable
tactics, sometimes too far ( ie: scapegoating, getting mired in process)

I am very much in favor of QN, and feel that our movement towards
equality is benefited by their timely existence.

I understand the points you make, I just was looking at it from different
perspective.

LUX ./. owen

--
D. Owen Rowley {uunet,fernwood,sun}!autodesk!owen, owen@autodesk.com
[ EU-PHORIA: A STATE OF WELL BEING ]
Euphoria is my natural state, I do what I enjoy and an abundance 
of all good fortune comes to me for it.
From: solovay@netcom.com (Andrew Solovay)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: MOTSS-Oriented Music, Part II
Date: 25 Jan 93 22:42:40 GMT
Organization: Castle Anthrax

In article <C1FGLt.1pA@hpuerca.atl.hp.com> kfj@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Kirk Johanning) writes:
>In <1993Jan25.060407.10785@fuug.fi> an6245@anon.penet.fi (Nobody in particular...) writes:
>
>>Specifically, what I'm looking for are songs which contain lyrics that are
>>obviously MOTSS-oriented.  Songs by artists who are rumored to be gay,
>>especially if that rumor is only in the "homosexual community" (I use 
>>that phrase because I don't know of any other), are not really what
>>I'm looking for.
>
>>The examples I posted earlier ("Hideaway" and "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme") are
>>good examples.  
>
>I do not think that "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme" is really that good of an
>example as it is really a remake of a song by ABBA, where the singers
>in the group where women.  Unless you think that a song, originally
>from a woman's point of view, remade and sung by a male, makes it
>MOTSS-oriented.

Good enough for me! They could always have changed the pronouns, if
they'd wanted.

In the same vein: Blondie did a cover of Buddy Holley's "I'm gonna
love you too" on Parallel Lines. They didn't change any of the lyrics.
Now, the song doesn't clearly specify the sex of the song's subject,
but it does have the line:

"After all, another fellow took you, but I still can't overlook you."

Given that Blondie's lead singer was a woman, this implies that the
song is being sung to a bisexual man. (When Buddy Holley sang it,
there was no such implication.)
-- 
Andrew Solovay    

"Wait a minute! You guys are NINJAS!"
                ---The Tick
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: TMCCART3@ua1vm.ua.edu (Tracey McCartney)
Subject: Re: Alladin
Organization: Home of the @&#^%$* Crimson Tide
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 01:23:52 GMT

In article <thaaang.727629560@cwis>
thaaang@cwis.unomaha.edu (John Dorrance) writes:
 
>
>Oh. Duh. Sorry, I remember that now (I knew it was on the cassette
>box, but wasn't sure about the film); I was just pissed that Disney
>didn't add a nice eulogy or something; having a scene that screeches
>to a halt as Beauty turns to the camera and proposes a moment of
>silence after talking about how horrible AIDS is and how bigotry and
>homophobia are killing hundreds of thousands and 'remember, kids,
>gay is GOOD!' and then Gaston comes on wearing leather peek-a-boo
>briefs and he and the beast wrestle in porridge and Beauty's dad
>jacks off watching and the Gaston fan club girls get narcisstic and
>Beauty wises up and takes up with Camille Paglia and... well, you know.
>
I've crossposted this to rec.arts.animation -- I'm pretty sure one of
those folks has in his possession an early edit containing the scene
described above. I'll let you know what I come up with : ).
 
Tracey
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: jsb16@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Jennifer S Broekman)
Subject: Re: Soc.motss Reorganization - VOTING BEGINS!
Reply-To: jsb16@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Jennifer S Broekman)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 17:47:50 GMT

Aren't these proposals supposed to go through news.groups?

-jenneke, curious

   Only Boys Accepting Feminism Get Kissed Meaningfully  -- Geoff Marcy
The only unnatural sexual act is that which you cannot perform. - Alfred Kinsey
		jenneke is: jsb16@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Subject: No Liberty Without Ethics
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 07:57:53 GMT


In article <18436@autodesk.COM> owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen
Rowley) writes:

>In article <1993Jan20.074855.19431@macc.wisc.edu>,
>anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:

>>In article <18420@autodesk.COM> owen@autodesk.com (D. Owen
>>Rowley) writes:

>>>We are not perverts, we are a natural part of the natural
>>>cycle of things.  We have been at the forfront of the parts
>>>of our society that make it beutifull and entertaining for a
>>>long time and its time for society to stop treating us like
>>>second class citizens.  The way to do that is by acting like
>>>the first class valuable asset to society that we are.

>>We will have many arguments within the cohort as we try to
>>work out what "good citizen" means in our own terms.  

>*Good Citizen* is your term, I used *first class valuable
>asset* in order to bypass the relative value judgements of
>*bad and good*.

That's sophistry in its simplest form.  The value judgments
cannot be bypassed.

The argument by example -- some LGB people have done some
very good things -- is not adequate to secure liberty and
equality for us all.  The society as a collective enterprise
-- taking nothing away from its diversities during or after
the debate -- will have to undertake the enormously
difficult, fractious activity of *not* bypassing the
formation of ethical values.  You have several times
mentioned taking principled positions; *this* principle
underlies all others in our domain of discourse.

-- 
[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 <---------]
From: lance@hartmann.austin.ibm.com (Lance Hartmann)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Anyone registering china patterns in Hawaii, yet?
Summary: Status of court case involving same-sex marriages in Hawaii.
Keywords: hawaii hi marriage legal
Date: 26 Jan 93 20:10:35 GMT
Reply-To: lance%hartmann.austin.ibm.com@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com
Organization: IBM, Austin

In case I missed something (our newsfeed is less reliable than the
Pony Express):  is there any news about the court case concerning
same-sex marriages in Hawaii?

Lance Hartmann (lance%hartmann.austin.ibm.com@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com)
               Yes, that IS a '%' (percent sign) in my network address.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All statements, comments, opinions, etc. herein reflect those of the author
and shall NOT be misconstrued as those of IBM or anyone else for that matter.
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: tdbear@dvorak.amd.com (Thomas D. Barrett)
Subject: Re: Clinton may not issue Executive Order
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.; Austin, Texas
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 14:58:16 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.051559.17154@ads.com> henry@ADS.COM (Henry Mensch) writes:
>rwhite@jagat.uucp (Robert White) wrote: 
>->Aparently Clinton (any president)
>->can not touch the Uniform Code of Military (in)Justice, where sodomy
>->will still be listed as a crime
>changing the UCMJ requires an Act of Congress.  no big deal.

Well it is such a big deal if they can't even recognize that even just
our basic human and Constituitional rights are being trampled on and
need protecting.  The mentality is, of course, that since we
supposedly do something different in the bedroom (we all know that we
don't do anything different... other than maybe a different sex
partner than a het) we forfit all of our human and constitutional
rights...NOT!

I heard on the Today show that "conduct" will play an important role
in the exec order that Clinton WILL put into place ASAP.  I am hoping
that it Immediately stops the millions spent in the witch-hunts, and
starts the process to fully accept and recognize gays and lesbians in
the military.  I think that the word "conduct" will come in to play to
remove any doubt that this order DOES NOT excuse any act which is
currently covered in the UCMJ, especially sexual misconduct while on
duty and while on base (something the hets need to remember!).
 

-- 
|Tom Barrett (TDBear), Sr. Engineer|tom.barrett@amd.com|v:512-462-6856 |
|AMD PCD MS-520 | 5900 E. Ben White|Austin, TX  78741  |f:512-462-5155 |
|"No is yes, And we're all free" ---Tracy Chapman, "Why?"              |
|My views are my own and may not be the same as the company of origin  |
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: buckmr@rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire)
Subject: URGENT: Gay Military ban Action
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:12:00 EST
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA02519; Mon, 25 Jan 93 13:12:13 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA16704; Mon, 25 Jan 93 13:12:11 -0800
X-Received: from client.its.rpi.edu (vccsouth23.its.rpi.edu) by rpi.edu (4.1/SMHUB41);
	id AA03889; Mon, 25 Jan 93 16:12:07 EST for soc.motss.usenet@decwrl.dec.com
X-Received: by client.its.rpi.edu (4.1/SUB16);
	id AA26115; Mon, 25 Jan 93 16:12:07 EST for soc.motss.usenet@decwrl.dec.com
X-To: noglstp@elroy.jpl.nasa.gov
X-Cc: soc.motss.usenet



Sub:    URGENT! Military Ban Action
  
Many citizens of the US are sending messages by phone and mail to the White
House urging President Clinton to NOT lift the ban on gays and lesbians in the
military.  It is essential that our voices in support of ending the 50 year ban
are heard:
 
IMMEDIATELY DO THE FOLLOWING:
 
1.  Telephone the White House at 202-456-1111 and tell them to lift the ban
now.  If you get a busy signal,  keep trying.  It doesn't count unless you
connect.
 
2.  Write and send by overnight mail if possible to the White House at the
following address:
 
President Bill Clinton
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave.,
Washington. D.C.  20500
 
3.   Legislation is being introduced in the House and Senate to make the ban
enforceable by legislation.  (Remember the ban was instituted through an
Executive Order 50 yrs ago - legislation could make the ban into LAW!!!)  It is
essential you immediate call and write your Congressperson and Senator and let
them know you oppose such legislation.  Senators are the most important right
now - VISIT THEM IN PERSON IF POSSIBLE.
 
4.  Get all of your friends and work associates to do all of the above!!!!.
 
Thank you!!!
 
Elizabeth Birch and Curt Shepard
CoChairs Board of Directors NGLTF

   
---
RON BUCKMIRE, 11 Colvin Circle, Troy, NY 12180-3735. ``BOYCOTT COLORADO!''
uunet!rpi.edu!buckmr||buckmr@rpitsmts.bitnet||buckmr@rpi.edu||+1 518 276 8910
"Straight White Male Privilege is like bad breath: no one notices they have it,
but if you point it out you're an asshole." -- G. Dauphin, _Village Voice_
From: doyle@freya.cs.umass.edu (Jim Doyle)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Sexual harassment from queers
Date: 27 Jan 93 01:18:55 GMT
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst

In article <1993Jan24.194324.1@hamp.hampshire.edu>, hjanules@hamp.hampshire.edu writes:
|> 
|> 	I have a question for those in the soc.motss world: Have any of you
|> ever experienced sexual harassment from another queer.  I have a number of
|> times, and my girlfriend is currently dealing with a similar issue with one of
|> her PROFESSORS.  Why does no one talk about this?  I don't think she and I are
|> the only ones victim to this. What do you think?

Sure have...   Two years ago when I came out - I started going to LBGA
meetings at UMass. It was pretty surprised at how defense they 'regular-crowd'
was when I went to that very first meeting - after awhile I got to know the
people and it was prety obvious there were a number of social subdivisions in
the community.

What I found to be really strange at that time was an attitude that alot of
people had regarding people that described themselves as "straight acting
and appearing". There was a concensus that these people were a deficit to
the 'support group' because they made students that were trying to come
to terms with their identity uncomfortable. The argument was that gay men
that wanted a place to act feminine and be themselves would feel pressure not
to do that in the presence of other gay men that were "straight acting and
masculine"

There was alot of in-fighting ; at that time alot of bisexuals began steering
away from the group and weekly activities because they too became a target
of criticism and harrassment. I hung out with a couple of people I met from 
organization that were more of the masculine, aggressive and athletic type
rather than the preppy, political, not into sports types. Some of these
guys also felt tensions in the group.

I tried hard and eventually got to know some pretty cool people ; but there
was this group that was just utterly socially impenetrable and did NOT like
or want bisexuals or 'straight-acting' people around. 

I think it just goes to show ya that there are assholes everywhere..

Other than that - the only other behavior that I have experienced that could
be construed as harrassment is from other gay men got bitter over me. I've 
had people guys that really wanted to date me and when I didnt indicate
any interest - they'd get all pissed off, act like pissed off spoiled
brats and spread rumors about me behind my back. But - that aint anything
new ; it happens in the straight world all the time too.

.... J.D.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Jim Doyle 	Univ. of Massachusetts - Dept. of Computer Science

Staff Programmer	PUMA/DCC/CNET	 email:	doyle@gaia.cs.umass.edu

office:		Lederle GRC Room A203	 Tel.  413-545-3179
home  :		91 Blackberry Ln         Tel.  413-549-1409
		Amherst,MA 01002-1516	
/* All opinions are my own ; not my employers.. or my other personality's  */
From: sbrack@jupiter (Steve Brack)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: "No Wavering on Gay Soldiers"
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:16:04 GMT
Reply-To: sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

tdbear@dvorak.amd.com (Thomas D. Barrett) writes:
: In article <AWOOTTEN.93Jan21160942@slacktide.cv.nrao.edu> awootten@slacktide.cv.nrao.edu (Al Wootten) writes:
: >As president, he should stand behind his beliefs as forthrightly as he did
: >as a candidate.
: 
: Bush and my ex-rep in CA Tom McClintock practiced this and I hated
: their philosophy.  Our elected officals represent US, not their
: personal views.  Yes, we elect them based on their platforms, but that
: does not mean that they have the right to vote against the will of the
: people.

	At the federal level, the government functions not as a democracy, 
	but as a republic, where we elect leaders & trust them to use their
	judgement.  
: 
: Clinton, as well as Bush, is welcome to publically come out in favor
: of one program or another, but it is ethically wrong for them to force
: their ideology on the rest of the nation if the rest of the nation
: wants something else. 

	The nation wanted Clinton to make presidential decisions.
	Clinton is making presidential decisions. 

: That is the main thing that is wrong with
: politics now.  We have a bunch of old queens sitting on seats of power
: and dispensing their tired old beliefs.  It is the PEOPLE that they
: represent who should have the voice... especially in major policy
: decisions.

	And the people do have the voice.  They are the ones who elect these
	"tired old queens."  If you don't like the politics of the current
	government, elect a new one.  You can try to influence the opinion
	of those you elected, but, in the end, they make the decision, just
	as you chose them to.

--
Steven S. Brack         | "Love one another." |  sbrack@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu
Toledo, OH  43613-1605  |        - A tolerant |  STU0061@UOFT01.BITNET          
MY OWN OPINIONS         |          Christian  |  sbrack@nyx.cs.du.edu
From: billy@briarpatch.uucp (Billy Green)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: MOTSS-oriented music
Date:      28 Jan 93 00:29:11 PST
Organization: Briarpatch Associates, San Francisco, CA

an6245@anon.penet.fi (Nobody in particular...) writes:
>I've seen posted on here lists of both MOTSS-oriented movies and gay
>TV characters.  I haven't seen anything yet related to MOTSS-oriented
>music.
>
>The only two songs I know about are "Hideaway" and "Gimme, Gimme, Gimme"
>both by Erasure.

"Number 47 said to number 3,
'You're the cutest jailbird I ever did see.
Sure would be delighted with your company,
Come on and do the jailhouse rock with me.'"

Unless Elvis knew of some strange, hidden co-ed prison, I can't imagine
that this lyric is not MOTSS-oriented.


Billy Green
San Francisco CA
briarpatch!billy@lever.lever.com

"I asked him if it was true that he had been abducted by aliens...he said
no.  He went of his own accord."
					--Mostly Harmless
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: henry@ADS.COM (Henry Mensch)
Subject: Re: FBI Security Investigations... (was "No Wavering on Gay Soldiers")
Organization: Advanced Decision Systems; a div of Booz, Allen & Hamilton
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:44:33 GMT

tdbear@dvorak.amd.com (Thomas D. Barrett) wrote: 
->But that is the problem when it is based on one (typically) man's
->opinion.  In most cases, a new-hire who is denied a security clearance
->will be terminated rather than the company actively appealing the
->decision.  

umm, "the Company" doesn't actively appeal *anything* ... the appeal
is a matter between an individual and the us government.

furthermore, the FBI doesn't conduct the investigations (at least for
DoD) ... 

->On a personal subject... I have never been in a position where I
->needed a security clearance, and I don't think that I would be happy
->working in a position where I really had to have one.  It's not that I
->am a security risk, it's that I am somewhat of a radical. 

ooh.  you stud! 8-}

-> ... I respect
->some aspects of security, but have trouble knowing about issues when I
->see them as morally wrong and unethical.  I have no desire to put
->myself in the stressful situation of knowing something that needs to
->be told, but I can't tell it.  In a situation like that, I loose all
->respect for those with whom I share the secret.  So... that in a
->nutshell is why I don't want a security clearance, and that is why
->those who would be investigating me should deny it.

that sounds about right.

->be asked to leave the room than to not be able to sleep at nights.

umm, "being asked to leave the room" is only the tip of the iceberg.

--
# henry mensch / booz, allen & hamilton, inc.  / <henry@ads.com>
# "fight the real enemy."  -- sinead o'connor, and many others.
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: rossco@iastate.edu (Ross Stenersen)
Subject: Re: Tips for coming out to friends?
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 01:24:53 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.175913.23681@bradley.bradley.edu> larry@bradley.bradley.edu (L. D. Stratton) writes:
> In <latarra.727896636@camelot> latarra@camelot.bradley.edu (Lisa Ehren) writes:
>    Lisa,
>     Have you found it strange (read that as funny or disgusting) that when
>     you do come out to friends, their reaction is that you immediately
>     are going to come on to them?  Some of my male friends who are super- 
>     macho types and some who are butt-ugly are sure that they are an 
>     object of my desire.  That's when I tell them "I wouldn't fuck you if
>     you were the last man on earth!"
> ld
[I know, I know, you're not talking to me.  ;-) ]

I find it strange that you have friends like that.  I've come out to roughly
10 other guys and not once has one of them said or even hinted at anything
like that.

Ross                                        "Ignorance and prejudice
                                            "And fear
rossco@iastate.edu                          "Walk hand in hand"
rossco@aol.com                                  --Rush  ("Witch Hunt")
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: tdbear@dvorak.amd.com (Thomas D. Barrett)
Subject: Re: Deep Space Nine: Queer Kardassians?
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.; Austin, Texas
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 14:38:22 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.185433.12049@unocal.com> stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini) writes:
>I don't they are queer, but I find the race attractive in masculine terms.
>Humans seem comparatively effeminate in appearance.

Has anyone seen a female Cardassian?  

-- 
|Tom Barrett (TDBear), Sr. Engineer|tom.barrett@amd.com|v:512-462-6856 |
|AMD PCD MS-520 | 5900 E. Ben White|Austin, TX  78741  |f:512-462-5155 |
|"No is yes, And we're all free" ---Tracy Chapman, "Why?"              |
|My views are my own and may not be the same as the company of origin  |
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: murphy@well.sf.ca.us (Daniel A. Murphy)
Subject: Re: Tori Amos
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 09:52:49 GMT


After seeing Tori Amos in concert, I can't conclude anything about
her sexual orientation except that she likes men and piano benches...
-- 
-------------------
Daniel A. Murphy        Net:         murphy@well.sf.ca.us
San Francisco, CA       GEnie:       D.MURPHY11
U.S.A.                  MCI Mail:    377-7947
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: White House Phone Number -- Correction! (for me.)
Date: 27 Jan 93 22:03:15 GMT
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff and Nonsense Division

In article <1993Jan27.204942.6731@PacBell.COM> rjwill6@pbsdts.sdcrc.pacbell.com (Rod Williams) writes:

>Geez, I've been calling the White House number all day
>(thank Technology for redial buttons!) and get busy every
>time...

I hope you haven't been calling (202) 456-1414.  I've been calling
that number all day and managed to get through five minutes to five
o'clock, only to be told that the White House *actually* takes calls
at:

(202) 456-1111.

Well, they could have fooled *me*.

In the meantime, I managed to get through to the offices of Powell,
Aspin, and the Pentagon Public Affairs office, and mail my letters to
Clinton, Powell, Aspin, Nunn, and the House Armed Services Committee.
I'll fax the White House tonight.

I'm going to try to set up a table in the Amherst dining hall at the
last minute for people to sign individual pre-written letters.  Wish
me luck!

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: cjones@physci.ucla.edu (Chad Jones)
Subject: Re: Inaugural Poem
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1
Organization: University of California Los Angeles
Date: 25 Jan 93 09:26:57 PST

In article <1k15bsINNogh@shelley.u.washington.edu> Loren Meissner,
lmeissne@carson.u.washington.edu writes:
>Did anyone notice that the text of the Inaugural poem as carried
>over the wire services (I posted the wire service version earlier today)
>omitted the reference to Gays?

I just noticed that, and read the poem 5 times to confirm my suspicion. 
The version printed in the Los Angeles Times included the gay/straight
references.  Unfortunately, I already recycled Thursday's paper (and I
was meaning to cut out the poem before I did).

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chad Jones                 | Do I need someone here to scold me or do I
Network Manager            | need someone who'll grab and pull me out of
UCLA Physiological Science | this four poster dull torpor pulling
cjones@physci.ucla.        | downward?                 -- 10,000 Maniacs