HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:39:45 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Apr8.162859.17414@ultra.com> stcroix@ultra.com (Bill St. Croix) writes:
>
>>attention.  Whether they want this to interfere with their situation,
>>that's their choice.  If it causes their current situation to end,
>
>What about the choice of the other person that is involved with the
>person you are wooing??  I guess their feelings don't matter.  Seems mighty
>selfish and inhuman, to me.
 
Do you mean the person that wants to be in a relationship with
someone that was of a mind to be woo'ed away, or do you mean the person
that want's to own the person that's looking in, to stepping up?
 
>
>>that the chance the chose to take.  If you are willing to put up with
>>being juggled with someone else, you decide if it's worth it.
>
>We all know that it comes down to everyones "personal opinion" about
>what to do in these kinds of cases.  In these cases, right and wrong are
>defined by the person who makes the decision.
>
>Just remember, you aren't the only one that has to live with the 
>consequences of your actions.  All the people involved in the relationship
>that is broken up (depending on the stage ie married, engaged, dating) are
>going to be affected in some way.
 
If Anglewing and someone(????) wanted to have a relationship who in the
hell is anyone else to object. Anglewings ex or current does not own her
and never will. Her current might have a problem with his relationship
with her. If he does'nt like his relationship with her, he is free to
end said relationship. Because her current met her first, does not mean,
it is a better relationship or that he owns her. Someone has as much
(and Anglewing) right to happiness as you. If both are happy that makes
2 happy, 1 sad. If she stay's with you because you try to make her feel
quilty that's 2 unhappy, 1 snivveling puppy, happy. If their are kids
involved perhap's they would be better off, who's to say. If you think I'm
slime I'll be a happy slime, wit yo date.
Disclaimer:
 I don't pork my friends girlfriends, if I don't know you and
your girlfriend and I make music, I could care less about you.
 If I passed on every relationship that made some guy unhappy, I would'nt
ever have any relationship's. If she's worth having there's probably some
guy mooning over her somewhere. Etc, etc.

>I don't believe in the stars or the planets or angels watching from
>above, but I believe there's a Ghost of a Chance, we can find someone to
>love and make it last...
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: walter (Walter Lego)
Subject: Re: Male visual orientationREFRESH
Followup-To: soc.singles
Reply-To: nobody
Organization: Twisted Pair Inc.
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 11:32:16 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.005319.19993@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@isis.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>
>Good point--here I posted some of my thoughts about Pooh on soc.singles
>and I feel much better.  I think we can recommend this as a productive
>therapeutic technique and would suggest that everybody else to likewise.

Some of us already have and definitely felt much better.
But are you sure Pooh would welcome that from just about anyone? If she does, 
than you two should be perfect for each other.

						Walter

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I am posting under a pseudonym for personal reasons. There is 
enough info in the headers to determine my posting site and possibly even 
determine my login name which is all the information you get from other
postings except that in this case you KNOW for sure that the name in the
headers is a pseudonym. If you don't like the idea put me in your kill file. 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: FA.TJM@forsythe.stanford.edu (Thom McKean)
Subject: JungleGyms (was re: [something.  I fail to remember!])
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 23:07:22 GMT

In article <1992Apr15.223619.26610@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>,
kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>>kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Me) writes:
>>>and asks them out, then they are brutally rejected because they didn't
>
>Me writes:
>>No, the problem is with your assumption of rejection being "brutal."
>
>My use of "brutally" was pure hyperbole. Which smiley indicates that one?

Oops.  I'maDork.  My HyperboleMeter's on the fritz.  I'll give it a
kick...

>>Far fewer problems if folks just got offa their asses and took some
>>real initiative.  The results can be devastatingly wonderful.
>Exactly.
>--
>"The truffle is not an outright aphrodisiac, but it may in certain
> circumstances make women more affectionate and men more amiable."
                                                ...Brillat-Savarin
Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!  Played on a jungle gym over the weekend for the
first time since I was in my preteens.  (Okay, first time *sober*
since my preteems.)  I had Fun (yes, with a capital F).

Anyone ever done the nasty on one of these things?

Just wondering,

Thom
Wake up, son.  I'll be takin' these Huggies and whatever cash you
got in the drawer...
From: ps3p+@andrew.cmu.edu (Peter A. Simon)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Avoiding dating married people
Date: 11 Apr 92 15:52:31 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.kdtkgzK00WBO41dDlD
	<1992Apr10.230818.17146@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu>
Organization: Senior, Civil Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

>All in all, if a person has had time to develop a past history of
>trustworthiness, then by all means that person should be trusted.  But
>how can you fault a little healthy scepticism, on either side, when
>two people have just met?

I can't.  I mis-read Michele's original post and misjudged Michele
accordingly.  While I wish there were NOT men and women who deceive
others for their own gain or pleasure, the fact is there are. And it is
worthwhile to protect oneself against them.  I do, too, of course.

BUT, I find it discouraging when I am repeatedly treated with
suspiscion.  I guess I take it too personally.

Sorry, Michele.  You're right.

Peter
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tedwards@wam.umd.edu (technopagan priest)
Subject: Re: The "first" "move" (was Re: A R C )
Organization: University of Maryland at College Park
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 09:50:35 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.174732.8836@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@isis.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>Now all I've got to do is figure out how to get around the Wicca part,
>since, much as I like intelligent, aggressive women who are relatively
>unconstrained by convention, the ones I meet keep turning out to be
>serious, practicing pagans with a serious religious observance scheduled
>every seven to eight minutes--not that there's anything inherently wrong
>with pagans, but it doesn't seem to leave much room in their lives for
>anyone who isn't a pagan.

What's an atheist to do?  Well, Wicca breaks down into
1) the "bitch witches" who take things a little too seriously,
   really, really, believe in magick, etc.  Most of these
   wouldn't touch a guy with a 10' pole anyway...
2) the believing others...they manage to balance the goddess with
   reality...and
3) the unbelievers seeking spiritual fullfilment despite their
   atheistic philosophies and
4) the unbelievers who are just there to meet women

Anyway, avoid #1 if they don't avoid you...#2 are usually OK to
deal with if you do a bit of reading ("Drawing down the Moon", etc.)
I'm occasionally a #3...face it, we all have inborn spiritual needs,
or else religion wouldn't be a big thing...read some Joseph Cambell
(Power of Myth, etc.) and get in touch with your spirituality, and
you'll find Wicca is probably the best way for an atheist to deal with
it.     

If you're just a #4, you will stand out soon enough...

Anyway, if someone is giving you trouble for not being a die-hard
Wiccan, just tell them "How Christian of you...going to burn me
at the stake or something..." :-)

-Tom


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Subject: Re: The "first" "move" (was Re: A R C )
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 11:39:07 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <65164@apple.Apple.COM> stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones) writes:
>
>Maybe. But then maybe the men would start playing hard to get,
>and we would have to get them drunk on truffles in order to have
>our way with them.

Shouldn't that be "Truffles (tm)"?.....

Aahz - Chocolate and alcohol?  Yum!
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

Mothers are inventors by necessity
From: u8acb@ohm.york.ac.uk (Alex Barclay)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: THE ELEMENTS OF SEDUCTION
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:25:11 GMT
Organization: Electronics Department, University of York, UK

In <1992Apr14.212458.25276@tigger.jvnc.net> richh@tigger.jvnc.net (RICHH) writes:

>There's a local place here in Philly that sells these 'fake beepers'
>for about twenty-five bucks.  They look real, but all they really
>are are alarm clocks.
>Here's what you do.  Say you're meeting a blind date at 7 for dinner.
>You set the beeper to go off at about 7:30.  That should give you
>ample time to  make your decision.  If it's not clicking, you simply
>excuse yourself and not return. That's okay, but here's the real
>beauty:  if it *is* clicking, you let it go off anyway.  She'll say
>something like, "Shouldn't you be checking on that?"

>"Nah, you are far more interesting than anything going on in that
>silly old ICU."

You sad case... You shouldn't have to resort to things like that. Besides
surely the idea is to get a drunk as possible if it's not "clicking" then
you can have a f_____g good time embarrising her unless she follows
suit. In the latter case your made.

It's the old saying "Never been to bed with an ugly woman, but woken up
with quite a few!"

			Alex.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@isis.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: synchonous or asynchonous phone calls
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 06:44:00 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.171946.708@aspentec.com> jwalsh@aspentec.com (Jamie Walsh) writes:
>>>a number of people seem to think that asking for a phone number 
>
>The spring and summer before I met my husband, I gave my phone number
>to several men.  I didn't think any of them would ever call.
>Six of them called me on Labor Day weekend when I was home with the flu.
>Must be a popular time for cleaning out wallets.

Nah, it's just synchonicity at work.  You can go six months without anyone
showing interest at all, but as soon as someone calls you up, asks you
on a date, and you agree, seventeen more people will call you the same
evening and ask you on a date for the same night the first one did.

Trygve   (Works like this all the time.)

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: Discussion Of Romantic Songs
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 13:32:03 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.124758.1639@ait.com> eleanor@ait.com (Eleanor Evans) writes:
>Angelwing, in passing....
>>....imaginary seductions in front of the fireplace [while the parents are
>>out of town or at the local Sizzler].
>
>Well, I'm embarrassed to admit it, but the highlight of next week for me
>is that his parent are going out of town....  Ah, the problems of 
>ProblemYoungerManHood....  I feel so young.....
>
>Piglet
 
Sound's like ProblemYoungerBoyHood. Better take him to England.
From: rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Male visual orientationREFRESH
Date: 15 Apr 92 20:24:26 GMT
Reply-To: rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Dept., Madison, WI

In <1992Apr14.142121.13926@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu> mcregor@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Meloney Cregor) writes:
>In article <6rxjc7l.aahz@netcom.com> aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius) writes:
>>>"Have you seen Mr. Aahz?"
>>>" Yes, he's over in small and perky."
>>Ex*cuse* me?  I'd be over in "small and feisty", thank you very much.
>Feisty?   They come in feisty?

I think they come in "grape" too.  Aren't they all made by the Kool-Aid
corporation?  (Or maybe that's "warm aid". :-)

>Hmmm.  I guess mine *are* well behaved.

You'd think we were talking about computer network congestion policies. :-)

-- 
Michael Rawdon
rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI

Don't worry, smile and dance.  You just can't work life out.
Don't let down moods entrance you, take the wine and shout.
					- Pete Townshend, "Empty Glass"
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: Male visual orientationREFRESH
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 13:50:23 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.152939.14752@cs.yale.edu> loosemore-sandra@CS.YALE.EDU (Sandra Loosemore) writes:
>In article <ftmj1am.barry@netcom.com> barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes:
>
>   >Come on folks, let's try to exhibit a little more tolerance and
>   >understanding.
>
>	   Ooh, the irony.
>
>Hey guys, what I keep hearing you all saying is that you think any
>woman who *doesn't* enjoy dressing up like a prostitute has some kind
>of problem.  Is *that* really a tolerant attitude?  As I said, what
 
Have your hearing checked.
 

>consenting adults choose to do is their own business, but if they choose

Actually that's what everybody else is saying. You said if Starcap likes
his girlfriend in revealing clothes he not only is glorifying prostitution
but subjecting women to it.
 
>not to do it, that's their own business too.  Sheesh.
>
>-Sandra

Sheesh is a bit of an understatement.
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: DOES ANYBODY REMEMBER...
Date: 6 Apr 92 18:07:30 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Apr6.164453.11923@u.washington.edu> intrigue@milton.u.washington.edu (Angelwing) writes:
|In article <1992Apr6.130849.17065@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
|>
|>Lick-'m-Aid?
|>
|>-Nance
|
|Flavor Straws?
|
Care for a Pez?  I've got a Pez dispenser in my desk.  There's only
a few red ones left.


-- 
+=============================================================================+
| John Fereira                Al Bundy for President          
| johnf@auspex.com         "He's as good as the next guy"                     |
+=============================================================================+
Xref: sparky soc.singles:10540 sci.med:8391 misc.consumers:10151 misc.kids:12450
From: jwalsh@aspentec.com (Jamie Walsh)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,sci.med,misc.consumers,misc.kids
Subject: Re: Business cards
Date: 6 Apr 92 17:48:14 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: Aspen Technology, Inc. Cambridge, MA.

In article <22499@alice.att.com>, ark@alice.att.com (Andrew Koenig) writes:
> Oh no, not again.
> 
> I have seen so many posts over the years about Craig Shergold
> dying of cancer that I can only figure he must be a cat.
> 
> Seriously, I have heard from several places that this request
> is just one of those urban legends.  Unfortunately, this particular
> one has caused floods of post cards to descend on non-existent
> people for many years.  Please don't add to it.

To the best of my knowledge, this is the only urban legend that sprung
from a true story that just wouldn't die when it was over.

-- 
--jamie
	  "There's a seeker born every minute."

Internet:	jwalsh@aspentec.com
UUCP:	        uunet!aspentec!jwalsh
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jailbird@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Ron D. Harvey)
Subject: Re: A R C
Organization: The RAMJAC Corporation
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 16:27:42 GMT

In article <1992Apr7.092859.29878@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@isis.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:

>Well, I suppose I must be at least as deceived as Alison, since I seem to
>run into lots of aggressive women willing to make the first move (a good
>thing too, since I happen to like that particular quality).

>Trygve   (At least they seemed pretty aggressive to me.) 

	This is a great justification for being chronically passive-
aggressive.  And as any dedicated soc.singles reader knows, this is also 
a great way to get into a relationship with exactly the *wrong* person.

	(The Other) Ron




-- 
Ron D. Harvey	jailbird@ddsw1.mcs.com 

The only difference between a halo and a noose is about a foot.
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Male visual orientationREFRESH
Date: 9 Apr 92 11:29:50 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <c-rjpj-.shannah@netcom.com> shannah@netcom.com (Teri Miller) writes:
>
><sigh>  The net is a really fickle place, though.  I remember a
>time when I was getting offers of kinky pastimes, and all I had
>to bring was my hammer and crowbar.... <the net.grandma wanders
>off, muttering to herself>

You mean you no longer get any kinky offers?  My, what a difference
getting married makes.  I'll have to try it sometime......
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

Mothers are inventors by necessity
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: walter (Walter Lego)
Subject: Re: Older men and younger women (advice needed)
Followup-To: soc.singles
Reply-To: nobody
Organization: Twisted Pair Inc.
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 92 11:43:18 GMT

In article <rtkc8INNgao@agate.berkeley.edu> epg@nature.berkeley.edu writes:
>
>Why would a man not want to date a woman who is considerably younger
>than he is?

Perhaps, because they are looking for someone even younger?

>
>I've had two relationships in the last year end almost before they
>started in which the men I was involved with were uncomfortable about
>dating me because of my age.  I'm 25, well educated and have had more
>than a handful of relationships.  My first "interest" is 38, the second
>is 39.  In both cases, we were friends for several months before getting
>involved.  
>
>I became interested in each of them because they were nice, interesting
>men.  When they turned out to be older than I'd thought, it didn't
>bother me because I already liked them.  They both say that I am
>beautiful, caring, intelligent and very mature.  So if they think I'm so
>wonderful, why does my age matter?

Are you sure it was the age and not something else? If men were to play the
"Be sensitive and let them down easy" game like the women, the age difference
would be a perfect excuse to let you down. especially if they didn't feel any
"sparks" and "chemistry" with you. Men can play the same game too, you know.

>p.s. Please forgive the crossposting.  It was difficult to figure out
>who might be best to answer my questions.

That depends on whether you want an uterus or a cauldron.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Needing not to Need
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1992 23:13:43 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Apr6.214424.23207@kakwa.ucs.ualberta.ca>  userisra@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca (Mark Israel) writes:
>
>    Are you sure you want to give up the "need"?  Or would you rather have it
> reciprocated?

I think getting help for his problem is a lot better than finding someone
with the same problem.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu (The Eternal Fool)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Rules, I see no Rules here
Date: 6 Apr 92 22:53:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: inet-gw-.9204070101.AA04419
Reply-To: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu
Organization: DEC Palo Alto
To: soc.singles.usenet


      Ken Loo foolishly asks " Are there rules? "

      Yes.

      Kill.
      Or be killed.

      Actually, there *are* other rules, but it's easier to just
      boil them all down into this one.

      It's *way* easier to remember.
From: intrigue@milton.u.washington.edu (Angelwing)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Second Move
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:34:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: u.1992Apr15.153409.28659
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

In article <9204141633.AA13986@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com> GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu writes:
>
>       Angelwing says " a man will notice a woman's signals, that is
>       if his head isn't in the clouds ".

Angelwing *also* sez:  Don't assume ... and it seems, Bro, that you have
assumed that I am mad at you.  Whadda goof.

>       THERE'S the whole DAMN problem, wrapped up neatly. Women
>
>       ASSUME.  Men don't. :) :) :)

Oh pish and tosh.  Don't make general statements.  Now you're going to get
everybody riled up saying "*I* don't assume!"

>       I mean, look, apparently
>       Angelwing's mad at me.

No I am not ... even though you did intimate that I am a psycho-bitch.

>       *I* sure didn't see any smoke signals from her steaming head. :)

Well, yesterday somebody typed "**GIGGLE**" at me and *that* steamed me up
pretty good.  But other than that ...

Angelwing - even tempered, always.

*------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Angelwing       |"Two things are wanted by a true man, danger and*
* U. of Washington| play - therefore, he seeks woman as the most   *
*                 | dangerous toy."       Friedrich Nietzsche      *
*------------------------------------------------------------------*
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: pnichols@ra.csc.ti.com
Subject: Candor III
Keywords: Lock
Organization: (Giggle) No, stop it, really...
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 21:00:44 GMT


	I dunno, :) might also be a safety net, or an escape route.  It all depends on
the circumstances.

	But CANDOR, that's different.  Not much gray area there.  Unfortunately, there
isn't much 'gray matter' being applied towards it by enough people.  You said
'it 
takes patience on the part of those who espouse it'.  Now, how many
relationships
couldn't do with some extra patience anyway?  I think we've just proved that
candor IS necessary, and IS greatly underused.  I like to think I'm a patient
person, but it wouldn't hurt to take another look at the way I view things.  Or

any of us, really.

	Yeah, and with demographics in opposition, there's little left to do 'cept
keep smiling. (is that a hint, kpc....?)
 
>(a smiley doesn't substitute for being with a stable and CANDID person, but,
>what, are we to ask too much?)

	Ask, for God's sake, ASK!!!!!  How can we not?????
	
	-Paul "When everything is gone, the last we can rely on is Honesty" Nichols.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@isis.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: A R C
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 09:28:59 GMT

In article <9204070353.AA17034@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com> GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu writes:
>
>        Alison Rebecca Colman errors with
>
>                " There are *plenty* of aggressive women willing
>                  to make the first move "
>
>      At last. Somebody more deceived than me.
>      Man, what a relief.

Well, I suppose I must be at least as deceived as Alison, since I seem to
run into lots of aggressive women willing to make the first move (a good
thing too, since I happen to like that particular quality).

It seems like the women I know who are happilly involved in a serious
relationship almost always were the ones to make the first move--which
seems like a good way to get the ones that they want and, for that matter,
would seem to increase their chances of getting involved with someone 
who isn't going to be constantly seeking elsewhere.

Trygve   (At least they seemed pretty aggressive to me.) 
Newsgroups: soc.singles