HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chrisl@stpaul.gov (Chris A Lyman)
Newsgroups: soc.women,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: ABSOLUTELY NEW REMEDY FOR CONTRACEPTION IS OFFERED !!
Date: 5 Oct 92 17:35:13 GMT
Organization: City of Saint Paul Public Works

KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu (Kurt Ludwick) writes:
> andro@sasco.georgia.su (Andrew Gachechiladze) says:

>>   It is biologically clean remedy. There is no sexual hormones in
>> its composition and generally is produced without any chemical
>> preparation.
>>   A woman can use this remedy without consultation and interference
>> of a physician. It is very simple and convenient in use and the main
>> thing is that it doesn't cause any side effects on woman's organizm.
>> Please, pay attention on this fact. It is multi use with
>>                       99,9 % GUARANTEE !!

> Hey, I've heard of it!  It's called ABSTINENCE!

Andrew, don't you just hate it when someone jumps in with the punch line?

> (Sorry. I AM sorry.  I couldn't help it.  I lost control of my fingers.
> Please don't hurt me....  >:-)

Miss Drieux is going to have a _serious_ talk with you, young man. :-)

-- 
Chris Lyman  /  email: chrisl@pwcs.stpaul.gov  /  #include <std.disclaimers.h>
    In America, any boy may become president and I suppose that's just one
    of the risks he takes. -- Adlai Stevenson
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.child-support,soc.men,soc.couples
From: yasu@ll.mit.edu (Alan Yasutovich)
Subject: Re: What a Problem!!!
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 18:24:58 GMT

In article <BvE97K.BI9@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> seeker@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Karen Lynn White) writes:
>I doubt it.  
>
>I live in Indiana and recently got divorced.  My lawyer said although
>one can still ask, judges almost never ask the father to pay for college
>anymore.  (NO, I didn't try, sheesh.)  He also said such older agreements
>were rarely if ever enforced and that he expects a law to go into effect
>in the next year or so to overrule any such judgments made in the past.  
>

	Boy won't that be a breath of fresh air.

-- 
	Alan Yasutovich
	"inquiring  (and nosey) minds WANT TO KNOW!!!"
	I can remember when "safe sex" meant having a padded headboard!!
	Tick Tock.....Tick Tock......Tick Tock .....Tick Tock......
From: clong@remus.rutgers.edu (Chris Long)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Mattel and math avoidance in girls
Date: 2 Oct 92 05:03:08 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1992Oct1.192100.10598@news.nd.edu>, Susan Larsen writes:

> Perhaps not.  But if Ken did say "Playing chess is hard", you had 
> better believe that parents and boys all across America would be 
> up in arms.  Cool or not, few boys would let such a statement slide 
> by unchallenged.

To tell you the absolute truth, I don't think anyone would care.  How
many people play chess, study chess, or enjoy chess?  I do, and my
friends think I'm nutty.  I understand the point you are trying to
make, however.

...
> My daughter, her friends, and her cousins are all crackerjacks in 
> math.

If it's too easy for them, that's really bad.  You should try to see
if they could get supplemental learning (I was learning topology when
I was twelve) to keep them challenged.  I'm working with my old high
school along similar lines, and I've come to the conclusion that one
of the best things would be a subscription to some type of publication.
For example, a bright young person might really enjoy some parts of
_College Math Journal_, _Mathematics Magazine_, or _Pi Mu Epsilon_.
Your daughter is probably too young to read them on her own, but you
should be able to dig some good ideas out for her to play with.

> In fact, my daughter is begging me to teach her economics 
> out of a college-level text.  "I can do that Mommy.  I can read 
> graphs, I can do percents.  Show me Mommy."  I heard that just 
> last night.  And she is in fifth grade.  I don't think we need 
> Barbie telling girls like this that math is hard, do you?

I partially agree with you.  Barbie is saying only "Math class
is hard", which is a rather meaningless statement when taken out
of context.  Is Barbie talking about calculus?  If she's studying
to be a doctor like she claims, it's almost certainly an honors
class.  If Barbie was saying "I can't do math" I would agree
completely, but she isn't saying that.  I don't think Mattel
is guilty of sexism, only poor judgement; something positive
would have been better.  After all, Barbie *is* only uttering
a truism - math is and will always be hard for most people.
-- 
Chris Long, 265 Old York Rd., Bridgewater, NJ  08807-2618
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.abortion.inequity,talk.abortion,soc.men
From: sakata@uhunix.uhcc.Hawaii.Edu (Henry Sakata)
Subject: Re: Mattel and math avoidance in girls
Organization: University of Hawaii
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:58:06 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.231026.9791@news.Hawaii.Edu> dlm@galileo.ifa.hawaii.edu (Deborah Maraziti (aka Spacee)) writes:
>In article <1992Oct2.224430.6183@speedy.aero.org> nadel@attatash.aero.org (Miriam Nadel) writes:
>>>In article <1992Sep29.203919.2777@zip.eecs.umich.edu> charles@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Charles Jacob Cohen) writes:
>>>
>>>	....Mattel is selling
>>>	a product called "Teen Talk Barbie" which says 4 phrases.  One of the 
>>>	phrases is "Math class is hard".
>>>
>>....each individual doll says 4 phrases but that there are actually about
>>100 different phrases used....
>
>The Mattel representative speaking to me also said that each doll has four
>phrases.  Seems like math _must_ be tough in that company as I was told
>there is only a 1% chance that a given doll would say 
>"Math class is hard!"  Hmm:  4/100=1%????

In a way, the Mattel representative is correct.  If one were to
randomly select a doll and pull its string, the probability that
it will repeat a specific phrase is 1/100.  The reasoning is that
the probability of successfully selecting a doll with a certain
phrase is 1 in 25 (there are 3,921,225 ways to select four phrases
out of 100; and 156,849 combinations of one specific phrase plus
three others out of 99).  After the doll is selected, the
probability that it will say any of its four phrases is one in
four.  Therefore, the probability that a given doll will say
a particular phrase is:

     (1/25) * (1/4) = 1/100

If this is incorrect, please correct me.  Now, if one is going to
pull the string more than once, then that's a different story!

Although this post is defending the representative's mathematical
reasoning, I am in no way condoning nor supporting the fact that
a doll marketed for girls will say "Math class is hard!"  No
child should be marred by words that may have a lasting psychological
effect.

This may be inappropriate in these newsgroups, but it emphasizes
how I feel we must use discretion with phrases we repeat to
children.

                Words leave impression
                On innocent, white paper
                Uneraseable

                       h.n.sakata
                       copyright (c) 1991

I hope that the leaders at Mattel will reconsider and recall
any doll that has a negative phrase.

Henry N. Sakata
sakata@uhunix.uhcc.hawaii.edu
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men,alt.flame
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Subject: Re: Amy Fischer: The Circus Continues
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 18:37:23 GMT

In article <Bv67oo.Kqt.2@cs.cmu.edu> garvin+@cs.cmu.edu (Susan Garvin) writes:
>In article <1992Sep25.112152.1@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
>
>[lots of text deleted and my apologies to other readers]
>
>#  The "rarely prosecuted" is not accurate. While many feminists like to
>#dump all versions of rape into the "rarely prosecuted" catagory along
>#with date rape, alcohol rape, and can't parallel-park rape, 
                                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


>Other people may feel sympathy for you, Rivero, but I don't.  
>If your current behavior is any indication of your past
>behavior, no human being could be expected to associate with
>you.
>
>Back in the killfile you go.
>
>Susan


Thanks, Susan, for pointing out his joke  -- the first time I skimmed 
the posting, I didn't notice it.

It made for a great laugh!  (And yes, I laughed at the SEMINARS FOR MEN
parody, even though I was offended, because my sense of humor isn't 
politically correct.  All in good fun.)

(And no, I don't believe this is a disparagement of rape concerns, 
which are very serious, but it is a disparagement of the unreasonable
movement to redefine "rape" as "harassment," which itself detracts 
from the seriousness of rape.)

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism
From: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Subject: Re: Mattel and math avoidance in girls
Reply-To: danwell@IASTATE.EDU (Daniel A Ashlock)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 21:47:58 GMT

   There was an article last year in the Des Moines Register that noted,
acording to statistical abstracts, there is _no_ pay gap between men and women
if we look at only those men and women who have completed at least 10 hours
(2-3) courses of college math.

   Viewed in this light the math-phobe barbie is quite alarming.

   After four years of ignoring barbie, my daughter got one as a present from a
neighbor on her birthday:

   Day I: (in tears)  "Daddy, this lady can't sit down!"

   Day II: (puzzled) "Daddy, why does barbie always walk tippy toe?"

   Day II: (in tears) "Daddy, I lost barbies shoes and she falls down 
                        without them."

   Day III: (cheerfully) "Daddy, barbie falls down too much.  I'm going to
                          play with tigger and bun-rab't."

In the package with my daughter's barbie was an add for a "non-fashion" barbie
that had more nearly realistic proportions and articulated knees and elbows.
Progress?  *sigh*

   As a math professor who has taught remedial classes I can certify that 
mindless fear of mathematics, sufficient to prevent graduation in many
majors, occurs in both sexes; it does seem to happen to women more often:
and women certianly claim "I can't to math because I'm a woman" more often 
than men make the analogous male claim.

   All this annoys the devil out of me.  My best professor as an undergraduate
was Judith Roitman of the University of Kansas.

Thanks for the soap-box

Dan 
Danwell@IASTATE.EDU
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: questions about abortion issue
Date: 29 Sep 92 18:42:53 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

mmrwlm@sn096.uca (Wanda L McCrae) writes:

>I agree totally.  I don't know how the issue of abortion became
>a legal issue, but I think it should be left in the hands of the
>individual seeking abortions and the doctors who wish to perform
>them....
>I wonder why the powers that be don't realize it is a personal
>issue and just leave the entire matter alone.  It is not a decision for the
>nation or the state or the city/town to make; it is a decision the woman has
>to make and deal with in her life.  I would not want the government
>telling me when I am allowed to conceive, why would I want to be told
>when I can/cannot end a pregnancy?

Some people feel that the government has a compelling reason to protect
the life of the unborn.  Some people feel that an abortion is that taking
of a human life and that it therefore should be regulated, restricted, 
or forbidden.  Some people feel that abortion is a dangerous medical
proceedure and for this reason it should be regulated or restricted. 
Some people feel that someone other than a doctor -- the pregnant woman,
her parent(s)/guardian, a judge -- should make the decision whether
to terminate a pregnancy.

That is why abortion *is* a legal issue.

							--  Michal
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: sdavey@triton.unm.edu (Sean Davey)
Subject: questions about abortion issue
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 21:17:24 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

hello,
  I've been thinking about abortion as a legal issue and since I haven't
heard things put this way I want to ask if my ideas hold any water or if
I'm just haven't talked to enough people.  Basically I was thinking that
as far as the law is concerned it is about protecting people's rights.
The problem with this issue is that there are two people's rights involved--
the unborn child and the mother.  Since it would be impossible for a law
in this country's legal system to protect the rights of both people it
is should not IMO be a matter for the law.  I feel this especially when I
see both sides using moral arguements to defend their side.  Is this overly
simplistic?  by that I mean is this a relevant or important slant to this
issue.
	Sean
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.abortion.inequity,talk.abortion,soc.men
From: nyikos@math.scarolina.edu (Peter Nyikos)
Subject: Re: Guilty of ... STUPIDITY!
Organization: USC  Department of Computer Science
Date:  1 Oct 92 03:19:42 GMT

In <Bv8z4z.86I@cs.psu.edu> beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:

>In article <1992Sep27.142543.22029@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> kcochran@nyx.cs.du.edu (Keith "Justified And Ancient" Cochran) writes:
>>In article <1992Sep26.010732.2804@zooid.guild.org> Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:

>[discussion re violent thoughts vs. violent actions, and spousal notification]

>>And, since this sort of situation can be *very* stressful, and since some women
>>are going to wind up being killed if they have to tell their spouses of an
>>abortion, you want to require women to tell their spouses.
>>
>>Wonderful logic.

>I heard no such logic except from you.

>The reason for notification is not to require women to be killed.

>You seem to conveniently and persistently ignore the proposal that 
>a woman need not inform her husband if it poses a danger to her.


>>Gee, and why would the women "refuse to speak honestly and openly"?  Maybe
>>becuase they've already heard about how if they "show disrespect", they'll
>>be killed?

>Again, the only proposal to kill a woman simply because she 
>"shows disrespect" has come from you.  Is that why you are so 
>afraid of informing men about things that might upset them?

Sledovatel Cochran, afraid of informing men about things that might
upset them???!!!!!

Now I've heard everything.  Have a look at my reply to Cochran on 
this same thread.  (AND on all the above newsgroups.  I'm glad.
Someone ought to expose Cochran for the hypocrite that he is.)

>Don
>-- 
>beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged

BTW I first used "Sledovatel Cochran" in talk.abortion on the
THE SUFFERING OF SOME UNBORN AND THEIR MOTHERS. Case 1. 
thread.  He was interrogating me about a woman who had just
had an incomplete abortion and was furious over the abortionist
who refused to return her money, saying "No freebies," after
she had been to the hospital for an emergency operation.

Hint on "Sledovatel": look at the translator's notes near the
end of _The Gulag Archipelago_.

Peter Nyikos
From: dwelch@mpd.tandem.com (Dan Welch)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Mattel and math avoidance in girls
Date: 2 Oct 92 15:11:30 GMT
Organization: Tandem Computers (MPD) Austin, TX

In article <1992Oct2.100417.10143@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>"It's a subtle form of brainwashing," said Nancy Metx, a math teacher
>in Gaithersburg, Md.  "It's a very young person hearing that, and
>that's not what we want young women to hear."
                                                                               
I think that I've come over to the "this is bad" side of this argument,
but doesn't the above statement strike you as kinda odd?  Chances are that
the women didn't even realize what she was saying.

Daniel Welch
----
A lifetime of accomplishments, of which the dirt knows none;
Only in death can one truly return --
Return the carrots, the apples and potatoes,
The chickens, the cows, the fish and tomatoes.
From: dswartz@sw.stratus.com (Dan Swartzendruber)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Mattel and math avoidance in girls
Date: 1 Oct 92 21:10:10 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <Oct.1.14.18.05.1992.10195@remus.rutgers.edu>, clong@remus.rutgers.edu (Chris Long) writes:
> In article <1992Oct1.165449.6739@news.nd.edu>, Susan Larsen writes:
> 
> > Football is hard.
> 
> Nope; even the nerdy kids in my neighborhood (like myself) played
> football.  I was, however, the only one in my neighborhood to ever learn
> calculus.
> 
> > Playing chess is hard.  Learning programming is hard.  But, what
> > toy company would market a Ken doll or a Joe doll that would make
> > these statements?
> 
> Ken and Joe don't program or play chess, since it isn't "cool".
> 
> > Yes, math class is hard.  But it is equally true that math class
> > is fun.
> 
> For you and me, but for the vast majority of people of both sexes
> this simply isn't true.  The statement Barbie is making may not
> reflect the world as we wish it were, but it does reflect the
> world as it is.

You're right, in principle.  But I do understand (and agree with) Susan's
point ( hold the presses :) ); which is that making statements like that
to children (who are almost exclusively female) can damage their confidence
about even trying to do math.  I've seen parents do the routine of telling
their kid(s) that they're stupid, or can't do X, or whatever.  And it's not
unusual to see those kinds of messages have that kind of negative effect.

> -- 
> Chris Long, 265 Old York Rd., Bridgewater, NJ  08807-2618

-- 

Dan S.
Xref: sparky soc.women:17338 alt.abortion.inequity:4217 talk.abortion:40228 soc.men:17278
From: sgast+@pitt.edu (Susan Garvin)
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.abortion.inequity,talk.abortion,soc.men
Subject: Re: Guilty of ... STUPIDITY!
Summary: Sexual harassment!  People being mean!
Date: 3 Oct 92 05:15:53 GMT
Followup-To: talk.abortion
Organization: University of Pittsburgh



I missed this the first time.  Nyikos thinks he's being sexually
harassed?  I wonder if he's planning to file suit.  Since the
basic problem is that Keith is posting words that Nyikos doesn't
want to see, maybe he should join a net.famous already pending
suit.

Or he could grow up and learn to use a real killfile.

Susan
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: gwangung@byron.u.washington.edu (Roger Tang)
Subject: Re: Support for young women in science
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 15:34:03 GMT

In article <92272.015045RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET> <RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:
>-To which I say:  Looks like you have answered your own question.  That is,
>-some women would feel more comfortable talking to only women -- THAT is
>-*clearly* one thing group (A) achieves that group (B) cannot.
>The issue I am
>raising is a genuine one and it is not going to go away by pretending that
>I `just misunderstood'.

	Even when it is stunningly obvious that you HAVE misunderstood?

	Again, just WHAT about the original posting gave you the idea
that women were discouraged from talking to men about science?

	And, again, given that there are problems peculiar to women in
doing science (and I'd be VERY interested in any claims that there
aren't any), who would be the appropriate source to go to?  Offhand, I'd
say you'd go to someone who's experienced the same problem....

-- 
	"I got into theatre originally to pick up girls. Unfortunately, all I
found were women..."
e-mail:  gwangung@milton.u.washington.edu
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Help! I need romantic ideas.
Date: 6 Oct 1992 02:14:40 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

cannon@scs.unt.edu (Dustin Cannon (Lab 3460)) writes:



>I was wondering if you had any other little 
>romantic things I could do that would make my SO think I am the most 
>romantic guy ever!  I'm just a college student, so nothing too expensive.  


Pack a picnic basket and take her to the park.  Feed the ducks and 
watch the children play.  Ask her about the shapes she sees in the 
clouds.

Make dinner for her -- something that can be eaten with your fingers.
Eat it from the same plate while sitting on the floor.  (TV must be off!)

Wake her up in the middle of the night when the air is warm and 
go for a walk in the moonlight.

Bring her cookies (still warm from the oven) while she's studying.
(This doesn't have to be hard -- buy the pre-made refridgerated
cookie dough.)

Leave her a little love note (a joke or a hand-drawn sketch) 
tucked in her mathbook.

Give her a hug when she doesn't expect it.  This is best done in
private.  Maybe while she's doing her laundry (if you can catch
her alone in the laundry-room.)

Declare it to be her birthday (even though it's really months
away) and bring her a decorated cup-cake with a candle.  Make
it one of those self-relighting trick candles.  Wear a party hat.

Best wishes!

						--  Michal

Newsgroups: soc.women
From: slarsen@titian.helios.nd.edu (susan larsen)
Subject: Re: Mattel and math avoidance in girls
Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 19:21:00 GMT

In article <Oct.1.14.18.05.1992.10195@remus.rutgers.edu> clong@remus.rutgers.edu (Chris Long) writes:
>In article <1992Oct1.165449.6739@news.nd.edu>, Susan Larsen writes:
>
>> Football is hard.
>
>Nope; even the nerdy kids in my neighborhood (like myself) played
>football.  I was, however, the only one in my neighborhood to ever learn
>calculus.

It may not take a mental giant to play football, but being hard or 
difficult doesn't necessarily apply only to the mind.  I think Bo 
Jackson has learned just how hard football can be.  Further, how 
many people are earning a wage with their math skills and how many 
with their football skills?  Football may not be hard on the mind, 
but it is hard on the body and very difficult to break into. (If 
you want to talk about hard on the mind and the body, I'd cast 
my vote for pro basketball. How does Michael Jordan float, twist, 
backhand, all the time keeping track of the ball position and still 
know where he is? [oops, a digression])

In my experience, I found algebra to be tough, but rewarding.  Gym, 
on the other hand, was way too hard for me.  I couldn't progress 
pass a forward somersault.  Lots of girls in my junior high and high 
school got As and Bs in math courses; only eight could do the 
requisite backflips and aerials to make it on the cheerleading squad.
Can anyone envision Barbie saying "Cheerleading is hard"?

>> Playing chess is hard.  Learning programming is hard.  But, what
>> toy company would market a Ken doll or a Joe doll that would make
>> these statements?
>
>Ken and Joe don't program or play chess, since it isn't "cool".

Perhaps not.  But if Ken did say "Playing chess is hard", you had 
better believe that parents and boys all across America would be 
up in arms.  Cool or not, few boys would let such a statement slide 
by unchallenged.

>> Yes, math class is hard.  But it is equally true that math class
>> is fun.
>
>For you and me, but for the vast majority of people of both sexes
>this simply isn't true.  The statement Barbie is making may not
>reflect the world as we wish it were, but it does reflect the
>world as it is.

I believe we all have within us the power to make the world the 
way we wish it were.  If the great doers of history simply accepted 
things as the way it is, we'd all be living like Fred Flintstone. 
My daughter, her friends, and her cousins are all crackerjacks in 
math.  In fact, my daughter is begging me to teach her economics 
out of a college-level text.  "I can do that Mommy.  I can read 
graphs, I can do percents.  Show me Mommy."  I heard that just 
last night.  And she is in fifth grade.  I don't think we need 
Barbie telling girls like this that math is hard, do you?

Sue Larsen
slarsen@berlin.helios.nd.edu
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.abortion.inequity,talk.abortion,soc.men