HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: amadeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Susan Harwood Kaczmarczik)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: FAQ list?
Date: 26 Jul 92 00:24:40 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at Austin


Mark Cornick writes:
>Just a question... has anyone done an FAQ list for alt.pagan?

We keep discussing this, and it keeps getting voted down.  As one
might suspect, there's precious little consensus around here about
*anything*, and most people seem to feel that there's not really any
way to get a truly representative FAQ.

However.  I've volunteered my services before; if the sentiment
changes I'd be willing to help create one, but not alone.
-- 
-----Susan Harwood Kaczmarczik-------------------------------*<:-)-------------
"Queens never make bargains."  -- The Red Queen, _Through the Looking Glass_
-----amadeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu--------------The University of Texas @Austin---
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: stereotypes - and a request
Keywords: Misogyny/Gynophobia, what does it all mean?
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
	<1992Jul22.153618.1@fnalno.fnal.gov>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 07:47:00 GMT

In article <1992Jul22.153618.1@fnalno.fnal.gov> 
holzman@fnalno.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman) writes:
>The exact quote will take time to get, but a paraphrase is that men are
>constitutionally incapable of the level of caring and nurturance that 
>women are capable of. [Barbara Jordan]
>You asked for examples of feminists (I believe the word you used was
>"EXTREMIST", I can check if you like) pushing something other than equality. 
>That is what I have presented.  If you want to argue that it is OK for them to
>It would mean only having a woman for President, Vice President, entire
>Congress, entire city, state, local gov't.  It  would mean men being excluded
>from these positions.
>I use the war analogy because it accurately describes what I am seeing.
>Are you familiar with pre-1920 America? 

Yeah, I hear what your saying, I should always check my back, everywhere
is just like Compton. That's gangstar talk, isn't it? But I got my back 
tonight, know what I'm sayin' G?
From: jblain@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: the work "warlock"
Date: 28 Jul 92 16:49:35 -0300
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

In article <3-PCNews-124beta@astral.scvl.ca.us>, highmage@astral.scvl.ca.us (Steve Schwartz) writes:
> jblain@ac.dal.ca ( @ Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada) once wrote....
>>A small point of correction. Susan said "warlock" came from "Scots Gaelic".
>>Warlock is Old English (and probably also Old Scots, which is NOT a Gaelic
>>language.
>>
>>It certainly did mean "oathbreaker" or "traitor" and has little to
>>do with male witches other than by (non-witches) association.
>>
>>A nasty word that was applied as a put down.
> 
> Actually, it was not a put down, it was a term used to describe those
> people (usally men), who where not witches, but infiltrators of the
> covens. These people would be sent to infiltrate and attempt to destroy
> the group from the inside.
> 
> Bright Blessings,
> Steve Schwartz
> 
Thanks for the correction, Steve. I was thinking of it as being applied
by non-witches to _presumed_ witches, and also its application to various
people in quite high places who were known as sorcerers or magicians (and
several of whom were known for changing sides in political disputes, so that
the suggestion of changing sides, disloyalty, etc became associated with
magical practice) - so that it became a label to attach to a political enemy 
to suggest treachery associated with "black magic" - I'm thinking of people 
like the Earl of Bothwell, in Scotland, whose overthrow was the intended 
result of the first big round of witch-burning there . . .

Thinking further about it, I can see how it was possibly applied in _both_
ways . . .
 
> ----
> ==============================================================================
> Steve Schwartz                             Address: 245-M Mt. Hermon Road #119
> highmage@astral.scvl.ca.us                          Scotts Valley, CA 95066
> ==============================================================================
-- 

	Jenny		Jblain @ ac.dal.ca
__________________________________________________________________________
	I was in many shapes before I was released:
	.....
	I was a path, I was an eagle, I was a coracle in seas;
	I was a bubble in beer, I was a drop in a shower;
	I was a sword in hand, I was a shield in battle.
	I was a string in a harp enchanted nine years, in the water as foam;
	I was a spark in fire, I was wood in a bonfire;
	I am not one who does not sing; I have sung since I was small.

						[from The Book of Taliesin]
From: RMJUN%ALASKA.BITNET@CORNELLC.cit.cornell.edu (Juneau School District:  Data Pr)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: (none)
Date: 29 Jul 1992 12:41:15 -0500
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Hiya all, Frank Perricone here.  My feed to this newsgroup has been cut off,
and I don't know how long it may take to get back in.  If anyone wants to send
me any messages I can be reached at RMJUN@acad1.alaska.edu or
RMJUN@alaska.bitnet.  Hope to be back soon (shucks, just when things were
getting interesting!)... Bright blessings to all :)
From: dwlogsdon@vax1.umkc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Movies with Pagan themes.
Date: 23 Jul 92 18:50:23 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Kansas City

There is a wonderful film called "The Sorceress", which tells the story of a
midwife/hebalist being persecuted by the Church in the early Middle Ages.
Although the movie was made in France, it was filmed in English (NOT dubbed or
sub-titled!), is based in part on fact, and also on local (and very pro-Pagan)
legends. It might be a bit hard to find, but it's well worth looking for; or
you can contact Mystic Fire Video, who've been distributing it here in the
States. 
                                                    DAVE
From: heimberg@pacific.mitre.org (Jeff Heimberger)
Subject: Re: Who cares
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 12:34:00 GMT

In article <Brr7xn.80v@news.cso.uiuc.edu> ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A. Davis-Howe) writes:
>heimberg@pacific.mitre.org (Jeff Heimberger) writes:
>
>>I'm tired of being *personally* responsible for every wrong on the
>>planet, just because I'm a white, anglo saxon, (formerly) protestant,
>>middle class, heterosexual male with a fair education.  I try really
>
>Hmm, I wonder who said that you were "*personally* responsible", Janis or you.

Janis was not in the thread of discussion I was following at that
point.  Some guy from the UK, I believe, had said something similar.  I
just added my $0.02 in support of his position.

>[...]

Regards,

Jeff H...
From: jblain@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Misogyny (etc. --PHarvey)
Date: 26 Jul 92 23:28:54 -0300
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

In article <1992Jul24.151138.12603@bradley.bradley.edu>, larry@bradley.bradley.edu (Larry D. Stratton) writes:
> In <1992Jul24.102928.6641@ac.dal.ca> jblain@ac.dal.ca writes:
>>In article <1992Jul22.174656.26545@cis.umassd.edu>, cscionti@UMASSD.EDU writes:
>>> (women, that is).
> 
>>This doesn't seem "obvious" to me, only circular. To say anyone is afraid of
>>something because they are "scary", fearsome, etc is tautological. Why are 
>>women perceived as "scary"? Who perceives us as "scary" . . .? 
>>(Note that I said "perceived as", not "are". I don't consider I'm "scary" . . .)
> 
>    I agree with the 'perceived', Jenny.  One theory is that men have a
>    need to control, part of the masculine mystique.  Women have been 
>    finding new strength and a new sense of personna.  The conflict that
>    arises is seen as threatening to the male.

Thanks, Larry - so where does this need to control come from? How does is
originate? Why is it part of the masculine mystique? What is the masculine
mystique? . . .

Can men avoid it? Some men, on this net, seem to . . .
-- 

	Jenny		Jblain @ ac.dal.ca
__________________________________________________________________________
	I was in many shapes before I was released:
	.....
	I was a path, I was an eagle, I was a coracle in seas;
	I was a bubble in beer, I was a drop in a shower;
	I was a sword in hand, I was a shield in battle.
	I was a string in a harp enchanted nine years, in the water as foam;
	I was a spark in fire, I was wood in a bonfire;
	I am not one who does not sing; I have sung since I was small.

						[from The Book of Taliesin]
From: brewich!donal@lobster.hou.tx.us (Donal)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: soc.religion.pagan (Was: alt.wicca, anyone?)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 17:05:08 CDT
Organization: The Brewer's Witch BBS, HouTx, +1 713 272 7350

ceci@lysator.liu.se (Ceci Henningsson) writes:

> My suggestion is, that we start a soc.religion.pagan group.
> 
I will second this notion! It is essentially the meat of my argument 
regarding s.r.w, and I am the first (actually second) to say that I 
support the added status and VISIBILITY that s.r.p would give us. It is 
important for us to be seen. Only then can open minded Christians ask us 
questions.
 
Blessed be

--------------------
Donal, Sysop of The Brewer's Witch BBS -- +1 713 272 7350
(Internet) lobster.hou.tx.us!brewich!donal 
(SCA) Ld. Donal Dubh, IC of Dun Bruddair, B of the Stargate, K of Ansteorra
From: Frank.Perricone@f814.n355.z1.therose.pdx.com (Frank Perricone)
Sender: postmaster@therose.pdx.com
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Celtic Xianity <was: Re: Lithuania>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 21:02:00 -0700

In a message dated 20 Jul 92  18:00:49, Carl E. Anderson wrote:

 CE> looking for more sources on Celtic Christianity and figure 
 CE> some people on
 CE> here might know something about it.  I've found a couple of 
 CE> reputable books
 CE> on the subject, but am sure there must be more.  Any help 

I have, but haven't read, _Celtic_Fire_ edited by Robert Van de Weyer, Doubleday
Books 1990, ISBN 0-385-41958-9.  From the back cover, "'_Celtic_Fire_ is a
wondrous treasure-house of tall 'true' stories of such well-known figures as
Patrick, Brigid, Brendan, Columba, Cuthbert, and many others dear to my
childhood and even dearer now.  These tales of saints and beasts are a beautiful
reminder that the animals are part of God's plan, doing heavenly work with often
more grace than granted human beings.'  -- Madeleine L'Engle"

A brief bibliography lists about 25 other works.

From: Frank.Perricone@f814.n355.z1.therose.pdx.com (Frank Perricone)
Sender: postmaster@therose.pdx.com
From: heimberg@pacific.mitre.org (Jeff Heimberger)
Subject: Re: Who cares
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 11:36:18 GMT

In article <12417@inews.intel.com> pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey) writes:
>In article <1992Jul22.122642.13162@linus.mitre.org> 
>heimberg@pacific.mitre.org (Jeff Heimberger) writes:
>>Abortion is an issue that doesn't happen to concern me -- does that make
>>me bad?
>
>Well, see what happens is that issue may not directly concern you, but if
>someone gets away with something, they'll be coming for you next, see what
>I'm saying.  You know for some reason this reminds me of some history. Back
>in WWII, somebody got the idea of eliminating the Jewish race. Now most
>of these factories for meeting this goal where in Poland. I'm not blaming
>Poles, but there were far too many who took a job where maybe they shouldn't
>have. You see what some people didn't realize was that when the problem of
>the Jews and Gypsies and homosexuals and communists was taken care of, the
>Slavic people were to be next.

I have to admit it's a bit of an intellectual leap for my poor mind to
go from the abortion issue to the Holocaust, but I'll grant it.

>A crime against the individual is a crime
>against us all. Just something to think about, that's all.

I have been thinking about it.  My point is that my concerns are
different from the concerns of other people.  The fact that I do not
share their concerns in no way prevents them from fighting the good
fight.

Regards,

Jeff H...
From: cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Subject: Re: Firewalk
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 31 Jul 92 01:21:46 GMT

In article <2180@tymix.Tymnet.COM> jschmidt@oolong.Tymnet.COM (John Schmidt) writes:
>Tim, and everyone:
>
>Knowing intellectually that I won't get burned as long as I keep walking, and
>actually stepping into a pit of coals and walking for more than it takes to
>step out of it are very different things.  

I'm sure they are; any physicist's plams will stil sweat if s/he were to
go coal-walking.

You people (not necessarily John) are acting like scientists go home and
bust our asses dissecting your experiences just so we can show you up
and make you look like fools by waving a sheet of paper full of
equations in your face and yelling, "Nyaah-nyaaaaaaah!"

Sorry, but I beg to differ.  We study the hard sciences because we like
to, and because we find a very profound sense of inclusion in the
universe by doing so.  We see something unusual that at first glance
seems counterintuitive -- like coal-walking -- and instead of just
going, "Oh, isn't the mind a powerful thing *yawn*," we ask, "Gee, I
wonder what makes that happen?"

Please stop giving yourselves so much credit; we study science not to
thumb our noses at you but because we enjoy it.  I'm sure the original
poster's experience was marvelous, and I wouldn't mind duplicating it by
coal-walking (with of course some healthy trepidation).  But why the
hell are you people insisting that knowing what makes the stars shine
makes them less beautiful?  what the fuck is wrong with trying to
understand?  It sounds to me like an awful lot of people are trying to
glorify ignorance.  Coal-walking is a wonderful and empowering
experience; it is perfectly explainable at the same time.  I pity people
who can't understand this. 

>Empowering myself to overcome my
>fears would be a definite benefit of this.  

Agreed, of course! 

>Intellectually, of course, I
>agree, seems obvious.  Am I gonna go home and do it Sunday at my Barbeque?
>
>No way.

If only so many people didn't act like the intellectual understanding
wasn't an end in itself.  It is fun to know what makes things happen.
Period.

>Cheers,
>
>John

Blessings,
Janis
From: pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Overthrow "THE MAN" symbolically, was (Who cares)
Date: 29 Jul 92 17:41:22 GMT

In article <krikket.5399@meltdown.chi.il.us> 
krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us (D. 'krikket' Krick) writes:
>Whooops.  I did see the subject line stuff, and still managed to misinterprate
>your meaning.  My apologies.  I will agree, that all people do have a touch
>of "The Overlord" in them...  I'm fortunate enough to see "The Overlord"
>making appearances in my life less and less often...

Now I get it. OK so I'm a little slow on the uptake sometimes. "THE MAN" as
symbol of oppression goes way back. But in the modern world of today, that term
is really politically incorrect, isn't it? So, am I correct in assuming that
the new P/C term is "THE OVERLORD"? Shouldn't it be more like "THE OVERPERSON"
or "THE DOWNPRESSOR-PERSON"? And should I point this out to people as a form
of sexism? Ah to be politically correct, what a goal eh?
From: cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Subject: Re: Who cares
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 23 Jul 92 21:01:02 GMT

In article <1ZgDoB3w164w@ailanth.UUCP> ailsa%ailanth.uucp@wang.com (Ailsa N.T. Murphy) writes:
>
>maybe you shou8ld check your attitude then, or actually try it.  i hAVE 
>done that, had no troubloe, definitely left alive.  difference: i LIVE in 
>the slums.  i may be white, but i am still one of the family, as it were.
>
>i think all this fear of black men is just another face of racism.
>
>                                            -ailsa

Much as I hate to admit it (since I find myself doing it too), she's
right.  I've heard black guys saying that sometimes they just get a kick
out of how white people tense up around them automatically, so they play
with it a little to let off some stress.

I'VE fallen victim to this as well -- i.e. tensed up around black men or
acted like they were time bombs.  It may be the single most irritating
stupid thing I find myself doing.  But, just because I know it's dumb
doesn't mean I can just suddenly say, "Oh, I'm a liberated and nonracist
modern woman."  I STILL do it!  It's almost like a reflex.  I've been
indoctrinated in the mindset that black men are dangerous and to be
treated like nitroglycerin since I was a kid.  No noe just came up to me
and said it; I saw it on TV and saw it in the way people acted towards
one another.  I realize to some extent the problem, AND I STILL DO IT.
And every time I do, I want to kick myself afterwards.

This is why I'm mighty suspicious of men who say, "What do you mean I'm
sexist?  I've read a Mary Daly book."  Come ON.  We're talking about
undoing a LIFETIME of indoctrination.  It just ain't that easy.  From
personal experience, I can see this.  Maybe someone is going to post and
say something like, "Well, I'm sorry that you still have problems with
racism, but *I* am totally liberated and unaffected by the racist and
sexist signals of our time."

Right.  Excuse me while I collapse in laughter.  Anyone who can, in a few
years, fight off a mechanism that has been grinding away in western
"civilization" for the last thousand years is really kidding
themselves.  You can't do it.  No one can. 

Blessings,
Janis
From: AS.AAM@forsythe.stanford.edu (Astrid Mustard)
Subject: Re: Who cares
Organization: Stanford University, California, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 14:47:41 GMT

In article <2sgDoB2w164w@ailanth.UUCP>,
ailsa%ailanth.uucp@wang.com (Ailsa N.T. Murphy) writes:
>>
>no.  there IS no reasonable answer to ytour suggestion that gay rights
>activists should be working for straight rights.  if you can't see that
>by suggesting this, you are implying that gay people's problems in
>society are no worse than yours, and that this is 1) insulting and 2)
>stupid and possibly 3) bigoted, then there is really no poinbt in talking
>to you.  you ARE helping to perpetuate the problems you talk about, just
>by sounding off in this asinine way in this newsgroup.
>
>if you consider someone as moderate as janis an extermist who has no
>credibility with you, then perhaps you ought to look at whether you are
>not,k in fact, conservative.
>
>                                           -ailsa
>

One thing people seem to forget is that gays and other minorities
have to live in fear of hate crimes (like gay bashing).  Maybe where
some of you come from that's not a reality, but it is in San
Francisco.

I've noticed on this line that some people are avidly trying to
support the right of minorities fighting for their rights - swinging
the balance to the other extreme.  Others are avidly trying to
explain that the other extreme is just as bad as the original
extreme (Straight white male dominance type thing), and balance is
what is needed.   AND THEY'RE ARGUING ABOUT IT!

Changes of either kind don't happen overnight.  It's a long, painful
journey taking generations - we here today may never see the results
of our actions that promote equality & freedom for all.  Why can't
the "extremists" fight for the extremes of freedom (taking power
away from and oppressing the oppressors), and those who want things
to be balanced in the middle fight for that....  Eventually it will
even out, especially if that is where people are taking it.
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: shaman@cix.compulink.co.uk (Leo Smith)
Subject: Re: Firewalking
Reply-To: shaman@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 11:19:59 +0000

Irrsepective of theories about conduction (and coals and charcoal are
quite reasonable thremal conductors actually) or the other theory
usually toted (the sweat on the hand/foot turns to superheated steam,
and this acts as a conducting layer) I think I would challenge anyone
who cares to , to try and walk across, or even pick up momentarily,
some barbecue coals the next time they are cooking.....


My experience of fires, and my knowledge of physics, which is real -
do NOT fully explain the experience that the original poster
described.

Leaving aside all the mental shenanigins, *if it happened as
described*, then at the very least there is some physics at work that
I am not aware of.

I am sure if it had poetntial military significance it would have
been well researched: can you imagine it: People running across fires
with telemetry aerial on their heads and thermocouples glued to their
feet :-)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: heimberg@pacific.mitre.org (Jeff Heimberger)
Subject: Re: Women, men, scum, and wicca . . .
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 19:33:15 GMT

In article <70282@apple.Apple.COM> russell@Apple.COM (Russell Williams) writes:
>In article <2A6B36DE.16386@noiro.acs.uci.edu> cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
>[A lot of impassioned and well-reasoned stuff too long to quote]
>
>I have to agree with Janis: when I hear people  complaining about
>affirmative action or men complaining about women-only
>groups, etc. my reaction is: get real.

I beg to differ.  What if there was a white man's congressional caucus,
as there are for women and blacks?  What if there was a National
Association for the Advancement of White People?  What if there was a
Hetero Rights Organization?  All of these would be labeled harmful and
reactionary out-of-hand, regardless of what they actually did.

>You're just a selfish kid
>who's had all the toys and is complaining about having to share them.

I disagree.  There is more than enough to share... it seems to me,
however, that we're not talking about sharing.  It seems the various
protest organizations are interested in the pendulum swinging the other
way, rather than having it come to rest in the center.  Why?

>As for thousands of years of guilt, though, I don't accept it. I'm
>not big on guilt in the first place, and I've only had 36 years to
>accumulate it. I don't believe in "even unto the
>third and fourth (or whatever it is) generations". I'm responsible
>(a word I much prefer) for what *I* do, not for what anybody else
>does, and certainly not for what dead people did. A history of 
>thousands of years of oppression of women by men certainly affects 
>women (and men) differently than would a single lifetime's worth,
>but that doesn't add up to an interest-bearing guilt account. 
>
>Most would say that Hitler bore more guilt than the millions who
>followed him, but his existence gave others the responsibility
>to oppose him. I'm not guilty of thousands of years of male
>domination, but I have a responsibility to help change it.

I agree with you here.

Regards,

Jeff H...