HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: S7985203@deimos.ucc.umass.edu ( )
Subject: Re: "K" Names
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Amherst
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 03:09:02 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

In <1992Apr8.192414.585@cbfsb.cb.att.com> sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com writes:

> In article <1992Mar25.124303.4579@umbc3.umbc.edu> clark@umbc5.umbc.edu (Kathy Clark) writes:
> >
> >  Hi! I'm not sure if this is the correct newsgroup to use, but
> >my fiance and I have just been talking (no possibility of it happening
> >for a few more years), but we were talking about names for
> >our children some day.  My fiance's name is Kevin, and mine is
> >Kathy, so we thought it would be cute, if our children had "K" names
> >also.  We have been thinking of different names, and have looked
> >in baby name books, but I thought that you all could come up with
> >some good "K" names also.  Thanks for all of your help!
> >
> >Kathy
> >**                			  ()__()    (_)       ** 
> >**   clark@umbc5.umbc.edu       	  ( oo )   ,-'        ** 
> >**                              	 /^`\%'^\ /    	      ** 
> >**                			(/(  . )\)            ** 
> >**                  			  Q/--\Q              ** 
> >**                                                            **
> >****************************************************************
> 
> 
> How about:  Kimberly, Kaylin, Kirsten, Kristian,  Kory,  Karin,
>             Kristina.....


Here are some more:
	Kenneth, Karl, Kaitlyn, Kristi, Kayla, Kendra, Karla

If I think of more I'll let you know...

Christy
From: jive@spanky.ssc.gov (Jim Ivey)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: Some help, please.
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:25:55 GMT
Organization: SSC Laboratory, Dallas, TX


> If you love something let it go.  
> If it come back its yours for life
                      ^^^^^
> If is doesn't it never was yours to hold.
                             ^^^^^

     This saying has always given me a bad taste, because it makes someone
sound like a possession.  A person shouldn't ever be yours, or mine, or
anyone's, except their own.

     Jim
From: reykja@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Reykja Sigurdsson)
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 07:59:23 GMT
Subject: Re: do I stay or do I go?
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: soc.couples

i don't see how you can trust either of these people again. without trust, 
there is really *no* relationship. i have never found that trust can be 
recovered once it has been violated. both of these people treated you with 
total disrespect and have no right to have you in their lives. it may be 
sounding harsh but it is easier the long term to get rid of negative influences.they can only cause eventual pain. 

                                                   -rks


Newsgroups: soc.couples
Newsgroups: soc.couples

   As one woman who recently initiated a divorce, I can honestly say that I
didn't do any lying. Neither did he. The relationship had just gotten stale
and boring. Sometimes people get married for the wrong reasons and they don't
see that it won't work until it's too late. In our case, I had a need to deal
with certain issues in my own life and he gave me the opportunity to do that. 
(I don't mean that in a positive sense. I was the typical codependent.) When 
my need to re-enact all of that ended, the relationship had no more value. He
would have stayed in it forever -- as a result of lethargy more than anything. 
(Finding another mate takes effort -- and an ability to learn from the past.)
   I was tempted on many occasions to find another man. There was a desire to 
get even for the abuse he reaped on me. The only thing about that is that it 
would not have been fair to the man I found. That stopped me. 

   Most of the women I have talked with about these sorts of things make it 
very clear that if a man leaves her emotionally starving (as my ex did), she 
will find someone else to feed her in those areas. While it is far preferable
to clean up the old before starting the new, it isn't always possible --       
especially when people get wrapped up in all sorts of material pursuits and 
that becomes more important than personal happiness. 

   Women are not lying, cheating, conniving bitches. On the other hand, I 
don't think we are any longer willing to put up with garbage relationships
just to have someone. And if a man is not willing to be a positive addition
to our lives, we are more inclined to just take off. Is that progress? In 
some ways, yes, and in others not. It is certainly better to take responsibiliyt

for one's own happiness but commitment is important also.
From: jclark@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (John Clark)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: Female friends
Date: 12 Apr 92 00:26:45 GMT
Organization: University of California, San Diego

In article <1992Apr10.161557.15929@ncar.ucar.edu> ilana@kiowa.scd.ucar.edu (Ilana Stern) writes:
+In article <31479@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>, jclark@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes:
+
+[Much deleted about historic societal assumption that men owned their
+wives, which I do not argue with.  We are now talking about 'nowadays'. ]

I suppose the reason why I look to the past is that I feel that the
present is not so extraordinarily different. I have been reading
quite a bit of late about the various movements of the 19th and
noting parallels to the current era. Clearly the 'woman's question'
of the 19th is different than today, but I don't feel it is
different in kind but in degree. Like the basal stem vocabulary
which stays with an individual well into massive brain degeneration,
I feel certain attitudes of men relative to women are just as deep
and don't differ significantly from those of past ages. The 'white
racist' has been taught to not say certain things in 'polite'
company, but in private or amoung like minded individuals, the
narrow views are easily found.

Is this a projection on all men that I hold. A projection being a
personal view which is 'projected' onto others independent of cause.
I don't believe so. But when men express one view in the presence of
woman, then privately express another, and when I point out the
hypocritcal behavior, I'm looked upon with a certain amount of
distrust. Maybe in San Diego I run into such types more frequently
than in more enlightend areas, but I suspect there are vast wells of
such sentiment, only covered by a 'polite' vocabulary.

+
+I don't think that the 'ownership' orientation is exclusively male, nor
+is it exclusively found in sexual relationships.  I also don't think
+that 'mutual ownership', i.e. monogamy, is a bad thing.  Some examples:

This 'mutual ownership' is the inovation that I see in the marriage
model which began taking real form in the '20's.

+keep from feeling jealous and peeved.  I think this was an 'ownership'
+mentality (not a good one, I freely admit) coming to the fore, although
+it had nothing to do with sex.

What I was thinking of was the semiotics of sex. I.e. the symbolic
meaning of the sex act relative to relationships between humans, in
the U.S.culture, as I see it. There are other forms of 'posession' and
symbols of it. Is all posession bad? In your example, what I would
call the 'enlightend' posession of the modern marriage, posession is
not a bad thing. The problem arrises when the mutual posession becomes
asymetric. There is no silver bullet here, I have no answer to
the burning question of how to 'end' a state of poseson, previously
mutual, but now unilateral.
-- 

John Clark
jclark@ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: soc.couples
From: s_ritz@oz.plymouth.edu (Scott A. Ritz)
Subject: Help!
Reply-To: s_ritz@oz.plymouth.edu (Scott A. Ritz)
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 92 15:42:29 GMT

    Hi I'm kind of new to this newsgroup, but I would sure like mail
from any person in my situation. I am a junior at Plymouth State
College in New Hampshire. I have been going out with a girl at a
college in Upstate New York for almost three years. We met at a summer
camp in New Hampshire and we have both enjoyed our summers together
and have been very much in love. To this day I still love her very much.
    Well my girlfriend decided to pledge to a sorority this spring
semester at her school. At first I was opposed because I feared
loosing her love and affection. I then gave in because I figured that
if it makes her happy, it makes me happy. It turns out that slowly
over the past two months she has been loosing interest in me. She
claims that she is too busy to care about me, and her friends are more
important than me. I am sure this is a product of her sorority or
something like that.
    I feel realy hurt and bitter at her. I still love her, but it is
taring me apart day by day. I still talk to her on the phone and
everything, but she acts as if I don't exist. Her grades have severely
dropped and her personality is completely changed. Please, if anyone
has any advice or has been in the same situation I would appreciate
some advice on what to do. I realy don't think I could take it much longer.

Scott Ritz
Plymouth State College
Plymouth, N.H.
s_ritz@oz.plymouth.edu
From: jwalsh@aspentec.com (Jamie Walsh)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: CFV: soc.penpals
Date: 10 Apr 92 16:50:37 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: Aspen Technology, Inc. Cambridge, MA.

In article <1992Apr9.030227.7795@nic.umass.edu>, S7985203@deimos.ucc.umass.edu ( ) writes:
> Name of Newsgroup:  SOC.PENPALS
> 
> Status:  UNMODERATED
> 
> Charter:  This newsgroup is to make it possible for people on the net to 
> 	make friends and penpals.  This will also give people a chance to have 
> 	correspondents in other places of the world, which is helpful for 
> 	travel and tourism.  Included will be postings of information about 
> 	people interested in becoming a penpal and also general 
> 	information/questions about certain geographical locations are also 
> 	accepted.     

This should easily be handled by a mailing list, since it's purpose is
to generate email anyway.  If the mailing list became too large to
handle, then it might indicate a need for a newsgroup.  Set up a mailing
list and post a monthly announcement of its existence to relevant groups.

As far as travel and tourism, there is a long standing newsgroup, rec.travel.
The various soc.culture.[country] groups also tend to carry travel 
information quite frequently.  So travel info is not a valid co-reason
for this group.

I noticed in the header that this call for votes was only posted to
soc.couples.  I can't imagine why only people interested in discussions
about long-term committed couples might be selected for this vote.
Soc.singles and alt.romance have more people looking for people
to write to, and news.groups really ought to be included at the very least.  

Are we skipping the customary 30 day discussion period before a call for
votes, or was the discussion carried in one group and the CFV sent to
another?

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

Internet:	jwalsh@aspentec.com
UUCP:	        uunet!aspentec!jwalsh
Newsgroups: soc.couples
From: LYNNE@nuacc.acns.nwu.edu (Lynne D Jeffers)
Subject: Ready for marriage?
Organization: Northwestern University
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 17:20:52 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.21

I am 33 years old with a four year-old son from a previous marriage.  My 24
year-old SO and I have been together for two and a half years, living together
for the past seven months or so.  

Fourteen months ago my SO asked me to marry him.  I said yes.  We've been on
hold since then.  He had said that before he mentioned marriage to his parents,
he wanted them to get used to me and the situation in general (me being older,
divorced and with a child).  I figured, "No problem."  

But now I'm starting to get frustrated.  He'll occasionally ask me, "So, you
want to get married, huh?"  To which I reply, "Yes."  But if I ask him when he
wants to get married, he tells me he's not ready.  "Eventually" he'll marry me,
he says.

My question to you is, What is "ready?"  

We've discussed future plans, building a house together (we currently live in
my house), and how *we* are going to afford sending my son to Montessori
school.  We've talked about how we don't ever want to live without each other,
having children together, and IRAs for our golden years.  We've seen each other
at our best and worst, and still want to stay together.  

We have maintained separate finances.  The house and all utilities are in my
name. We each have our own checking & savings accounts.  Everything will be
converted to joint accounts when we're married (we've even discussed that).

My view is that we take advantage of many of the benefits of marriage without
being formally married.  I don't know whether he's got those proverbial cold
feet or is just afraid of making a commitment that he can't easily back out of. 
He always talks about making sure there's a back door out of a situation before
he makes a decision about anything.

Please help me out.  How did you know you were ready to get married?

Thanks,
Lynne

===============================================================================
Lynne D Jeffers        ldj@nwu.edu        Academic Computing & Network Services
Northwestern University       Evanston, Illinois 60208-2850       (708)491-4092

"What can I say, I don't want to play anymore. I'm heading for the door.  
 I can't stand this emotional violence. Leave in silence."  -Depeche Mode
From: mkoblas@sun422.nas.nasa.gov (Michelle R. Koblas)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: anti-SO?
Date: 16 Apr 92 17:37:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: nas.1992Apr16.173711.29360
Reply-To: mkoblas@nas.nasa.gov (Michelle R. Koblas)
Followup-To: soc.couples
Organization: NASA-Ames Research Center

Hey, Brian -- I thought you were into doing away with "SO"!!  What's
all this in your posting????

In article <1992Apr15.231448.24806@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> Brian.C.Kohn@att.com (The Resource, Poet-Magician of Quality) writes:

[Majority of response deleted... ]
>of us or maybe it's both of us that are not ready.  The point is not
>only can't you look for an answer to your question from people who are
>not your SO, your SO himself may not know the answer!  
          ^^       ^^
>-- 
>Brian Charles Kohn             AT&T Bell Laboratories Quality Process Center
>ISO Certified Lead Assessor    E-MAIL: att!hoqax!bicker  (bicker@hoqax.ATT.COM)
>    'Hope, not fear, is the most positive advocate of action.' - S.R. Lawhead
>                   Stamp Out "SO": "RP" = "Romantic Partner"
                    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Michelle  ;-)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Michelle R. Koblas                      Internet: mkoblas@nas.nasa.gov
"The old theory was, marry an older man, they're more mature.  The new
theory is, men don't mature, marry a young one."   -- Unknown comedian
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: Older men and younger women (advice needed)
Date: 14 Apr 92 17:44:56 GMT
	<1992Apr9.135930.9530@cbnewsc.cb.att.com>
Followup-To: soc.couples
Distribution: usa
Organization: /theta/theta5/unc/martinc/.organization
In-reply-to: kapa@cbnewsc.cb.att.com's message of 9 Apr 92 13:59:30 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.135930.9530@cbnewsc.cb.att.com> kapa@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (k.a.perkins) writes:

   In article <1992Apr8.214737.2635@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>, jlacey@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (james.w.lacey) writes:
   > 
   > Esquire magazine recently had some articles on this topic
	   < older man, younger woman >
   > somewhat "light" but interesting none the less. One rule of
   > thumb for a couple's ages that an article mentioned was that
   > the woman should be half the man's age plus seven.  Using this
   > rule (which should be taken tounge-in-cheek), you were about
   > a year too young for these men.
   > 
   But how can this be?  When the man is 22, the woman should be 18.
   When he is 24, she should be 19.  How can she only age 1 year for
   his 2?  I am baffled once again by the wisdom of Esquire. Or perhaps
   E doesn't allow for relationships continuing?

I think that's supposed to be a lower bound.  Don't take up with a woman
whose age is less than (your age / 2) + 7.  Thm: Given that age(w) >
(age(m)/2) + 7, at time t, we can conclude that at any t' > t the same
relationship holds.  At least in their ages.  Prf: Oh, never mind.

Don't mind me, I'm just writing a dissertation.
--
Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu/(ne crm@cs.duke.edu) 
O/Department of Computer Science/Sitterson Hall/UNC/Chapel Hill, NC 27599
H/3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
The universe is full of magical things patiently waiting for our wits to
grow sharper.  -- Eden Phillpot, I'm told.  Anyone have a better reference?
Newsgroups: soc.couples
From: Ben Fulton <fulton@copper.ucs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: Older men and younger women (advice needed)
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 10:35:00 -0500

In <1992Apr9.135930.9530@cbnewsc.cb.att.com> kapa@cbnewsc.cb.att.com (k.a.perkins) writes:


>> somewhat "light" but interesting none the less. One rule of
>> thumb for a couple's ages that an article mentioned was that
>> the woman should be half the man's age plus seven.  Using this
>> 
>But how can this be?  When the man is 22, the woman should be 18.
>When he is 24, she should be 19.  How can she only age 1 year for
>his 2?  I am baffled once again by the wisdom of Esquire. Or perhaps
>E doesn't allow for relationships continuing?

When the woman gets too old, you dump her for a younger woman.  I thought
that was obvious.

:-)

ben
fulton@copper.ucs.indiana.edu
right here, right now
there is no other place I'd rather be!

Newsgroups: soc.couples
From: cloister@milton.u.washington.edu (cloister bell)
Subject: Re: Some help, please.
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 17:58:05 GMT

willey@ravel.udel.edu (Edward V Willey) writes:

["boy meets girl, boy loses girl, boy gets girl back, then loses her, then gets
 her back again, but now she wants to lose him" story deleted]

>   I really have no idea what to do.  I want to show her that we're
>right for each other, but there's so much tenseness around that I'm not
>sure if I'll be able to do that.  I dread that idea of us breaking up,
>and dread the idea of her seeing that same guy again.   Is there a way
>to convince someone that you're right for each other?  And if so, is
>that a good thing to do?

if she doesn't think you're right for eachother, then you're not right for
eachother.  it *has* to be mutual, by definition.  you can't 'convince' her
that you're right for her if you're not, because it's not true.  that is
something that only she can decide.  if you were to persuade her that you are
right for her when you're not, you would be living a lie which would eventually
fall apart.  why waste the time?  if she is right for you, she will eventually
decide that and all will be well.  hang tight and let her make up her mind
without interference.
-- 
+-------------------------------------------------+---------------------------+
|tactical nuclear sdi stealth nsafood signature.  | cloister@u.washington.edu |
+-------------------------------------------------+---------------------------+
Newsgroups: soc.couples
From: ronni@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Taisia)
Subject: Re: Younger/older/different
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 23:44:49 GMT

In <CVCLRGG@ais.org> nal@ais.org (Nancy Leinonen) writes:

>I have never understood the big deal about age differences.  My husband is 7 years younger than I and we are just fine.  In fact, we always joke about the face
>that he is far more serious than I am, and the fact that a lot of people 
>take him for being older than I am.

>Oh well... I don' tknow.  I've never been into conventionalities.


Well for starters I have found that I tend to be drawn to people at least
6-11 years younger than me.  Most of my peers are into things I am
not and most of them are too caught up in today's rat race to enjoy
some of the stranger things.
 <In otherwards, they think they have grown up>
 My SO is 9 years younger than me, and we've been involved since he was
21 years of age.  We have a very healthy sex life and enjoy most of
the same things.
 <Giggle>
From: deannab@hpmwtd.HP.COM (Deanna Bergstrom)
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 23:10:36 GMT
Subject: Re: testing choices...was Re: Sanctity of relationships
Organization: HP Santa Rosa Site (NMD MTA MWTD). - Santa Rosa, Ca.
Newsgroups: soc.couples

>  You can not make anyone do anything.
----------

This statement is the key to the original question.  We are talking
about PEOPLE, here, ADULTS, who have the right and ability to make
up their own minds about who they want to spend time with...whether
in a dating relationship or a marriage.  That's PEOPLE, not PROPERTY.

I've been on the "receiving" end of an ending relationship, complete
with suicidal thoughts (briefly) and broken hearts, more than once.
The one time he left me for someone else, it was STILL his choice.
Our relationship had problems and he decided to leave rather than
work them out...but it was HIS CHOICE; he wasn't "stolen away", like
a car or the family silver.  "She" couldn't MAKE him choose her over
me...HE made the decision, however poor a decision I may have thought
it was.  If a man I were involved with were so unable to control his
own choices that someone else could "MAKE" him leave, I think I would
have long since decided that I would be better off without him.

Just as you cannot MAKE someone love you, someone else can't MAKE someone
STOP LOVING YOU.

Slavery was outlawed in this country a very long time ago.  
PEOPLE ARE NOT PROPERTY!!


--deanna
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Date: 17 Apr 92 20:24:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbfsb.1992Apr17.202444.10386
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Apr17.162330.12055@cs.tulane.edu> jordan@cs.tulane.edu (Misti Jordan) writes:
>
**some stuff deleted**

>I don't see how it could be tippy in the first place. I'm not saying
>that one should go around screwing everyone they can just so you'll
>have something to compare your spouse to, but I , for one, know from
>experience that quite often you don't realize that there is something
>wrong with your relationship until someone else shows you otherwise.
>
>Misti

This is a very good point.  It happens quite often (not only in
relationships) where one is so accustomed to thinking or seeing
things one certain way, that they are not aware there are other
options.  And sometimes it does take someone else to show you
another way.

					Steve
					
all misty eyes from misti's post.
Newsgroups: soc.couples
From: uk09365@nx03.mik.uky.edu (robert i kesten)
Subject: Re: What is SO?
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 14:36:29 GMT
X-Bytes: 

In article <4APR199209591504@vxcrna.cern.ch> veitch@vxcrna.cern.ch (Liz  
Veitch) writes:
> Punch (for those of you living abroad  - it's a satirical magazine )   
once 
> coined a lovely "PC" term : live-in-friend-person !     It started as a 
> joke, and almost caught on in some circles!
> 
> 
> Liz

[note:  Punch is no more as of this month]

How about:  POSSLQ:  Persons of Opposite Sex Sharing Living Quarters
(I guess it could also be read as:  Persons Of Same-Sex Sharing Living  
Quarters...)

RIK
Newsgroups: soc.couples