HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Re: Feminists ignore Cosmetics?....Why don't you guys get a JOB?
From: rivero@mdcbbs.com
Date: 9 Sep 92 10:21:16 GMT
Organization: Electronic Data Systems, Unigraphics Division, Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: rivero

In article <73740011@hpsad.sad.hp.com>, sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen) writes:
> In soc.women, sklautky@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu (Stephen Klautky) writes:
> 
>    >So, I have a question for you feminist or feminist-leaning
>    >women.  Are you bothered that a man appreciates the look of a
>    >woman in makeup better than without makeup?
> 
> I doubt if anyone would label me a feminist but here is my 2 cents anyway.
> I am bothered by men who want their wives/lovers to refrain from makeup so
> they will be less attractive to others;

  This is a two-way street. There are many women who, once married, will
"fatten up" their husbands with high calorie meals in order to make him
less attractive to the sectretarial pool. Neither the high calorie meal nor the
face paint are not necessarily good things.


> I wear the amount of makeup
> that *I* like unless I feel like impressing a particular person 

  Aren't you impressive without makeup?

> If a man actually prefers the
> tammy look, he would be better off with someone else, but it does not bother
> me in the least. 

  Personally, I prefer the rugged outdoor look.


> If he has told me he prefers no makeup and then sees me
> without, he can modify his previous statement if necessary - no problem -
> how can he know until he sees me many ways?
-- 

  We know if we prefer real human beings to painted objects.


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero rivero@mdcbbs.com  Middle-Aged Mutant Ninja Animator   |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|                    When 911 won't work,  .357 will!                    |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Statistical "proofs" (Was Re: women in engineering ( help..))
Date: 15 Sep 92 13:17:43 GMT
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA


 In article <1992Sep14.022506.9937@uoft02.utoledo.edu> dweddin@uoft02.utoledo.edu writes:
 | the point is, there are few women in engineering NOT because we sit around
 | and plot and scheme to keep women out...far from it!!! i would love it if
 | there were more women engineers...you ever work 8+ hours a day surrounded by
 | a bunch of smelly guys?!?! jeez, a little change in scenery would be
 | nice once in a while.

Yes, I have worked 8+ hours under those conditions.  Add to that the foul
language, propositions, etc.  If I had a daughter (I have 2 sons), I doubt
if I would encourage her to follow in my footsteps as a female engineer.
Xref: sparky soc.women:16239 alt.feminism:704
From: 9125113g@lux.latrobe.edu.au (Mitch Davis)
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Feminists ignore Cosmetics?
Date: 7 Sep 92 02:50:10 GMT
 <1992Sep4.045535.3618@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> <1992Sep6.184403.21554@morrow.stanford.edu>
Organization: La Trobe University

In article <1992Sep6.184403.21554@morrow.stanford.edu> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>In article <1992Sep4.045535.3618@lugb.latrobe.edu.au> 9125113g@lux.latrobe.edu.au (Mitch Davis) writes:
>>What really amuses me is the thought that you women (rash generalization, 
>>I know!) need a BOOK (Naomi Whatever) to tell you you don't need to look 
>>like the cover of Cosmopolitan to be loved and to be lovable.
>
>While I agree in spirit with what you've written, the point needs to
>be made that many (most?) women do feel compelled to look like the
>cover of Cosmo to be attractive.  It's not amusing in that sense, it's
>sad and painful.

It's more than that, it's a tragedy.

Here's an idea:

Let's say you have a factory.  Half your machines are running at 90%
efficiency, and the other half at 10% efficiency.  Now, if you want to
make your factory better, there is very little point in trying to wring
the last 10% out of the first set of machines - with the same amount of
effort, you could make the second set of machines 90% efficient as well.

And so it is with us.  I percieve women as the "great untapped
resource".  If only our society would listen to what women had to
offer, and be prepared to accept what women have to give, our society
would be fantastically richer.

This is not about power.  This is about common sense.

>thought was wonderfully sexy, compliment her, and had her say, "Oh,
>no!  My thighs are too big, my breasts are too small, etc."?

I cringe.  A big turn-off.

>>(Who believes that the "empowering of women" is an act of revenge, and
>>would simply be the same as what women get now, with-the-words-"men"
>>crossed-out-and-the-word-"Women"-written-on-with-crayon.  Let's ditch
>>the "empowerment", and have a bit of rational equality.)
>
>I don't understand this at all.

I see the militant-style feminists.  I get the feeling that all they
want to do is toss out all the men in positions of power, and install
women instead.  Is that the way to go?  I think not.  I think men have a
lot to learn from women, and that like a family, the responsibility
within society should be shared between women and men, as they are able.

Mitch.
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.sex.wizards
From: ggurman@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Gail Gurman)
Subject: Re: How to relieve menstural cramp
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 16:13:40 GMT

In article <zukor.716251122@blacks> zukor@blacks.jpl.nasa.gov (Karen Zukor) writes:
>         I have heard those suggestions about exercise and eliminating  
>         caffeine, and I know they help some women, but they
>         do nothing for me.  What kind of pain killers do you take?
>         Ibruprofen in large quantities (800 mg) is my answer.

Mine too.  Though I should add that when I was on the pill my cramps 
decreased significantly. Also, I have a problem with predictability and
the pill solved that too.

Gail
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 14:44:03 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: how to tell a good programmer
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA
Newsgroups: soc.women

In soc.women, bright@nazgul.UUCP (Walter Bright) writes:

>I've both interviewed for and been interviewed for programming positions. The
>number one way to tell if a programmer is any good is to ask them to bring in
>a sample of their best work (presumably a source listing). Then, ask them to
>walk through and explain it to you.
...
>Sadly, I am not aware of a *single* other interviewer besides me who has ever
>done this.

I am an interviewee who has brought work samples to interviews with good
results.  I do not remember ever being asked to though.
From: stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Father Notification Reconsidered
Date: 9 Sep 92 15:03:18 GMT
Followup-To: soc.women,soc.men
Organization: Murasami Labs

In article <1992Sep09.015619.1497@microsoft.com>, jenk@microsoft.com (Jen
Kilmer) wrote:
> 

> This is where pre-nuptial agreements come in and should be enforced.

[interesting prenup covering pregnancy removed]

> What I don't like is that courts do not always enforce such agreements
> and that it's not REQUIRED that pre-nuptials be done. They should be.

As it stands, without some change in the basic law, they would *never*
enforce such an agreement as you proposed. 

> Don, I don't think we should allow it - we should REQUIRE it.

Well, as other people have put it to me when I said I would require a
prenup,
this is what some/many/most women would say: don't you love me and trust
me?

Of course, if you *require* it, it gets me off that hook... :)

I'd like some feedback from women on this - would do you think of
prenuptials?
What do your non-net women friends think of this?

K'Char
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 14:17:31 GMT
Subject: Re: Remote (Taxpayer) Wallets
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA
Newsgroups: soc.women

In soc.women, jsw@cray.com (Jon S. Wood) writes:

   >Give me one example Woody, where modification of previous court findings
   >occurred in family court? Do you know of any? 

Woody may not supply you with an example but I can.  My ex took me back to
court.  He had originally agreed to pay the children's medical bills but
decided he only wanted to pay half.  The court agreed to that eventhough
his income was more than twice mine (I'm a peon engineer, he is a manager).
The child support got slightly lowered at the same time.
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men
From: ilana@kiowa.scd.ucar.edu (Ilana Stern)
Subject: Re: Fun with probabilities
Organization: NCAR/UCAR
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 20:16:13 GMT

In article <1992Sep11.092542.1@mdcbbs.com>, rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
> > In article <715965054@lear.cs.duke.edu> gazit@cs.duke.edu (Hillel) writes:
> > /Consumers Report claimed that condoms are 85% effective.  In other words,
> > /over one year of using condoms, there is 15% probability for an unwanted
> > /pregnancy.  
> 
>   Last night I was one of several speakers at a local men's forum, and 
> another speaker made the statement that condoms break during use 17%
> of the time. This seems like a very high failure rate. Anyone have some
> accurate references please?

According to the Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains Fact Book,
"10 out of 100 couples will get pregnant using condoms in a year.  When
a woman uses vaginal birth control (foam) with a condom, the chances
of not getting pregnant are much better."

It's possible that the physical failure rate (breakage) > the functional
failure rate (breakage leading pregnancy) because of foam usage, sex 
when the woman is not in a fertile stage, etc.

-- 
/\                Ilana Stern DoD#009  ilana@ncar.ucar.edu 
  \_][ <--NCAR       Colorado...is totally rectangular.
      \_Boulder______________________________________________________Kansas__
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:40:00 GMT
Subject: Re: Is sexual freedom a good thing? (Was Re: Right To Not Support)
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA
Newsgroups: soc.women

In soc.women, chpetk@gdr.bath.ac.uk (Toby Kelsey) writes:

>   But having parents to care for it and spend time with it is
>   far more important for a child's upbringing and mental
>   health that having an extra source of income.  Therefore
>   logically there should be far greater penalties for
>   preventing access to the parents (including not telling
>   them about the child) than for failing to pay child support.

The courts do enforce visitation and sometimes even move the children
to the other parent if the current one does not honor those rights.
It may not happen enough.

Having someone around to spend time with a child can well depend on
that extra income -- a single parent who has to work 2-3 jobs to make
ends meet does not have that kind of time.

>   If you think fathers have rights in respect of their children,
>   then the right to know they exist must be one of the most basic.

Unfortunately, there are mothers out there who really do not know who
the father of their child is.  Men who want to raise their children
will need to stay away from that type of woman -- laws can't help there.
When the father is know (or even can be narrowed down to a few), I would
agree that pregnancy should be grounds for notification as is any other
sexually transmitted state.
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men
From: noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer)
Subject: Re: 3 year old burn victim goes home
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 12:42:49 GMT

In article <1992Sep10.054627.25349@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>In article <1992Sep9.141250.1@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
>>
>>  Little Sammy, the 3 year old who was kidnapped, locked in a car, and 
>>then set on fire by his mother's lesbian lover, was released from the 
>>hospital today.  Sammy had suffered third degree burns over
>>60% of his body, including being burned clear to the bone in many places,
>>including his right arm, which was covered during Sammy's TV appearence
>>today. Doctors had originally given him only a 1 in 10 chance to survive
>>at all and were pleased that he was able to go home, although he will
>>require extensive physical therepy for many years to come, and will not
>>recover the full use of his body.
>
>>|   Cal me silly, call me barbaric, call me irresponsible, but it occurs |
>>|  to me that torching a small child justifies the death penelty in the  |
>>|  slowest and most painful manner allowed by law.                       |
>
>I don't know about the death penalty but I agree that someone who
>would do this to anyone, particularly a child, deserves to be locked
>up for a very long time.
>
>The man who did the same thing to his son served something like 6
>years and is now out of prison.  I think the law (in California) has
>changed since then and the penalty for something like this is much
>harsher (as it should be, imo).  Six years and his son will serve a
>lifetime of pain and disfigurement.

(Lancaster) - Edna Engle, 46, was sentenced to 33 years in fail for the
murder of her son, 4.  The child dies by scalding.

####End of article

Source: USA Today, September 10, 1992

Apparently the judge, in sentencing Edna Engle to 33 years, figured out
some way to stipulate that she do most of that time in prison.
According to the Radio show I listened to this morning, she won't be
eligible for parole for 28 years.

The strange part about her son's murder was that the boy lived for some
time after the scalding and the mother tried to pass the burns off as
some rare skin disease. 

Aaron L. Hoffmeyer
TR@CBNEA.ATT.COM 
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.sex.wizards
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Subject: Re: How to relieve menstural cramp
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 20:59:32 GMT

synth@deepthought.unm.edu (Synth F. Oberheim) writes:


>I have heard that concentrated doses of ibuprofen over extended periods
>of time can potentially lead to health problems; I can't remember for
>sure, but it might have been liver damage that was in question.  I
>suggest anyone wanting to use ibuprofen in large dosages consult a
>pharmacist or doctor first ...

I'd like to second this -- my doctor warned that it could contribute
to kidney damage.
From: reykja@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Reykja Sigurdsson)
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 1992 09:20:45 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: Italian Mothers (Re: Adults, Children and sex)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: soc.women

> 
> Clearly the perspective of someone who'se never suffered from ethnic 
> stereotyping.  The glories of being naive...
> -- 
> Thanks, John Kolassa, kolassa@bio1.bst.rochester.edu

       I can't see where looking at the possibility that a cultural 
standard existed at some time in history is ethnic stereotyping! That
is just bloody hypersensitive. 

       God-bloody-damn! Here come the PC police! 

       In my own ethnic group, there was a time in history when babies
who were not perfect were left out in the wilds to starve. 

       Russians used swaddling of babies -- certainly cruel by today's 
standards. 

       Examining all these customs is perfectly natural! How are we
supposed to learn anything otherwise???

       Just my two-bits worth -- but, then, maybe it is not worth 
even that. We all know that Icelanders are drunk all the time. 

       Lighten up!!

-reykja
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: .
Date: 4 Sep 92 22:15:34 GMT
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA

Here are some unwritten rules for dating that I have come across.  
None are absolute for each individual, of course, but enough people follow
an approximation of them that the eligible mate list shrinks.
What have I missed?

1. woman's age  <  man's age  <  (woman's age * 2)
2. woman's height  <  (man's height - 3")
3. woman's income  <  man's income  >  her (father or ex-husband's) income
4. woman's (religion, race)  ==  man's r+r
5. woman's IQ  <  man's IQ
6. woman's handicaps == man's handicaps 
      (i.e healthy don't date cripples)
7. woman's education  <  man's education  >  her (father or ex's) education
8. woman's % overweight  <  man's % overweight
9. man's score  <  woman's score (Bo=10)  >  man's score-3   
     (i.e. woman is at least as attractive but not overly so, MissAmerica is
      not supposed to go out with total dogs)
10. woman's athletic ability  <  man's
11. woman's social standing  <=  man's
12. woman's independence level  <=  man's
      (a woman who is competant on her own doesn't make him feel needed?)
13. woman's handyman level  <  man's 
      (i.e. if he can't handle a drill, they have to hire someone, 
            if he's a whiz then she can be familiar with it)
14. sex of partner #1  <>  sex of partner #2


I.E. A man of age 50 and IQ 125 and income $50,000  can date an woman age
     25-45, IQ 70-124 and income $0-$45,00
but  a woman with the same criteria is eligible to date men who are 50-100
     with IQ>125 and incomes >$50,000
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men
From: bevans@carina.unm.edu (Mathemagician)
Subject: Re: Another right to not
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 10:12:58 GMT
Organization: Society for the Preservation of E. coli

In article <1992Sep4.095907.1@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
>  I have seen the lab tests which show just how human a foetus really is. 
>Certainly it can feel and respond to pain. Women who undergo a saline 
>abortion can feel the foetus struggling and convulsing as it dies.

Didn't we already go through the rigamorale that claimed an
non-myelinated nervous system is not a good measure of whether or not
an organism feels pain?

>Having actually bothered to check the scientific evidence myself, I am
>forced to remind my ex that she is NOT God, NOT a doctor (hell she didn't
>even finish high school) and that therefore her point of view is merely
>an opinion, and an uneducated one at that.

First, you're going to have to prove to me that god exists before you
can claim that a certain person isn't god.  The fact that she isn't a
doctor and didn't finish high school isn't necessarily an indication
that she doesn't know the biological status of a fetus.

A fetus is, essentially, a parasite capable of killing its host.  If
we can get rid of a tape worm with no second thoughts, why not a
fetus?  Sound barbaric?  Well, in a word, yes.  Now, I can see fingers
busily typing away about slippery slope arguments.  I'm going to say
that these comments here are very narrow in scope.  Ending the life of
somebody already born is not the same as ending the life of a fetus.

>  What bothers me about this debate is that, in California, a woman can
>divorce a man on the grounds of not being able to father a child. In
>my divorce, my ex-wife's abortion was not considered relevent.

This, however, I will definitely agree as something that needs to be
-- 
Brian Evans                |     "Bad mood, bad mood...Sure I'm in a bad mood!
bevans@carina.unm.edu      |      I haven't had sex...*EVER!*" -- Virgin Mary
From: desj@ccr-p.ida.org (David desJardins)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: WOMEN ARE NOT PAYED LESS THAN MEN
Date: 15 Sep 92 20:42:37 GMT
Organization: IDA Center for Communications Research, Princeton

Mathemagician <bevans@carina.unm.edu> writes:
>>"When we talk...7% of communication is conveyed by meaning of words, 38% from
>>intonation, 55%...takes the form of visual cues." John Walsh, Compression Labs

>While I don't doubt that your source said this, he is incorrect.  Most
>studies on non-verbal communication state that in casual conversation,
>it is about 65% non-verbal, 35% verbal.

Does this mean anything at all, or is it just more pseudo-mathematics?
How can you measure the quantity of information conveyed, and especially
how can you do so so accurately as to say that 45% is *wrong* because
the *correct* figure is 35% ???

                                        David desJardins
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men,alt.abortion.inequity,talk.abortion
From: bevans@carina.unm.edu (Mathemagician)
Subject: Re: Missed Opportunity....
Date: Sat, 05 Sep 92 10:24:03 GMT
Organization: Society for the Preservation of E. coli

In article <1992Sep4.235739.7656@col.hp.com> mikel@col.hp.com (Mike Lopke) writes:
>drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
>> ps: small clue - things that are not yet are not yet.
>> their potential to become something is there, but they
>> are not yet that which they might become. Thus the loss
>> of that which is not yet is NOT the loss of the 'thing_in_itself'
>> but the loss of the 'thing_in_its_potential_to_become.'

>small clue - Derisive sarcasm of anothers's pain and loss is not appropriate.

Big clue:  drieux wasn't using derisive sarcasm.

>eg: Stop crying you stupid lady.  It was born dead.  You think its a what?
>Baaaaaaa Haaaaaa  Haaaaa ho ho hee hee  

That isn't even close to what drieux was talking about.  He certainly
understands their loss.  However, he recognises that a person who
wants a baby and has a miscarriage has imbued the fetus with all sorts
of characteristics not necessarily held by a person having an
abortion.  I fully agree that nobody truly "wants" to have an
abortion, but I will posit that a person who wants that child doesn't
feel the same way as a person who doesn't want that child...the
"potential" has been imbued to the fetus.

Analogy that may be a bit weak but at leasts points in the right
direction:

When I audition for a part, I see myself in that part.  I see myself
doing the role.

What happens when I don't get it?  I'm usually in some poor state of
mind which includes anger, jealousy, sadness, insecurity, and paranoid
delusions all at the same time.  But the thing is, I'm pissed because
my expectations haven't been realised.  I didn't have the role to
begin with.  I have set myself up for a certain reward and it didn't
come.  Naturally that means that I am going to be in a foul mood of
some sort, but that doesn't change the fact that an expectation is not
the same thing as the real thing.

Yes, a person who has a miscarriage is going to feel distraught over
losing the child.  However, they haven't lost a "child" in a biological
sense.  They've lost their expectations they imbued upon something
that truly existed...a fetus *will*become* a child, but it isn't
already one.

Again, this isn't sarcasm or derision.  It's merely recognising the
obvious.  I have had friends who have had miscarriages and I truly did
feel bad because that child isn't here.  I do not feel silly because
of my feelings.  However, I recognise that my feelings are due to my
expectations of what was to be, not of what actually existed.

-- 
Brian Evans                |     "Bad mood, bad mood...Sure I'm in a bad mood!
bevans@carina.unm.edu      |      I haven't had sex...*EVER!*" -- Virgin Mary
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:50:22 GMT
Subject: Re: Father Notification Reconsidered
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA