HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: what is attractive ?
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 07:41:57 GMT

In article <9008@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>In article <ewright.727736220@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>
>>feet to make them appear smaller and more attractive.  In the United 
>>States, just 20 years ago, it was generally accepted that women should
>>be soft, rather than the "hard bodies" popular today.  Muscles on women
>>were considered unattractive.
>
>I've always thought that the best example of this was the whole tanning
>phenomenon... until relatively recently, women in Western societies attempted
>to appear as pale as possible (and did things like take milk baths to try
>to lighten their skins).  

I think the common theme of all historical standards of beauty has been 
to look as rich as possible--back when many people worked outdoors and
pale skin was a sign of a life of luxury and ease, pale skin was in; when
life for the poor was much more active and not nearly as calorie-intensive,
corpulence was a sign of wealth and, therefore, attractiveness.

Nowadays, it's the well-to-do who have time to exercise and get even tans,
and the lean, muscular, tan body is in.

Trygve   (Similarly, height is associated with power/wealth (among males,
          anyway), so taller is considered more attractive in men; etc.)
--
Up next:  "Incredible baby born without head or body!"
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Diane)
Subject: Re: THE MEN SONG
Organization: University of Missouri
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 93 08:59:06 CST

In article <1993Jan25.195933.3027@gacvx2.gac.edu>
mkleczka@gacvx2.gac.edu writes:
 
>Here's a little song I learnt recently:
>THE MEN SONG
>Men, men, men, men,
>Men are better than women.
>Men are BIGGER! (emphasize bigger)
>Men are STONGER! (emphasize stronger)
>Men are better than women.
 
 
That was soooo sweet! Maybe *next* week you'll learn the
'Little Teapot' song! Hugs to your mommy!
Diane
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Classiest Pickup Lines
Date: 22 Jan 93 15:57:39 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1993Jan22.064326.23715@midway.uchicago.edu> ss19@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <28223@sybase.sybase.com> mysti@sierra.sybase.com (Mysti Rubert) writes:
|>[On e-suckups]
|>He hasn't claimed a false sense of
|>familiarity, he has claimed to appreciate my writing.  As a tech writer,
|>that most universally despised producer of things no one wants to read,
|>it's nice.  
|
|   As a tech writer for a _database_ company, where no one even
|wants to even _admit_ that the documents in question even exist,
|let alone read them, it's nice.  And at Sybase, it's the second
|lowest job on the food chain (the lowest, of course, being *my*
|job...)
 
You must be the systems administrator.  I think we've still got a couple
of your guys hanging around one of our systems.  They've been working here
for about a month.  I guess they just don't want to go back.

-- 
-john
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor)
Subject: Re: MWF?
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 22:43:49 GMT

In article <16B5D127B9.C558172@mizzou1.missouri.edu> C558172@mizzou1.missouri.edu writes:

>Monday, Wensday, Friday.  Depraved minds is right. B-)  Or was that a joke?
>--Shannon

Shannon, please!  Depraved minds are no joke.  They must be gently and
carefully nurtured.
From: stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Honesty, Your word, and Trust -- a crisis?
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:32:30 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond) writes:

>dfuller@portal.hq.videocart.com (Dave Fuller) writes:
>   The problem with the other "white lies" (i'll be at the party) is a 
>   multiple problem i think. This is done because people hate conflict.
>   Why say "no" and have to explain why ? You can just say "yes", avoid it,
>   then get excused for it later. The conflict avoidance brings on more than
>   just your typical lies however. How often does somebody make you angry
>   (even in the most minor sense) ? What do you do ? Do you tell them on the
>   spot to stop, or go and tell somebody else how mad the person made you.
>   All too often, alot of people know what is bothering somebody. It seems that
>   everybody EXCEPT the person CREATING the problem is aware that it exists.

>Yup.  Yet another breakdown in communication.  We are unwilling to
>confront each other on even the smallest issues.  So the issues
>aggregate, and snowball until they become a major issue.  The kind
>that cause relationships to fail.  Even the kind that causes wars.

I'm really annoyed at the self-righteous tone of this thread.

Hm... do you think that if I had decided not to post that, it might cause 
a war someday? 

Stef
stef@apple.com
--
There is a great difference between not wishing to do evil 
and not knowing how. --Seneca
From: weaver@jetsun.weitek.COM (Michael Gordon Weaver)
Subject: Re: Audrey Hepburn (was: *How* did you meet your SO)
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 93 01:42:27 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.174105.8427@netcom.com> cocoa@netcom.com writes:
>I studied "Shall We Dance" in film class in college, but was much less impressed
>with it than other musicals.  Astair and Rogers are portrayed in such a 
>"formula" that it distracts me too much.  I've never seen "Roberta".  Is it
>less formulaic?  
>
Yes.

The Stanford theater is in the middle of a Fred Astair film festival 
(a Audrey Hepburn festival will be next), and I have seen six films so
far, so I had trouble remembering "Shall We Dance". If I remember, it
is the one where Fred plays Petrov, the phony Russian ballet dancer 
who dreams of tap dancing with Ginger. I think the only thing that 
really stands out about it compared to some of the other
films is the music by Gershwin (?).

Yes, most of the films follow a formula. I think they kept trying to do
the same picture as the first successful one (Gay Divorcee?), with Fred
as the gentleman in love with Ginger, the girl from the boondocks, who
plays hard to get. I don't particularly like this formula.  Also, they
tend to keep making Fred and Ginger dancers, that is, trying to write
the plot to explain why the characters are singing and dancing, which I
think is a mistake. I prefer a musical be like opera or ballet, where
the singing and dancing are not supposed to be taken literally.

Roberta has a pretty good plot, at least for a musical. Fred and Ginger
get top billing, but in the plot they are secondary characters. The
main plot is a romance between (forgot his name) and Irene Dunne. I
love the scene where Irene Dunne sings 'Smoke Gets in Your Eyes'. To
make it really corny, her love interest comes in in the middle of the
song, mad at her, and she has to tell him to go.

>I thought it was interesting when I heard that Astaire actually danced more
>times with Rita Hayworth than with Ginger Rogers.  Anyone else remember this
>trivia?
>

Well, I think that Fred Astaire was not really big until he had a hit 
dancing with Ginger. Before seeing this film festival, I didn't really
like Ginger (because of the formula), but now I think she is very good
and it's the formula I don't like. Besides being able to sing and dance,
she can play different characters, something I am not sure I could say
about Fred Astaire.

As long as they were a team, I think the producers were unwilling to
stray very far from the formula. The later Fred Astaire films without
Ginger have a lot more variation, which is good.

Michael.

The film festival is going more or less in chronilogical order, so I 
am playing a mental game, trying to decide which film is best, which
dance is best, which song is best, which partner is best, and so on.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Subject: Re: (LONG) Re: Living alone and liking it
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 19:30:42 GMT

In article <1993Jan28.163749.12684@ast.saic.com> dobbs@ast.saic.com (Lynn Dobbs) writes:
>In article <1993Jan28.151654.13487@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
>>Examples?  Just when is one flying off a handle?   How does one
>>GET on a handle?  And why would one be on a handle when things
>>are getting testy anyway?  And no please don't ANYONE allude to
>>a "handle" being a "penis" because then I'll be REALLY confused.
> I don't think very many men would ever refer to their penis as
>a handle.  The very idea of being lifted by one's handle ....

(Psssst, Lynn.  I was trying to save the net from the forseeable "Hey
baby you can sit on my handle" post.  Someone had to.)
-- 
-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+
Nance Colucci                                      att!ihlpl!colucci
"Guech how mangy schticsh uf gumf I haf ing my mouf?" -Chris Colucci
-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+
From: barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Credibility and Trueness
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:21:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.1993Jan25.202114.1328
Organization: QQQCLC

In article <ewright.727981082@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>In <1993Jan25.051224.25468@netcom.com> barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes:
>>	Seems Charlie owes me a sheepskin. Ed, here's your clue: 4 dates
>>does not constitute a relationship, 
>
>The dictionary defines relationship as follows: a romantic or 
>passionate attachment.  No mention of time.

	So go beat off with a dictionary. Any normal human being could
probably figure out for himself that there's a qualitative difference
between going out with someone 4 times, and having a major involvement.
And if he couldn't, having that fact confirmed for him by more
experienced parties should do the trick.

>You shouldn't try using big words like that unless you know
>what they mean.

	Ed, go fuck yourself; no one else will.

						Kayembee
From: quirke_a@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Anonymous Postings
Date: 22 Jan 93 12:30:46 NZST
Organization: Welligton City Council, Public Access.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: kosmos.wcc.govt.nz

martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:

> I just don't want soc.singles taken over by "MAM looking for SAF geisha
> with own shamisen". 

   Um, I wouldn't mind making an exception for that particular example...

- Tony Q. (With boggled mind, and sweaty palm...)
-- 
Tony Quirke, Wellington, New Zealand (Quirke_A@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz)
"Only the free have disposition to be truthful.
 Only the truthful have the interest to be just.
 Only the just possess the willpower to be free." - WH Auden.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: Favorite Groups
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 03:50:11 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1993Jan25.193436.15478@netcom.com> desiree@netcom.com (dmc) writes:

>And yea, Rob's got cool taste in music.  
>(and yea, that's a suckup...)

Wow.  I want to give this a high mark, because *nobody* ever sucks
up to me (whimper, whine, sob :-)  Can someone other than the Russian
judge send me the rating privately so I can calibrate my meter?

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com
"Shouldn't I have this, shouldn't I have this, shouldn't I have all of this,
 and, passionate kisses, passionate kisses, passionate kisses, from you?"
- "Passionate Kisses" Lucinda Williams
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Breeding Strategy (was meeting women in clubs)
Date: 22 Jan 93 16:02:34 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <16B5DEC8B.SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu> SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Diane) writes:
>In article <8895@news.duke.edu>
|diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
| 
|>In article <JMD.93Jan20141137@lion.bear.com> jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond) writes:
|>>When was the last time you saw a gorilla write a computer
|>>program?  For that matter, when was the last time you saw a gorilla
|>>start a war?
|>
|>And when was the last time you gained breeding access to your next-door
|>neighbor by eating her young?
 >
My next door neighbor has a 16 year old daughter.  I don't think Mom
would approve.  Mom, on the other hand...
  
|You're being completely UNfair! Josh hasn't done that in *months*!!!!
|(have you, Josh?)
  
Me neither. *sigh*.

-- 
-john
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jwall@nyx.cs.du.edu (Jeff Wall)
Subject: Re: Living alone and liking it
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 13:47:33 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.100736.5784@netcom.com> rohwerwd@netcom.com (W. David Rohwer) writes:
>In article <1993Jan21.185205.2304@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> jwall@nyx.cs.du.edu (Jeff Wall) writes:
>>In article <77121@apple.apple.COM> stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones) writes:
>>>blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
>>>
>>>>So what do you look like in latex? :)
>>>
>>>Like Garfield.
>>
>>Garfield is absolutely adorable!!  (Not to mention humerous)
>>
>
>     I once gave a stuffed Garfield to a potential girlfriend when
>I was 19.  I was trying to be romantic.
>

So, what's yer point???

Cheers,

Jeff Wall
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: Credibility and Trueness
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 03:30:53 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1993Jan27.211222.296@ast.saic.com> dobbs@ast.saic.com (Lynn Dobbs) writes:

>>Besides, psychology is based on a denial of the existance of 
>>free will.  And without free will, you cannot decide to do
>>
>What????  Most schools of psycology are based completely on free will! 
>In fact, off-hand, I can't think of one that is completely deterministic.

Oh?  You mean the joke's true?  B.F. Skinner really *is* a contradiction
in terms?  And Sigmund Freud....



Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: SM ISO MAIL
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 06:04:39 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1993Jan22.000846.10561@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> sgokhale@lonestar.utsa.edu (Shashank S. Gokhale) writes:

>hey you yes you. why do you make fun of people like this?  were you not seeking
>a SO at anytime?

Probably not by standing on a table at a cocktail party and loudly
observing that they wanted to find someone to take home that night,
and then going out and waiting in the parking lot for the women to
flock to you.  Which is the analogy to what you did here.

>*talk about people who cannot be serious!!*

Okay, we can do that.  You go ahead and start.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com
"Shouldn't I have this, shouldn't I have this, shouldn't I have all of this,
 and, passionate kisses, passionate kisses, passionate kisses, from you?"
- "Passionate Kisses" Lucinda Williams
From: brent.mason@uuworld.via.mind.ORG (Brent Mason) 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Could be worse (was:
Date: 23 Jan 93 22:43:00 GMT
Reply-To: brent.mason@uuworld.via.mind.ORG (Brent Mason) 
Distribution: world
Organization: Micro Exchange - Kenwood, CA - 707-833-4032

JP> From: pieper@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (John Pieper)
  > Subject: Re: Could be worse (was: Re: Upper Midwest)
  > Message-ID: <1993Jan20.032514.3329@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>

> This brings to mind another advantage of living alone, to borrow from
> another thread: you can brew a batch of beer and be reasonably assured
> of having some left by the time it's properly aged.  > --

       Got a hella good chuckle out of this one.   I would like to add my
Entenmann's Glazed Buttermilk Donuts to this list.  (no wife to scarf em
all down while I'm at class)

       Brent Mason
---
 . BABBLE v1.0 . OS/2 2.0 vs Widdows 3.1... There is no comparison!
  . KMail 2.94  Micro Exchange
                                                                                                  
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: Meeting women in clubs
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 20:51:16 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <MARTINC.93Jan21095216@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:

>But every time someone proposes a distinction that is particularly "human" -- 
>language use, tool making, "war", sexual behavior -- there is a primate that has
>the same behavior, or the clear capability.

Oh?  Which primates create representational art?  Which possess a
substantial body of knowledge, or lore, passed down from one generation
to the next?  Which employ the scientific method?

Just because we share some behaviors with apes does not mean mankind
is just a (not very capable) ape.  Nor does it mean we must artificially
"ape" their behaviors to be more human.

Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.sex,alt.peeves
From: geoffm@netcom.com (Geoff Miller)
Subject: Re: Sometimes you just have to ask...
Followup-To: soc.singles,alt.sex,alt.peeves
Organization: PETA (People for the Evisceration of Tiresome Activists)
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 16:58:00 GMT



In article <1993Jan24.073009.1298@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com 
(drieux, just drieux) writes:

>ObPeeve: Attack Of the KillerHooters!

Be careful, they usually travel in pairs!




Geoff

-- 
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-
Geoff Miller                    + + + + + + + +                Mountain View 
geoffm@netcom.com               + + + + + + + +                California
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Subject: Re: SM ISO MAIL
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 15:11:32 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article 16585@auspex-gw.auspex.com, johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:

>First of all,  with the emergence of the anonymous posting service personal
>ads are finding their way onto soc.singles with great frequency.  As a
>result, a neophyte reader is going to see them and might figure that they
>are acceptable here.

I doubt our problem with personal ads resides with the people who
take any time to find out what the group is like.  I think it's
more likely that they scan their .newsrc for likely targets before
they read anything at all in the affected groups.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, thurlow@convex.com
"Shouldn't I have this, shouldn't I have this, shouldn't I have all of this,
 and, passionate kisses, passionate kisses, passionate kisses, from you?"
- "Passionate Kisses" Lucinda Williams
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Subject: Re: Credibility...
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:39:17 GMT

In article <lm8bdaINN8tu@news.bbn.com> dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
>
>Let's pin down what you mean...
>
>1)  Would you consider a person who had one or two dates a month with people
>that he/she never went out with again to be non-single?
>
>2)  Would you consider a person who went out as often as he/she liked with
>groups of friends to be non-single?


I may be taking this out of context but, in all my experience, anyone
I have ever spoken with and I myself consider anyone not married to be
"single".  The fact that one might have or not have freinds and how close
she or he might be toward those friends has no bearing on whether or not
one is "single".  The exception to this rule:  Some who are engaged might
refer to themselves as "being engaged" as opposed to being single.  
Although, technically, they still remain to be single until they marry.

>If you really are excluding these two groups of people from your definition
>of single, then I guess I'd have to agree with you that I think most people
>would find it difficult to be happy without friends and a social life.  I
>think it would also be tough to be happy if you felt that you didn't have
>anyone who really cared about you (but family, friends, and cats are useful
>here.)  A couple of dates here and there, while good for your self-esteem, 
>doesn't really make a huge difference in the long run.  It would be easier 
>to be happy with one good friend in your life than no friends and some 
>superficial dates.

I agree.

>Dawn


                 Steve Stein  (609) 639-2264
    *******************************************************
    *  Just my opinion, though it could change tomorrow   *
    *******************************************************
From: dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: SM ISO MAIL
Date: 25 Jan 93 18:43:17 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman (BBN)
NNTP-Posting-Host: spcink.bbn.com

In article <1993Jan23.223506.28886@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA writes:
>In article 4335@news.acns.nwu.edu, drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan23.021605.22785@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA writes:
>
>Yes, I seemed to. Unbeknownst to you, I was being satirical. You seem to
>take things quite literally. Things are not always what they appear to be.
>John posted something to that effect yesterday...

Dreas, don't be so stupid.  It was perfectly obvious that you were being
satirical, and it was perfectly obvious that you didn't hear John's points.
If it's funny, we can forgive a lot, but I didn't find your Indian accent 
posts to be very funny at all and your response to John's flame wasn't very
funny.  So there's nothing to excuse your lack of sensitivity.

>I do apologize for offending your sensibilities, but
>my point about personal ads remains what it was.

As John pointed out, you didn't make a point about personal ads.  You 
imitated his presumed accent.  It's the equivalent of pointing and laughing.

>Now, why is it that when I make fun of French people, Californians, Americans,
>The British, or any other group, including Canadians from one end of this 
>country (Canada, BTW), to the other, you remain silent? Then you jump on me 
>when I joke about a visible minority. You are a tad inconsistent, there.

Because there's a big difference in making a joke between insiders and
pointing at an outsider.  I've never been seriously harrassed for being of
german descent, so I'm likely to find a joke about German-Americans 
at worst non-offensive.  I have at times faced real discrimination 
and harrassment for being a female, so a joke about women had better be 
funny or it's going to push my buttons.  Nothing inconsistent about that.

Dawn
-- 
"You have this adorable and misguided notion that death is something really
radical and cool but I still can't help being attracted to your fresh-faced
uncompromised tatoo-ed rebel stance and god damn, I'd like to help you
sing your tune."  "Folk Song..." by Bongwater
Newsgroups: soc.singles