HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hermit@cats.UCSC.EDU (William R. Ward)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Star Trek Opening
Date: 10 Sep 92 07:06:34 GMT
	<AWERLING.92Sep7162855@dante.nmsu.edu>
	<1992Sep9.134803.21357@panix.com>
Organization: Computing and Telecommunications Services, UCSC
NNTP-Posting-Host: si.ucsc.edu
In-reply-to: smeyer@panix.com's message of 9 Sep 92 13:48:03 GMT

In article <1992Sep9.134803.21357@panix.com> smeyer@panix.com (Seth Meyer) writes:
|(Then again, in ST II, Saavik (Kirstie Alley) was referred to as Mr.
|Saavik)

In the Star Trek universe, the issue of gender-related terms is dealt
with by using the "traditional" Navy terminology which is male-only.
This is somewhat sexist, but I think the point of it is to avoid
having separate terms for each gender.  And since the English language
doesn't have a gender-neutral equivalent, they changed the meaning of
"Mister" from "male officer being addressed by superior officer" by
removing the male-only connotations.  Thus, to a person in the 24th
century, the word "Mister" has no male-only meaning.

Now this is arguably sexist, but it would be inconvenient to make up a
term, and I think it is sexist (and speciesist, for the possible case
of a genderless or more-than-two-gender species).

Thus you address your female superiors as "sir" (which happens several
times in The Next Generation, when officers address admirals), and
female underling officers as "mister" in Star Trek.  I think it's an
acceptable compromise, and it was devised specifically to be
non-sexist (in Roddenberry's opinion, anyway).

As for female captains, the original series didn't have them, but
ST:TNG does.  The "Enterprise C," (NCC 1701-C) which visited the era
of ST:TNG from the era just after the Star Trek movies in the episode
"Yesterday's Enterprise," was commanded by a woman.  And many admirals
in the show have been women.  Unfortunately there aren't any women in
leadership roles who are regular cast members, just occasional or
one-episode guest stars.

--
William R Ward                       Bay View Software
VoiceMail: +1 (408) 479-4072         Internet:  hermit@cats.ucsc.edu
SnailMail: 1803 Mission St. #339     BITNet:    hermit@cats.bitnet
           Santa Cruz CA 95060 USA
Xref: sparky alt.feminism:890 soc.women:16356
From: pw@panix.com (Paul Wallich)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.women
Subject: Re: women in engineering ( help..)
Date: 9 Sep 92 17:52:03 GMT
Organization: Trivializers R Us

In article <1992Sep8.220540.26780@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:

>I believe it was Margaret Mead who pointed out that, regardless of
>what men in a society did, men's work is nearly always rated higher in
>status and more valuable than women's work.  

Except, of course, when women's work is rated as so crucially
important, nay, sacred that men can't possibly be permitted
to do it, and women can possibly be permitted to do anything
else, lest the universe itself crumble from its foundation.

Btw, what is the proper order of _Kinder, Kirche, Kueche_
anyway? One probably ought to find out before november.

paul
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: awerling@nmsu.edu (WERLING)
Subject: Re: birth control [Was: Re: Choice for men]
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<1992Sep13.221346.824@cco.caltech.edu> <j-yn0ff.tyger@netcom.com>
	<ZEN.92Sep13235947@death.corp.sun.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 03:26:09 GMT

Because I cannot for some damn reason use the up and down arrow keys
on this terminal, I will type my response *before* the repeated text.
*sigh*

As a homosexual, I don't always think of all the dynamics in M-F
relationships.  I'm very much aware of the pressure on men to use
condoms, and advocate their use (and distribution in public schools --
soapbox blip!) quite frequently.  I am not loathe to accept
responsibility, as this writer suggests....

Quoted material:
     Of course, from reading this newsgroup, it seems that men are so loath
   to take on any kind of responsibility at all that I'm not at all
   surprised that there aren't other effective options for men than what
   currently exists.

    -- d
--
Andrew Werling    awerling@nmsu.edu    yip@acca.nmsu.edu
Transmitting from Planet Yip--where everyone you meet 
			      is already dead.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: sk73171@cs.tut.fi (Kiiskil{ Sami)
Subject: Re: Modest proposal (was: Unisex bathrooms)
Organization: Tampere Univ. of Technology, Finland.
	<MUFFY.92Sep2193344@remarque.berkeley.edu>
	<1863f7INNq4g@agate.berkeley.edu>
	<MUFFY.92Sep3154743@remarque.berkeley.edu>
	<1992Sep4.150748.4262@javelin.sim.es.com>
	<MUFFY.92Sep8200931@remarque.berkeley.edu>
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 21:39:25 GMT


In article <MUFFY.92Sep8200931@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:

> This is an interesting suggestion.  It occurs to me that it could
> possibly be adapted to the question of effective male birth control.
> Could not a similar system be installed in the tubes coming out of the
> testicles, such that when a man ejaculates, the fluid is reliably and
> conveniently carried off into a little disposable bag or bottle or
> whatever?

I dont quite get this, do you mean that there should be permanent
chateders from the seemen tubes or that the device should connected
in place whenever needed. In the former case, system might work but the
extra openings for the pipes would increase infection risk. On the latter
case, it would be hard to get the connection leakproof.
Maybe it will work, but I don't think so. Much easier way is to close the
seemen tubes or use hormonal treatment, KClO3 might also work. 
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
: Money isn't everything, : Sami Kiiskil{  ( The { means 'ae' ) :   Nothing   :
: . . . there is also     : e-mail : sk73171@ee.tut.fi          :     is      :
:  H i g h - T e c h  ! ! : phone : 931-180690 or 934-428254    : impossible. :
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Pot Calls Kettle "Sooty" (Was: Some examples (Was Re: Winning by Violation (was: new group?)))
Date: 9 Sep 92 01:30:16 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
| <   Hillel, are you aware of the difference between attacking
| <   someone personally and disputing their ideas?

ataylor@nmsu.edu (Alan Taylor) writes:
| 	Is FITCH aware of this difference?
| 
| 	Or is calling someone's personal experience 
| 	"fantasies" merely a disputation of ideas?

You can find any number of my articles which rest on the
most ideational, most impersonal plane.  People have actually
complained about it.  So it's obvious that I know the
difference and can implement it.  When I attack someone
personally, I do it deliberately, and I usually do a good,
solid job of it, too.

Okay, you're sensitive about "fantasies."  You said:

| 	This is interesting. Some people feel exactly this
| 	way with respect to "feminism"; that they must bow
| 	down to it or be silenced, humiliated and/or destroyed.

I said:
| This is something I'd like to get at: your fantasies of
| being oppressed by powerful feminists.  Once again, you
| cite Dworkin, but in the pragmatics of American politics,
| Dworkin is a clown -- a monkey of right-wing fascist
| social reactionaries.  What about all the feminists who
| oppose Dworkin?  Are they oppressing you, too?

Well, tell us how the brutal feminists are opressing you,
okay?  I'm a feminist.  Am I oppressing you?  Be concrete
and specific.  Show us how you're being "silenced, humilia-
ted and/or destroyed."
-- 
 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: aaldrich@encore.com (Al Aldrich)
Subject: Re: Choice for men
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:36:34 GMT

gazit@duke.cs.duke.edu (Hillel Gazit) writes:

>In article <10SEP199212180593@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov> 
>spzkny@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (JAMES ZAKANY) writes:

>I think that Norplant or IUD as a condition for welfare will be fair because
>the woman will have to do something that helps society in exchange for the 
>welfare, but I don't think that most of the "choice for women!" feminists 
>will agree that *their* reproduction right will be under such attack...

I don't agree with this, but I am curious..do you also condone men
getting a vasectomy as a condition for receiving welfare?

/al

-- 
Al Aldrich	inet:aaldrich@encore.com
"..if you understood everything I said, you'd be me." miles davis
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MY opinions are not to be construed as those of my employer.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: awerling@nmsu.edu (WERLING)
Subject: Re: Grading papers
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<MUFFY.92Sep8172659@remarque.berkeley.edu> <2466@tymix.Tymnet.COM>
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 05:58:33 GMT

In article <2466@tymix.Tymnet.COM> baba@samadhi.Tymnet.COM (Duane Hentrich) writes:

Muffy:
   >Well...actually, there *is* a pair of gender-neutral pronouns (there is
   >also a possessive form) which has been invented, by those people who saw
   >a need.  You will find it in frequent use on such newsgroups as
   >alt.sex.bondage, if you would like to check it out.  The pronouns in

-   Oooooooo. Mainstream.

Are you just naturally a bitch or do you have to force it?

   >question are "sie" (gender-neutral equivalent to "she" and "he") and
   >"hir" (gender-neutral equivalent to "her" and "his").

-   Yes, I have seen these. Seldom. For me they don't work. I know no one
-   personally who does use them.

The problem with "hir" (as I see it) is that it's verbalization is
difficult to distinguish from "her."

   >The thing you seem to have overlooked is that not everyone thinks the
   >same way.  Therefore, some people (such as AWERLING) believe that we

-   Actually, I didn't overlook it as much as incorporate it into my
-   post by capaitalizing WE. I suppose I should have put a more sarcastic
-   tone of voice on that one word, but..... such is life.

You have an axe to grind, obviously.  What is it?

--
Andrew Werling    awerling@nmsu.edu    yip@acca.nmsu.edu
"Jesus is coming, look busy."
          --from a button I bought in an Albuquerque bookstore.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Subject: Re: Choice for men
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 02:04:49 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <nancyo.716158932@sfu.ca> nancyo@fraser.sfu.ca (Nancy Patricia O'Connor) writes:
>
>I recently read an article about alternative methods of birth control
>for MEN (I think it was in an old issue of MS.), and it seemed to
>suggest that while there are many forms that have been thought of
>and probably even researched to a degree, there isn't the same
>demand for a male method of hormonally (for example) controlling
>reproduction as there is for women.  Surprise, surprise.

Last I heard, the hormonal methods of male birth control also have the
side effects of rendering the male impotent, and not interested in sex.
While some feminists might think this desirable, I personally am not
surprised that it has not caught on.

BTW, I am curious why everyone is comparing a vasectomy to an implant.
A valid comparison to a vasectomy would be having the womans tubes tied.
I suggest that most woman would want that about as much as most men would
want a vasectomy.

There are (as far as I am aware) no safe, reversable, relibale, non-surgical
methods of male birth control. And until there are, comparing them side
to side is not a valid or even a reasonable comparison.

Also, I wonder why the women are not given the same choice (as far as
responsibility goes), sterilization, or abstinance. I have not seen
anything even approaching equal treatment of responsibilility between
men and women as far as sex is concerned in this discussion. Men are
given final or extreme choices. Women are given no such absolute choices,
even when there is a more or less equivalant choice.

Should not men and women have equivalant reproductive choices, as far as
that is possible? 


Rich

payner@netcom.com


Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.men
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Subject: Re: a programmer is not an engineer, indeed
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 03:33:33 GMT

>>> You're right, a programmer is NOT an engineer, and an engineer is NOT a
>>> programmer. 

>The point is, engineering and CS are two different
>courses of study

Yup, they are two different disciplines.  Industry has needs for each.

Now can we get back to talking about feminism?

							--  Michal
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: moselecw@elec.canterbury.ac.nz (C.W. Moseley)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Bathroom symbols
Date: 14 Sep 92 01:13:48 GMT
Organization: Electrical Engineering, University of Canterbury, New Zealand

peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
> Well, lets think -- what are the primary gross-scale physical differences?

> Women tend to be larger in the hips with narrower shoulders.  Men tend to 
> have narrower hips and broader shoulders.  So use equilateral triangles
> with tip pointing up for females and tip pointing down for males.

and make them PINK!
Xref: sparky alt.feminism:863 soc.women:16335
From: awerling@nmsu.edu (WERLING)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: "One" as a pronoun
Date: 11 Sep 92 05:26:53 GMT
	<Bu29y4.AEK@comp.vuw.ac.nz> <1992Sep8.062558.24485@news.columbia.edu>
	<AWERLING.92Sep8155010@dante.nmsu.edu>
	<1992Sep9.020300.1393@cco.caltech.edu>
Organization: NMSU Computer Science

In article <1992Sep9.020300.1393@cco.caltech.edu> keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:

-   Well, I would write:
-
-	"One should watch what he says about his teacher,..."t
-
-   This clearly sets up the gerderlessness but does not seem so awkward.

How does the continued use of "his" maintain genderlessness?

--
Andrew Werling    awerling@nmsu.edu    yip@acca.nmsu.edu
"Jesus is coming, look busy."
          --from a button I bought in an Albuquerque bookstore.
From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Choice for men
Date: 11 Sep 92 18:32:58 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Sep11.142704.18175@midway.uchicago.edu> mec6@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>
>>>If they don't
>>>trust the other gender, they can have sex with their own gender or avoid
>>>sex or whatever works, but they should NOT just dump the problem on the
>>>other person.
>>
>>Why is it that you think that having sex with their own sex is an option?
>>Even if you would do it (and it is not important, and I do not care),
>>that is -your- choice, and it is as reasonable to think others have
>>that choice as to think that others can change religion at will. 
>
>Err -- are you familiar with the meaning of the term "or"?  She listed
>some *options*, some of which are more or less attractive to different
>people -- some may down right repulsive.  She didn't say that people
>*should* go around have sex with same sex people...  Sheez.

Then we disagree with what is and is not an option. You might think
castration a wonderfull option. I do not see it as an option at all.
And generally, I suggest that the above mentioned is not an acceptable
option.
 
>I mean, I think people *do* have the option to change their religion if
>they choose to.  Granted, many people don't exercise that option, but
>it is still an option.

If you even think that this is an option, I'd love for you to demonstrate
that it can work for me. Would you rather start with the JWs, or the
Mormons?
 
>>>Muffy
>>Rich
>rini
>
Rich again
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: 95cjc@williams.edu (Christopher J Chapman)
Subject: Re: Bathroom symbols
Organization: Williams College, Williamstown, MA
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 04:08:34 GMT

>>I agree that the symbols currently used are based on the assumption
>>that most women will wear skirts and most men won't.  I also agree
>>that this isn't necessarily the case and that there's no reason that
>>official symbols should promote such stereotypes.  But then how do we
>>generically show the difference between the genders so someone who
>>can't read English knows which bathroom to go into?

How about caulking a life-sized, glowing phallus to the men's facility
and a rotating, glowing, clear plastic maxi-pad (with wings of course)
to the women's facility?

Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer)
Subject: Re: Sexism: Defined
Date: 09 Sep 92 02:44:31 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <=7qn#w-.payner@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:
>In article <1992Sep7.223943.8127@news.acns.nwu.edu> Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde) writes:
>>Rich:
>>
>>>That women can be sexist at all is denied by prominent feminists like
>>>Dworkin, who confuse social context for sexism.
>>
>>I never claimed to agree with Andrea Dworkin -- she may be "prominent"
>>but she doesn't represent either my views or any school of thought I
>>tend to subscribe to.  I don't want to defend her and I'm not especially
>>surprised if I happen to be saying something different than her.
>
Am I the only one who is surprised (not!) to see, Yet Again, "The
Prominent Feminist Andrea Dworkin says This" followed by "Dworkin
who? / I don't agree with Dworkin / Well, she says she's a feminist,
David Duke says he's republican / who cares what Dworkin says?"

Could we all agree that Dw*rk*n is a sh*th**d and leave it alone?

[we now return to normal]

-jen
From: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Modest proposal (was: Unisex bathrooms)
Date: 8 Sep 92 20:09:31
Organization: Natural Language Incorporated
	<MUFFY.92Sep2193344@remarque.berkeley.edu>
	<1863f7INNq4g@agate.berkeley.edu>
	<MUFFY.92Sep3154743@remarque.berkeley.edu>
	<1992Sep4.150748.4262@javelin.sim.es.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: biesel@javelin.sim.es.com's message of Fri, 4 Sep 1992 15:07:48 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.150748.4262@javelin.sim.es.com> biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel) writes:
>muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>[discussion of it taking longer for women to get out of their clothes
>to use the bathroom]

>Since there are already thousands of public lavatories with limited
>facilities for women, and since sharing bathrooms seems to be unpopular,
>and difficult to implement, I suggest that federal funds be allocated
>toward developing a disposable, cheap catheter which can be installed
>by every woman desiring one. This would at least reduce the time it 
>currently takes for women to urinate, thus equalizing the lines at
>these facilities.

This is an interesting suggestion.  It occurs to me that it could
possibly be adapted to the question of effective male birth control.
Could not a similar system be installed in the tubes coming out of the
testicles, such that when a man ejaculates, the fluid is reliably and
conveniently carried off into a little disposable bag or bottle or
whatever?

Muffy
--

Muffy Barkocy | muffy@mica.berkeley.edu | wi.4636@wizvax.methuen.ma.us
~Little round planet/in a big universe/sometimes it looks blessed/
 sometimes it looks cursed/Depends on what you look at, obviously/
 But even more it depends on the way that you see~ - Bruce Cockburn
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: aaldrich@encore.com (Al Aldrich)
Subject: Re: Sweeping Generalizations About Men By Feminis
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 11:36:10 GMT

moselecw@elec.canterbury.ac.nz (C.W. Moseley) writes:

>In article <Btz0M4.Erx@encore.com>, aaldrich@encore.com (Al Aldrich) writes:
>> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:
>> 
>> 
>> I freely admit I am not a scholar of feminism..so what? I cannot 
>> comment on my own observations?

>no, just that to do so `as a feminist' is improprietry exemplified.

oooh..big words..just for your information, I did not make that
statement `as a feminist'..I made it as me, a person who had an opinion
on the subject. I am not a representitive of anyones opinions but
my own. Some people here seem to think that `feminism' connotes some
kind of unified religion with all of the incumbent dogma and jargon.
Different people DO approach things in different ways. Just because I
am not a scholar of feminism does not mean that I cannot deal with the
real life issues that the books were written about. I think your
attitude is a bit elitist.

>much as I would never comment on eg Judaism, `as a jew', to comment
>from a feminist perspective, then claim you know little about feminism,
>is, well, unusual?

That is a silly argument. One is born a Jew.. I don't think anyone is
born a feminist..
/al

-- 
Al Aldrich	inet:aaldrich@encore.com
"..if you understood everything I said, you'd be me." miles davis
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MY opinions are not to be construed as those of my employer.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel)
Subject: Re: Choice for men
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:42:32 GMT

nancyo@fraser.sfu.ca (Nancy Patricia O'Connor) writes:

>zen@death.corp.sun.com (d) writes:

>I recently read an article about alternative methods of birth control
>for MEN (I think it was in an old issue of MS.), and it seemed to
>suggest that while there are many forms that have been thought of
>and probably even researched to a degree, there isn't the same
>demand for a male method of hormonally (for example) controlling
>reproduction as there is for women.  Surprise, surprise.


Presumably the goal of birth control is the prevention of fertilization
of a specific female. It is obviously more efficient to find an effective
means of preventing ovulation/fertilization/implantation for her than to
suppress the production of sperm for every male she might mate with.

Regards,
       H. Biesel