HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ilana@kiowa.scd.ucar.edu (Ilana Stern)
Subject: Re: Female friends
Organization: NCAR/UCAR
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 16:15:57 GMT

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'. ]

 > Ownership implies continued access to the object owned. It seem that
 > if both people in a relationship have the same attitude about each
 > other then no harm done. But when one changes, the 'owner' quickly
 > becomes unable to deal with the change, and the recent posting along
 > the line of 'she dun me wrong' becomes the old song sung.
 > 
 > Does this mean I believe that every man approaches a physical
 > relationship with women with the idea of 'ownership'. Not at all.
 > The counter examples are too numerous. Do I believe that many men
 > when confronted with a change in the relationship with a woman that
 > has been intimate, revert to the 'ownership' orientation?
 > 
 > Yes.

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:

1) You might say that in some sense my husband and I have a 'mutual
ownership' relationship:  we assume that we are each other's first choice
for doing things. I will feel hurt if, for example, he arranges to go
off on Saturday on a hike with another friend, without me, when I have
no Saturday plans and would enjoy hiking, unless he discusses it with 
me beforehand.  In a sense, that is ownership, but we view it more as
a commitment to the importance of shared time and activities.

2) Chantal was visiting me from back east.  We had planned to go out
to lunch;  my friend Karen down the street called, and I invited her to
come with us.  As it turned out, Chantal and Karen hit it off -- in fact,
they seemed to get along better with each other than with me!  I couldn't
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.

3) My husband has a formerly close friend who won't associate with us
any more, now that we are married.  He badmouths me to all of our mutual
friends.  We think he's jealous -- he and my husband used to do lots of
things together, but now I'm included, and closer to my husband than
he is, so he's lost his ownership of his time to me.

In sum, I think that what you (John) call 'ownership' is plain old
jealousy.  And I agree, that comes into play when a relationship
becomes a sexual one -- but I think that often, it's already there
anyway.

-- 
/\        Ilana Stern DOD#009 | Hello, I am a rocket scientist, are there any
  \_][    ilana@ncar.ucar.edu | more cajun-flavored pork rinds?
      \_______________________|______________________________________________
From: pepke@ds1.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: Some general term
Date: 15 Apr 92 02:36:44 GMT
Reply-To: pepke@ds1.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Organization: Florida State University, but I don't speak for them

In article <1992Apr11.204835.16197@morgan.ucs.mun.ca> kirsten@morgan.ucs.mun.ca (Kirsten Starcher) writes:
>
>Anyone have any suggestions?

From Emo Phillips:

    Hot little bag of estrogen.

Or, one of my favorites:

    Pelvic affiliate.

-EMP
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: "K" Names
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:24:14 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

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.....
Newsgroups: soc.couples
From: garvey@skybridge.SCL.CWRU.Edu (Heather Garvey)
Subject: Re: Female friends
X-Post-Machine: yukon.scl.cwru.edu
Organization: Smith Undergrad Lab, CWRU, Cleve. OH
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 11:40:22 GMT

jclark@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes:
>shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan) writes:
>+jclark@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes:
>+
>+>Of course, who would want to spoil a friendship which is based on
>+>equality and independence, with a sign of ownership.
>+
>+Where's the sign of ownership?
>
>Sex.

	But only if you get the studded collar properly tight. :-)

	Really, sex is only a sign of ownership if you let it be. And
I know a lot of people who don't let it be! :) Any "ownership" between
my squeeze and myself comes out of love and commitment, of which sex 
is only a small part. Sex comes under 'recreational activities' rather
than 'the definition of our relationship'. :-)
	I don't get where you think sex and ownership are linked. Could
you perhaps provide us with a whole paragraph of idea? :-) It might
help us understand.

--
"Oh beloved ice cream bar, how I love to lick your creamy center!"| Heather
"I've been bad, Ren. You'll smack me!"  "You stoopid eeeediot!"   | "Moose"
"Remember, kids -- Only five more days to Yak-Shaving Day!"       | Garvey
"Squeak! Squeak! Squeak, I tell you!" "Happy, happy. Joy, joy"    | R&S in '92!
From: goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Mark Goldberg)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: do I stay or do I go?
Date: 8 Apr 92 18:24:17 GMT
Reply-To: goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Mark Goldberg)
Organization: Naval Surface Warfare Center, Annapolis, MD

In soc.couples, IO20393@MAINE.MAINE.EDU writes:
I'm a college student, involved in a long distance relatioship.
>On a recent visit, my SO informed me that before we left for college  (we were
>still seeing each other then) he cheated on me with my best friend!   Since I
>had had a one-nighter with a friend while away at school  (which I told him
>about)  I let it pass.   However, I realized later that I'm still very upset
>about this. [elaboration deleted]

I think you have every right to be upset.  But a long-distance realtionship
at this time in you life will also present problems.  It's a difficult
thing to maintain without a high degree of maturity, personal strength,
and trust.  What happened was obviously not your fault.  If I were in
you position, what happened would certainly change my conception of
who was really my "best friend."  You can't blame her totally for what
happened, since an affair (as this is) requires his concurrence.  You
may have to face the prospect of coming to grips with your own life
at college first.  Depending on the distance involved and you SO's life
situation, it may be unrealistic to expect the type of fidelity and
committment that is needed for an LDR.  Letting go may be very painful,
but think of the long-term benefits of making your self available to
meet new people and form new relatonships.
   /|/| /||)|/  /~_/\| |\|)[~|)/~_  |   Everyone's entitled to MY opinion.
  / | |/~||\|\  \_/\/|_|/|)[_|\\_/  |      goldberg@oasys.dt.navy.mil
========Imagination is more important than knowledge. - Albert Einstein=======
From: "thomas miller" <thomas.miller@canrem.com>
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: engagment rings ?
Date: 13 Apr 92 16:11:35 EST
Reply-To: "thomas miller" <thomas.miller@canrem.com>
Distribution: soc
Organization: Canada Remote Systems

Does anyone have a work of referance or suggestions regarding buying
diamonds.

         thanks


                                 From the keyboard of
                                     Tom miller
                                   Toronto Canada
---
  DeLuxe 1.12 #8589         A closed mouth gathers no feet.
--
Canada Remote Systems  - Toronto, Ontario/Detroit, MI
World's Largest PCBOARD System - 416-629-7000/629-7044
From: SEK@psuvm.psu.edu (Sonja Kueppers)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: Sleeping with friends...
Date: 5 Apr 92 19:50:08 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

In article <1992Apr4.193431.16891@sol.UVic.CA>, jtice@butterfly.UVic.CA (Jason
W. Tice) says:
>
>What I have a very hard time figuring out is what/where the boundary between
>what sleeping with a friend means, ans what sleeping with your SO means.

Hmm.  Well, for me, there are two kinds of sexual relationships I have with
people other than my SO:
  1) Close
  2) Distant

Close relationships are relationships which appear to be "dating" type
relationships.  I generally know what the other person is doing at any
particular minute of the day, etc.

Distant relationships are ones which are more casual and infrequent.
Someone I might sleep with a few times a year falls into this category.
The "distant" category doesn't mean that we can't be close friends; the
relationship just doesn't have the intensity of the "close" type of
relationship.

I have had relationships which have moved from the "close" type to the
"distant" type.


>If I and my SO were having an open relationship, what is there, that
>distinguishes our relationship from the other people we were sleeps with?
>where is the boundary between friendship and "romantic" love?

For me, the answer is commitment and security.  My primary SO is the
person I'm planning my life with.  That's the person with whom I
make important life decisions.  Comfort, trust, friendship...these are
things I have with my primary SO that I don't necessarily have with
anyone else -- certainly not to the same degree.

Sound boring?  It isn't, not for us.  For some people, it probably is.

>Do you have to be able to separate the emotional from the physical?

Not necessarily.  I don't think it's such a bad thing to have serious
emotional relationships with more than one person.  And I do feel a
certain amount of attachment to anyone I've been intimate with, even
if it was only once and I don't even know their name.

-Sonja
-----------------------------Sonja Kueppers------------------------------
|SEK@PSUVM (bitnet)            ____  "Sex should be friendly.  Otherwise|
|SEK@PSUVM.psu.edu             \bi/   stick to mechanical toys; it's    |
|MaBellNet: (814) 867-1805      \/    more sanitary." TEFL, Heinlein    |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: thomasg@epx.hscs.umn.edu (Thomas Gasser)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: Some help, please.
Date: 8 Apr 92 17:48:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: epx.thomasg.474
Organization: Department of Neurosurgery, University of Minnesota

In article <18683@ravel.udel.edu> willey@ravel.udel.edu (Edward V Willey) writes:


>Hi,
>   I'm sure this question has come up many time in this group, but I'd
>still really appreciate some help with the following problem, which is
>tearing me up inside, and I think a lot of you can relate to it.
>   I've been seeing a girl since freshmen year at college and we just
>celebrated our three year aniversary.  The beginning of the relationship
>was wonderful, we both seemed very much in love and perfect for each
>other.  A year or so went by and things were still great, there was talk
>of marriage and foreverness.  Then things got somewhat stale.  I'm not
>really sure why it happened, but I do have some ideas.  We broke up, and
>I started seeing someone else.  After a month or two, we got back
>together, and things started to go well again.  Last summer was
>wonderful, and the old powerful feelings started coming back.  Then in
>September, she broke up with me, saying that she needed time to be
>alone.  There was another guy involved who was constantly trying to
>break us up so he could see her.  That night she started a serious relationship 
>with that same person.
>   Around late November, they broke up and we started seeing each other
>again.  She went to London for a month, and when she got back things
>were pretty good, but there was a lot of tenseness which led to
>fighting.  Please keep in mind that all that was just a quick summary.
>   Now we are talking of breaking up again.  She says she doesn't feel the same
>was for me as she used to, and that the old feelings aren't there
>anymore.  I feel just the opposite, I'm utterly in love with her and
>still want a future together.  She said she'll give it some more time,
>but that she doubts it'll work.  She also said she'll probably start
>seeing the same guy she saw before again if we break up.
>   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?
>   I welcome all input, and thanks for listening to me.  I doubt that
>everthing that I intended to say came across in what I wrote, but the
>basic idea is there.

>          -Ed Willey.


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.

Paraphased from someone, somewhere


Thomas Gasser                                          
(612) 624-4427
Dept of Neurosurgery     
University of MN      
THOMASG@EPX.HSCS.UMN.EDU
From: shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: Female friends
Date: 7 Apr 92 14:29:26 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

jclark@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes:

>In article <Apr.5.12.58.41.1992.21497@gandalf.rutgers.edu> shagan@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Susan Hagan) writes:
>+jclark@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes:

>+>Of course, who would want to spoil a friendship which is based on
>+>equality and independence, with a sign of ownership.


>+Where's the sign of ownership?

>Sex.


You'll have to be more specific.  Where is the sign of ownership and to
whom is it a sign?
From: jtice@butterfly.UVic.CA (Jason W. Tice)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: do I stay or do I go?
Date: 14 Apr 92 07:22:19 GMT
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada

reykja@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Reykja Sigurdsson) wrote:
=
=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. 

	Here, I have to disagree.  I understand where Reykja is coming
	from, but to not allow for extenuating circumstances will leave
	you open to a lot of possibilities of hurt.  You have to be able
	to deal with the pain.  If you don't feel you can weather similar
	pain again, make it very well known to those involved.

	I fully believe in the old cliche:

			 Once: bitten
			Twice: Shy
		  Three times: F**king stupid

	Ok, so something has happened once.  Give them the benefit
	of the doubt.  Mistakes happen.  Make your pain and your 
	tolerance levels well known.  Make it known you will not 
	tolerate this happening again.  If it happens again, get out 
	of there.  Don't ever let yourself get to the stupidity stage.  
	That's just too much pain.

=both of these people treated you with total disrespect and have no right to 
=have you in their lives. 

	This is a little too egocentric for me...  You do have to take
	care of yourself first.  You can't be productive, helpful if you
	are screwed up and hurting inside.  Be as selfish as you must. 
	Trust in yourself first and foremost. But also be willing to trust 
	others--Especially if they have admitted that they were wrong.

=it may be sounding harsh but it is easier the long term to get 
=rid of negative influences.  they can only cause eventual pain. 

	And if its easier, it has to be better? In a strong relationship, 
	you have to knowingly accept the "negative influences" as well as 
	the positive.  You're involved with them because you love them--not 
	the other way around.  deciding to throw it away under the pretext
	of getting "rid of negative influences" is a cheap way out.  Yeah,
	its easy, and yeah, it may even be the right choice for this situation.
	I don;t know the entire dynamics of the relationship.

	This is definitely one of the true tests of the bonds of your
	relationship. It's no longer fun and love and passion.  It's
	the grit. It takes an incredible amount of courage, strength, 
	trust and hope (and yeah, some stupidity) to say "Ok, you've 
	made a mistake. don't let it happen again.  I still love you, 
	I still trust you."
=
=                                                   -rks

Jason W. Tice

-- 
I am not who you seem to think I'm claiming you think I am.
							jtice@nero.uvic.ca
From: S7985203@deimos.ucc.umass.edu ( )
Subject: CFV: soc.penpals
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Amherst
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 03:02:27 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20

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.     


Rationale:  It's true that you can meet people through other newsgroups but 
	you do not always have the guarantee that they will want to 
	have penpals.  Having this newsgroup makes it easier to make 
	friends without possibly searching endlessly.  As one person said 
	to me during the rfd: "You can't tell much about a person from an 
	opinion or two in a post".  In soc.penpals, people would list post 
	some of their interests so others would get an idea about whether 
	they'd like to correspond with them or not.  Also, this newsgroup 
	has often been compared to alt.personals.  There is one major 
	difference.  There would not be any anonymous postings.  As one 
	person put it:  "...a lot hide behind anonymity to spew abuse and 
	intolerance". Therefore, without the anonymouse postings, we may get 
	rid of some of that.

Voting:  Please send all votes DIRECTLY to:
		
			s7985203@tethys.ucc.umass.edu


	Votes that are posted on the net WILL NOT be accepted.
	Please also be very specific as to whether you are voting FOR or 
AGAINST this newsgroup.  It is suggested that you word it similar to the 
following:
	   I vote FOR soc.penpals 
		   or			
	   I vote AGAINST soc.penpals

also accepted:  I vote YES for soc.penpals
			or
		I vote NO for soc.penpals

Please also include your name in your vote.


Voting Period:   All voting will end at 5:00 PM EST on APRIL 30, 1992!
		Any votes that are received after that time will NOT be 
		counted.		
		
Newsgroups: soc.couples
From: a_rockwe@oz.plymouth.edu (Hiya *smile* )
Subject: Can someone help me?
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, N.H.
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 16:21:07 GMT

Hiya.. I'm new to this newsgroup, but I have a question.. I didn't
know where to put it, but this looks like it would be a good place..
I write letters to a close friend often, and I am trying to come up
with different closings.. I'm tired of the usual ones, such as "Love
You Always", and "Yours Forever".. if anyone has any that they can
think of, I would appreciate your help.. Thank you in advance for any
help you might be able to provide.. Please send any responses you have
to this email: a_rockwe@oz.plymouth.edu

					Thank You,
					-Angela
From: SEK@psuvm.psu.edu (Sonja Kueppers)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Re: Ready for marriage?
Date: 16 Apr 92 13:33:52 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

In article <1992Apr14.172052.18667@casbah.acns.nwu.edu>,
LYNNE@nuacc.acns.nwu.edu (Lynne D Jeffers) says:
>
>My question to you is, What is "ready?"

For us, "ready" was when we realized we couldn't think of any reason to
break up.  (We'd been together for 1 year and 8 months at the time, and
he was about to graduate and get a job elsewhere.  This was a logical
time to break up or get engaged, since we didn't think it made sense to
have an LDR if there was no concrete plan for a future together.)

-Sonja
------
SEK@psuvm.psu.edu SEK@PSUVM.BITNET
Love is not enough.  It must be the foundation, the cornerstone --
but not the complete structure.  It is much too pliable, too yielding.
                                            - Bette Davis
From: webdw@cbnews.cb.att.com (bruce.d.woods)
Newsgroups: soc.couples
Subject: Do you remember - 50's edition.
Date: 13 Apr 92 16:05:50 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T


McDonald's hamburgers - a new novelty only 15 cents each.

Hula hoops - another fad toy by Wham-O the company that also
marketed the Slinky.

Playing cards attached to bicycle fenders - to make "engine"
noises when the spokes hit them.

Winston cigarettes - the first nationally popular filter cigarette
and sponsor of the CBS news program, "Douglas Edwards with the news".

Vanguard missiles - they kept blowing up as the US tried to launch
its first satellite.

Long red licorice sticks - for 2 cents each.

Lone Ranger/Hopalong Cassidy/Roy Rogers/Gene Autry - cap guns.

Your Hit Parade - The top 7 songs of the week, on TV.

Passbook savings rate of 3%, home mortgage rate of 4 1/2%, a very
heavy trading day on the NYSE was 20,000,000 shares.

Most folks didn't lock their doors (or need to).

The danger from unprotected sex was NOT disease.
Newsgroups: soc.couples
From: rfelix@netcom.com (Robbie Felix)
Subject: Younger/older/different
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 92 18:10:08 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

There is a lot of discussion here regarding differences between two
members of a romantic partnership. I see them as all the same issue,
whether they are differences in culture, age, religion, size, shape,
race etc.etc.

If you are a person who finds diversity attractive, who respects the
differences between people, it probably won't be an insurmountable
problem for you. If you are a person who prefers to associate with
people who are your same race, age, culture, religion, size and shape
, you probably will probably not be happy with a lover who is
different either.

If I choose to walk down the street with a friend who is fatter,
skinnier, younger,older, blacker or whiter than I am, I do not care
what other people think. If there is a "stigma" attached to this, I do
not care. I feel sorry for people who are motivated my the approval of
others.

Love is a precious and awesome thing. I would never let someone else's
opinions get in the way of my happiness. If you find love, don't go
looking for things to extinguish it with! Especially opinions from
people who don't care about your happiness first!

I have said before, If you choose to march to a different drum, do it
bravely. If you choose to travel a path different from most, don't be
surprised when you don't get their approval! Learn to live without
needing approval from others and you will be a LOT happier!


rf
Newsgroups: soc.couples