HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: awerling@nmsu.edu (WERLING)
Subject: Re: Unisex bathrooms
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 22:02:48 GMT

In article <95kn83p.payner@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:

> >By at least putting the urinals behind a door, women can use the mens room,
> >if necessary, and it would be less embarassing to all involved.

> Have you never seen a mens bathroom where one wall is a continuous
> porcelain urinal? Also, this makes getting in and out very inconvient,
> and possibly dangerous if the door has sharp edges. Is there some problem
> with keeping a mens room usable for men as well?


Well, this is one male who goes to the stall no matter *what* he has
to do in there...unless the entire bathroom is empty.

Maybe public bathrooms should just be gigantic unisex areas of stalls
(even if they put the urinals in the stalls).

--
Andrew Werling    awerling@nmsu.edu    yip@acca.nmsu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: gworrell@carina.unm.edu (Gayla M. Worrell)
Subject: Children's Books
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 23:08:45 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Distribution: usa


I am responding to the person requesting information about books for children.
I am sorry I cannot respond personally, I have misplaced the original posting.

In the past few years, there has been an explosion in the number of non-sexist, non-racist children's books published.  Having lost your posting, I do not know which city you live in.  If it is a major city, you probably have a feminist  
bookstore somewhere nearby.  If you are unable to locate one, let me know, I canconnect you to some great publishers who provide mail order service.

I applaud your decision to expose your child to these books.

******************************************************************************
Gayla M. Worrell        gworrell@carina.unm.edu        
University of New Mexico - Mental Health Center, Albuquerque, NM

My employer thinks I have no opinion, so these must be my own.
 
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Playing Games with Words
Date: 4 Sep 92 20:04:58 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <Bu29y4.AEK@comp.vuw.ac.nz>, Francis.Gardner@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Francis Gardner) writes:

>   What I plan to do is flip a coin to determine the gender of my third person,
>   and state in the report that I did as such to get around this problem.

>   Comments, flames.......

(Sorry, I only have a comment.  I don't have time to think of a really good
flame!)

You might try not using "he" or "she" at all.  Many times one can simply
use a title, such as "the operator" or "the user", etc instead of using
"he" or "she".  It's a bit of a challenge to write a document this way,
but it can be done!

Terry "the poster" Wood
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: ERA question
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<1992Aug26.222810.3115@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 21:53:04 GMT

<In article <1992Aug26.222810.3115@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> rweibl@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Richard A Weibl) writes:

<The arguments may be legitimate, but they really avoided the substantive nature
<of the ERA intent.  The basic argument was that women should not be treated as
<second class citizens solely on the basis of their sex.  That means, more
<importantly than bathroom facilities, that women should receive equal pay for
<equal work; employment, housing, and educational opportunities should not be
<beyond the reach of women because of their sex; and that in issues of family
<rights as defined by law, women should have equal access to resources, 
<property, and government support.

<What the opponents did was ignore these issues, displace the discourse in 
<academic terms, and shaped the debate in a manner that was intended to appeal 
<to irrational fears.

	Odd, I recall some opponents to the ERA pointing out that
	equal pay for equal work had been the law since the late
	1960's, that employment, housing and educational opportunities
	were already addressed by various aspects of the Civil Rights
	legislation (again of the 1960's) and that issues of
	family rights were properly left to various States, rather
	than the Federal Government.

	Perhaps I had the misfortune to know articulate, thinking
	people who opposed the ERA instead of the cartoon characters
	Ric apparently encountered.
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: The trashing of alt.feminism
Date: 2 Sep 92 23:05:12 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <MUFFY.92Sep2144632@remarque.berkeley.edu>, muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
> In article <5389@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> abbst@vms.cis.pitt.edu writes:

> Heck, mine aren't flames, either, then.

>>Please feel free to flame all you like.  With every posting -- with every
>>attack you make you justify why you should not be a moderator.  

> *LAUGH*...oh, right.  I *know* there there is nothing that says that
> moderators of one group cannot flame in another.  There is also nothing
> that says they cannot defend themselves when attacked.

You are quite right, there is nothing that says one can't flame whether or
not one is a moderator.  But why don't both of you try not flaming?

Please!

Terry
-- 
        INTERNET: tjw+@pitt.edu         BITNET: TJW@PITTVMS
"Laugh while you can, Monkey Boy!"                        - Lord "John" Warfin
"There can be only one!"                                  - The Highlander
"There should have been only one. I want my money back!"  - Terry
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: umlepine@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Bryan Lepine)
Subject: Re: Sexist studies... was(Re: Feminism & Women's Studies)
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 16:02:55 GMT

In <xqkn+8p.payner@netcom.com> payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes:

>In article <AWERLING.92Sep1232252@dante.nmsu.edu> awerling@nmsu.edu (WERLING) writes:
>>
>>Women's Studies in and of itself is *not* sexist.  It is a study that
>>focuses on a particular group of people.  

>No, you are playing games with words, it focuses on a particular
>-sex-. 

 From what I've seen in this newsgroup this is the what feminists do. They
play with words in order to find some possible insult to their gender so
they can then proceed to dump on whoever dares utter such slander!
Sheesh! Give me a break who cares if you call men boys and women girls?
 Maybe we should use descriptions:

	Excuse me, would youpeople with the bulges in your sweaters enjoy
going to coffe with that group of people over there with the bulges in
their pants? 

 No doubt this will be even worse than using boys and girls because it
refers to parts on a female that they don't like us males staring at yet
at the same time they fight to be able to expose them in public!
 I have an easier time figuring out my tax forms! :^)


And one last thing:

	I LIKED THE STAR TREK OPENING BETTER BEFORE THEY WERE PRESSURED
	INTO CHANGING IT! 

whew, I had to get that off my chest

Don't flame too hard cuz I respect the right to equality for any race
religion or gender, however I don't care who does it, arguing semantics is
silly and it doesn't solve a damn thing. If you are able to obtain
equality in the workplace and at home what does it matter if what anybody
calls you?
-- 
============================================================================
"For a successful technology, reality must take |Bryan C. Lepine           |
 precedence over public relations, for nature   |umlepine@ccu.umanitoba.ca |
 cannot be fooled."	 -Richard Feynman       ============================
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel)
Subject: Re: Sexist Incidents
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 19:39:56 GMT

aaldrich@encore.com (Al Aldrich) writes:

...[examples of 'sexist' behavior deleted]...

>Even the most well intentioned and politically correct men continue to
>play rougher with their male kids then their female kids,

They certainly do. The most recent issue of Scientific American has
an article on sexual differentiation of the human brain. One of the
interesting differences that emerges is that mammals, primates in
particular, engage in rough-and-tumble play primarily among male
young.

Perhaps these "...well intentioned and politically correct men..."
are following the dictates of their biological makeup, rather
than the transient pressures of current fashion.

Regards,
       H. Biesel
From: Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: proposed vote of confidence
Date: 3 Sep 92 01:36:38 GMT
Reply-To: Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde)
Followup-To: alt.feminism
Organization: Ministry of Silly Walks
Originator: lunde@casbah.acns.nwu.edu

In article <1992Sep2.164407.24466@panix.com> gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
>The only possible reason to have a "vote of confidence"
>in the moderators of soc.feminism, or to replace them, would
>be to silence soc.feminism as a distinct newsgroup.

Also, the creation of this group has created an alternative forum
where people *may* discuss feminism without the benifits or
disadvantages of moderation. This renders some of the questions a bit moot.

-- 
 Albert Lunde         | Interfaith  |     *Y*Y*      "A branch on the
 Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu |  Bisexual   |      *Y*        tree of life"
 alunde@nuacvm.bitnet |  Feminist   |.......|.........................
Organization: Masters student, Materials Science and Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Date: Wed,  2 Sep 1992 12:55:04 -0400 
From: David O Hunt <dh4j+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Freshm*n

What about "frosh"?  :P

David
From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Sweeping Generalizations About Men By Feminists (Was: Feminism & Women's Studies)
Date: 3 Sep 92 02:53:11 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) flogs Dworkin yet again.  If Dworkin
did not exist, people like Nosy would have to invent her.

In article <Btz0M4.Erx@encore.com> aaldrich@encore.com (Al Aldrich) writes:
| I can see that if the above statements are a reflection of what most
| here feel to be the feminist `party line' why there is so much
| animosity. Whew..what a bunch of hate flying here.. Does anyone out
| there feel that the above 2 statements ARE correct or lend any
| credibility to them at all? Baffled.

You're getting a the soc.men version of feminism.  Besides
that, there are hundreds of books, articles, and postings
that reflect another kind of feminism.

Just study the texts, and notice out of those millions of
sentences which Nosy finds important, and you'll see where
he's at.
-- 
 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
From: smeyer@panix.com (Seth Meyer)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Freshm*n
Date: 2 Sep 92 13:55:12 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <oneil.715407157@cwis> oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil) writes:
>smeyer@panix.com (Seth Meyer) writes:
>>Is the term "student" sexist because it has "stud" in it?  What about
>>other languages which have words which imply only one sex?
>
>Don't be silly.  The word "man" in freshman is gender-specific.  The
>word "student" comes from the Latin word "studeo" meaning to study.
>Please be careful about the etymologies you use.

OK.  What about "woman"?  I think I've seen this spelled "womyn" but I
don't recall where.  (Probably back at school...) How about other
languages which have gender specific words?

>>freshm*n level?  It's the student's third year but they're a
>>first-year student?
>
>Yes, because they have only completed the "first year" of studies,
>technically.

But if they've completed two years of studies elsewhere but the
college they transfer to only allows credits for ... well I understand
your point.  Maybe it's just the way it sounds.  Why not "freshling"?
Even "freshperson" would have been better than "first-year student."

>Think carefully about the words that have been used to describe a weak
>man and you will realize that sexism is inherent in that language: "sissy"
>"ef/feminate/" "girlie-man" (Not to mention homophobia, which I believe
>is directly related to sexism.)

True, but this works the other way too.  Like "tom-boy" for example.
Granted, the number of words are not equal to those to describe weak
men.

>Think about the curses we use in English.  If you tell someone to 
>get "f***ed" or if you say "I'm going to f*** you up" you're basically
>saying that you think the person should be put in the woman's position
>during a rape.  

This is new to me.  I never heard this comparison made and I don't see
the connection.  Please explain this.

- Seth
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: tyger@netcom.com (Kitty in the Middle)
Subject: Re: What's the purpose here?
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 00:20:25 GMT
Organization:  Funk the Dumb Stuff!

In article <MUFFY.92Aug26172614@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>In article <1bbnqca.tyger@netcom.com> tyger@netcom.com (Kitty in the Middle) writes:
>>I would agree that keeping things civil is a good idea, in general, but lately
>>I and others who have posted there or have tried to have compared notes, and 
>>seen that prospective posts that appeared to us to be harmless, but in 
>>disagreement with the party line, if you will, were rejected.
>
>Well, I'd be *very* curious to know what "the party line" is.  If there
>is one, no one told me about it, so I have not been rejecting posts on
>that basis.  Would you please tell me what this party line is?

HellifIknow. Every time I think I have it figured out, it switches, or seems
to. I come up with something I think may be relevant, give it a go, and
*poof* no good. Of course this *was* almost two years ago...I've poked my 
head in once or twice since, but I don't see much of a difference. Here's a 
question for you...why, of the moderated groups, is soc.feminism one of the
only ones with more than one moderator...volume? checks and balances? Thoughts?

>Thanks so very much...

Always a pleasure, Ms. Barkocy.

>Muffy

  Tyger

-- 
      Kristen Kohlbecker    And I would choose to be with you
      tyger@netcom.com      That's if the choice were mine to make   
                            But you can make decisions too
      A Tyger and a Lady    And you can have this heart to break
From: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: girl/woman = guy/man? (WAS: Sexist Incidents)
Date: 3 Sep 92 15:27:35 GMT
Organization: AIAI, University of Edinburgh, Scotland

In article <715423078.17379@minster.york.ac.uk> aaron@minster.york.ac.uk writes:

>best to use the word "woman" as a substitute (and mean it and not just as
>a vacuous substitution when the speaker would still rather use the derogatory
>term "girl"). 

So in addition to saying something something different, we have to
mean something different?  If what we say is of so little importance,
why can't we just mean something different (which I already do)?
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: litow@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (bruce e litow)
Subject: H. Biesel and catheterization
Summary: A good idea improved upon
Originator: litow@proclus.csd.uwm.edu
Keywords: cut out the middleman, Dr. Benway
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 16:13:12 GMT

H. Biesel, in a recent posting, suggested surgical alterations in
men and women (sic) in order to equalize lavatory utilization stress,
both in the larger societal sense, and in the ever-menacing personal
hygiene one. His suggestion is a swell one (to steal a phrase) but
Dr. Benway (always thinking about somatic improvements) has proposed
a more radical approach. Following his motto, `cut out the middleman',
Benway would simply attach a venting tube from the bladder with an
external nozzle. This eliminates that annoying urethra and, with a
CO2 assist, could provide for spectacular voidings. The idea is
literally too good to be true, no?


Dr. Benway is responsible for this swell idea, I'm just reporting
the facts.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: slaury@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Susan Laury)
Subject: Re: Feminists ignore Cosmetics?
Organization: Indiana University
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 18:32:32 GMT

In article <181h94INNiu@cs.utexas.edu> russw@cs.utexas.edu (Russ Williams) writes:
>
>Hold on, is there actually a real difference between perfume and cologne?
>I always assumed they were basically the same chemically, and they just
>call it "perfume" for women and "cologne" for men for marketing reasons.


Actually, perfume is more highly conctrated than cologne. I think
that is the main difference. However, most of what is sold to women
is cologne, even though it is referred to as perfume.


-- 
And the speaking will get easier and easier. ... And at last you'll know with
surpassing certainty that only one thing is more frightening than speaking
your truth. And that is not speaking.
		--Naomi Wolf, Commencement Address, Scripps College
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: mackenzi@McRCIM.McGill.EDU (Paul Mackenzie)
Subject: Sexist Incidents
Originator: mackenzi@ice.mcrcim.mcgill.edu
Organization: McGill Research Centre for  Intelligent Machines
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 92 18:36:39 GMT


Has anyone had any experience with blatant sexism?  By this I mean some
decision making that was OBVIOUSLY based on sex where sex had no logical
part in the decision.  I am trying to find out what this is, because all
through school, university, and now graduate school I have never really
witnessed what I thought was sexist (other than on TV, books, etc).  I
am particularly interested in sexism in universities.

I guess I'm either blind or lucky.  If the former, please open my eyes.

Paul
From: dsvoss@isr.harvard.edu (Steve Voss)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
Subject: Re: ERA question
Date: 27 Aug 92 00:45:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA

Richard may not have dismissed the possibility of unisex bathrooms or
a female draft, but I did, so maybe I am responsible for the ire.  That's
not to say I am not sympathetic to either cause (I support both).  But
I do not believe that the ERA was very likely to produce either of these.
Nor do I think it would have produced equal pay for equal work.  If you
read the Jane Mansbridge book I recommended on "Why We Lost the ERA"
you will see that an anti-discrimination clause protecting women already
had been written into law by the early 1980s, and it hadn't produced
any of these results as expressed in court decisions.

The fact is, the impact of a constitutional amendment as vague as the
ERA would have been is basically in the hands of the courts.  Since
the particular guys we had on the bench during the 1980s (and the
woman we picked up during the decade) were a very unlikely crew to be
forcing mixed-sex restrooms or a female draft, you can't legitimately
expect that would have been the result of the proposed text.

Remember, blacks had "equal protection" under the law all during the
period of Jim Crow laws and lynchings and KKK power.  Didn't help them
much at all until the Warren Court started interpreting the constitution
in a favorable way.  Same probably would have been true with an ERA.

Steve Voss
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: julie@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu (Julie Wright)
Subject: Re: Sexist Incidents
Organization: Center for Biomolecular Simulation, Department of Chemistry,
	Columbia University
	<1992Aug31.174327.17143@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
	<ATAYLOR.92Sep1194028@gauss.nmsu.edu>
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 07:02:15 GMT

In article <ATAYLOR.92Sep1194028@gauss.nmsu.edu> ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy) writes:

>	   If these remarks are serious, these men are stupid and sexist.
>	   If they are "jokes", these men may be sexist or may
>	   merely be stupid (or may be both).
>
>	   It does not follow, however, that all men
>	   are stupid and/or sexist.
>
>	   How do you deal with these remarks? Do you feel
>	   that your way of dealing with them is "working"?
>
>	   Sometimes there is no easy solution to such a problem....


	My mother and I once had a long discussion trying to figure
out how to handle these situations.  Ideally, of course, one comes up
with a witty retort which puts the jerk in his place and convulses 
everyone else with mirth.  In reality, for us, this rarely happens, so
we had to come up with a backup plan.  A few situations call for 
outright hostility, but this is unpleasant and can cause more problems
than it solves.  The best general plan we came up with was to act
politely puzzled and ask for an explanation, in a confused but well-
meaning sort of way.  If done properly, it should kill a stupid joke,
or make a person's sexist views abundantly clear to everyone present.
	And when you think of that witty retort 8 hours later, be sure
to share it with your friends so they'll be prepared to use it in a 
similar situation.
	
---j.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: awerling@nmsu.edu (WERLING)
Subject: Re: Feminism & Women's Studies
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
	<1992Aug31.172158.16877@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 00:34:27 GMT

In article <1992Aug31.172158.16877@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> crussel@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Carol A Russell) writes:

>But you're up against the old adage of "how to prove a negative", in this case 
>that you're *not* anti-feminism.

Actually, it would be the feminist's job -- if the feminist were the
one making the allegation that all men are anti-feminist -- to prove
that Seth *is* anti-feminist.  Not the other way around.

>And I don't think it is the feminist's goal to yell at men...but we have a lot 
>of pent up anger.

I took a Women Writers course in the English department here a couple
of years ago...I was one of four men in the course (one eventually
dropped due to his own procrastination).  I learned from the course
how women's voices have been stifled throughout history, and how they
had to fight to be heard.  Through literature, we studied this, and I
learned quite a bit from it.  I am not well-schooled in modern
feminism, but have interest in it.  

Basically, I am curious.  How am I anti-feminist?


>   carol

Thanks for giving me something to think about Carol!

--
Andrew Werling   awerling@nmsu.edu   yip@acca.nmsu.edu
"now we find sodom strange take it out put it in your mouth how do you like
gomorrah now a taste of this swallow that feel the fish hide the hat ezekial
where's your wheel you better grease it GREASE GREASE GREASE GREASE! ROCK!!!"
       --Chainsaw Kittens, "Ezekial Walks Through Sodom and Gomorrah"
Newsgroups: alt.feminism