HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wendyt@cs.washington.edu (Wendy Thrash)
Subject: Rob B.
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 92 22:20:50 GMT

I have tried for days now to post a simple article remembering Rob,
saying goodbye.  I don't seem to be able to do it.  I'm just too angry.

I'll miss you, cowboy.
-Wendy T.
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: coren@osf.org (Robert Coren)
Subject: Re: gay vegetarians anonymous (was, be kind to small furry animals)
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 13:46:21 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.200844.18753@reed.edu>, nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) writes:
> I can't imagine this is possibly interesting to anyone on soc.motss,

Oh no, of course not.

> but if I'm asked a direct question my egotistical nature requires that
> I respond..
> 

It wouldn't be Usenet if you didn't.

> In article <1992Aug20.141127.8608@osf.org> coren@osf.org (Robert Coren) writes:
> >In article <1992Aug19.215833.10537@reed.edu>, nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) writes:
> >> If it wiggled, I won't eat it.
> >Just out of idle curiosity, does this include spermatozoa?
> 
> idle?

Idle, at the moment... they don't travel well, and besides...

> 
> Unfortunately, I do not eat spermatozoa. I resent the hell out of it,
> but it really doesn't seem like it's a good idea - the few figures we
> have on that transmission vector for HIV are not encouraging.

As FJ!! has already reminded us.

Of course, my question *was* idle, and mostly a joke anyway. Somehow i
had an association of ideas from the word "wiggle"...
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: psp@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (P.S. Powledge)
Subject: Re: The Claytoon on the Couch (was Re: Stereotyping)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 02:05:57 GMT
Keywords: spokespersons, alternative lifestyes, poor


In an article somewhere, somebody from the 'alternative cognitive function'
community typed:

>In article <1992Aug20.154755.9413@tc.cornell.edu> shore@tc.cornell.edu writes:
>>Claytoon is a pig.  Anyone who's spent any time around
>>livestock can tell you that.
>Folks who stare at more than the inside of their own eyeballs might begin
>to see a pattern developing from these who are asserting themselves as
>spokespersons of of the 'alternative sex' community.

Hey, wow, Melinda -- I didn't know you'd been promoted to "spokesperson."
Congratulations! It really gives me hope to see "just another member of 
the cabal" work her way up the ladder!

Awed,
-- 
				||| Polly Powledge
				||| Internet: P.S.Powledge@ATT.COM
				||| Uucp:     att!hrmso!psp
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mara@panix.com (Mara Chibnik)
Subject: Re: Responses to people dying
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 21:06:48 GMT
Organization: (getting there)

jclander@maestro.mitre.org (Julian C. Lander) responds to Mark
Morrissey's suggestion that we use National Coming Out Day as
the annual "recollection" day for Rob and others of the friends
we have lost:

 >No! No! Please, no!  A day is a good idea, but don't use one already 
 >dedicated to a certain purpose.
Seconded (unless you want to take over something like Memorial Day
or Good Friday).  That is, I don't care if the day without posting
is already used for some other consideration, but please, *not*
NCOD.

Not only do I agree with Julian that:
 >we need to maintain at least a theoretical distinction
 >between queers (in this case, I'm using "queer" as shorthand for lesbian,
 >gay, bisexual, etc.) and AIDS [ ... ]

I'd like to expand on his thought:
 >Potential flame deterrent:  You may argue that the issue isn't just
 >AIDS (see the next quoted paragraph below) but a general memorial day for
 >queerfolk.  But then why co-opt a day which already has queer 
 >significance?

I'd like to see NCOD as a *celebration*.  It's assertive, it's
upbeat.  If there is trepidation going into it there should be
affirmation coming out of it.  It is, of all days, not the day to
suggest refraining from posting on the net.

Heck, I'd settle for Thanksgiving.  That has always been a big
family holiday for my folks (although with my parents spending
longer winters in Florida these days that may well change), and my
mother has _always_ asked each of us at the table, every year, what
we were especially thankful for.  And one item on our list,
collectively, has always been good friends.

I don't intend this so much as a suggestion as I do a hint that
I'd prefer almost any date to October 11.  

 >[Removing foam, descending.]
Julian, I kept trying to hear your lathered voice in my mind's ear
as I read your article, but it all seemed quite level headed and
reasonable to me.  There weren't nearly enough aaarghs and
grrrrrrrrrrghs and capital letters for foam.  Maybe another time.

-- 

  Mara Chibnik
  mara@panix.com                Life is too important to be taken seriously.

Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: amz@iguana.cis.ohio-state.edu (Arnold M Zwicky)
Subject: Re: wearing symbols
Followup-To: soc.motss
Summary: make a moving target
Organization: getting there
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 23:53:34 GMT

in article <1992Aug16.194309.21551@macc.wisc.edu>
anderson@macc.wisc.edu (jess anderson) writes:

 >Do [our symbols] need protection?  I don't think so.  After all, we
 >can create new ones any time we like.  To treat the rainbow
 >banner or the pink triangle like a corporate logo is to
 >acquiesce in the opposition's philosophy.

just so.  even better, we can keep adding new ones, changing them,
shifting their meanings.  (lesbigay symbols can be like slang
vocabulary.  they're all signals of group identity, negotiated on the
spot by members of the group, always in the process of renegotiation,
not something decided on by people in authority.)  we can present a
constantly moving target, lighting on anything except the few symbols
already claimed by law.  we can be everywhere.

and when our symbols overlap with other groups', we can trumpet our
meanings, and give the other groups the choice of fleeing from our
shared symbols, thereby exposing their homophobia, or of living
comfortably (or at least not unfomfortably) with the ambiguity.

arnold
From: max@athena.mit.edu (Max Meredith Vasilatos)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Goodbye to Rob
Date: 16 Aug 92 00:43:16 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

From the tibetan:

"Even if the object is a wild animal, bird, human, non-human or 
spirit, if the time of death has already passed, if one recites 
the mantra one hundred, one thousand, ten thousand or one hundred 
thousand times with loving compassion ... within seven days,
inevitably, he will be liberated from the lower realms and be
reborn in a happy realm..."

referring to the Mantra Purifying the Karmic Obscurations:

namo ratna trayaya, om kamkani kamkani, rotzani rotzani,
tortani tortani, trasani trasani, partihana partihana, 
sarwa karma param parani me sarwa sato nam soha

Consider it said a bazillion times for Rob.  I'm sorry he died.

Max
max@athena.mit.edu
From: aberson@enh.nist.gov
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: RE: sexual attraction
Date: 14 Aug 92 22:40:57 GMT
Organization: NIST

In a previous article, nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) wrote:
>In article <1992Aug14.020214.17310@cis.ohio-state.edu> amz@iguana.cis.ohio-state.edu (Arnold M Zwicky) writes:
>>  [1 the prime directive:] people i love nonsexually are attractive to
>>me sexually;
> 
>I noticed this myself recently. I figured it out when I fell for about
>the fourth straight male friend of mine.

This has changed for me recently.  For the last few years, since returning
to South Florida, during a time of upheaval in my life, I tended to form
friendships with people who I was not sexually attracted to.  This kept the 
friendships simple and kept jealousy out of my primary relationship, things I 
needed at the time.  Lately, though, I have been befriending people I have 
found attractive, and I'm finding the sexual pulls and tugs to be refreshing, 
and to add a separate dimension to the my friendships.

>I also realized that I wish I
>weren't so homosexual so that I would enjoy being sexual with a female
>friend of mine.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.  I have been interested in experiencing
sex with a motos, even though I have never found any women to be sexually
attractive.  I do have a couple of longtime female friends who I have thought 
about having sex with at various times, but have never done anything with
these thoughts yet.  I'm not sure that my being gay has much to do with my
ability to have sex with a woman, just, as we have discussed recently, a man
having sex with another man can still be straight.

>So what does this mean? Does it mean that I make friends with people
>who are sexually attractive, or is it that I tend to be sexually
>attracted to friends of mine? I don't know. What does one do when the
>inevitable problems occur?

Are these necessarily problems.  Sometimes a change to a friendship of a 
sexual nature follows naturally, and there may be no problems.

>I'm also glad that I tend to love (nonsexually) people who I am
>sexually attracted to. I know people who like to have sex with one
>sort of person, but they are not capable of being friends with these
>people. I am happy that I am not this way.

I'm happy that I'm finding myself to be less this way also.

       Sim Aberson   Ft. Lauderdale, FL   aberson%3328.span@sdsc.edu
"It's always Beach Party Barbie, or Malibu Barbie....  That shit does not
prepare you for the true horror of a real woman's life.  Where is Single,
Abused, Trailer-Park Barbie?"             - Roseanne Arnold
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: rlc1028@tamsun.tamu.edu  
Subject: Banana Republic Ad in September VANITY FAIR
Organization: Texas A&M University
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 16:43:00 GMT

Has anyone seen the new Banana Republic ad in the September issue of
VANITY FAIR, pages 262 & 263?  A male couple is featured cuddling
with a cityscape in the background.  The picture is entitled (as are
other B.R. ads) "Free Souls".

The issue ahs been out for a little while.  Have I just totally missed the
discussion, or is this news?

Bud Cox
rlc1028@zeus.tamu.edu
From: adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Whizzzzzzz ( was Re: Introduction)
Date: 19 Aug 1992 19:41:46 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu

In article <19AUG92.17400951@enh.nist.gov> 
aberson@enh.nist.gov, who really ought to get
out of that weather balloon and see some movies, writes:
> In a previous article, adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson) wrote:
> >[Aside: What *was* that horrible restaurant Mae West used to
> >like?  Damn, I wish I could remember.  Anyway, the father of
> >a friend of mine was in the national tour of "Sextette" and
> >he has all sorts of funny stories about her.]
>
> Perhaps we will hear some of them during the next crosspost frenzy?

Please, no more crosspost frenzies!  I can't remember
many of them, actually, so I'd have to call Mike (the father
of my friend) and listen to him talk on and on and on about
himself and the soap he's on and all sorts of other stuff
before I'd be able to ask him for some of the Mae West stories.
The only thing I can remember offhand, now that I think of
it, is that Mae would carry on conversations with her fellow
actors *during* the performance.  Not conversations, really,
but she'd make observations about people in the audience, and
she'd make them loud enough for people in the first few rows
to hear.  Things like, "Will you get a load of the tits on that 
broad in the second row".

[...]
> I'm realizing that the few same-sex love scenes I have seen seem more 
> real to me the motos sex on screen, not because I can relate to them, 
> but possibly because they are portrayed more realistically.  

More *realistically*?  Oh dear.  Are we talking about porn here?
I was.

> They don't
> have passion measured by dripping sweat, sex in bizarre places
> (Risky Business comes to mind - the scene in the subway), 

Um, have you see Inch by Inch?

> moaning and
> groaning to orgasm usually seen in opposite sex coupling.

We must watch different movies.

> I could just be idealizing the very few gay sex scenes I have
> ever seen on the screen, though.

Oh, well then you have many hours of viewing pleasure ahead
of you!

Arne
From: fjvwing@cs.vu.nl (FJ!!)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Introduction
Date: 20 Aug 92 09:56:48 GMT

anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
::In article <m=!n=+m.jfh@netcom.com> jfh@netcom.com (Jack
::Hamilton) writes:

:::I'd prefer to think that people like John Dorrance and Elf
:::Sternberg are the wave of the future.
:As an aside, it would not have occurred to me to put Elf on
:the "about-20" crest of the wave; he's been around much
:longer than Donald, John, Nelson or Trey, in my impression.

Jezus C, what does it take to get mentioned here? I'm only two years
older than John! Do I have to make my name even shorter?

				FJ!! (#include Arne_big_smilie.c)
From: sik@cci632.cci.com (Shawn Kammerdiener)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: UNGAY GAY
Date: 13 Aug 92 17:38:06 GMT
Organization: CCI

In article <15rij1INNbna@cs.utexas.edu> osborn@cs.utexas.edu (John Howard Osborn) writes:
>>
>>so: the new sightings are in syracuse, san francisco, san jose,
>locally political, and social issues.  It also has "News of the Weird"
>(yea!) and "The Straight Dope" (yea!) and "Life in Hell."  (Yea!)
>

	In case no one mentioned it, this ad also appeared in Rochester, NY.
Our alternative paper _City Newspaper_ has had it for several months now.
I know someone on the paper and am attempting to get information on the
solicitor of the advertisement. Keep ya posted.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil,
is that good men do nothing." - Edmund Burke.
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: wjw@leland.Stanford.EDU (Wilhelmus Johannes Wytenburg)
Subject: Morrison & Foerster: any comments?
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 18:18:26 GMT


A general question to all the motssies out there:
Does anyone have any info about or experience with
the EOE/non-descrimination policy of the law firm
Morrison & Foerster?  Any comments about good, bad,
or indifferent experiences are welcomed.

Thanx,

wjw@leland.stanford.edu

---------------------- + ------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: hughes@daffy.cis.udel.edu (John Hughes)
Subject: Re: What the phobes really want
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 03:15:50 GMT

In article <joelp.714272306@cs.man.ac.uk> joelp@cs.man.ac.uk (Joel Parthemore || Pharos Project) writes:
>rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes about that Gay Problem and just what
>should we do with these poor sods, anyway?...
>
>>	Eventually we all end up being relocated to Delaware.
>
>Lord, what a nightmare!  So that's my subconscious reason why I'm not too keen
>to return Stateside.  (OK, my sister lives in Delaware.)

Hey! Hey! What's all this about Delaware? Is something wrong with Delaware?
Hey, I *live* in Delaware.

Though I probably wouldn't mind it if each and every one of you really
were relocated to Delaware...


John
hughes@cis.udel.edu


...but I can't help it. I tried to live in Philadelphia.
From: markm@ogicse.ogi.edu (Mark Morrissey)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Question about non-rights laws (OR:9 CO:2)
Date: 16 Aug 92 16:52:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.41510
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute (formerly OGC), Beaverton, OR

In article <1992Aug16.154331.3346@spdcc.com> rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:
>
>	Could the proposed anti-gay laws in CO and OR be construed
>to outlaw gay bars?

Yes.  Bars, baths, hotels, restaurants.  If it requires a license from the
state and can be shown to cater to homosexuals, then a license can be
withdrawn (remember who awards health certificates).

One of the concerns here is that, like a bartender who must refuse to serve
someone whom he believes to be intoxicated, establishements will be required
to refuse service to 'known' or suspected homosexuals.

If this passes, then I think a ballot measure to change the name of the
state capital to Nuremburg is called for.

--mark
--
Mark Morrissey           One Hatred to rule them all.  One Hatred to find them.
markm@cse.ogi.edu        One Hatred to bring them all and in the darkness bind
                         them.  In the land of Bigotry where the Shadows lie.

Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: cbe@unlinfo.unl.edu (cbe)
Subject: Re: musical finale
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 18:05:25 GMT

anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:


>In article <1992Aug22.155847.17936@unlinfo.unl.edu>
>cbe@unlinfo.unl.edu (cbe) writes:

>>I think my preference would be 
>>more of a an incremental farewell to this world:

>>Schumann: Second Movement, Quartet in A Major

>>Mozart: Aria from Zaide
>>        Masonic Funeral Music (no, I don't wear aprons)

>>Bach:   Et resurrexit from the Mass in B Minor (not for religious 
>>        content, but for joy)

>>It seems to me that JSB is necessary for any *proper*
>>introduction to Eternity.

>>Or, maybe, just the Berg Violin Concerto.

to which Jess responds:
>Dearest, baby, honey-lamb, you've been keeping secrets!
>Those in the know about such things are scarcer than hen's
>teeth in these precincts (though there are a very few others
>that I know of, including one first-rate composer).

>-- 

But then there is the very obvious:

Ravel:  Pavane pour une Infant_a_ defunte


Colburn Eigen                  H|u> = E|u>
From: twpierce@amhux1.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Too straight looking to be gay??? (was re: UNGAY GAY)
Date: 19 Aug 92 17:02:27 GMT
Organization: Amherst College, Amherst MA

In article <1992Aug17.182110.2986@microsoft.com> bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:

>There is a whole, invisible chunk of gay men that won't come out because
>they refuse to be identified with the intentional femininity and 
>other bizarre practices that are prevalent among the fringe.

Their problem.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / "I don't know how much support NAMBLA
\  / twpierce@amherst.edu      /  has in the gay community."
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /   -- Clayton Cramer, August 1992
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: sgw@boy.com (Steven Warner)
Subject: Re: Too straight looking to be gay??? (was re: UNGAY GAY)
Organization: Beach Systems / RTFM UN*X Solutions, Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 05:44:03 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.172701.3835@microsoft.com> bobsarv@microsoft.com (Bob Sarver) writes:
>1.  Because many of the the more feminine types would rather be masculine, 
>    but just can't seem to get the hang of it;

The type of people you speak of are much more secure in who they are then you
seem to be, from what you have written.

[more bs deleted]

>3.  Because the more feminine gays feel that if they have to go
>    through life being immediately identified as gay and ostracized
>    for it, then goddammit, so should everybody else

That assumes that these people do not want to be identified, which is
not necessarly correct, or that being identified as gay is bad, which is
wrong, or that they should feel badly about being thought of as GAY
which is bullshit.

>I have met many gay men, handsome, masculine, and closeted--and they will
>probably stay that way forever.  Why?  Because the once-a-year trip to a gay
>function or gay bar reinforces their fears of being surrounded by nelly,
>campy gays that are embarassing and fringe radicals.

This line shows how ignorant your judgements are. How many _gay_ functions
have you been to? Did you notice that there are _ALL_ kinds of people there?
Not everyone fits into your stereotype of fem or masc. 

>Don't worry about it.  The problem is not with you.  It is with them.

There isn't any problem, since you only come out once a year, right?
----
 Steven Warner                 " happiness = reality - expectations "
 34W   sgw@boy.com
 36L   sunnyvale, ca, usa
From: sclark@ocf.berkeley.edu (Steven Clark)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Lost in Austin
Date: 21 Aug 92 15:33:02 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigbang.berkeley.edu

In article <1992Aug20.194248.370@oakhill.sps.mot.com> rjchou@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Ri Jen Chou) writes:

>No, 6th street is *not* where you want to be.  Next time try 4th and Colorado,
>2nd and San Jacinto, and 7th and Red River.   But these are pretty close to
>each other, and within easy walking distance of 6th street.

Thanks for the info! I wish I'd asked *before* I left!! I heard Hippie
Hollow (a nude swimming hole on Lake Travis) was also a good place to 
go but, alas I didn't get a chance. 

>I am really sorry that you encountered this in Austin, or anywhere
>for that matter.

Well, it hasn't soured me on the whole city, or even the state. 
I did have a lot of very positive experiences there, too. I got 
It seemed like the rednecks were bashing *because* they were
in an area with a large gay community.
Queers and steers don't mix!:-)
 
>There *has* been an increase in gay-bashing and
>assaults in Texas in recent years.  The really frightening thing is
>that soemtimes these violent acts against us are done "for fun".
>
That is definitely the impression I got. 

>He had never known a gay person before, so all his impressions of us
>were from stereotypes and prejudices from his friends.  My coming out
>to him (coupled with a *severe* upbraiding) is turning him around. 

Halleluja! That is why we gotta come out and stay out! 

>I'm not saying that we can ignore
>things like the things that happened to you; we can't.  We *must* 
>fight back in whatever way we know.

Ok, can of worms time. How does one fight back? Reverse-prejudice? 
justice...'till now.

Steven
From: mattm@Apple.COM (Matthew Melmon)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: How evil are the Republicans?
Date: 21 Aug 92 21:12:12 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

shore@dinah.tc.cornell.edu (Melinda Shore) writes:

>[]
>the Republican leadership and the average Republican.
>Their leadership has completely sold them out to the
>radical Christian right.  What was once the party of
>Barry Goldwater has become the party of Pat Robertson.
>How else can you explain the platform plank calling
>for a Constitutional amendment banning abortion, when
>55% of the delegates to the convention are pro-choice?
>How else can you explain Dan Quayle's appearance on the
>ticket when he has an approval rating among Republicans
>of *11%*?  
>-- 
>       Melinda Shore - Cornell Theory Center - shore@tc.cornell.edu


I have been coming around to this same conclusion.  While I consider
the Democrats criminally incompetent, there have been some sinister
undertones - not even undertones anymore - washing through the
Republican party.  I voted for Reagan, and would have done so again.
I voted for Bush, and most certainly will not do so again.  The
thought of a single party controling both the legislative and executive
branch is not appealing, to me anyway - especially the Democrats.
But I've had enough of James Baker and I've had enough of Dan Quayle
and just about any other member of the Republican ruling elite (I
do *like* Cheney, and Colin Powell - but he probably doesn't count
as a member of either political party, they should be so lucky...).
Anyway, the Constitutional Amendment surprised me quite a bit.  I
am generally against abortion, but greatly prefer it kept at the 
State level.  I prefer most everything kept at the State level.  My
few Republican comrades were also surprised.  So in addition to
the 55% who are pro-choice, there is some chunk of the 'with reservations'
crowd who certainly do *not* favor an Amendment.

And while I agree with Quayle's attack on the 'Cultural Elite' - I doubt
it was his original conception.  I am *not* in the 11%.

The Republican party is really the Republican Steering Committee.  With
their first reasonably credible candidate in half a century, maybe
a donkey will occupy the White House come 1993.

Matthew Melmon
Apple Computer, Inc.
If my opinions were Apple's, I'd be driving a shiny car