HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Furr@cup.portal.com (George Dalton Madison)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Different Strokes (was Re: Changing standards of female bea
Date: Mon,  4 Jan 93 20:03:55 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1993Jan4.081233.27128@spdcc.com> <1993Jan4.112401.28898@macc.wisc.edu>
  <1993Jan4.172613.15254@spdcc.com>

Steve Dyer writes:
>Jess Anderson writes:
>>Not you, necessarily, but quite a few men, gay and straight
>>and otherwise, are conditioned not to use any of this stuff
>>because it's woman-identified.  God forbid anyone should get
>>the idea we're not Real Men.
>
>I don't think you need to identify an aversion to such products with
>latent misogyny.  There are other reasons to be suspicious of them.

Primarily, that they're useless and overpriced.  The hype and
bullshit in this field is *STAGGERING*.  Smearing vitamins on
your face or putting them in your shampoo does nothing for
your skin or hair -- it just makes your wallet thinner.

Obviously, there will be people with special problems -- but in
general with regard to the skin, "less is more."  Your skin's own
natural oil is the best moisturizer, and so on.

I tend to doubt that women would be a market for so many cleansing
and moisturizing products if they didn't have to remove makeup,
and then moisturize to replace that stripped off by removing the
makeup.
 
() Sex between a man and a woman can be wonderful; provided
() you get between the right man and the right woman.
()      -- Woody Allen
-----
[> George D. Madison | NBCS: B8f+t+w-e+s+k+a!cv | Just say NO to razors! <]
[> It's a BEAR thing -- you wouldn't understand. <|> furr@cup.portal.com <]
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: cjlee@netcom.com (Caroline Jean Lee)
Subject: Re: Dworkin (was Re: Liberty)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 09:43:01 GMT

I'm afraid I missed the earlier part of this thread, having been on
vacation since the 24th, but there is a very good essay that I think
would be helpful on the reactions to Dworkin's work and on the idea of
"man-hating." Some excerpts from Audre Lorde's essay called 'The Uses
of Anger: Women responding to Racism,' from _Sister_Outsider_. Lorde
is talking about feminists' responses to racism, but I think it
applies here.

"We are working in a context of. . .virulent hatred leveled against
all women, people of Color, lesbians and gay men, poor people. . .

This hatred and our anger is very different. . .To those women here
who fear the anger of women of Color more than their own unscrutinized
racist attitudes, I ask:Is the anger of women of Color more
threatening than the woman-hatred that tinges all aspects of our
lives?"
 
"To turn aside from the anger of Black women with excuses or the
pretexts of intimidation is to award no one power - it is merely
another way of preserving racial blindness, the power of unaddressed
privilege, unbreached, intact."

"if we listen to the content of what is said with at least as much
intensity as we defend ourselves against the manner of saying."

Thinking about the way Dworkin has been criticized for "man-hating" while
misogynists are not, as Jess pointed out:

"For it is not the anger of Black women which is dripping fown over
this globe like a diseased liquid.  It is not my anger that launches
rockets, spends over sixty thousand dollars a second on missiles and
other agents of war and death, slaughters children in cities,
stockpiles nerve gas and chemical bombs, sodomizes our daughters and
our earth."


I will type the essay in full if people want it.

Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: paul@psych.toronto.edu (Paul Hastings)
Subject: Re: Year of the Queer
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:47:20 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.222957.24421@netcom.com> jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) writes:
>In article <1993Jan12.182645.16870@psych.toronto.edu> jarvis@psych.toronto.edu 
>(Brian Jarvis) writes:
>>
>>Either explanation is fine by me.  I'm just trying to reconcile these
>>all-inclusive simplistic statements with my knowledge that there's a
>>_lot_ of diversity in a population of 5 billion across six* continents
>>and a recorded history of more than 5000 years.
>
>Can you suggest any other events which have had as much influence?
>Remember that whatever it is has to have a *date*, not a time period. 

Why the hang-up on a discrete event with a specifiable date that one can
point out?  The gist of Brian's arguments have been that gay pride has
developed as a *process*, not wham-bam-thank-ye-clan, life apres Stonewall
now has PRIDE! (a deeper love, pride, a deeper love, whoa oh oh oh...)
I'm proud of many events, groups, and proceedings, and saddended and
disheartened (and for a while suicidal) from many others.  Pride Day
encompasses all of those.  All of them.  And I'm sorry if this upsets
you, but I will not have those events taken from me so that we can
celebrate Stonewall in and of itself to the exclusion of all else.
-paul

-- 
Butch Smurf     S6 b++ g l y+ z+ n+ o+ x+ a-u v+ j+
"Our Father makes art in Heaven, Howard be thy name..."

Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Subject: Re: Changing standards of female beauty
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 01:57:30 GMT

In article <mattm-050193094345@mcmelmon.apple.com>
mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon) writes:

>[re getting rid of lice:]

>This does not work.  I once remarked upon the unusual shaving patterns
>of a too-yummy-to-resist-yum-yum, only to acquire those damn biting
>insects - whereupon I was faced with the humiliating process of
>buying anit-you-know-what goop (a process which takes *weeks*); or,
>doing something drastic (a process which takes an *hour*).  I did
>something drastic.  Shaving does not work, BUT dunking your ENTIRE
>BODY in Nair and leaving it on for fifteen minutes most certainly
>kills every living organism upon the surface of your flesh (and
>probably causes brain damage).  This once was enough to convince
>me that, save for dire circumstances, a little body hair was
>a small price to pay.  As for the 'real' hair, I did not particularly
>want to go bald, nor did I want to take the chance that the little
>vermin might be boinking behind my ears.  I sprayed my head with
>Raid and washed it off twenty seconds later.  I figured it would
>probably make me sick (it did), but I would survive and those damn
>*creatures* would not.  

If any part of that story is true, I'll enjoy (considerably)
the thought of having irrefutable proof that you're *even*
stupider than you seemed heretofore.

-- 
[Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin]
[Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson]
[Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888]
[---------> Discrimination, Bigotry, and Hate are not Family Values <---------]
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: john@drummond.demon.co.uk (John Fisher)
Subject: Re: Different Strokes (was Re: Changing standards of female 
Reply-To: john@drummond.demon.co.uk
Distribution: world
X-Mailer: cppnews $Revision: 1.20 $
Organization: not
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 01:35:46 +0000

In article <76256@apple.apple.COM> stevenso@Apple.COM (David Stevenson) writes:

> anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
> >
> >[...]
> >There is a very large
> >barking creature (I admit only assuming it is a dog)
> >averaging 25 loud reports a minute, for about two weeks now,
> >day and night, day in, day out, without cessation.
> >[...]
> 
> You could offer to keep the dog for him, so that it would annoy your neighbors
> instead.  Or you could scrub some cats in your bathroom tub, being sure to
> tie their legs first.  As a last resort, you could buy yourself a screaming
> baby.

*I* suggest burning some old tyres in the front garden.

--John
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Subject: Re: Soc.motss: The Color Version
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 13:10:30 GMT

In article <thaaang.726393033@cwis> thaaang@cwis.unomaha.edu
(John Dorrance) writes:

>Woah, I'm slow...
 ^^^^ 
Yup.  But cute.

-- 
[Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin]
[Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson]
[Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888]
[---------> Discrimination, Bigotry, and Hate are not Family Values <---------]
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: joe@spdcc.com (Joseph Francis)
Subject: Rouge
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:56:59 GMT

In article <C0HFB7.KK3@panix.com> mara@panix.com (Mara Chibnik) writes:
>
>shafer@spdcc.com (Mary Shafer) writes:
> >I agree with you that calling lipstick moisturizing emollient color
> >enhancing rod is pretty far gone on the euphemism scale, but women
> >buy euphemism, too.  In my youth the color one applied to the cheeks
> >was rouge, but now it's blusher.  I am unable to discern any difference
> >in effect between the two.
>
>I learned to apply makeup before (but only just before) "blusher"
>was introduced.  Rouge was highly concentrated color, and you were
>supposed to apply the least possible, and to blend it outward from
>wherever you first put it.  You *never* added rouge after that first
>touch; if anything, you removed some of it (with tissues, or
>cotton).  Blusher is (or used to be) much less concentrated, and, of
>course, it came in a pressed powder form that you applied with a
>makeup brush.  The idea was to apply it gradually, increasing the
>amount of color you added until you had the effect you wanted.

This reminds me of a friend of mine's parent's story. They had been
interned in Auschwitz (not together, initially: in fact, the mother,
making "Sophie's Choice", chose the life of her child by her first
husband then had the guards laugh "fooled you", shoot the child dead
on the spot and sent her to prison anyway) midway through the pogrom.
She managed to secret a tiny box of rouge in a body cavity, and even
though she was dead from exhaustion, she convinced the guards she was
reasonably healthy for a long time because she put a tiny bit on her
lips each morning to make them red instead of white from starvation.
She survived her first husband and all her children (they normally
would just shoot the people who looked too dead-tired to work) and met
her future husband not long before liberation. Her work, incidentally,
in the prison camp, was music. I think it is a striking metaphor, the
rouge.
-- 
US Jojo; damp, slighly soiled, but tasty nonetheless.
From: nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Coors heir comes out
Date: 10 Jan 93 22:39:21 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1993Jan10.223921.29661
Reply-To: nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

(from the January 1st Just Out, written by Jim Hunger, part of the
national news section)

---
Coors heir comes out

Dallas Coors, the 75-year-old heir to the Coors Beer fortune, came out
as a gay man in an interview on the Boston cable-TV show "Between
Takes". During the interview, filmed at his summer home in Providence,
RI, Coors talked of being encouraged by friends, including an unnamed
congressman, to write his autobiography, which would be about "living
in a world where that type of thing [homosexuality] is totally
unacceptable," from 1950 through the 1970s.

Close to tears at one point, Coors said that in spite of the hardships
gay people encounter, they "should just go on living".
---

I'm amazed that there was no mention of the role Coors beer played in
establishing a world where "that type of thing is totally unacceptable".
                __
nelson@reed.edu \/     In a totally sane society, madness is the only freedom
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: steven@cray.com (Steven Levine)
Subject: Re: Therbligs (zw{i,a}cky matters)
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 7 Jan 93 11:31:00 CST

In article <1993Jan7.052928.19051@spdcc.com>
 shafer@spdcc.com (Mary Shafer) writes:
>
>Both of the Gilbreths (Frank and Lillian) were efficiency experts.
>
>I believe that she was the one who came up with the concept of
>reducing each task to its component units, so it's not surprising that
>the unit was named after _her_.
>
>If you read more about the Gilbreaths than "Cheaper by the Dozen" you
>will find out that she was considered by many (not just women, this
>isn't revisionism) to be the real innovator.
>

The Gilbreth children who wrote _Cheaper by the Dozen_ and its
sequel, _Bells on Their Toes_, also wrote a biography of their
mother (Lillian Moller Gilbreth), though I don't remember its
title and haven't read in over twenty years.  Apparently when
Frank Gilbreth died and Lillian continued with their
consulting business, there was a great deal of skepticism.
Eventually, though, she established her own independent reputation,

I believe that she is the one who redesigned the refrigerator --
the early electric refrigerators were patterned after ice boxes,
with the milk shelf on the bottom.  

--
Steven Levine
steven@cray.com
From: LASAGA <LASAGA@corral.uwyo.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Denver Post: "Amendment 2 boycott spurs backlash"
Date: 4 Jan 1993 00:45:26 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu




gerber@boulder.parcplace.com (Andrew Gerber) writes:                   
>                                                                      
>From today's Denver Post; Sunday, January 3, 1992                    
>Amendment 2 boycot spurs backlash:                                      
>                                                                    
>A new Denver Post/News 4 Poll shows there's a backlash in Colorado to
>the growing national boycott of the state over Amendment 2, the      
>citizen intiative that barred laws protecting gays.               
>People are more angry than ahamed, and they don't think a repeal
>effort would succeed.
>                                                                    
      [some stats deleted]
>	  
>Does the call for a boycott of Colorado by homosexual rights groups make you
>more likely or less likely to support the repeal of Amendment 2?
>
>More Likely: 25%   Less Likely: 43%   No Difference: 28%   Don't Know: 4%


Are these the statistics that supposedly show that "people are 
more angry than ashamed, and they don't think a repeal effort would succeed"?  

This poll was a bit confusing (and I don't have a copy of today's
Denver Post).  I don't see how these numbers can be interpreted to mean that
_more_ people are now less likely to want to repeal Amendment 2 because of the
boycott.  The 43% less likely (reported above) could have been part of the 53%
who originally voted "yes."  But notice that that number is not _more_ than
the original 53%.

Are there other numbers on which they based their conclusions?  (I know
a couple of t.v. news shows reported the same conclusion.)

-maria lasaga



Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon)
Subject: Re: taking over
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 00:41:29 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Followup-To: soc.motss

In article <17797@umd5.umd.edu>, jns@elea.umd.edu (J. N. Shaumeyer) wrote:
> 
> 
> Expatriot Bob Sarver (bobsarv@microsoft.com) suggests:
>  
> > I was just wondering:  has anyone written a FAQ on Cramer's 
> > assertions?  It would seem like a logical thing to do.
> > 
> > With a FAQ, any argument he posted could be rebutted by referring 
> > the reader to Response #4 (or whatever) of the Cramer FAQ.
> 
> I suggest that you begin responding strictly in the manner
> you suggest ["Response #4 + Corollary #12..."], but that

I *love* it...

> While we're at it, I suggest that it's time to implement
> Phase C of the Secret Homosexual Agenda to Take Over 
> America [*].  The code words: Kiss a Queer for America.

Bah.  Code phrase:  Have you hugged your neighbors nubile teenage
sons, yet?

*X*
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: michaelk@netcom.com (Michael Kronstadt)
Subject: Columbia College 1968 (was Re: Unversity Fac/Staff LESBIGAY ...)
Organization: Abbott Critical Care Systems, Mountain View CA
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 20:47:56 GMT

In article <C0Fy8z.II8@panix.com> mara@panix.com (Mara Chibnik) writes:
>daviss@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Stephen Davis) writes:
> >Here at Columbia U. we've had a student gay organization for almost 20  
> >years.  (It actually claims to be the first such campus organization, but  
> >who knows or cares...)
>
>I'm surprised to hear that it's that _short_ a time.  

I graduated in 1968, so it was sometime in 1967 (possibly '66 but I don't
think so) that the College grudgingly recognized the "Student Homophile
Association"--two years before Stonewall and, as far as I know, the first
such student organization in the US.

It caused an uproar, of course, with the Chair of the Classics Dept., no
less, calling it the end of the University (which by Columbia standards
was far more extreme than "the end of the Western World.")  I wonder what
he thought all those Greeks has been up to.

I, unfortunately, was too closeted/unaware to do more than dream about
going to a meeting (sigh).

At our 20th reunion in '88, it was interesting to see who else from our
class was gay--sort of a reunion within a reunion.  So any Columbia
College Class of '68 motssers who were thinking of going to our 25th
reunion next June, let me know and we can plan something special.

-- 
Michael Kronstadt         michaelk@netcom.com                       __o
Abbott Critical Care Systems       ____    "Ride the bike,        _`\<,_
Mountain View, CA                  \  /      ride the bike,      (*)/ (*)
(my opinions, not Abbott's)         \/        ride the bike." -- Fausto Coppi
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: cjlee@netcom.com (Caroline Jean Lee)
Subject: Re: Dworkin (was Re: Liberty)
Keywords: menstruation, biological destiny, other nonsense
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 08:05:21 GMT

On the idea that women's biological role as childbearer is somehow a
cause of or explanation for sexism and gender-based discrimination
(and thus, women will have to transcend/escape this biological role
to overcome sexism):

Could someone please post "If men could menstrate," by, I believe,
Andrea Dworkin?

It is an illuminating and funny critique that devastates any such notion
that biology plays a role in the development of an "-ism."

Unfortunately, I no longer have a copy, having left my files back East
in my migration to SF.

Caroline
From: hbaldwin@mizar.usc.edu (Harry Baldwin)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Dworkin (was Re: Liberty)
Date: 6 Jan 1993 09:24:31 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu

In article <1993Jan6.101842.4133@spdcc.com> joe@spdcc.com (Joseph Francis) writes:

>Not to mention the Raquel Welch dildo rape scene in the terribly
>underrated Gore Vidal screen disaster whose name eludes me.

Myra Breckenridge.  Wonderful book, awful movie. Directed by some pimpled
nine-day wonder whose name will always elude me. Raquel Welch is effective;
Mae West is embarrassingly effective.  Based on his extraneous performance
in this movie and his subsequent antics in print, Rex Reed should have been
strangled at birth.
The dildo rape scene in the book contains my favorite definition of
getting fucked: 'like an enema with a blowtorch.'
From: adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Gay-bashing (was: Re: Private...)
Date: 5 Jan 1993 14:23:00 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu

In article <1993Jan5.202826.8388@cs.brown.edu> 
atropos@netlab.cis.brown.edu (David O'Donnell) writes:

> Bashing is more than just physical assault, just as child abuse is 
> more than simply beating.
> 	A few years ago, my boyfriend and I had epithets yelled at us 
> as we walked to a movie theatre.

A few *years* ago?  Heavens, I have that happen to me at least
once a week.  Most recently on Sunday, as I was walking to the
grocery store around the corner from my apartment.  A car filled
with scummy teenagers was stopped at a light, and as I crossed
the street in front of the car they all started making smoochy-
kissy sounds, which escalated into whistles and "hey faggot!"
and "hey cocksucker!" catcalls.  

> That is gay-bashing. 

I don't know that I agree.

> Workers calling someing a "fucking faggot" is bashing.

No, I really don't agree.  Bashing is bashing.  This is taunting.

Arne
From: roger@quantime.co.uk (Roger Phillips)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: "latency" (was Re: US Schools Adding Lessons on Gay Life)
Date: 10 Jan 93 01:34:34 GMT
Reply-To: roger@quantime.co.uk (Roger Phillips)
Organization: Quantime Ltd, London (software for market research)

In article <1993Jan9.102832.26491@reed.edu>,
nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) writes:
> In article <C0JI0M.Ey6@panix.com>
> mara@panix.com (Mara Chibnik) writes:
> >And, of course, we cannot introduce "sex education" too early, or
> >we'll ruin latency for our young people.  [growl]
> 
> "latency"? Is that the word for the way my friend and I used to play
> with each other's dicks when we were eight?

No, it's an alternative spelling for wait-and-see.

-- 
Roger Phillips                            roger@quantime.co.uk
"*nun* n. a tussock moth (_Psiluria monacha_), a pest in pine forests"
-- Chambers English Dictionary (1988)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: jarvis@psych.toronto.edu (Brian Jarvis)
Subject: Re: Colorado Replies
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 15:22:55 GMT

In article <rizzoe.614.726242522@FASECON.ECON.NYU.EDU> rizzoe@FASECON.ECON.NYU.EDU (Emily Rizzo) writes:
>
>In the last week I have received 5 replies from mail sent to Colorado 
>organizations right after the passage of Measure 2.  

Interesting.  I wrote fourteen letters in total and have received not
one acknowledgement from any office including the Governor, Lt. Gov.,
Sec. of State, various tourism boards, chambers of commerce and so on.
I guess "aliens" don't warrant a reply.

Brian
-- 

Brian A. Jarvis,          Rm. 4026, Sidney Smith Hall, Dept. of Psychology,
jarvis@psych.toronto.edu  University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
System Administrator      M5S 1A1  (416) 978-3948
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: jarvis@psych.toronto.edu (Brian Jarvis)
Subject: Re: What to do for NEW YEAR'S EVE in Los Angeles?
Organization: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 21:21:14 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.211643.4092@psych.toronto.edu> paul@psych.toronto.edu (Paul Hastings) writes:
>In article <1993Jan4.190055.15697@psych.toronto.edu> jarvis@psych.toronto.edu (Brian Jarvis) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan4.181841.22262@netcom.com> jfh@netcom.com (Jack Hamilton) writes:
>>>Badlands in Toronto wanted CA$4.50 for a glass of champagne.  A Coca-Cola
>>>was $2.50.  Even after the exchange rate is taken into consideration   
>>>(US$1 ~= CA$1.20), that's ridiculous. 
>>
>>It is, no question.  I heard that Colby's was giving away champagne at
>>midnight. 
>
>Nope.  Or, if they were, I have a bone to pick with my friends that 
>tend bar there, cuz *I* sure as hell didn't get any complimentary
>bubbly.

I sit corrected if not disciplined.

>          Come to think of it, I didn't buy any either.  AAAHH!!  My
>first New Year's without champagne!!  And then I spent two hours 
>taking care of friends strung out on various letters of the alphabet.
>Oh well, so it wasn't the best new year's eve ever.  

I didn't have any champagne either; I really can't stand the taste of
the stuff.  On the lighter side, when midnight struck, I was kissing
every man on the dance floor.  And for a good while after midnight
too, I think.  Time flies when you're having fun.

Is it 1997 yet?

Brian
-- 

Brian A. Jarvis,          Rm. 4026, Sidney Smith Hall, Dept. of Psychology,
jarvis@psych.toronto.edu  University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
System Administrator      M5S 1A1  (416) 978-3948
Newsgroups: soc.motss