HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jefu@nmt.edu (Jeff Putnam)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Costner plans Colorado Filming
Date: 3 Jan 93 15:38:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: nmt.1993Jan3.153820.16353
Distribution: soc
Organization: The Museum of Differential Geometry

In article <1i2guvINN426@plts.uucp> tal@plts.uucp (Tom Limoncelli) writes:
>In article <1525@dosbears> dosbears!mikel@pyramid.com writes:
>>>Albuquerque is starting to see some convention business that Colorado
>>>lost.  Also, anyone looking for a place to go skiing should consider
>>>New Mexico.

>New Jersey has just about everything that is listed in the "Demands"
>for the MOW93 (more-so than any other state).  New Jersey law prohibits
>discrimination based on sexual-orientation in employment, housing,
>loans, and public accomodations. ...

On the TV news the other night they said that New Mexico is going to
try again to get a gay rights bill through the legislature.  This
was tried two years ago and failed.  The news program had one of
these call in opinion lines and was showing 70% _against_ a gay
rights bill.  

I'll try to get some addresses for anyone who might want to write and
let the legislature know how you feel.

-- 
jefu <=> Jeff Putnam - New Mexico Tech <=> jefu@nmt.edu 
"Daffodils go Ping! and Oink! // They Really are alarming 
I'm scared of big geraniums // And I'm sure that Lilac's harming"
(Dr. Bertram X. Fegg)
From: jns@roissy.umd.edu (J. N. Shaumeyer)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: EE statements (was: Re: Attention Skiers Boycotting Colorado)
Date: 31 Dec 92 18:26:11 GMT
Organization: Militant Homosexual Lobby, Gay Lifestyles, Inc.


Walter Smith (smithw@col.hp.com) wrote:
 
> dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
> > I'd be happy if partnership benefits were extended to all couples
> > without reference to their marital status. 
> 
> Has anyone put together a way to for companies to code this, that 
> would provide coverage for 'couples', without leaving them open 
> to roomates or just anyone a person wants to put on the insurance? 

[It's frequently called 'marriage'; it's been "put together"
 by the government.]

> I may be ill-informed (please, let's not all snicker at once..:-)
> about it, but I was under the impression homosexual marriages were'nt 
> 'legal'.  If they were, then this issue would be a lot easier to 
> deal with. 

Do you even bother to read what you write?

--jns
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: hughes@dogwood.botany.uga.edu (Wayne Hughes)
Subject: Re: Changing standards of female beauty (Is: the empowerment of women)
Organization: Botany Department - U of Georgia, Athens
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 07:09:01 GMT

In article <1i6201INNo03@mizar.usc.edu> adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson) writes:
>In article <1993Jan3.014408.18528@toolz.uucp> 
>todd@toolz.uucp (Todd Merriman) writes:
>> It's sad that fashion dictates that women must hide behind a

     [....]
>
>> As long as women continue to smear that ridiculous colored
>> stuff all over their faces, they cannot be taken seriously.
>
>By you, perhaps.  I don't have any problems taking women
>seriously whether or not they're wearing makeup.
>

  Tee hee.  Come to Georgia if you want to see what "a little
  powder" looks like.

  Wayne
From: rkelly@carina.unm.edu (Robert Kelly)
Subject: Anger, Dworkin and ACT-UP
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 16:44:24 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1hoi7rINN2br@shelley.u.washington.edu> rhiann@carson.u.washington.edu (Sandy --not Sandra) writes:
>
>It is pretty much a gay truism these days, that radical groups like
>Act-up are *necessary* to make the more mainstream groups look mainstream,
>i.e., without ACT-UP, HRCF would look radical to the bible belt.

ASIDE:
	The right did criticize HRCF for not supporting Bush and called
	them "radicals."  I forget the source on this one (advocate interview
	I believe--maybe NGLTF conference).

	Sorry, I am not an activist so that HRCF and Tim McFeeley can 
	assimilate and be "Just like straight people... only gay."

>Without Dworkin, is it possible that women like Daly and Griffin would
>be too 'radical' to be seriously listened to?

I think this has to do with no culturally-acceptable way to vent anger
and rage (or grief, for that matter).  We hear someone like Dworkin, or 
Petrellis, and think -- "What a angry person"--totally disclaiming what 
they are saying because they can't be nice about it.

I personally believe we need to get rid fo the Anger=Irrationality
principle and start listening more carefully to someone when they are angry.

If someone listened to ACT-UP years ago, maybe more might have 
been done by now.  Who knows?

Robert Kelly
rkelly@triton.unm.edu
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blessed are the censors, for they shall inhibit the earth.
        Yet Another Boring Quote
From: nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Muffin on Parade
Date: 30 Dec 92 06:48:58 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Dec30.064858.1099
Reply-To: nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

In article <55440005@hpscit.sc.hp.com> jprigeon@hpscit.sc.hp.com (John Prigeon) writes:
>jap, wondering just exactly what the demarcation is between e+ and e++.

"ouch"

Nelson, who can only remember "e", "s", and "k". 
                __
nelson@reed.edu \/       This is the time, and this is the record of the time
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: buckmr@aix02.ecs.rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire)
Subject: Re: NY Times Supports Colorado Boycott
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 07:21:44 GMT

rjwill6@pbsdts.sdcrc.pacbell.com (Rod Williams) writes:


>    "A successful boycott can help energize the most progressive
>    Coloradans to overturn their new law.  And it would send a
>    potent warning to other states that may soon consider similar
>    measures." 
Oh, Lordy! What in the world is going ON in the Editorial offices over at
the Gray Lady? Endorsing a Boycott nistigated by Militant Homosexual Activists
(tm)? Amazing.

A VERY pleasant sight to see, I might add.

-- 
RON BUCKMIRE
The Lyrics Transcription Project: Cocteau Twins Division, section 319
11 Colvin Circle, Troy, NY 12180-3735
vox:(518)-276-8910 fax:(518)-276-6920 buckmr@rpi.edu buckmr@rpitsmts.bitnet
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca (Ken Dykes)
Subject: Dworking
Organization: Thinkage Ltd.
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 12:54:39 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.172603.21477@spdcc.com> joe@spdcc.com (Joseph Francis) writes:
>>intercourse is fully as horrific as the gas chambers at 
>>Auschwitz?
>
>I knew there was something about heterosexuality that gave me the
>willies! Dworkin's put her finger right on it! Hitler! How fresh!

willies are penises (penii?) arent they?

put her finger right on it?

-- 
   - Ken Dykes, Thinkage Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario, Canada    [43.47N 80.52W]
         kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca   postmaster@thinkage.com   thinkage!kgdykes
         harley-request@thinkage.on.ca             kgdykes@math.uwaterloo.ca
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: news@mont.cs.missouri.edu
Subject: Re: Did the Corp go Gay??????
Organization: University of Missouri
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 10:41:49 CST

In article <1992Dec30.121301.13693@wetware.com>
drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
 
>My God, Turn my back on the USMC,
>and they turn out to be a bunch of Faireys....
>Who'd have thunk it....
>
 
Oh come off it Drieux. I mean, *honestly*, did you think a
STRAYT guy designed those *divine* dress blue uniforms? I think not!
Diane
From: Furr@cup.portal.com (George Dalton Madison)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: "cures" for homosexuality
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 18:33:50 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Dec23.132036.17120@thinkage.on.ca> <72338@cup.portal.com>
  <1992Dec24.162218.23332@midway.uchicago.edu>

Ellen Keyne Seebacher writes:
> Furr@cup.portal.com (George Dalton Madison) writes:
>>Ken Dykes writes:
>>>[on kidnapping Cliff]
>>>get in line buster! :-)
>>I have dibs on the space immediately preceeding or following
>>Ken.  This way, I could be amused while waiting.  ;-{)##]
>
>I don't think Cliff has enough beard for you, George.

He certainly did at motss.con; I hope that situation hasn't
changed for the worse.....  ;-)

>[Not to say that watching you waiting with Ken wouldn't be amusing....]

It couldn't possibly be as amusing for an observer as for
myself, but then that doesn't invalidate your observation....

;-{)##]
 
() Never make anything simple and efficient when it can be
() complex and wonderful.
-----
[> 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 <]
From: Furr@cup.portal.com (George Dalton Madison)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: soc.motss.*
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 92 20:28:06 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <BzF8xB.7uv@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> <1gvtshINN5is@crcnis1.unl.edu>
  <1992Dec20.065410.8579@macc.wisc.edu> <1992Dec21.141228.13237@bsu-ucs>

David Speakman writes:
>WE do need a division. I don't know about your guys, but I do not have
>the time to wade through literally thousands of postings each day.

This is "literally" erroneous.  Unless Portal is missing over
half the traffic on soc.motss on an ongoing, daily basis, it's
definitely not "thousands per day."  *Hundreds*, yes.

You may have a point, but making blatant inflations of something
so easily verified doesn't get you very far.

 
() Thinking always of trying to do more brings a state of
() mind in which nothing seems impossible.
()      -- Henry Ford
-----
[> 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 <]
From: markw@meaddata.com (Mark Wasson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: EE statements (was: Re: Attention Skiers Boycotting Colorado)
Date: 31 Dec 1992 18:19:06 GMT
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: linguist.meaddata.com

In article <1992Dec31.171339.28754@PacBell.COM>, rjwill6@PacBell.COM (Rod Williams) writes:
|> > smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith) writes:
|> >> rjwill6@PacBell.COM (Rod Williams) writes:
|> 
|> >> And this doesn't even address lower payment of single
|> >> employees.  
|> >
|> >When I was single, I didn't have a problem with married 
|> >people at my same level getting paid more; I figured they 
|> >needed it, as they had more responsibilities to take care 
|> >of.  I don't know that this is really an EE issue. 
|> 
|> But they don't always have "more responsibilities."  If they
|> don't have children and their spouse is also working, why
|> should they get more compensation than their single counterparts?
|> Why does the company arbitrarily decide who "needs it" and
|> who deosn't, merely on the basis of a marriage certificate?

There are also different kinds of responsibilities.  Raising children
does take extra money, but so does buying a fancy house or a fancy
car.  I certainly don't equate children to houses or cars, but all of
these are optional lifestyle choices.  If I were to overextend myself
by buying  such a house or car, I certainly would not expect my
employer to come to my rescue.  Why should I expect it to do so if I
have more kids or spouses than I can afford.

I don't see why an employer should go out of its way to reward some
lifestyle choices and not others.  An employer should reward an
employee an amount commensurate with the value that employee brings to
the company - not how that employee chooses to live his or her life.

Mark
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: penis size (was Re: Muffin on Parade)
Date: 31 Dec 92 22:13:46 GMT
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA

In article <1hvnsqINNdgv@spim.mti.sgi.com> dauber@tattoo.mti.sgi.com (Jeff Dauber) writes:
>Stop it then.  Look, everyone has the equipment they have.  The
>problem, however, is not that your dick is big or small.  It seems to
>be associated with your caring what other people think.  Fuck em.  If
>they are only interested in you because you have a big dick, don't deal
>with them.  If you take pride in your body, regardless of the shape and
>size, their bullshit does not mean anything.

Amen.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: jefu@akbar.nmt.edu (Jeff Putnam)
Subject: Re: Private antidiscrimination policies in CO (was Re: Attention...)
Organization: New Mexico Tech
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 14:18:41 GMT

In article <22@bbx.basis.com> scott@bbx.basis.com (Scott Amspoker)  
writes:

> Actually, CO2 states that you cannot make a claim of discrimination 
> based on a homosexual orientation.  It prevents someone from sueing
> if they were discriminated against for being homosexual (or even
> suspected of being homosexual).  Please note that you can sue if
> you were fired for being heterosexual.   I can't tell you if
> private contracts are affected by this.  I just wanted to point out
> that there is more to CO2 than you realize.

> Side note: I'm not sure if the person's *actual* orientation is  
considered
> relevent with CO2 - only the *reason* for discrimination.  In other  
words,
> an employer can fire a heterosexual employee and simply say "I  
think
> you're a fag".  Since the heterosexual employee was fired "for  
being
> gay" he/she would have no ability to sue - even if to prove that  
they
> weren't gay.

It is probably worth noting that this hole - that you can be
denied employment/housing/.... on the basis of appearing gay
(just think how hard it would be to do if you had to _prove_
someone gay) can be used to discriminate arbitrarily.  For
example, suppose I dont want to rent to anyone of a certain
race.  All I need to do is to claim that I'm not renting to them
because they are gay - or appear gay to me.  Granted, a history
of this kind of thing might be used in court to establish a 
pattern of discrimination, but I think that would be rather
harder to prove - especially if I (as the landlord) am a bit
canny and refuse to rent to a few people of other races on
the same basis.  

I dont know if this could be used for a legal challenge or
not.

--
jefu <=> Jeff Putnam - New Mexico Tech <=> jefu@nmt.edu 
"Daffodils go Ping! and Oink! // They Really are alarming 
I'm scared of big geraniums // And I'm sure that Lilac's harming"
(Dr. Bertram X. Fegg)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From:  David Christopher Rogers <drogers@riacs.edu>
Subject: Re: long-term relationships...success stories, please...
Originator: drogers@solstice.riacs.edu
Organization: RIACS, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 18:40:57 GMT

Well, Doug and I have been together going on 5 years now, which perhaps
isn't of much note in and of itself: many other here have longer histories
with their partners.

However, we're both into S&M, and there's another level of anti-relationship
myth surrounding folks like us.  As recently as 15 years ago, the
"definitive" text on gay male leather sexuality declared that relationships
between people into S&M could not last, and we should reconcile ourselves
to a series of sexual encounters with semi-anonymous men.  Luckily for me,
I never defer to so-called authority figures (except in bed... (and there,
"deference" may be too mild a term... but I digress)), and I decided to
fight yet another round of "you-can't-do-that".

It was only after creating this relationship thing that I discovered that
I was hardly the first... it was like being a pioneer into an uncharted
area, all alone, and reaching your goal only to find a small but rowdy hoard
of fellow travelers.

The moral is, of course, imagine how you want to live, and live it, whether
you have other people's success stories or not.  Write your own story.

David Christopher Rogers
From: rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: soc.motss.*
Date: 24 Dec 92 01:32:58 GMT
Organization: insert anything here

anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson) writes:
>rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:

>>but this is more a nod to Jess'
>>comment ages ago about clithes that never go out of style.
>                        ^^^^^^^
>Inquiring minds may want to know: is there a syllable
>boundary between the 't' and the 'h?'
>That would certainly help it stay in style, whatever it is.

	Hey - I don't kiss and tell...!   Or do I - I keep forgetting.

	Anyway ---so nasty!  :-)

	Me - I can't decide which is bigger - my thesis or the output
from "cat thesis_files | spell | more"...

With big (and sliughtly furry) fingers...
BBC
From: adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Dworkin (was Re: Liberty)
Date: 30 Dec 1992 09:39:13 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu

In article <1992Dec30.145823.7995@tc.cornell.edu> 
shore@dinah.tc.cornell.edu (Melinda Shore) writes:

> The point is that not everything Dworkin says is drivel,
> yet men (in particular) get so overwrought when they hear
> what she says about them that they dismiss everything.

It is as a *gay* man that I find myself getting so
overwrought when I read what she's written about us.
Such as?  Oh, that gay men represent the very apogee
of patriarchal privilege.  In any case, I get exactly
this overwrought when I hear what Metzger says about
blacks and Jews, this overwrought when I hear what
Farakhan says about whites and Jews, this overwrought
when I hear what the Robertson-Shlafly-Buchanan-etc.
gang says about women, blacks, Jews, lesbigays.  And
if someone not known to be a C***** sort of crank were 
to write on soc.motss that this of hate-monger shouldn't
be dismissed out of hand if only because the questions
that prompted his or her hate-mongering are legitimate
ones, then you can be quite sure I will object.

Arne
From: nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: How did you find soc.motss?
Date: 31 Dec 92 05:44:47 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Dec31.054447.18948
Reply-To: nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

In article <C01BxF.65u@agora.rain.com> batie@agora.rain.com (Alan Batie) writes:
>Computer just haven't been the same since they stopped putting switches
>and lights on them *SIGH*

did someone queer come up with the CM-2 front panel?

>You poor, deprived (or is that depraved?) child --- stop by sometime and
>I'll show you a *real* computer...

too late. I already helped you move those *real* computers. I thought
vacuum tubes would be light, being evacuated and all. And those decks
of cards - Alan, why are you holding on to those? (I know, to make
eager young men bend over to lift box after box of them).

ObMotss: just went to my first gay bar all by myself. I was quite
nervous, actually. And bored - I drank my drink, and left. How does
one loiter?
                __
nelson@reed.edu \/             Some things are just pictures before your eyes
From: smithw@col.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Private antidiscrimination policies in CO (was Re: Attention...)
Date: 1 Jan 1993 01:19:24 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

rdonahue@spdcc.com (Bob Donahue) writes:
> 	That doesn't mean we don't fix both, but it doesn't mean
> we ignore one for the other.  If you're going to insist on qualifying 
> one of them as "worse", I'm not going to waste my time with you.

And people tell me that if someone doesn't "toe my line" that I 
won't talk rationally with them...things that make you shake your
head...I'm not 'insisting' you do anything, nor will you 'insist' 
on my view of one thing as being worse than something else.  This 
isn't a flame, just a statement.  Just don't expect me to view 
being told that I flame those who won't "toe my line" as anything 
but a red herring, when you come out with something like that; 
that if I'm going to look at things in a way you don't like, then 
forget it....ppppffftttttttttttttttttttttt.

Walter
From: Minotaur@cup.portal.com (A Frank Swilling)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: March on Washington
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 92 20:45:56 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: usa
  <1992Dec15.192659.28783@serval.net.wsu.edu>

Herschel Browne makes an admission he will come to regret:

>Can anyone tell me offhand the date of the big 1993 march on Washington?
>I know I *live* in Washington, but that doesn't cause me to know this.

>Thanks.

>Herschel Browne

It's the week of April 25th.  So can we all come and stay with you?

:-)

Frank
Minotaur@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Mike Reaser)
Subject: Re: Private antidiscrimination policies in CO (was Re: Attention...)
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 17:05:57 GMT
Organization: a stone mountain of Kudzu

In <1992Dec31.013013.13337@bsu-ucs> d000dlphi@leo.bsuvc.bsu.edu (David Speakman) writes:

>That's true. The wording of the amendment is that in CO, no suit can be brought
>claiming sexual orientation as a discrimination target.

>In a civil case of breech of contract, you'd have to prove that NO OTHER
>reasons were used in the firing. The company could get out of it simply by
>stating that you weren't living up to job expectations.

>Even though you know it was for sexual orientation.

>Bites, huh?
>David

Oh, the company could claim it was solely based on sexual orientation --
especially if you had been an employee of Cracker Barrel "Family"
Restaurants.

Let us not forget the employees in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, Kentucky,
Virginia, North Carolina, and elsewhere fired simply because they were
Gay or Lesbian.  No work-related issues (performance, attendance, etc.)
were stated, officially or "off the record", as the reason for their
firings; the only reason listed for most of them was that their
homosexuality precluded them from being employed by Cracker Barrel.

Of course, Cracker Barrel never included "sexual orientation" in any
type of official company policy -- but they _DID_ fire these employees
explicitly because of their sexual orientation, so we should not see
claims from any of the ChronicallyClueless (tm) that no one has ever
been fired for "being gay".

--
=======================================================================
 Mike Reaser, Hewlett-Packard N. Amer. Response Center - Atlanta
 Internet:  mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com
 NBCS: B5 f t w g+ k s              I barely speak for myself, so
 #include <standard.disclaimer>       don't make me speak for HP
=======================================================================
that
From: richard@Apple.COM (a flying squirrel)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: correction to end-of-year reading
Date: 31 Dec 92 17:47:13 GMT
Organization: Xiola Blue

Arnold Zwicky:

>martha *grimes*, not martha *stewart* (as mara points out).
>i just can't cope with these colorless names.  smith, stewart,
>wolf, jones, anderson, grimes, miller, fox...all the same to me.

You forgot "Johnson" in that list.

But Stewart, particularly Martha, is not colorless.  She's lily-white,
a beacon from dinner to shining dinner.  Seeing her face on those 
wretched "entertaining" (definite sneer quotes) books is a guarantee
of dyspepsia.
-- 
a flying squirrel is: richard@apple.com  Apple Computer Inc.

"Sex is a filter, and it admits a certain vision."  - William S. Burroughs
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Mike Reaser)
Subject: Re: Attention Skiers Boycotting Colorado
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 22:45:54 GMT
Organization: a stone mountain of Kudzu

In <C03G46.4B4@hpuerca.atl.hp.com> mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Mike Reaser) writes:

>Simply have an EE statement does _NOT_ guarantee it will not be violated.
        ^^^^
        having

Yes, I have 2 Bachelor's degrees.
Yes, I have a Master's degree.
No, I think I am geneticaly incapable of proofreading.

--
=======================================================================
 Mike Reaser, Hewlett-Packard N. Amer. Response Center - Atlanta
 Internet:  mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com
 NBCS: B5 f t w g+ k s              I barely speak for myself, so
 #include <standard.disclaimer>       don't make me speak for HP
=======================================================================