HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cherokee@b11.b11.ingr.com (Lori Ludick)
Subject: Re: guys with long hair
Reply-To: cherokee@b11.b11.ingr.com 
Organization: Huntsville, AL
Distribution: soc
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 17:12:42 GMT

In article <156a6eINNeuk@rodan.UU.NET> evie@rodan.UU.NET (Evie Allen) writes:
>In article <Bs5Lwz.yn@waterloo.hp.com> hudel@waterloo.hp.com (Chris Hudel) writes:
>>cherokee@b11.b11.ingr.com (Lori Ludick) writes:
>>: 	I have found that male friends that have long hair are more at
>>: 	ease with themselves and with other people, they tend to be more
>>: 	individualistic, while men with short hair are less open.
>>: 	I have met several great guys with short hair, but they are still less 
>>: 	likely to open up.
>>:
>>Oh, puhhhhlllease.  
>>--
>I don't understand why guys feel they have to grow their hair long...
>I prefer guys with short hair..I find that really attractive!
>I have a male friend who's hair is longer than mine and he gets
>more attention from unsuspecting males....from behind he does.
>You should see their faces when he turns around.
>I would choose a guy with short hair any day over one with long hair...
>Come to think of it, I wouldn't be interested at all with a male who
>has hair longer than mine!
>
>Evie
>>                                                         Chris Hudel
>>business: hudel@waterloo.hp.com                         519/883-3080
>>pleasure: chudel@watarts.waterloo.edu             
>>(Pleasure forwards to business...)       - all comments are mine, not HP's - 
>
>

	It is a style preference, it would be like a man saying I don't
	understand why a woman wears makeup, or why they cut their hair, or why
	they paint their fingernails, or whatever.

	I think some guys do not look good with long hair, some look great.
	It is nice to run your fingers through their hair and play with it,
	it can very sexy and sensuous flirtation.


	Also chris,
	Generally I believe that people that choose the hairstyles they have 
	because that is what they want are more likely to express themselves in 
	other ways then someone who wil not pick a certain style because it 
	might not fit society's viewpoint of them.

	
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Net.Women
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 02:58:44 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Jul28.193425.13239@med.umich.edu>  blackp@med.umich.edu writes:
>
> I friend of mine and are are having a dispute as to whether there
> are actually any good looking net.women that read this news group.

There are no good looking net.women.  There are a number of intelligent,
attractive and interesting net.women.  Also, if you meet them, a number
of them turn out to be good looking real.life.women.

> Any suggestions as to how this dispute could be settled?

Get out more, and get a life.  Or, get a GIF viewer, a box of Kleenex,
and subscribe to alt.sex.pictures.net.goddesses.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Subject: Re: I Had Crabs With Steve
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 17:38:55 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.070757.2809@dg-rtp.dg.com> morton@rtpnet06.rtp.dg.com (John R. Morton) writes:
>Does anyone else feel this way ?????
>
>I often notice that posts are obviously intended for one person, or
>a small group, sometimes with a " you had to be there", to understand
>type of content... And I am at a loss to imagine why the poster thought
>the entire USA wanted or needed to read it ?
>
>I email out of vogue, or do some consider their flirtings of National
>importance.... or maybe something else I overlooked ??
>
>hopeleslly without a clue,
>
>JM

Why do you assume anyone would be interested in your feelings about
this post?  Because.......this group includes comments, ideas, 
criticism, etc......Some know others, others are interested in
knowing about some.......some don't care about anybody.  If
you don't care, or don't like it, don't read it.  Most of what's
posted here doesn't interest me either, but everyone once in a while
something does and I comment, otherwise I use the K key.

Just my explaination, I'm sure you'll get others.

				Steve
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: oaf@serverx.osf.org (Oded Feingold)
Subject: NOT Pickup Lines, ferchrissake, but being InTeReSting, maybe
Summary: whatthehell kinda name is pooh, anyway?  a French spy??
Keywords: lime Jello, cops, snakes, hematomas, diseases
Organization: Open Software Foundation
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 03:47:02 GMT

pooh@eddie.mit.edu (a @ Pooh Muffin Different Utility Research writes) Kitchen:

>	I read somewhere that the best way to be an interesting person is
>	to be interested in other people.  I think it's a pretty good 
>	guideline.

I have a better one.  Be so screamingly outre that people forget their
problems in order to gape in astonishment at yours:

    Arrive at work sporting a huge hematoma from a python bite.  Offer
	onlookers some teeth that broke off in your arm.  They really
	are sharp, by the way.

    Get photographed by the local paper while being tossed out of the
	Registry of Motor Vehicles by three cops.  (I complained that
	the service was too polite, and I would rapidly lose my
	respect for the awesome majesty of the law and drive like a
	jerk unless they did something to restore my faith in them.
	So they gave me the bum's rush, then skedaddled back inside in
	panic when they realized the Herald had someone outside.  I
	had to beg the guy not to use the picture, because I didn't
	want registry cops getting in trouble.  [It got quashed.])

    Do something that lets people think the magic of life isn't gone,
	and sanity may not yet triumph in this world.

Of course, that takes some work, some talent, some money, maybe some
luck or pain.  It also takes a finely tuned sense of poor judgment.
But it gets the heart beating, and for some reason people like that.

However, let me mention that visiting a sci-fi convention in a town
that's not your own, while wearing a package of lime Jello on a
carabiner hanging off one's waist will only appeal to a small number
of thoroughly dirty-minded people.  So if you do that, and forget
you've done it, and someone comes up and [...], don't blame me, okay.

Does anyone know if Kenn Barry survived the last earthquack?
-- 
Oded Feingold  oaf@osf.org     Contractor at  Open Software Foundation
OSF:   11 Cambridge Center     Cambridge Ma. 02142      (617) 621-7265
Home:  21 Oxford Circle        Belmont   Ma. 02178      (617) 489-6918
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Killing all Idiots!
Date: 31 Jul 92 13:53:16 GMT
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: luzenko@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com's message of 30 Jul 92 20:40:06 GMT

In article <2176@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com> luzenko@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com (Bill Luzenko) writes:

   But Angelwing I'd be dead too!!

Damn, he's quick.
--
Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu/(ne crm@cs.duke.edu) 
O/Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
H/3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am he who walks the States with a barb'd tongue, questioning every
one I meet,/Who are you that wanted only to be told what you knew
before?/ Who are you that wanted only a book to join you in your
nonsense?"  _Leaves of Grass_ xxiii.4.
From: neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Postlethwaite)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Would you Shag a 14 year old ??
Date: 25 Jul 92 21:02:26 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Heriot-Watt University, Scotland

In article <PALOU.92Jul22144516@osnome.che.wisc.edu> palou@osnome.che.wisc.edu (Ignasi Palou-Rivera) writes:
>
>Easy question. NO. Why? Well, it's not that I think 14-year olds
>shouldn't be sexually active, but I think it's better for them to
>stick to their own age group. I believe that the usual distinction
>between older and younger that eighteen is valid. Not that a 17-year
>old and a 19 should not mix, but it isn't good for people well above
>(I mean three years, that is 21) to have a sexual relationship with
>people under-18.
>

Ok, an analogy back to you.

Say you are phisically able to do a certain task like properly drive a
car at 17 (age here anyway), but 'society doesn't think it is a good idea
to do it until you are 21'.

Is this fair ??

Most girls are fully physically able to conceive and give birth from about
12-15 (depending on body chemistry). Society doesn't think it is a good
idea .....

A sick 'friend' of mine has this really crass saying...

'If their old enough to bleed, their old enough to breed'.

In many 3rd world countries the girls are going forth and multiplying from
a very early age. In Holland the age of consent is 14.

Neil

P.S. I'm not a child pervert before you ask !!

****************************| Sig' Time |*********************************
JANET: 	  neilp@uk.ac.hw.cs   *   Neil Postlethwaite, Rm G.25, 
INTERNET: neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk   *   Dept of Computer Science,  
UUCP: 	  ..!uknet!hwcs!neilp *   Heriot-Watt University, Riccarton Campus
                              *   Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, United Kingdom.
------------------------------*-------------------------------------------
Computer Science Account      *   Phone +44 (0)31 449-5111 x4174
From: gswst@gl.pitt.edu (Gary S. Wachs)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Morality- Alarming results
Date: 31 Jul 92 03:49:29 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh, Electrical Engineering

In article <1992Jul29.191245.16851@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>In article <1992Jul29.035035.16360@zooid.guild.org> Ross Ridge <ross@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>>
>> Greg Skinner :
>>>It is the same principle with having sex with 14 year olds;
>>>there was a time when not only was it legal it was a commonly accepted
>>>practice when they consented.
>>
>>Once a apon time 14 year old could marry and then support his family
>>working in the fields.  Nowadays no 14 year could support his family
>>and would be great burden on society.  So, it seems to me to be very
>>reasonable for modern society to discourage 14 years old from having
>>sex, just like I think it's reasonable for an goverment to impose speed
>>limits that save lives.
>
>I don't know if this is still the case, but a psych book I have here mentions
>how old one has to be to legally get married--and in some states, this is
>as young as eleven (for females with parental consent).
>
>Still, it seems odd to put as much weight on age as most people do--I know
>many people who, at age 14, were much more mature than a lot of other
>people I know in their twenties and older.
>
>Trygve

I was hoping someone would segway into the young-adults-having-sex issue.
I agree with Ross: I think young people should be discouraged from having sex.
And when I say discouraged, I don't mean "educated as to methods of 
contraception" (although that should also be taught).  There was 
an excellent viewpoint on this problem in Newsweek a month or so ago. The
article was titled "A new kind of Sex eduation".  Basically, the author
was unsatisfied with the approach to sex-ed approved by Planned Parenthood
becuase it ignored - indeed, it discouraged - informing young people of
the importance of living with some decency (ie getting a job and being married
before bringing children into the world).  No no no , Planned Parenthood
says, that's an ethical, or moral, perspective - let's not get
into such arbitrary points of view, that's their attitude.  Sickening,
isn't it.  They make a great start: they say to the kids, "don't be
ashamed, do whatever you feel like doing!  Here's how to do it safely..."
I hate that, I really resent it.  To squander the valuable opportunity to
inform young adults of what's at stake and leave them thinking only of
how free they are.  What a crock.

By the way, I think I remember where I saw those statistics on rape.  It
was an issue of Parade magazine within the last 4 months.

Gar
From: pdsmith@bbn.com (Peter D. Smith)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Fraternities (was: Re: E.W.- Average age of subscribers)
Date: 28 Jul 1992 21:20:08 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Reply-To: pdsmith@spca.bbn.com (Peter D. Smith)
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <l7bd6uINN94q@skat.usc.edu> tarra@skat.usc.edu (Frat Boy) writes:
>You obviously are the only person who lost friends or family members in Viet
>Nam, so you know more about it than everyone else.  Well you are wrong, and
>you are stupid for implying this.  You are also stupid for trying to place

No, please -- tell use what you really think.



				Peter D. Smith

And Dawn -- my little niece is the same way -- she always refuses a kiss
when asked.  Luckily, she adores being picked up, smooched, and replaced,
so my warm uncle feelings are fully satisfied.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: haroome@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Allisson Roome)
Subject: Trygve's Dungeon (Re: I'm Crushed)
Organization: Me? Nah ... now where did I refile that message?
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 12:42:53 EDT

In article <1992Jul21.183236.22120@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu 
(trygve lode) writes:
>
>Trygve    (Who doesn't think that women's liberation has gone too far at
>           all--in fact, I even make a point of always letting women who
>           get tied up in my dungeon loose...eventually.)

It's true - he does let women out of his dungeon. He let me out long
enough to go to a party, Pike's Peak, Boulder (people watching and
such things), hiking in Rocky Mountain State Park (I don't want to be
a flatlander anymore - sniff), Elich Gardens, and a Renaissance Faire.
Besides, what if they're already loose women (I'm not - unattached but
not loose - sorry Larry)?

BTW - he's a lot of fun.  Anyone who's going to be in the Denver area
should look him up ... He's damned impressive in the chainmail - women
launch themselves into his arms (made someone with us wish that he was
wearing some just for the femine-attentions) - seriously.  


Allisson


--
| H.  Allisson Roome - haroome@rodan.acs.syr.edu 
 "The only thing that makes life possible is permanent, intolerable
  uncertainty; not knowing what comes next" (Ursula Le Guin) 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: blackp@med.umich.edu (Jeremy Thomas James)
Subject: Re: Net.Women
Originator: blackp@hendrix.itn.med.umich.edu
Keywords: good looking cute beautiful etc.
Organization: University of Michigan - Medical Center
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 22:56:19 GMT


In article <l7bdn0INN91b@news.bbn.com>, dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
|> blackp@med.umich.edu (Jeremy Thomas James) writes:
|> >
|> >--------------
|> >I friend of mine and are are having a dispute as to whether there
|> >are actually any good looking net.women that read this news group.
|> >Any suggestions as to how this dispute could be settled?
|> 
|> I'm having a hard time choosing between the different answers that came
|> to mind, so I'll go ahead and use them all:
|> 
|> Flame 1:  No, there are no good looking women reading this.  It is 
|> axiomatic that everyone on the net is funny-looking and weird because
|> if we were good looking and normal we'd be doing something else.  My
|> sole source of comfort is that you're probably even more funny-looking
|> and weird than I am.
|> 
|> Flame 2:  Good looking?  I've been told that I have an adorable logon id,
|> to say nothing of some really great ascii.  (Translation:  You can't see 
|> us, so why care what we look like?)
|> 
|> Flame 3:  There aren't any good looking women, but sitting back and 
|> counting the twits that crawl out of the woodwork can be a rewarding
|> (if time consuming) hobby.
|> 
|> Dawn 
|> 

I love how quick you are to flame.
1st-I have as good a right to ask this question as anyone has to ask any  
    other question.  If you don't like it, skip it and go on.
2nd-I don't see anything wrong with this question.  I never suggested
    anything (on purpose) sorry if you take offense at being asked something
    such a terrible question.  I simply wondered what people would come up 
    with. (a little creativity)
3rd-See my response to the other replyer for more info on my reasons.
4th-I'm actually good looking ( so I've been told ) and was just
    bored at work hoping for such a compassionate answer.  ( I'm just one of
    those nice guys who females seem less attracted to. My 2 cents on why I'm
    here )

|> PS  Thanks for the straight lines, I'm in a rotten mood and I've been
|> wanting to broil somebody.

No problem.  Just don't do it too often.  Gives you a negative image.
-- 
What I say isn't necessarily the opinion of the organization I belong to!
===============================================================================
Jeremy T. James         University of Michigan Medical Center,  ITN 
B1911 CFOB, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0704 Phone:313-747-2778  blackp@med.umich.edu
"Even if your on the right track, you'll get run over if you're there too long"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Define "FEMININE" anything goes...
Date: 29 Jul 92 19:55:55 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Jul29.012801.21455@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark William Hopkins) writes:
|In article <1992Jul28.144638.19290@news.acns.nwu.edu> drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max) writes:
|>Feminine means skimpy silk undies underneath blue jeans
| 
|In article <1992Jul28.172215.23207@cbfsb.cb.att.com> jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
|>Is it wrong for a man .....
|>Hold it. Could you go into a little more detail?
|
|In article <1992Jul28.192015.25687@news.acns.nwu.edu> drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max) writes:
|>Black
|
|Zebra striped, while we're on the subject. :)

None.

It's a good thing Max didn't use the word "panties" instead of "undies" or
that guy that was ready to take his vacation in her neck of the woods would
have been joined by many others.  When a woman says "panties" it makes young
boy's sticker peck up.

-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
From: neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Postlethwaite)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Would you Shag a 14 year old ??
Date: 26 Jul 92 11:28:30 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Heriot-Watt University, Scotland

In article <1992Jul23.210858.9131@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> strake@coos.dartmouth.edu (strake) writes:
>
>Now lets take a look at it. Mark has a good point. It is entirely dependent
>on the society. I'm not saying its good or bad, but society defines what
>is commonly considered good or bad. Imagine this world
>all children are taught about sex by their parents. when their children
>reach puberty, fathers sit down with their sons and explain things to the sons,
>show them the more common ways of masturbation, and show them immediately that
>masturbation is not bad and is in fact healthy.
>Mothers do the same things with their daughters, perhaps even laying down with
>them and doing 69 with their daughters to show them how such things feel, how
>they should feel, what is bad, etc.  (fathers would also do this with their
>sons) then, fathers would sit down with the daughters and being very careful,
>and loving, and supportive, perhaps even with the mother looking on, take the
>daughters virginity in a joyous rite of womanhood. Mothers would do the same
>with their sons for a rite of manhood.

I'm not really sure what to say here. I'm a bit speechless.

Has someone cross posted the thread to alt.tasteless ??


Neil


****************************| Sig' Time |*********************************
JANET: 	  neilp@uk.ac.hw.cs   *   Neil Postlethwaite, Rm G.25, 
INTERNET: neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk   *   Dept of Computer Science,  
UUCP: 	  ..!uknet!hwcs!neilp *   Heriot-Watt University, Riccarton Campus
                              *   Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, United Kingdom.
------------------------------*-------------------------------------------
Computer Science Account      *   Phone +44 (0)31 449-5111 x4174
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: glover@dvinci.USask.Ca (Ken Glover)
Subject: Re: Of Canadians and arithmetic skills
Organization: University of Saskatchewan
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 19:43:10 GMT

walter (Walter Lego) writes:
[stuff deleted]
: ...
: 
: Sweepstakes open to residents of the United States and Canada, except
: employees of... In order to win a prize, residents of Canada will be 
: required to correctly answer a time-limited arithmetical skill-test question.

That is to make sure the the winner is really Canadian, not from some other
place on earth :-)

Really, the govenment has a rule about not being able to give away things on
a draw, so simple math is required to win (improves the education system ;-)

Ken

: 
: ...
: 
: 
: 						Walter
: 
: What disclaimer?
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: topless
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:12:42 GMT

dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
>[I was at a party with Her Royal Majesty a few months ago and she started 
>squalling.  So I asked the guy I was talking to if he would mind if I fed
>the baby.  He said, "No, of course not, do you mind if I leer?"  I couldn't
>think of a comeback.]

	Hmmm. My mother's solution was to drive her fingers into the larynx
of the gentleman in question and watch him strangle. Apperently they teach
those skills in convents, which is why *I'm* polite to nuns, ex or
otherwise.

	I won't even mention what happened to the flasher...

								
							James Nicoll
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Would you Shag a 14 year old ??
Date: 29 Jul 92 19:12:45 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Jul29.123512.13436@cbfsb.cb.att.com> jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
|In article <1992Jul28.220434.15278@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com writes:
|>In  <1992Jul27.182840.6897@sbil.co.uk>  mikeu@dinar.sbi.COM (Michael Urbanski) writes:
|>> In article <l6qr5iINN4g6@news.bbn.com>, Bonger writes:
|>> |>
|>> |> >Given the opportunity if you came across a seriously gorgeously horny
|>> |> >girl who was very repsonsive and willing to get to bed with you, but
|>> |> >you knew she was only 14 years old.
|>> |> >
|>> |> >Would you ??
|>> |> >
|>
|>Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
| 
| You know I was gonna stay out of this, But, has anybody noticed
|some of those olympic gymnastic girls ain't have bad. Now the swimmers
|I wouldn't wanna meet in a dark alley.

Stay out of it?  No way.  I haven't had this much fun since the "Would you
rather shag Gabriela Sabatini, Stefi Graff, or Jennifer Capriati" thread
that was crossposted to rec.tennis and rec.humor.

Somehow everytime I see womens gymnastics I'm reminded of that old National
Lampoon album called "That's not funny, that's sick".  They did a segment
called "Gymnasty".  The scene took place in the "Tito Pavillion" and the
male and female broadcasters were describing the floor exercise of the
young Rumanian girl.

"There she stands, pert little chest thrust out....and she does a flip-flop,
followed by a double back, and a roundhouse...DAN, DID SEE THE WAY HER
NIPPLES STOOD OUT on that double back...BOY, I'D LIKE TO FUCK HER... We'll
I'm no lesi Dan, but ......"

A classic.


-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
Newsgroups: soc.singles