HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: intrigue@milton.u.washington.edu (Angelwing)
Subject: Re: A R C
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 16:00:17 GMT

In article <1992Apr7.092859.29878@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@isis.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>In article <9204070353.AA17034@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com> GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu writes:
>>
>>        Alison Rebecca Colman errors with
>>
>>                " There are *plenty* of aggressive women willing
>>                  to make the first move "

>It seems like the women I know who are happilly involved in a serious
>relationship almost always were the ones to make the first move--which
>seems like a good way to get the ones that they want and, for that matter,
>would seem to increase their chances of getting involved with someone 
>who isn't going to be constantly seeking elsewhere.

You know, at the risk of coming across at *totally* sexist, I'm going to
have to say that it always seems to be at least the women's *idea* to be
in the relationship.  No matter how obviously aggressive she is, if a
women has her eye on a man you can bet that sooner or later he's going to
figure it out.  I mean, she doesn't have to actually call him up and say
"Hey, you with the blinders on!  Let's go out!"  Just being available,
just being around, just smiling at the right time or arranging to be at
the same restaurant at lunch ...a zillion things.  Not necessarily
aggressive, but definitely aware.  Keep your eyes open, boys.

Angelwing - It's all in the way you look at it.


*------------------------------------------------------------------*
* Angelwing       |"Two things are wanted by a true man, danger and*
* U. of Washington| play - therefore, he seeks woman as the most   *
*                 | dangerous toy."       Friedrich Nietzsche      *
*------------------------------------------------------------------*

Xref: sparky soc.singles:10641 soc.men:8159 soc.women:8726
From: davros@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Buddy Brannan)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Men and women talking
Date: 8 Apr 92 04:39:42 GMT
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

Why aren't there any flamewars? Well I'm new here ... so I haven't a clue.
:) Surprised me though, 'cause I've seen lots o' flamewars in the (ummmm)
week? two? that I've been more or less sort of casually reading this group.
I like a nice occasional flamewar--passes the time and keeps the ol' adrenaline
going--so I don't mind 'em--but the lull's nice. :)
Buddy, KB5ELV
davros@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
"My dear Brigadier, a straight line may be the shortest distance between two
points, but it is by no means the most interesting."--The Doctor
From: epg@nature.berkeley.edu ()
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Newspaper personals (history...) - update
Date: 9 Apr 1992 05:52:32 GMT
Organization: U.C.B.
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: nature.berkeley.edu

The following message is an update of my "personal" experience. Not only
will you get my side of this date, you will get his too.  We now go LIVE
to my living room ......... 

CP: Good evening ladies and gentlemen, ...yes I'm alive and real and having
the pleasure of sitting here beside little 'e'.  I have been enjoying
reading the back-n-forth of messages all about life, love and the sanctity of
relationships. And it's been so kind of little 'e' to give me access...

little 'e': Oh yes, I'm such a generous type.  Well, he did bribe me
with a piece of chocolate. :-) (sorry to interrupt) :-(

CP: Oooo... don't tell them that part.
As I was saying, so kind as
to give me (...brief?) access to her newsreader so I once again have the
thrill of...  posting to the net!  (It's been a while since I left the
technical world...)

little 'e': Now he's just a boring musician. Sigh! :-)  Play me that
song again CP, so I can be blue.

CP: Which one did you want to hear little 'e'?  But, really I'm just a
poor student. OK, I drive a shiny beamer, but... hey I'm poor and a
"nice guy" too!

little 'e': You don't drive a beamer and you know it.  Tho you may
<have> a beamer and I don't know it. :-)  Please excuse the innuendo,
it's a little late.  (Time to put CP to bed perhaps?) :-)

CP: Ohoo....

little 'e': As you see, I've left him speechless. :-)  Goodnight.

*Because I was endowed with a mind, heart, and soul,
I enjoy everything in life.*

just me,

little 'e'

p.s. Having regained some composure, CP says: Me too! (to "Because I was ...")
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: THE ELEMENTS OF SEDUCTION
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:05:44 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Apr14.212458.25276@tigger.jvnc.net> richh@tigger.jvnc.net (RICHH) writes:
>There's a local place here in Philly that sells these 'fake beepers'
>for about twenty-five bucks.  They look real, but all they really
>are are alarm clocks.
>Here's what you do.  Say you're meeting a blind date at 7 for dinner.
>You set the beeper to go off at about 7:30.  That should give you
>ample time to  make your decision.  If it's not clicking, you simply
>excuse yourself and not return. That's okay, but here's the real
>beauty:  if it *is* clicking, you let it go off anyway.  She'll say
>something like, "Shouldn't you be checking on that?"
>
>"Nah, you are far more interesting than anything going on in that
>silly old ICU."
>
>*BARANGUS*
>
>RICHH
>--of course, if you already have a beeper, you're one step ahead.

I like the way your mind works, course you could say you gotta make a call
and save $25 or maybe "I'm going out for a pack of smokes be right back".
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Subject: Re: Peeking through the curtain
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 92 09:23:19 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <1992Apr07.080406.14999@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
>> There's still something wrong with this...
>In your opinion.
As always.

>> Saying 'Oh, I trust you to do what you want' is
>> simply asking them to remain monogamous, but your just 'preparing'
>> yourself because you really don't trust your partner, and you want to
>> be ready with the 'Oh, I guess I couldn't trust him/her after all' when
>> they play with your trust- or the 'I'll give her/him *one more chance*,
>> but thats all' beating.
>It can be - if you're immature.  But note that what you said isn't
>what Pooh said.  It could be, if you added to it:
>   I trust you to do what you want, and I trust that you wouldn't
>   want to do anything that hurt me.

Yes, but a monogamous relationship >is< trusting the other person to
not sleep with anybody else.
Calling it 'open' doesn't add one iota of trust that shouldn't have already
been there in the first place. I guess it means I consider my SO sleeping
with somebody else to be a 'bad' thing.

>> Otherwise, whats the point of >having< an SO?
>What's the point of having anything if you don't get exclusive use of it?
>Is that what you're asking?

When it comes to sex? You're damn right I want (and give) exclusivness.
If I'm not enough to 'satisfy' my lover, well then either me and her need
to have a talk and work things out, or whe should find another lover. (or
vice-versa, of course). 

Maybe my attitude towards the whole thing is a bit straight-laced, but I
consider sex an important part of a relationship, and monogamy an important
part of sex.

r.
From: cnh5730@maraba.tamu.edu (Charles Herrick)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Sorority bashing (was: Frat bashing re re visited
Date: 10 Apr 92 19:50:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: tamsun.12184

John Fereira writes

|> In article <KRANITZ.92Apr9172005@dspalley.mr.med.ge.com>  
kranitz@mr.med.ge.com (Wes Kranitz 4-6857 MRCE) writes:
|> When women were admitted,
|> >they were allowed to select the name they were called by. They  
selected
|> >brother.

|> It should've been fraternity babe.  The use of "babe" is becoming  
pretty
|> widespread and I find it refreshing that women are confident enough of  
their
|> femininity that they are not offended by the use of the term.


Even more common is the term "bow-head."


People tell a joke about the difference between a sorority bow-head and a  
toilet seat.
From: greg@pomona.claremont.edu (Tigger)
Subject: Hip Hip Hooray!
Organization: Pomona College
Date: 16 Apr 92 23:22:48 PDT

Ee gads!  I'm back again!  Dear God, won't I ever go away?  Nah,
even if there probably aren't many around who will recognize me
from the last time I haunted this group...

Anyway, three cheers for the institution known as The Pub (as
opposed to The Meat Market or The Total Dive).  In particular,
three cheers for The Brittish Bulldog.  It's not quite McGinty's,
but they do have Blackthorn Cider...

Hip hip hooray!

--
|  Greg Orman                                 greg@pomona.claremont.edu  |
|                        Live to Ride, Ride to Live                      |
|        A Man's Best Friends:  a Harley, a Baretta, and a Gund          |
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu
Subject:      A R C
To: soc.singles.usenet
Reply-To: GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu
Organization: DEC Palo Alto
Date:         Mon, 06 Apr 92 21:51:07 MST


        Alison Rebecca Colman errors with

                " There are *plenty* of aggressive women willing
                  to make the first move "

      At last. Somebody more deceived than me.
      Man, what a relief.

      Alison, if you can answer these 3 questions, I'll believe you:

      1) What year is this?
      2) What planet is this?
      3) Is Dan Moscony right?
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.women,soc.men
From: jpglori@srv.PacBell.COM (John P. Gloria)
Subject: Re: buying things
Organization: Pacific * Bell
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 05:41:21 GMT

In article <1992Apr7.135658.12733@risky.ecs.umass.edu> shortell@spock.ecs.umass.edu (Laurel L Shortell) writes:
>In article <vxljs3f@lynx.unm.edu> blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr3.022831.875@ait.com> eleanor@ait.com (Eleanor Evans) writes:
>>>I'd like to buy a man thing--is there like a catalog, or something?  A
>>>toll-free number?  Where do I sign up?
>>
>>Well, I know where you can rent a great man thing- by the hour or day- with
>>the man still attached (that part being unfourtunately non-negotible ';-)
>>Leave a message at this here account ';-)
>
>What a disgusting thing to say! She was asking an innocent
>question, and you felt you had to jump on the opportunity
>to spout vile comments? Keep it in your pants, buster.

Take it with a grain of salt.  I personally got my SECOND good laugh
of the evening.  I think I wet my pants.  Nah, just kidding.
-- 
        ********     John Gloria - jpglori@pacbell.com	********	
 "He that knows himself, knows others; and he that is ignornant of
himself, could not write a very profound lecture on other men's heads.
													- Charles Caleb Colton
Newsgroups: alt.sex,talk.bizarre,soc.singles
From: dbj@cs.washington.edu (Dave Johnson)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: date characteristics
Date: 6 Apr 92 17:18:34 GMT
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Apr04.090338.16001@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
>In  <11017@borg.cs.unc.edu>  davidson@pooh.cs.unc.edu (Drew Davidson) writes:
>> In article <1992Apr01.234724.7665@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com writes:
>> >Think
>> >about it - it's not like if you ask and she doesn't like you, she gets
>> >to keep your testicles for earrings.
>>
>> Oh, great.  Now you tell me.
>
>So you missed an opportunity to ask someone out - big deal.  Now if this
>were a *woman* saying "Now you tell me", it might be a problem...
>

I don't think you were listening carefully enough, Larry.
Didn't you notice the high pitch of Drew's voice?

-- 
  Dave Johnson

"You're not too smart, are you?  I like that in a man."
    --Kathleen Turner in Body Heat 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: richh@tigger.jvnc.net (RICHH)
Subject: Re: THE ELEMENTS OF SEDUCTION
Originator: richh@tigger.jvnc.net
Organization: JvNCnet, Princeton University, NJ
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 23:43:31 GMT

In article <1992Apr6.224813.5140@cbnewsm.cb.att.com> lfd@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (Lee Derbenwick) writes:
>In article <1992Apr5.195219.18854@tigger.jvnc.net>, richh@tigger.jvnc.net (RICHH) writes:
>> There are few things as thrilling or as challenging as seducing a woman
>> who absolutely loathes you.
>> If you can't see the sport in this, you will never understand men.
>
>Speak for yourself, not for "men".  I can't see any sport at all in
>seducing a woman who even moderately dislikes me.  If a seduction
>is not for mutual pleasure, what's the point?  Using sex to play
>power games is adolescent, at best.

No argument.
As for "What's the point?", alas, I'm not going to explain what  should
be bred in the bone.

RICHH

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Older men and younger women (advice needed)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 20:24:09 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  <1992Apr14.191100.27156@walter.bellcore.com>  walter (Walter Lego) writes:
> In article <1992Apr14.181740.31229@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com writes
> >
> >Why does a year or two difference in what you believed her age to be
> >make such a big difference?
>
> Perhaps, it is because some states seem to make a big deal out of that
> particular difference?

Not for dating, unless you consider doing that IkkySexThing a requisite
part of dating...

"What do you mean, 'statutory'?  She was movin' around like crazy!"

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: groves@noao.edu (Lee Groves )
Subject: Re: How to meet girls?
Organization: National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ, USA
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 18:59:34 GMT

From article <1992Apr16.181401.13648@wam.umd.edu>, by asp@wam.umd.edu (??):
> I'm 18 and this is my first year here at school.  I haven't met many girls and
> the I just don't seem to appeal to the ones I have.  I think I seem like a 
> decent guy.  I think I care alot and listen well.  What is a good way to meet
> girls and get this point across to them.  
> 
> Todd


1)  Get a look.
    (I recommend long hair, earrings, leather, and scars)

2)  Get an attitude.  The more arrogant the better.

3)  NEVER mention that you ever go near a computer.

4)  Only approach better than average looking women.

5)  Be a romantic.  Open doors.  Send (better yet, deliver) flowers.
    If possible, write music/poetry.

6)  Don't be cheap.  

7)  Show some class in how you decorate your doorm/appt/house.

8)  Be emotionally unreachable and enigmatic for a while.

9)  If you make a move, be decisive about it.

10) Don't act like a pathetic puppy dog needing a pat on the head.


As a former NiceGuy, I can vow that all of these work.  If one
has self-confidence and direction, the social life will all but
take care of itself...  

There is song by Tripp Shakespear with the line:

	I'm in love with a beautiful girl.
	I'm a charming and dangerous guy.

And that is the secret in a nutshell:  Be charming and dangerous.

Lee


-- 
Lee J. Groves, National Optical Astronomy Observatories, Tucson, AZ
Usenet:   {arizona,decvax,ncar}!noao!lgroves or  uunet!noao.edu!lgroves
Internet: lgroves@noao.edu         SPAN/HEPNET:  draco::lgroves
Phonenet: 602-325-9357
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@isis.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: The "first" "move" (was Re: A R C )
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 21:25:53 GMT

In article <kum9ecINNcek@news.bbn.com> dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
>In article <1992Apr14.173234.8899@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@isis.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>>In article <kujk8vINNdpm@news.bbn.com> dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
>>>
>>>Silly boy, I'm surprised I have to tell you this.  You offer to help them
>>>celebrate May Day, of course.  You *do* already have a cool helmet, don't
>>>you?  
>>
>>Why, yes, I do have a helmet with horns, but I've got to admit that crowded
>>fields aren't really my thing--do you think it would be OK to substitute
>>crumbs left over from breakfast in bed for the fields of grain?
>
>Most pagans live in downtown somewhere-or-other and don't have the luxury
>of a real field.  I usually ended up tossing a few wildflowers in the bed 
>just to get the idea across.  But why do you say crowded fields?  I'm sure 
>it would be better in a nice private one.

Why crowded fields?  I guess I just had thought that was the tradition--
and I just hadn't joined in because I'm not particularly fond of orgies.

But if a private field will do, I've got the dragonrun--it's sort of like
a dog run but much, much bigger.

>>>And May Day is even coming up.  (Wish I knew a guy with a helmet to help
>>>*me* celebrate.)
>>
>>Hmmmm...does conjure up some interesting images--now, what to do with the
>>ribbons and crepe paper....
>
>Interesting images indeed.  And here I was worrying about fitting a
>decent sized maypole in my apartment.

But I thought size wasn't supposed to be important?

>Oh my, oh my, oh my.

Oh, your *what*?  (Boggles the imagination.)

>Dawn

Trygve
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: bloom@tarkin.enet.dec.com (Elbert Bloom)
Subject: RE: over 50 but not over the hill!!
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date:  7 APR 92 17:43:42 EST



Ok Deb and Sandra. There are a few of us over 50 types out here who
read this news group. I am over 50 (51 to be exact), male and single
for the past 1-1/2 years. Mentally, however, I am closer to 20.

Lets hear from all of you beautiful ladies out there. Send me mail.
chronological age is no barrier, but you have to be mentally close
to 20.

Have a Great Day
Bert


Xref: sparky soc.singles:11131 sci.med:8591 misc.consumers:10426 misc.kids:12865
From: ansok@stsci.edu (Gary Ansok)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,sci.med,misc.consumers,misc.kids
Subject: Re: Business cards
Date: 13 Apr 92 17:58:55 GMT
Reply-To: ansok@stsci.edu (Gary Ansok)
Organization: TRW, c/o Space Telescope Science Inst., Baltimore, MD

In article <1992Apr11.131603.5421@crash.cts.com> rcf@pnet01.cts.com (Bob Forsythe) writes:
>     Locally, Von's Supermarkets does a program each year where they
>contribute so much toward a computer for a school for each cashier's ticket
>the school collects.  It gets them publicity and people are aware that
>shopping at Von's helps schools.  May be the same thing with the pop-tops. 
>There's more to these charity gimics than the intrinsic value of the item
>being collected.

Yes, but in this case they are only accepting Von's receipts, so those
who wish to participate have an incentive to shop at Von's, thereby
presumably increasing Von's sales.  Also, Von's is making no secret
of their backing of this program -- quite the opposite, in fact, to
increase their name recognition and public image.

For aluminum can pull-tabs, though, none of these seem to apply.  The
only company that I can see that would want to increase can usage is
Alcoa or some other can manufacturer; it wouldn't be a particular
soft drink manufacturer (e.g., Coca-Cola), since you can't tell whether
a pull tab came from a Coke can, a Pepsi can, or a beer can (in general).

Also, if a company was collecting tabs for charity, why would they be 
keeping it a secret?  I would think they'd be running ads to let you 
know that Company X is doing this good deed.

I think this is just a rumor -- but if anyone knows what company or
organization is behind this, _and_ you have checked with that organization,
please tell us so we can settle this!  (Don't just post to say "I heard
it was so-and-so.")  Who, if anyone, is writing the checks?

Gary
ansok@stsci.edu
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.women,soc.men
Subject: Re: buying things
Date: 7 Apr 92 22:07:25 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.ibm.com
Organization: The Village Waterbed
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM

In  <1992Apr7.201510.1858@wetware.com>  diana@wetware.com (CatWoman ) writes:
>
> Diana
> (who is plotting how to get her ProblemYoungerMan - with
> attached man thing - to come to MY place tonight so I
> will NOT have withdrawal symptoms...)

Tell him you have some new softwear that he'd love to get his hands on;
by the time he find out that you were talking about lingerie, you'll
have your hands on him.  :-)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: rdj@adpgate.UUCP (Richard Johnson)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Peeking through the curtain
Summary: Well just maybe
Date: 14 Apr 92 22:46:43 GMT
Article-I.D.: curly.1281
Organization: ADP Dealer Services R&D, Portland, OR

<Someone said:>
> >I can believe that there are probably some quite viable relationships where
> >both partners have agreed on 'openness', but for the vast majority of 'em
> >it one partner yakking the other one off.
 
and In article <1992Apr8.222511.14486@ait.com>, 
eleanor@ait.com (Eleanor Evans) replies:
> I can buy this.  That's certainly true of half the "open" relationships
> I've seen.  Actually, it's true of all the ones that called themselves
> "open".  

Hmm.  Maybe you don't enough of the right people.  :=)  My SO's and I
have had a (several?) succesful "open" relationship now for over 12
years.  Maybe you're right about the ones who have to _say_ the word,
though.  Most of the people in the Pacific Northwest (USA) call it
"alternative lifestyle" wghen they're serious, even though that includes
the practioners of lifestyles even I wouldn't consider.  

My view is that there are several kinds of intimacy, several kinds of
honesty.  Intimacy in any area requires honesty in that area.  Honesty
requires communication.  Communication requires trust.  Trust requires
(to a certain degree) intimacy.  The key is to make yourself trust
him/her.  

The HARD part to maintaining an open lifestyle is not the emotional
stuff you have to work through; and you do have some work through
initially.  It's the total amount of time, emotion, and energy you have
to devote to each and every member of the clan.  (And YES, our children
know precisely who their mother is, their father is, and the different
role of parents in our lifestyle.

I don't know why people get so hung up on the act of sex.  Maybe it's
because its soooo fun.  Maybe it because, as has been suggested in this
group, it because of it's symbolic meaning.  I try not to get too
carried away with it though, because everyone I've met has a different
view of the role of sex in a relationship.

> The only way my partner can hurt me is emotional infidelity.  Of course,
> excess physical activity with other people would give me a clue that
> there was something wrong in our relationship, but the occasional foray
> doesn't concern me.

I agree.  However... What is "excess"?  Is it when he stays away four
nights a week because you're having emotional problems he doesn't want
to deal with?  Is it when he stays with you, withing he were elsewhere?
Just curious.

-- 
Richard Johnson             (adpgate!curly!rdj@mcspdx.pdx.csd.mot.com)
"I have a mind like a steel sieve."  Kerry Cline
Newsgroups: soc.singles