HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
Subject: Taking a walk
Originator: elf@halcyon.com
Reply-To: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
Organization: Pendor, UnLtd.
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 07:14:25 GMT

In article <39076@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> sd.edu>
     jclark@sdcc3.ucsd.edu (John Clark) writes:

>Other methods of creating a safe environment include developing a
>'code of ethics' which is very negative towards physical agression.

   Or perhaps, very positive towards physical influence.  Teaching a
society to be nonagressive is suicidal when _everyone_ isn't going to
listen.  A better response, in my opinion, is to make everyone aware
that unwanted physical agression will be met, unquestioningly, with
disabling force.

>But I also don't think cultures change very much and so what is being
>asked for is a major cultural change.

   Actually, our culture has gone through four major paradigm shifts
since it's "birth" five hundred years ago.  Three of those happened in
the last century (Victorianism, Industrialism, Individualism) and, if
you read Toffler, the next ones are coming even faster...

         Elf !!!
-- 
Elf Sternberg    __   |     I have looked into the abyss, and the abyss
elf@halcyon.com  \/   | has looked into me.  Neither liked what we saw.
elf@polari.online.com |                              - Brother Theodore
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: none of my business
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 07:15:28 GMT

anonymus+791@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu writes:
>I was just wondering if any of the poly people out there in net.land
>were pagan or belonged to some non-mainstream religion.  Its really
>none of my business, but I was just wondering.

I do. O.T.O. {Love is the Law, Love under Will - those guys.}
From: robb@tfs.com (Not a tty)
Subject: Re: The Nature of Rights (was Re: So, you're straight... so far.) 
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 02:22:32 GMT

Uh, guys, it really is wonderful to hear the Objectivist point of view on the
net, I agree completely with the author.  I also feel that discussions about
rape, human rights and morality are fascinating, enlightening and great fun,
but I would caution you that this argument is quickly going to stray off of 
the "polyamory" issue and into "philosophy" issue. 

Perhaps it is time to change the Newsgroups line?

-- 
Robb Kane (robb@tfs.com) | Triarchy - 1: government by three persons   2: a 
TRW Financial Systems    | country under three rulers   3: A large, elegant,
Berkeley, California     | full keeled sailing vessle so named for its crew.
From: kayvan@satyr.Rational.COM (Kayvan Sylvan)
Subject: Re: ISO Bi-Fem and Girlfriend
Organization: Rational, Santa Clara, CA
	<lcgqg3INNrlb@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
	<MUFFY.92Sep29103638@remarque.berkeley.edu>
	<lchii7INN1d9@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
	<ZEN.92Sep30095101@death.corp.sun.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 22:04:27 GMT

In article <ZEN.92Sep30095101@death.corp.sun.com> zen@death.corp.sun.com (d) writes:

   > The real issue is
   > that I have to be interested in some arbitrary set of features chosen
   > by you, for example for you to be flattered.  

     Well of course -- what is flattery?  I have to appreciate the fact
   that you appreciate or compliment me for me to be affected by your
   flattery, or else it's just noise or annoyance.

Yes. If I try to flatter and I insult, my communication is an insult.
It doesn't matter what my intent was. If I realize this, then I can
move forward in the communication. If I try to resist it, I'm caught
in the interminable argument of "But I said XXX, not YYY, why aren't
you flattered?".

I keep looking at my results, not what I wish the results were or
should be.

			---Kayvan
--
--
| Kayvan Sylvan, Expert Support, Consulting for Rational, C++ Development     |
| kayvan@satyr.Rational.COM  === W: (408) 496-3847 === H: (408) 978-1407      |
| "Dubito ergo sum --- I doubt, therefore I am." "Why say why?"               |
From: anonymus+1542@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu (Lisa)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: hi
Date: 17 Oct 92 00:37:56 GMT
Organization: Anonymous contact service

Hi.

I've been reading alt.polyamory on and off for a couple of months now.  I was
really excited when I found this group, because I now I had word for something
that I have felt for a long time and a group of people that identify the same
way & that has helped me get to a better understanding of myself and given me
a context in which I can talk about being polyamourus & what exactly that means
to me, to other people, like my friends & my current SO.  (It was a similar
feeling as to when I first discovered other bisexual people & bisexu-l a couple
years ago -- I found a name & then I found other people & got a lot stronger 
in my own identity).

I'm more than a little nervous about posting (which is a major reason as to 
why I decided to try the anonymous posting route).  I have a lot of questions
I think.  You see, I think of myself as poly, but most of my friends don't,
my SO isn't & I've not actually been in more than one sexual relationship at
a time (I don't count the time I got involved with someone as a way to break
up with somebody else because I couldn't find another way to convince the 
guy that I REALLY didn't want to be seeing him) and even talking about the 
possibility of my being sexually/romantically & intimitely involved with other
folks has put something of a strain on my relationship with my SO & I'm really
wanting to know how other people have handled the logistics of actively being
poly.  

I mean, I'm muddling through okay on my own, but hearing other people's 
experiences would be helpful.

(I feel like I"m making a mess of this post, but so be it, I have been trying
to figure out exactly what I want to say & not saying anything (here I mean)
for months now so I'm just gonna send this and hope for the best.)

thanks,
Lisa

-- 
No test posting.  To use this service, mail to (note misspelling, "anonymus"):
Anonymous posting:	anonymus+<name.of.news.group>@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu
Anonymous mail:		<user's alias>@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu
Test path/get alias:	anonymus+ping@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu
Assign nickname:	anonymus+nick@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu	(in Subject:)
Anon administrator:	anonymus+0@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu	(anonymously)
			anonymus+admin@godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu	(non-anon)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence)
Subject: Re: ISO Bi-Fem and Girlfriend
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 13:02:40 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.014336.28959@latcs1.lat.oz.au> woodhous@latcs2.lat.oz.au (Joe P Woodhouse) writes:
>williamt@athena.Eng.sun.com (Dances with Drums) writes:
>
>>In the case of the woman, if she displays her
>>sexual assets, it is relevant.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>   [unhappy] Ouch! This phrase makes me pretty uneasy too.
>
>   I'm trying to explain to myself exactly why this is so. I think it's
>basically because it turns women & their bodies into something that is
>"ownable"...that's the sort of connotation I have from it, anyway.

It has always seemed to me that a large volume of both law and custom
has a nasty insinuation of "women as property".
>
>
>>>   A personal prejudice perhaps, but I would also regard being mugged of
>>>even hundreds of dollars to be less an invasion & violation than even
>>>one "itty bitty" rape.
>>   

Take rape, as a small example.  It raises hackles and brings out incredible
emotions, and carries serious penalties under the law.

Rape has two components: the sexual part, and the violent part.  Which is
the part that gets everyone upset?

Well, people get beaten up all the time (men and women).  Yes, there are
penalties for such activities, but just physically abusing someone is
not considered particularly serious (note: I happen to think it SHOULD
be very serious: I'm just commenting on how it is taken).

In fact, it seems to be possible to have "rape" without any physical
attack (date rape, etc).   

So the underpinnings of all the excitement seem to be aimed at the sexual
aspect.

And yet, if the woman is "loose", "provocative", etc., rape becomes difficult
to assess.

What is totally opposite to "loose" and "provocative?  How about married,
family, husband for starts?


Smells like a property issue to me.

		Tony

Lawrence & Clark, Inc		(617) 762-0707	(206) 323-2864
Xenix/Unix support,etc 	 	 Boston		 Seattle
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: smersch@eng.clemson.edu (Steve)
Subject: Does anybody celebrate a Deathday?
Reply-To: smersch@eng.clemson.edu
Organization: College of Engineering, Clemson Univ.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 03:11:46 GMT

I do.  Last year I had the opportunity to meet this character in the "flesh".  Fortunately, it was only a casual introduction and since I'm happy to still be here, I have decided to celebrate Deathday (October 19th).  I was wondering if anybody else had a similar thought.
From: thom@crayfish.ucsd.edu (Thom Cleland)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: ISO Bi-Fem and Girlfriend
Date: 9 Oct 1992 05:50:02 GMT
Organization: Tenuous at best
NNTP-Posting-Host: crayfish.ucsd.edu

In article <BvEM0o.AF5@news.orst.edu> johnb@math.orst.edu (John Bainbridge) writes:
>In article <1992Sep30.130934.24980@tfs.com> ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic) writes:
>>muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>>williamt@athena.Eng.Sun.COM (Dances with Drums) writes:
>>>>ptd2@po.CWRU.Edu (Palmer T. Davis) writes:
>
>Although I'm not sure if Eric necessarily addressed the issues Muffy
>was raising I must say I agree with his perspective.
>
>I find it ironic that frequently women (and men too for that matter)
>complain that men don't express their emotions/thoughts enough but
>when they do it's freqeuently found offensive <smile>.
>
And I had decided just to lurk tonight, 'cause I'm tired and all and
haven't been on the net for months...

but this thread is kinda hard to swallow; I need to come in here as
a male and support Muffy and Annemarie's positions.  Without 
marginalizing the problems people may have in interpersonal relations,
I think it's pretty fundamental that if you want a relationship with
a person, you have to involve that person's own, individual personality
in the relationship.  How can you complain about person X not responding
to you in the way you want?  That's their reaction and they have every
right to value their own feelings and judgments.  To say that someone
should be more responsive to you or more attracted to your way of 
speaking and acting is to imply that they should adhere to your judgements
rather than their own.  

hmmm... dunno, doesn't turn *me* on...

Thom


-- 
Thom Cleland     \ /^^/  >Neural systems/network physiology< >Amigaphile<  
(619) 453-7516    \OO/  >Aoinagi Shito-ryu == bend, and the wind passes <
tcleland@ucsd.edu  ++  >B3 f cdv g++ k+(+) m s+ r+ p growl+ purr++ zzz- <
"Wild magic is graven in every rock, every tree, in every blade of grass"
From: ecsd@tfs.com (Eric C. S. Dynamic)
Subject: Re: Important ACS update (godiva.nectar.cs.cmu.edu)
Organization: TRW Financial Systems
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 10:02:23 GMT

exile@gnu.ai.mit.edu writes:
>
>..........  he's letting us use his machine, so he can tell us
>anything he wants to.  if you don't like his rules, don't patronize
>his service.

>................................................  then thank him or
>shut up.

I agree. You wouldn't have anyone to complain to, if he weren't already
providing a service. I don't hear anyone volunteering to help him write
his code.

Thanks!
-ecsd
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: writings@athena.mit.edu (Writers Club)
Subject: Re: Am I being fair?  (I am not interested in men...)
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: na,local
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1992 05:45:34 GMT

This brings up a side issue:
Do y'all find media types of "sexy" women and men attractive?
I'm talking about the tall, long-legged, 20-lb-underweight women and the
broad-shouldered narrow-hipped "chiselled"-face muscular short-haired
men that seem to populate most magazine ads.

The reason I ask? My preferences are *much* different. So much so that some
of the models look grotesque to me. I figure those ads must appeal to
lots of folks, but...I kinda hope that they don't, and it's all a marketing
fiction.

-Von

Newsgroups: alt.polyamory,soc.women,soc.men
From: kayvan@satyr.Rational.COM (Kayvan Sylvan)
Subject: Re: ISO Bi-Fem and Girlfriend
Organization: Rational, Santa Clara, CA
	<lcgqg3INNrlb@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>
	<ZEN.92Sep30095307@death.corp.sun.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 22:10:12 GMT

In article <ZEN.92Sep30095307@death.corp.sun.com> zen@death.corp.sun.com (d) writes:

   >   Why is there this tendancy in humans, but it seems, especially in
   >   women, that as soon as they find out you want something, they are
   >   likely to withhold it or raise the price?

     It sounds more human than woman oriented to me.  Perhaps they smell
   your desperation, I don't know.  It doesn't happen to me.

    -- d

I've seen this happen with men and with women. Maybe you have
something there. It doesn't happen with me either.

			---Kayvan
--
--
| Kayvan Sylvan, Expert Support, Consulting for Rational, C++ Development     |
| kayvan@satyr.Rational.COM  === W: (408) 496-3847 === H: (408) 978-1407      |
| "Dubito ergo sum --- I doubt, therefore I am." "Why say why?"               |
Newsgroups: alt.individualism,talk.politics.drugs
From: tcox@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Tony Cox - (415)926-3105)
Subject: Re: Free Country WHERE? (was something else)
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 22:39:19 GMT

In article <Bw3AwK.2BC@ddsw1.mcs.com>, zane@ddsw1.mcs.com (Sameer Parekh) writes:
> In article <1992Oct10.032037.14884@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> pciszek@nyx.cs.du.edu (Paul Ciszek) writes:
>>starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:
>>
>>>Buy gold, vote Libertarian, and find a free country to flee to!
>>
>>And just where are you going to find a "free" country to flee to once the
>>USA is no longer free enough?  Some time ago I asked people to make a case
>>for various "free" countries, and judging from the response I got, there is
>>no place to run to.  Canada is the origin of some of our recent censorship
>>legislation.  In the UK, freedom of the press has the strength of legal
>>precedent, but no basis in the fundamental structure of the government.
>>Switzerland drafts every male who can stand up, and the church and state
>>are intertwined on a regional level (or so I've been told).  American women
>>who have visited New Zealand and Australia tell me they are not free havens
>>if you happen to be female.  Anyone got any suggestions?
>>
> 
> 	The moon?
> -- 

   Nice idea, but our `masters' have got that one buttoned up as well.
   I believe that the UN treaty on the space exploration (for, of
   course, the benefit of all mankind) forbids space flights without
   an official sponsoring nation. You will need to get your licenses
   first.

   BTW, does anyone know what happened to the L5 society? I used to be
   a member when they were out of Arizona, but resigned when they
   moved to Washington DC. They planned to become a lobbying group for
   NASA, which just didn't cut it for me.

   regards, Tony Cox, Stanford, CA
Newsgroups: alt.individualism
From: godfrey@sscvx1.ssc.gov (LAURENCE GODFREY)
Subject: Mr. Wee's mail
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 01:05:00 GMT


For users who neglect to read soc.culture.asean, I copy below an article
from Mr. Wee (sic) in that group.  It deals with a subject that I think
might appeal to readers of this group.

In article <1992Oct3.014909.1793@nuscc.nus.sg>, eng20009@nusunix1.nus.sg (TAN
 GIM WEE)    writes...

>Hello there, let me make this very clear. The fine for not flushing
>public toilets in Singapore is S$150. One hundred and fifty dollars, not
>$1500 or $1000 or any other amount!
> 
>--
>---------------------------------------------------------
>Tan Gim Wee
>EE Dept, NUS
>internet: eng20009@nusunix1.nus.sg
>bitnet: eng20009@nusvm.bitnet
>"Born to inspire, Destined to perform."

I understood that was the maximum fine, and that the actual figure depended
on the contents of the toilet bowl, after evaluation and analysis by the
Police Toilet Inspectorate.  Can you plead not gulity if the flushing
mechanism is defective, or micturating circumstances (that is intended
to be a joke)?

Is it true that there is a law against wearing dirty underwear in your
advanced country too?  Or for allowing your dick to hang on the wrong
side of your zipper?

Laurence

It seems that Mr. Wee "Born to perspire, Destined to perform" is also
"mandated to flush" after his performance.  Seems a rather intrusive 
piece of legislation to me.


Newsgroups: alt.individualism
From: intgrec@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (CHRIS GREB)
Subject: Re :A=A Prove Something
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date:  7 Oct 1992 11:21 EST  


Sorry to beat a dead horse, but in Chris Holt's reply to this post, he 
comments on the definition of tall.  (John is tall, or whatever).  That's 
exactly what it is. . .A DEFINITION.  By stating that there is no fuzzy 
logic (another objectivist catch phrase) there, one must assume that your 
definition is the same as his.  Is this way off base?

I realize that words can not give an absolutely accurate account of a 
concept, but what, exactly, (according to Miss Rand or Mr. Piekoff) does 
this preciseness gain???

	-Chris

Xref: sparky alt.individualism:5764 talk.politics.theory:4521
From: mad@spirit.clearpoint.com (Michael Davis)
Newsgroups: alt.individualism,talk.politics.theory
Subject: Projected Electoral Votes (was [FWd] Products to be banned by the FDA)
Date: 13 Oct 92 13:51:50 GMT
	<1992Oct5.203244.19773@yang.earlham.edu>
	<1992Oct8.065708.19841@genie.slhs.udel.edu>
	<1992Oct9.012737.19831@yang.earlham.edu>
Organization: Walking Dead Man Bar and Grille


On 9 Oct 92 06:27:37 GMT, allens@yang.earlham.edu (Allen Smith) said:

Allen> In article <1992Oct8.065708.19841@genie.slhs.udel.edu>, starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr) writes:

Allen> 	Is Clinton showing ahead when one considers the effects of the 
Allen> Electoral College? I haven't seen any state-by-state analyses, so I don't 
Allen> know.
Allen> 	-Allen

The articles I have seen give Clinton between 225 and 270+ electoral
votes, depending upon how much of a poll lead they wanted before
putting a state in one or the other's camp.  Since Perot got back in,
I have seen noone giving him any electoral votes, but he has taken
votes away from both canditates, usually to no net effect.

-mad

Michael A. Davis           Clearpoint Research Corp.   (508) 435-7452 (voice)
mad@spirit.clearpoint.com  135 Parkwood Drive          (508) 435-7504 (fax)
                           Hopkinton, MA 01738


Since we began restoring pride in the United States of America... flag
 sales have taken off.
                -- President George Bush.
Newsgroups: alt.individualism,alt.activism.d,talk.environment
From: fulton@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Ben Fulton)
Subject: Re: Environmentalism is not Anti-Individualism
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 18:19:37 GMT

In <1992Oct7.145522.24918@athena.cs.uga.edu> brown@pollux (Daniel Brown) writes:

>I cannot agree with that statement.  Environmentalists have been the driving
>force behind the destruction of property rights in the U.S. (e.g. restricting
>the usage of properties that are defined as "wetlands").

True enough.

>I have no complaint with a group trying to protect the environments of
>_humans_.  However, Greenpeace has traditionally put the interests of non-
>human animals before the welfare of human beings (e.g. the spotted owl issue).

But the spotted owl issue is for the most part a debate over _public_ lands,
not regulation or use restriction on private property.

-- 
ben                                     fulton@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
 "A tight bunch of bastards who want to win while loving each other,
  if they don't destroy their knees first, or start sleeping with 
  each other's girlfriends." - Rigler, about Indiana Ultimate
Newsgroups: alt.individualism
From: starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Tim Starr)
Subject: Re: Measure 9 in Oregon
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 08:31:35 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.223857.11084@klic.rain.com> keithl@klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) writes:
}
}For those of you who don't know, Oregon's ballot measure 9 is intended to add
}language to the Oregon Constitution defining homosexuality as unnatural and
}perverse.  It was put on the ballot as an initiative measure by the Oregon
}Citizen's Alliance, a medium-powerful local pressure group mostly made up of
}rural fundamentalists.  The measure is opposed by the major newspapers, most 
}businesses, the unions, most churches, the ecumenical council, the catholic
}archdiocese - in fact, just about every major organization except the OCA.

My understanding is that Oregon banned private sector job discrimination
on the criterion of sexual orientation, then the OCA got this repealed, then
put this alleged "No Special Rights" measure on the ballot.

I also understand that the substance of the measure is to ban anti-discrimi-
nation law for this criterion and to bar public support	of homosexuality among
other sexual deviations.

Thus far, it seems to be the sort of tyrannical backlash that banning
private sector job discrimination tends to result in.


Tim Starr - Renaissance Now! - Think Universally, Act Selfishly
starr@genie.slhs.udel.edu

"True greatness consists in the use of a powerful understanding to enlighten
oneself and others." - Voltaire
Newsgroups: alt.individualism,alt.activism.d,talk.environment
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Environmentalism is not Anti-Individualism
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<1992Oct9.012531.19830@yang.earlham.edu>
	<1992Oct9.145233.1663@vexcel.com>
	<1992Oct9.194117.19852@yang.earlham.edu>
Date: 10 Oct 92 11:11:57

The issue is one of a subspecies of owl vs. a subspecies of logger.
However, the owls have more lawyers and more movie stars than the
loggers do.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.

From: kingsley@hpwrce.mayfield.hp.com (Kingsley Morse)
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 1992 23:29:11 GMT
Subject: Please Help
Organization: HP Western Response Center
Newsgroups: alt.individualism

              Please answer these 9 questions and return.

1.) Do you think equal rights for men and women is generally a good idea?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

2.) Are you pro choice?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

3.) Are you in favor of adoption?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

4.) Do you think men should be allowed to legally terminate their parental
rights and responsibilities before fetal viability?
Yes                  [ ]
Sometimes            [ ]
No                   [ ]
Haven't heard enough [ ]
Other                [ ]

5.) What sex are you?
Male               [ ]
Female             [ ]

6.) How old are you?
Under 18           [ ]
19 to 65           [ ]
Over 65            [ ]

7.) What religion are you?
Protestant         [ ]
Catholic           [ ]
Jewish             [ ]
Other              [ ]

8.) What political party are you affiliated with?
Democratic         [ ]
Republican         [ ]
Other              [ ]

9.) How many years of education have you completed?
Grade School       [ ]
High School        [ ]
College            [ ]
More               [ ]
Newsgroups: alt.individualism