HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 92 09:43:30 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <ewright.717351456@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>In <5b9ns+p@lynx.unm.edu> blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
>>But, Edward, one thing you do have to do is try. 
>Yet, you still can't resist getting one last slam in.  What
>reason do you have to believe I'm not trying?  Even if I haven't
>succeeded, how does that prove that I haven't been trying?  Have
>you never heard of a person trying and not succeeding?  Perhaps
>I am trying very hard in the wrong way.  (And since you say you
>don't what the right way is, there is no way you can ever know this.)    

Two things-
1) Stop being so damn paranoid. I say you have to try, you view it as a
personal attack. It wasn't- you're being paranoid.
2) If what you're trying isn't working, perhaps its time to change the
methods?

>>Until then, have the grace to recognize that a large majority 
>>of people >do< consider physical appearances to be important, 
>>and that they >do< have a lot of evidence, scientific-wise, 
>>to back them up.
>I agree that a large majority of people do this.  I do not
>agree that makes it right.  However, I am prepared to look
>at your "scientific evidence."  Please present your citations,
>please.

Well, I'm not going to start doing research on things that are easy to find,
but, for a start, take a look at either a) a good history book or b) any
book on animal mating.
Why those two?
The history book will show you that throughout the >entire< history of
Human Beings, many major events have occured based on physical appearance.
Lets just take recent history for example. The US Civil war? Hitler's 3rd
Reich? Those two are big events that started almost exclusivley on the fact
that one person looked different from another person. The point? Human Beings
take personal appearances seriously.
The other book, on animal mating, shows that animals, in general, base thier
mate selection on a combination of two things- physical appearance and
dominance in a social strata. This is important because Human Beings, like
it or not, are animals. Some of these things are ground into our being.

r.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: Exercise mania ( was: The great fitness debate)
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 00:08:04 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <MARTINC.92Sep30225828@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:

>   >   It might be
>   >   true that exercise helps, but MODERATION is the key.  

>   >Wow, the all-or-nothing crowd are really out in force today.  Everything
>   >above is true -- and none of it contradicts the idea that exercise is
>   >important to health.

>   A guy says that *moderation* is the key and Charlie accuses
>   him of being part of the "all-or-nothing" crowd.  And since
>   it wasn't me whose position he misstated this time, Charlie
>   can't even use the "you misstated mine first" line this time.

>I say that everything he said is true.  Have I misquoted him by agreeing
>with him?  Fascinating.

I never accused you of misquoting him.  I said that you had
attacked him for being part of the "all-or-nothing crowd"
because he advocated moderation.

In just two sentences, you managed to 1) misquote me, 2) falsely accuse me
of misquotingg you, and 3) change the subject completely.  A remarkable
accomplishment.


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith)
Subject: Re: relationship gone to pot?
Organization: Gagging Sloth Records
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 17:24:29 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.134537.17294@walter.bellcore.com>, dl@cockatoo.bellcore.com (Daniel Liebster) writes:

|> >What a difficult situation, Aileen.  I've seen someone actually win a
|> >spouse away from an addition, but it took years and it was no joke.
|> 
|> As a mere technicality, pot is not addictive.

Pot is not *physically* addictive. Who cares? Neither is gambling, or a number
of other things that were mentioned in the post you replied to, but that does
not change the fact that people can and do become addicted to them.

jds

***************************************************************************
                               * Health and knowledge and wealth and power,
Jeff Smith                     * Passion and poems and sex
smith@fl08-g.comm.mot.com      * I wear a smile like a leather glove,
                               * I won't shut my mouth for less.
                                                - shriekback
***************************************************************************
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ganz@resumix.portal.com (Jonathan Ganz)
Subject: a doomed relationship?
Summary: Now all I need is what I have
Keywords: argg beautiful women I love
Organization: Resumix Inc.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 21:59:45 GMT

Well, I'm in this situation. If someone would like to offer
some meaninful comments, I probably don't want to hear them...:)

I met this women recently. She is foreign-born, blonde, long hair,
intelligent, and generally a wonderful person. She is also significantly
younger than me (about 15 years younger). We seem to have a lot of
common interests, including boating and music, etc. She's 23.

She has a green card and is presently unemployed, but looking for
work.

So far, our dates have consisted of playing volleyball together, having
dinner, and talking for several hours. (The dinner, etc. was an 
invitation, which she accepted.) We have another date scheduled for
this coming Friday...dinner and some entertainment in San Francisco.
She seems enthusiastic about going and told me (a couple of times)
how much she enjoyed dinner last time.

In fact, when we parted after talking for oh so many hours, I got
the impression that I could have kissed her goodnight if I had
tried. We were a few feet apart as we were saying goodnight and
our eyes sort of locked for an indescribable moment.

So, all this seems rather idyllic (even more so now that I've
written it down), but that still leaves me with some sort of
strange paranoia. I've had a couple of long-term relationships
but I've never felt anything like what I feel about her. I can't
stop thinking about her (and, no, I'm not just thinking about
sex :). I'm concerned that I'll do something silly and scare
her off or that she doesn't have anything like the feelings I
have for her. 

I would like to do the romantic bit, but I don't want to move
too quickly...yeh, I know...play it cool, but that's not how
I feel.  I also feel like I would like to find out how she
feels...without wasting a lot of time <-- guess this is sort of
a silly statement, as I'm sure I wouldn't consider it a waste,
but perhaps you know what I mean....

Normally, I feel slightly nervous when I'm around a woman who
is as physically beautiful as she is, but I felt none of that
around her; I felt calm, almost serene. 

So I guess I'm interested in hearing what the wonderful women
of the net have to say about all this (sure, I'll listen
indulgently to the guys too :). Is there anything I should
do, not do, try to do, try not to do? Yes, I'll be myself --
who else would you suggest -- Elvis? :)

Disclaimer to those who might know me: All characters are
fictitious... including me.... :)

So, there it is....

Thanks
Jonathan
 
-- 
Oh my, I really need a better sig....
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: hays@TECHNET.NM.ORG (Larry 'Purple' Hays)
Subject: Re: If you please?
Date: Tue, 06 Oct 92 20:47:25 GMT
Organization: New Mexico Technet   Albuquerque, NM
Distribution: na
Reply-To: hays@TECHNET.NM.ORG

In article <1992Oct6.154932.28434@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
>
>Ballon Boink update if you please?
>Details, details.

Well, a Post is forthcoming, but it's kinda long.  You ASKED for details. . .

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Larry 'Purple' Hays                                       hays@technet.nm.org

            "Life is short.  Live it up."  - Nikita Khrushchev
From: jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JOSEPH ALOYSIUS MCVEIGH)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Humans as Physical Creatures.
Date: 1 Oct 92 22:55:43 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz (Rachel/"Supergoof!") writes:

>That's interesting.  I assume I'd drive the athletic person crazy because he'd
>want to do active things and I'd prefer more sedentary things (such as, say,
>tennis v. 10-pin bowling).
>
>I guess if you were both pretty tolerant and laid-back it would work out.  I'd
>just hate to get involved with someone who was driven mad by my laziness.

In defense of some of us, I like to run and work out - I do a LOT of both -
but other than that I'm extremely sedentary. For instance, today I ran twice
(4 and 10 mi), and worked out for an hour, and tonight I'll be goiing to a bar
and shooting pool and - gasp - drinking beer, in large quantity too.
That is to say, I work out but I'm no finess fascist.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Aloysius McVeigh | "What do you want? Perfection?"
   jm0i@.Lehigh.edu     | "- or nothing. So you see, I take the nothing." (AR)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: tang@akofin.enet.dec.com (Gabe Tang)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Marriage
Date: 30 Sep 92 22:05:13 GMT
Distribution: soc.singles
Organization: the vms company


re: (gbennett) ........

>   Would you be willing to give up a career, a new home, and a new car
>   for an everlasting and loving marriage?

	Sure, why not, especially if she were rich and/or had her own
	comfortable career. ;^)))   If not, I suppose if it were in a 
	standard metropolitan statistical area, I could always get another 
	job, maybe in a different career path or hang a shingle to start a
	practice. This all presumes a preponderance of desirable attributes
	appreciated by both sides, no?

	If part of why she were to love me were what, where and how I lived
	my life-style, then giving it all up would be self-defeating. If,
	however, and that's a big if, she were to love me for other than
	those reasons, then she might be loving only part of me, not the 
	whole. If it's just a relocation issue, such as going off-shore,
	since she were a foreign national and wanted to live there, then
	again, it wouldn't be so bad; since the home and car could probably
	converted into some amount of cash to fund another home and car in
	the country of destination.

	But, as always, I believe you can and do love a person for more than 
	just the physical, intelligence or sexual aspects. There are alot
	more criteria that can make a really good match from just a so-so
	match. Family and educational background, ethics, morality, career 
	ambitions, family goals, life-style desires, individual tolerances, 
	substance use/abuse, stability vs. spontaneity, imagination, 
	dominant/subordinate personalities, personal discipline, financial 
	prudence.........blah, blah, blah.....ad nauseum.

	Still, ceteris paribus, I think, it is conceivable to give up the
	simple monetary aspects such as home, car and career for a worthwhile
	partner/spouse. 
	I'm pretty sure I could do that if that opportunity(?)/circumstance 
	ever arose.  ;-)))
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 27 Sep 92 18:40:11 GMT
	<1992Sep25.142142.2520@cbfsb.cb.att.com> <5561@news.duke.edu>
	<1992Sep26.184716.1921@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>
Distribution: na
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu's message of 26 Sep 92 18:47:16 GMT

In article <1992Sep26.184716.1921@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:


   Oh, nothing too much--Charlie was mentioning the best way to get him hot
   and bothered with a blow-drier

Damn.  Since she missed it, I was hoping to sneak the blow-drier move up
on her.

   (and why he no longer uses peanut butter
   when using this technique); 

Beth, I'll make an exception in your case.
--
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.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 05:25:53 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1d#pgz=@lynx.unm.edu> blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:

>>I am open-
>>minded and believe in judging people on their abilities and
>>their actions, not on physical appearance.  

>I'll buy everything you wrote, execept the 'open-minded' part.

Read what I said.  By "open-minded" I mean that I judge people
on their abilities and actions, not on physical appearance.

>You'll listen to what I have to say, but there is no way that
>you'll ever change your mind?

Perhaps, but then I would no longer be open-minded.

>What, then, is the point of discussion?

Well, I believe it started because someone asked a question
to the affect of "what if a man cannot find any woman who finds
him physically attractive?"  A couple people flamed him for asking
such a question, Charlie Martin flamed him for his grammar, and
someone else attempted an honest answer.  I gave him my opinion,
and then Charlie and the wolf pack descended on me for daring to
express a Politically Incorrect opinion in soc.singles.  Since I
once let the wolf pack run me out of soc.singles, I decided that
I'm not going to do it again.

Of course, I'm sure that you and Charlie are completely willing
to change your minds, right?  Oh, I see, you don't have to change
your minds because you're "right."

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith)
Subject: Re: More on guys who aren't dating Ed Wright
Organization: Gagging Sloth Records
Distribution: soc
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 14:57:36 GMT

In article <1ade3uINN688@golem.wcc.govt.nz>, parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz writes:

|> Maybe it's true that male/female friendships can never *truly* be 'just
|> friends'.

It's not true at all, in the general sense. However, it may be true for
certain individuals.

jds

***************************************************************************
                               * Health and knowledge and wealth and power,
Jeff Smith                     * Passion and poems and sex
smith@fl08-g.comm.mot.com      * I wear a smile like a leather glove,
                               * I won't shut my mouth for less.
                                                - shriekback
***************************************************************************
 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Can MOTOS's be friends?
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: soc
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 92 22:07:37 GMT

In article <1ade3uINN688@golem.wcc.govt.nz> parks_typ@med.wcc.govt.nz writes:
>
>To totally change the subject, why is it people can't handle the fact that
>someone isn't attracted to them?  I've had trouble in the past with a guy I
>really like as a friend, i.e. we get on really well and enjoy each other's
>company, but I'm simply not physically attracted to him.  He can't understand
>that, and my attempted explanations obviously haven't convinced him.  I'd hate
>to lose his friendship, but I'm sick of every time he's around, him hassling me
>to go out with him as more than a friend.
>
>Maybe it's true that male/female friendships can never *truly* be 'just
>friends'.

Or, more likely, some men and some women have trouble with friendships
with members of the opposite sex.  I suspect, though, that such people
are well in the minority--most of my friends are women; some of them
I find very attractive, some I find not particularly attractive, and
others are in-between.  Some have been lovers or romantic interests in
the past, most of them haven't--and none of these seem to get in the way
of our friendships in the least.  My best friend of many years is very
definitely female; and, at her wedding that I performed a few months ago,
the "best man" was female, so her husband doesn't seem to have any trouble
being friends with women either.

However, there is a small but vocal subset of humanit that tends to feel
that any feelings of attraction they may have for another somehow impose
an obligation on that other--that if A happens to get turned on thinking
about B then B has a 'moral obligation' to see to it that A is 
satisfied--and people who hold this particular attitude are unlikely to
be very good at being friends with MOTAS they find attractive.

Trygve
From: stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Nice Guys (noooooooo!)
Date: 26 Sep 92 18:06:32 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:

>what do people think in general about giving
>or getting reasons why a relationship can't work out or isn't working
>out?  When someone breaks up with you, do you want to know why?  

I don't give reasons unless I am asked to. And even if I am, I feel
uncomfortable about it, because I think that a lot of relationships don't work
out because of subtle incompatibilities. Giving a reason suggests that if 
this thing were fixed, everything would be OK. This can be misleading.

If I can identify a major personality incompatibility, I try to phrase it
in terms of my own needs rather than as a criticism of the other person.
For example, instead of saying, "You're not serious about anything," I
would say, "I guess I need to be with someone who is serious more of the
time." 

>The reason I don't think I could stay with this particular guy is
>because (this is difficult to phrase) he's not SERIOUS about anything.
[...]
>I have no interest in prolonging the agony by
>hooking up with someone else more immature than I am.

None of the following is meant as a criticism of your decision; it's just
some thoughts that your comments brought up:

There is a difference between being serious and being mature.

Perhaps he is hoping to become more mature someday too, but right now he is
acting his age. 

Sometimes someone might not be quite as mature as you'd like, but if you
are interested in a long-term relationship and you have a lot of stuff in
common with that person, you can look ahead and try to guess what they'll 
be like in the future.

--
Stef					"One of us has to be a pragmatist."
stef@apple.com				"Nonsense!"
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: What we find attractive
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 10:18:25 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.234044.27503@umr.edu> bolsen@mcs213f.cs.umr.edu (Brian Olsen) writes:
>In article <1992Sep27.181250.26579@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>>Here are some results from various psychological studies expressed as
>>correlation coefficients:
>>
>[deleted stuff]
>>
>>The physical traits included height, weight, hair color, eye color, and
>>skin color.  However, they also included nose breadth, earlobe length,
>>wrist circumference, distance between eyes, and lung volume.  One of the
>>highest, though, was length of the middle finger (+0.61), which seems to
>>be more important than either intelligence or hair color.
>>
>>The lengths of my middle fingers are 7.8 cm (left) and 8.0 cm (right).
>>
>>-- Herb Huston
>
>By the way, how do you measure your finger?  From the middle of the
>knuckle?

Good question!  Since my hands are still covered by muscle and skin, I
measured from the flexure line at the base of the finger.

>If so I should have women falling all over me on that alone
>(12.4 cm left, 12.5 cm right).  Any takers?

Well, those studies indicate that women with long fingers should be attracted
to your long fingers and you to theirs, not that everyone is going to find
long fingers attractive.  Perhaps more pertinently, did you take lessons
on the piano, harp, or guitar?

-- Herb Huston
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: Humans as Physical Creatures.
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 10:13:20 GMT

In article <4606@moscom.com> wjb@moscom.com writes:
>Charles R. Martin (martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu) wrote:
>: And how narrowly can we identify the
>: "date" on which the Neanderthals disappeared?
>July 18th, 39736 B.C.  Any other questions?

Yes.  Was that on the Julian Calendar or the Gregorian Calendar?

-- Herb Huston
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: relationship gone to pot?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 13:24:24 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.023659.22226@cheshire.oxy.edu> ac@cheshire.oxy.edu (Aileen Cho) writes:
>
>   Okay bear with me, I've just barely joined this group. I would like to
>know how people have dealt with relationships (or attempts at) with others
>who are potheads. I got the distinct feeling in my last crash-and-burn affair
>that I lost out to the weed. I suppose it was more reliable.  My friend also
>had a thing going that lasted a little longer than mine, but in the end that
>also burned out as pot took over.
>   Don't get me wrong, I'm not against pot per se (it's certainly no wore
>worse than cigarettes), it's just that when somebody you wanted to be with
>gets stoned every day (once things get a little difficult with the relation-
>ship), you get rather frustrated.
>   Any advice? (Besides not getting involved again with someone addicted to
>pot).
>                                      --ac
>
 
 Aw yea. Thats it. It was the pot.
 
 ac - "We need to communicate more"
 ph - "Listen honey we just had this discussion 15 minutes ago"
 ac - "But you never hold me in public"
 ph - "Look its 3:00am. Can't this wait till say 7:00 am?'
 ac - "look I have needs and wants. I demand they be met. Now"
 ph - "Well since it looks like we're not going to sleep I might as
       well get stoned and pretend I'm sleeping"
 ac - "It's the pot isn't it. Your addiction to pot is tearing us apart.
       No one cares about you like I do. You need treatment. YOU
       NEED HELP"
 ph - "Christ almighty all I wanted was a little sleep"
 ac - "I've called the intervention hotline, they want to talk to you."
 
and so it goes......

 
================================================================================
 Ipisissimus of the Inner Order of Sesquipedalian Fruitcakes - IIOSF XOX Dawn
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles