HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The "first" "move" (was Re: A R C )
Date: 14 Apr 1992 18:34:52 GMT
Organization: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc., Cambridge MA
Reply-To: dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin)
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

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.

>>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.

Oh my, oh my, oh my.

Dawn
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Subject: Re: Discussion Of Romantic Songs
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 17:32:07 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

Oh, whatthehell, here's some songs from my list:

"The Kissing Song", Steve Seskin

"Kisses Sweeter Than Wine", Paul Campbell (I like Peter, Paul and Mary's
version)

"Dodi Li", trad. Israeli dance

Most of the others that I can't think of right now are equally off-beat.
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

Mothers are inventors by necessity
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: intrigue@milton.u.washington.edu (Angelwing)
Subject: Spring Fever or what?
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: world,soc
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 21:52:28 GMT

Okay, it finally happened.  I just went over the edge.  I made a
puppet of my hand like that crazy old guy on Ed Sullivan used to do.
She's got lovely and I mean *lovely* turquoise eyes and long black
eyelashes and a sweet pink mouth.  Shall I name her?  Or just wash
her off?  I mean I have *work* to do this afternoon!

Angelwing - I seem to be possessed.

*------------------------------------------------------------------*
* 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      *
*------------------------------------------------------------------*
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: date characteristics
Date: Wed, 08 Apr 1992 18:08:35 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  <11085@borg.cs.unc.edu>  davidson@pooh.cs.unc.edu (Drew Davidson) writes:
> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
> >
> >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...
>
> Actually I was lamenting the painful years I spent wearing an iron
> codpiece while asking women out.  Lemme tell you -- I'm a lot more
> comfortable now that you enlightened me, but I'm starting to realize
> just how effective the damn thing was as a conversation starter.  And
> now I have the annoying habit of asking women "How do you like my
> codpiece?" when I'm not wearing one...

Once again, Drew, you're not looking at this in perspective.  Imagine
if you told someone "Go ahead - kick them as hard as you can" when you
forgot that you weren't wearing one...

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: keith@orion.ic.cmc.ca (Keith de Solla)
Subject: Re: physical attractiveness
Organization: Canadian Microelectronics Corporation
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 13:19:24 GMT

Article 17027 of soc.singles:
(Pooh @ the Utility Muffin Research Kitchen) teasingly writes:

>Aw, that's nothing -- I once knew a man whose hair would literally
>start falling out at a high rate when he was kissing.  Not that he
>had much to begin with ... never mind; since then I've found men
>with receding hairlines terribly attractive. :-)
      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^   !!!!!!

Oh, I'm in love!   :-)    :-)

-Keith (soc.singles.lurker)
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
| Keith P. de Solla        |  "Its not a bald spot, its a solar   |
| CMC                      |   panel for a sex machine"           |
| keith@orion.ic.cmc.ca    |                                      |
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: richh@tigger.jvnc.net (RICHH)
Subject: THE ELEMENTS OF SEDUCTION was(Re: Two things....)
Originator: richh@tigger.jvnc.net
Organization: JvNCnet, Princeton University, NJ
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 21:52:54 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.180817.8649@u.washington.edu> intrigue@milton.u.washington.edu (Angelwing) writes:
>In article <1992Apr8.162638.9925@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> ted5@po.CWRU.Edu (Thomas E. Davidson) writes:
>>
>>	Secondly, I would NEVER interfere with another relationship. They
>>ARE santified, and I simply won't allow anyone to break up with their boyfriend
>>for me unless they have a much better reason. Sorry....
>>
>>				Tom
>
>Oh NOOOO!  Waaahhhh!  Oh Tom .. say it isn't so!!   Pleeeeeeeeze let me
>break up with my boyfriend for you!  You're so ... so ....strong and manly!
>
>Angelwing - What *is* a "much better reason"?
>
Well, now that you bring it up...

Sometimes I get nervous when I find myself attracted to someone who is
*not* in a relationship.  I keep wondering 'why'.  What skeletons are
lurking in *her* closet, what phantoms, what demons may come out of
*her*?  

I do not mean to imply that anyone not involved with someone is an
emotional black hole, a relationship with whom would end up being a
sucking, swirling vortex of despair, punctuated only by brief moments
of false hope and illusory happiness--in an ever-blackening universe.
But it *could* be.  Be careful.

Also, the woman in a relationship has a distinctly hermeneutical
advantage over her unnattached sisters.  What I mean is, it is
easier for her to make comparisons, to question the status quo in a 
way that the single woman cannot.  

RICH
--And why *shouldn't* relationships be upwardly-mobile?
           ^^^^^^^^^
James, note the clever use of the apostrophe.  In contractions, it is
used to *replace* a letter, in this case the "o" from "not".
You're welcome.
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: THE SEDIMENTS OF REDUCTION was(Re:  How to meet girls)
Date: 16 Apr 92 22:17:16 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  <1992Apr16.211200.13030@tigger.jvnc.net>  richh@tigger.jvnc.net (RICHH) writes:
>
>      Be mildly amusing and drive recklessly.

It works - I have a friend that gets turned on by bad puns and fast driving...

>      Be a not unpleasant diversion and fly low over populated areas.

That's Walter...

>      Be an alcohol-related regret and smoke at gas stations.

(But not tobacco!)

>      Be Larry and ask a redneck for a fag.

Well, I'm half-way there...

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: fredw@mks.com (Fred Walter)
Subject: Re: Love: It is a precious thing?
Organization: Mortice Kern Systems Inc., Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 1992 01:58:38 GMT

pooh@group-w.uchicago.edu (Pooh @ the Utility Muffin Research Kitchen) writes:
>the REAL point of a relationship: to kill or be killed

I always thought the REAL point was to eat or be eaten...

:-)

	fred "I need a room-mate" walter
-- 
Disclaimer: everything I post is my *personal* opinion and does not represent
or reflect the opinion of the company which employs me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. R. (Fred) Walter, Mortice Kern Systems Inc.,	Internet: fredw@mks.com
From: epg@nature.berkeley.edu ()
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Paying for things on the first date (Help!)/NP personals
Date: 11 Apr 1992 19:09:42 GMT
Organization: U.C.B.
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: nature.berkeley.edu

As I mentioned earlier, I recieved many responses to my newspaper
personal.  Though this may sound great, it's really a mixed
blessing/curse.

I don't want to let a long time pass before I meet the people who
interested me most (about 15), so I'm trying to go out with 3 or 4 each
week.

I don't like to let men buy me dinner, drinks, etc. when I don't know
them.  I think it's unfair to <expect> a man to pay, and I don't want
anyone to think I "owe" them something because they bought me a drink or
whatever.  But spending $30-$50 extra each week is going to put me in
massive debt really soon.  So what should I do?


a soon to be <very> poor,

little 'e'
From: 01ksdavis@bsu-ucs.uucp
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Romantic Songs list
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:19:48 GMT


	Of course, certain songs by Rod Stewart come to mind:

		"Rhythm of My heart"

		"Downtain train"

		"Maggie"

		"To my heart"

		"This old heart of mine"-cover
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jailbird@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Ron D. Harvey)
Subject: Affairs (was: Re: Peeking through the curtain)
Organization: The RAMJAC Corporation
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 15:55:56 GMT

In article <1992Apr5.190009.27945@mks.com> fredw@mks.com (Fred Walter) writes:
>tlode@isis.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>>Well, let's just say that, given a real person who appears trustworthy
>>and someone I know nothing about and might only imagine would have the
>>feelings you think he might
>
>Given the context of this conversation (the 'someone [you] know nothing
>about' being the husband of the woman you want to have sex with), you
>can bet that in the majority of the cases the husband is going to feel
>the way you seem to have difficulty imagining he might. 

	If a person isn't sure whether or not they've committed some
sort of infidelity, or they think they know what's best for everyone
(knowingly or unknowingly) involved, the easiest way to clear things up
is to tell their partner(s) what going on and ask them what they think.

	Works every time.


-- 
Ron D. Harvey	jailbird@ddsw1.mcs.com 

The only difference between a halo and a noose is about a foot.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: walter (Walter Lego)
Subject: Re: Sanctity of relationships
Followup-To: soc.singles
Reply-To: nobody
Organization: Twisted Pair Inc.
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 92 22:45:40 GMT

In article <1514@tymix.Tymnet.COM> michele@sail.tymnet.com (Michele Fabrega) writes:
>
>YES!  I completely agree.  If the relationship is going to work out, there is
>NOTHING you can do to break it up.

Rubbish. Any relationship *will* have a million things that can prevent it from
working out including the occurrence of other people. Over the course of any 
relationship, each of the partners are likely to find at least one other person
that is much better for them than the one they are with. If they let that 
person break up the relationship, it says nothing about whether the relationship
would have worked otherwise. Add to this the uncertainty in the initial
stages about the current partner, and views about relationships that have
mostly been formed during the wonderful high school years and you land up 
with a completely unstable situation of never-ending breakups.

						Walter

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I am posting under a pseudonym for personal reasons. There is 
enough info in the headers to determine my posting site and possibly even 
determine my login name which is all the information you get from other
postings except that in this case you KNOW for sure that the name in the
headers is a pseudonym. If you don't like the idea put me in your kill file.
From: rcf@pnet01.cts.com (Bob Forsythe)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The "first" "move"
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:16:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: crash.1992Apr15.131630.19367
Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA

kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>ucda@toontown.uucp (Chris Andersen (The Dangerous Guy)) writes:
>
>>Now who made the first move in this meeting?  Some might say it was me since
>>I was the first one to indicate that I'd like to dance with her. While others
>>might say it was her since she was the one
>I would say, whoever asked the other out on a date.
>
>>who first noticed me and made a point of trying to get my attention.
>Getting your attention by what means? Not by coming over and speaking
>to you.


     Well, we don't know that she wouldn't have if Chris had been a bit
slower.  Some people take longer to decide what to do.  Besides, it still
sounds to me like she made the first overture.  Chris was just bright enough
and brave enough to pick up on it and do something about it.

Bob c/o The OTH Gang
rcf@pnet01.cts.com
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: eleanor@ait.com (Eleanor Evans)
Subject: Re: Newspaper personals phenomena
Organization: Artificial Intelligence Technologies, Inc.
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 13:20:47 GMT

Michael Rawdon says.....
>Ahhhh... so THAT'S my problem.  I don't know how to "pursue" a woman and
>feel uncomfortable doing so anyway.  (I pursue my cat when she gets outside -
>or I did when I had a cat.)

Well, what's the problem?  The pursuit is conducted in much the same way.

Piglet
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: liz@gvlf9-j.gvl.unisys.com (Liz Loquacious [Bradley])
Subject: Re: date characteristics
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: Unisys Defense Systems, Great Valley Labs, Paoli, Pa
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 21:44:07 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.185139.10309@morrow.stanford.edu> thom mckean writes:
>In article <4555@unccvax.uncc.edu>,
>goodrum@unccvax.uncc.edu (Huckleberry Muffin) writes:
>>
>>        There's not a thing hard about saying that. You say it,
>>then she says "Oh sure, I'd love to" and you both feel real good
>>about it and never deal with the question of *when* and *where*
>>you're going out, or even establish whether she wants to go out
>>with you or just go out.
>>        Asking for a real date, now that's hard.
>
>It's much harder to ask "Want to go out sometime?" than asking for a
>"real date" (that is, giving an actual date/time/place).
>

Not to try to invalidate the good suggestions you gave about asking
for a specific event, etc. but I just did this "unspecific" type of 
asking out last week and it didn't seem so risky.  I guess it 
depends on the circumstances.  I meet a lot of people at dances
where you don't get much time to talk during the dancing so it
makes sense to suggest "getting together" when you're enjoying a
conversation but it's time to go, etc.  It just seemed natural.
I had to leave and we were having a good conversation so I (a woman
no less) asked him if he would like to get together sometime.  He
said yes and we exchanged numbers and he said he'd call.  It was
quite casual although the date was a little odd.  (Here I go, getting
loquacious again.)  Let me just pass on a little advice: if you want
to get naked, don't go telling a woman that you really need skin to
skin contact with someone, anyone even.  How flattering.  I mean we
hadn't even touched; he said he didn't feel romantic.  Oh, you want me
to help you meet your skin-to-skin quota for the week?  I sure come
across some interesting ones!  (Although I am glad he was honest about
the lack of romantic feelings.  He is pretty needy but that's not the way
to go about getting those needs met IMHO.) 

>
>Much safer to ask "Would you like to go see Chick Corea Friday night
>at Slim's?"  If the woman is interested, she'll say yes.  If she's
>not interested, she'll say, no, thanks, I'm busy/gotta pluck my
>
>This seems to work for me pretty well.  It's nonthreatening to
>either person's ego.

--
Liz Loquacious
liz@gvl.unisys.com

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rcf@pnet01.cts.com (Bob Forsythe)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: want-sex(women) < want-sex(men)
Date: 16 Apr 92 15:16:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: crash.1992Apr16.151630.27932
Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA

userisra@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca (Mark Israel) writes:
>In article <1992Apr15.131630.19401@crash.cts.com>, rcf@pnet01.cts.com (Bob Forsythe) writes:
>
>> I don't know; I still wonder about this.
>
>   (-:  I (like Walter Mondale) worry about people who "know" things that
>just ain't so.  I'm glad you're not one of them, Bob.
>

     Can't get flamed if you don't take a stand (-:).

>> In the days before reliable birth control, women had to fear getting 
>> pregnant every time they got laid. 
>
>   But when did people realise that sexual intercourse CAUSED pregnancy?
>Probably only after most of human evolution had already happened.
>
>> Under those circumstances it's possible that turning off to sex was a 

     What time frame are you putting that into?  People have certainly known
for virtually all of recorded history, and, I imagine, prior to it (with the
possible exception of the Trobrian Islanders).  Besides, socialization doesn't
take all that long to accomplish.

>> good way to avoid the danger.
>
>   For most of human prehistory, wouldn't *instinctive* turning off have
>been more useful than socialized turning off?
>


     Depends on the ideology and life span.  When most people were only living
to be 35 or so, they got old quickly whether they had babies or not.  It would
be after life spans began to lengthen that they'd start to think about such
things.  Besides, instinctual survival skills seem to work in humans only for
short-term risks.  People have shown a remarkable ability to overcome their
long-term risk survival skills if they have enough time to think about it. 
Besides, I don't buy into biodeterminism.  I think virtually all human action
is based upon socialization.

Bob c/o The OTH Gang
rcf@pnet01.cts.com
From: swt@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Newspaper personals phenomena
Date: 15 Apr 92 14:22:58 EDT
Distribution: soc
Organization: Cornell University

In article <8czk02elc91300@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com>,
jsp@uts.amdahl.com (James Preston) writes: 
> swt@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes:
> 
> }My mind produced the image of myself on horseback
> } wearing a highwayman's cape, spurs, and a bikini, carrying a lasso, riding 
> }him down on the open range.... 
> 
> Gads, that's quite an image.  Feel free to so pursue me anytime.  I think
> I can guarantee that you'll catch me...
> 
> --James Preston
> 
Damn straight I'd catch you; I mean, what do you think the horse is
*for*?  (I believe in cutting through all this 'who's going to make the
first move' nonsense; I leave nothing to chance.)   :-)

				--Beth 
 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
swt@VAX5.CIT.CORNELL.EDU|"Watch what you say, they'll be calling you a radical,
			| A liberal,
			| Fanatical, criminal..."  -- Supertramp
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rmelvil@hughes.hacgate.UUCP (Richard Melville)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: date characteristics
Date: 15 Apr 92 17:28:01 GMT
	<12375@auspex-gw.auspex.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hughes Aircraft of Canada Limited, Calgary AB
In-reply-to: johnf@Auspex.COM's message of 8 Apr 92 23:36:18 GMT

In article <12375@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:

> Maybe she just doesn't like jazz.  Of course, for some people that might be 
> reason enough not to go out with her anyway.

Si, dump her.

--
----------------                        "I want to spend more money on bikes.
Richard Melville			 I think I need to see a psychiatrist."
Hughes Spatial Data Systems Division     Dave Bridges
From: browns@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Stuart Brown)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Hot tub seduction....
Keywords: woof!
Date: 7 Apr 92 22:16:09 GMT
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada


In article <1992Apr5.210919.1954@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> ted5@po.CWRU.Edu (Thomas E. Davidson) writes:
>
>	The best way to seduce someone is not to try, to attempt friendship
>and move slowly into romance, to learn about their fears and hopes and
>love and personality, to befriend them and THEN add something physical.
>	Then again, judging from the tenor of earlier responses, maybe I'm
>wrong....
>
>					Tom

I'll say you're wrong.  This friendship and romance bullshit dosen't come
close to a hot tub party for seduction potential.

	-Stu 

-- 
Stuart M. Brown                               Postdocs rush in where wise men
U. of Manitoba, Dept. Plant Science, Canada       Fear to tread. 
browns@ccu.umanitoba.ca        
				Disclaimer?? Sure: "That Disc is Mine!"
From: rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu (Michael Rawdon)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The "first" "move" (was Re: A R C )
Date: 14 Apr 92 17:40:30 GMT
Reply-To: rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu
Distribution: soc
Organization: University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Dept., Madison, WI

In <1992Apr13.094543.11657@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> swt@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes:
>I don't think all the aggressive women are at cons; it's just that those
>of us who hang around with SF/fantasy/SCA/Starfleet/computer types have
>developed aggressive habits to give ourselves at least a ghost of a chance
>of actually getting to date once in a while!  Men who pursue these types
>of activities often do so because their 'real world' social skills are
>not in the Olympic league.  

And then there are those of us whose real world (whatever that is) social
skills are not in the Olympic league and who aren't into fandom (despite
being avid SF/comic book/Star Trek/Doctor Who/fill-in-the-geek-blank fans).

We just muddle on as best we can.  (That's what USENET is for, right? :-)

-- 
Michael Rawdon
rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Department, Madison, WI

Can't let go - there's a madness in my soul tonight.
				- Bryan Ferry, "Can't Let Go"
Newsgroups: soc.singles,sci.med,misc.consumers,misc.kids
From: gordon@sneaky.lonestar.org (Gordon Burditt)
Subject: Re: Business cards
Organization: Gordon Burditt
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 04:08:00 GMT

>{ancient Shergold appeal deleted}
>] 
>] He was seven years old about 4 years ago; he is not seven years old 
>] now!
>{Updated Shergold info deleted}

>Also, folks - if you see ANYTHING that seems like this,
>check the FAQ for alt.folklore.urban first!!  Because this
>Shergold story WILL NOT DIE, it is one of the first items in the
>FAQ.  (similar stories - collecting pull-top rings to pay for
>various medical treatments, and the like, are also debunked
>thoroughly...)

Please do not send postcards, business cards, traffic tickets, cocaine,
or other such things to dying children in response to a mass appeal.  Not 
even if the story actually has a date on it, and you've verified that 
it's true.  Instead, send a donation of $1 (or more) to an organization 
dedicated to curing whatever the child is dying of, or the Red Cross, or 
UNICEF, or some other worthy charity.

If someone is really trying to set a record for the most <something>
received, they either didn't think about what they were asking for,
or they are being *DAMN SELFISH* about it.  Think about the cost of 
postcards and postage used to send millions of postcards to Craig Shergold.  
The same money, sent as donations to a charity, could have paid for
operations to save several children.  Or it could have been used for
research that eventually would benefit many more.

					Gordon L. Burditt
					sneaky.lonestar.org!gordon
Xref: sparky soc.singles:10985 sci.med:8551 misc.consumers:10366 misc.kids:12799