HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Various ramblings...
Date: 18 Aug 92 07:08:33 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki, Finland

>The strange thing is that in those 8 months, it never got any easier to
>ask people to dance, and it never got any easier to meet people or to
>talk to them.  And I went dancing at least 3 times a week.

Me neither.  But other people found it easier to talk to me.  And I
found out that I can actually do something that I thought I would
never do.  It was a big ego boost.

Juha

-- 
Juha Taina | taina@cs.helsinki.fi | Phone: +358-0-708-4247
From: deannab@hpmwtd.sr.hp.com (Deanna Bergstrom)
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 20:01:43 GMT
Subject: Re: 'E' Tickets
Organization: HP Santa Rosa Site (NMD MTA MWTD)
Newsgroups: soc.singles

Ok, it's dating me (but I'm FAR from "washed up")....

E tickets are/were the best ones!  (They don't use them anymore???)

But I don't have any....they all got used up right away.

Deanna
deannab@sr.hp.com
From: oldman@coos.dartmouth.edu (Prakash Das)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Married Men and Single Women
Keywords: Why are married men more attractive than single men?
Date: 15 Aug 92 03:48:14 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <6l2m=x-@lynx.unm.edu> blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
>Women, overall that I've known, much prefer Male Friends to Female Friends.
>In as much that a married man is percieved as being 'safe' (ie- she and he
>can be freinds without the ravages of 'sex' getting in the way, since,
>presumably, he has a steady supply of sex), a woman can then get close and
>be friends with a married man.
>
>Single mens, on the other hand, are only interested in 'sex'.

There may be some truth to this. On a very recent (about 2 days ago)
talk show (don't remember whether it was Phil Donahue or Sally Jesse)
something to this effect was discussed there for what its worth.
Logically, seems to make some sense too. Anyway, what do the women
think? Let's hear.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Subject: Re: single men
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 17:52:47 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.191330.5288@sfu.ca> probst@fraser.sfu.ca (Scott Probst) writes:
>>
>you know, this was something i noticed in the netherlands. i was in nijmegen,
>a relatively red-union-gay town, walking around at night, dressed a little
>"west coast", i guess (i live in vancouver), and the only people that
>would talk to me were the streetwalkers. weird.

So well what did you and the streetwalkers talk about, and was it just 
a flat exchange, and what rate did they give you, and did you like
talking to the streetwalkers?

In this newsgroup, Scott, one does NOT skip the *good* stuff or one
will be asked to elaborate.  :-)   Now.  Details please?

-Nance
"And the colored girls go do do do, do, do do do do, do do do do ..."
-- 
Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*    o__    *^*^*^*^*  |  Work that body!
att!ihlpk!colucci            _.>/               | Stay fit for life.
                            (_) \(_)                           
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Psychobabble
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 15:26:06 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  <ewillims.714130876@unix1.tcd.ie>  ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:
> In <thurlow.714098464@convex.convex.com> thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) wri
>
> >Like my belief that my cat likes some music.
>
>      Well if she purrs when you play it on the stereo and kneads her
> claws into your thighs in a suckling motion and licks your hand then I think
> you've proved it to my satisfaction.

Why?  When my girlfriend reacts this way, it's not in response to the music.
:-)

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: dbj@cs.washington.edu (Dave Johnson)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: How to not look smart (was Re: Various ramblings...
Date: 19 Aug 92 17:11:37 GMT
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle

In article <1992Aug19.143917.1765@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Hunk) writes:
>In article <1992Aug18.164633.7053@mks.com> fredw@mks.com (Fred Walter) writes:
>>Anyway, Kevin wanted to know how to not appear as a smart alec, to not appear
>>as if he's bragging. Trygve is not the person to talk to, because, at first
>>glance, does appear to be bragging.
>>
>>And not in a subtle, understated "and it was only a couple of hundred
>>dollars more, no big deal" way, but in a very blatent "I've got a porsche,
>>I've got not one, but two companies, and I've got a million" way.
>
>It ain't bragging if it's the truth.

Not quite.  It ain't bragging if it's the truth, and you say it
once, or answer when asked.  If you remind everybody every day,
or every week, or probably even every month, it's bragging.
-- 
  Dave Johnson

"You're not too smart, are you?  I like that in a man."
    --Kathleen Turner in Body Heat 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: Ross Ridge <ross@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Organization: ZOOiD BBS
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 21:41:37 GMT

kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>Sigh.  It's really hard to talk about statistics to someone who seems to be
>having trouble grasping the basic concepts (Teri may well be well-versed
>in statistical analysis, but what I've seen so far indicates otherwise).
>Perhaps I should try explaining them first.  But one more try at the
>standard approach...:-)

You're one to talk... 

>So: the right answer is that I maximize my attractiveness level however I
>must and then live with the consequences of that.
>
>But my attractiveness level isn't the *only* thing I have control over (even
>if that control is marginal).  I *also* have control (to some extent) over
>which environments I place myself.
>
>THIS is where the ratio bit comes in.  It is an INDEPENDENT VARIABLE from
>my attractiveness level, because it is something that I control
>independently.

>So: the *real* question is: which is easier to change?  Your attractiveness
>level, or your environment?
>
>I say it's easier to change your environment!  By a *long* way!

Not for you.  Lets define attractiveness level as being the probability
any given member of the appropriate gender you meet becoming romantically
involved with you.  So lets find out what your attractiveness level is.
You met thousands of women, and you've been romatically involved with zero
of them.  So your attractiveness level is zero, or least indistinguishable
from zero.  In other words no matter what the ratios, no matter the
number of women you meet, the probability of you becoming romantically
involved is practically zero.  The only thing you can do give yourself
a significant chance is to raise your attractiveness level.

>>Sure, and the way one hits the brakes can determine how one gets around
>>a corner, too, but I sincerely think that using the steering wheel will
>>make the most difference. 
>
>Exactly.  But guess what race car drivers do?  Account for everything,
>including the way they hit the brakes.  Why do you think they're race car
>drivers instead of taxi cab drivers?

You're not a race car driver, you're a 16 year old just learning to drive.
Maybe when you've got steering down pat you can start worring about
when to use the brakes when going around corners.

>>Do they not get dates in all
>>situations?  Or only in situations where the ratios are against them?
>
>They get *more* dates in situations in which, all other things being equal,
>the ratio is better for them.  Note very carefully the "all other things
>being equal".

But you don't get any dates, no matter what the ratio or the situation.

							Ross Ridge

-- 
Ross Ridge - The Great HTMU					     l/	 //
								    [OO][oo]
ross@zooid.guild.org						    /()\/()/
uunet.ca!zooid!ross						     db	 //
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: FINNS - Nice description, Juha!
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 16:09:27 GMT

In article <29003@hydra.Helsinki.FI> taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina) writes:
>In <1992Aug15.233736.1445@lub001.lamar.edu> lairdpg@lub001.lamar.edu writes:
>>Thanks for the description!  Sounds like you guys have a hard
>>time choosing amongst them!  
>
>We choosing them?  I'd say that the women do the choosing.  Or,
>perhaps both genders. This is quite a liberal country.

And then there is Finland's greatest contribution to social life,
indeed, to civilization itself, and also the second best sensual
experience -- the Sauna.

Well do I remember being broiled at 90 degrees C before running under
a midnight sun to a lake that had been frozen over just a few months
before.  And my friends said they were going easy on me since I was
a foreigner.

-- Herb Huston
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rudoff@mdd.comm.mot.com (Doug Rudoff)
Subject: Re: Major problems
Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 17:18:00 GMT


My suggestion: Tell her she's right to want to break things off. And
accept her decision without argument. At least she'll have some
respect for you.

No matter how hard it is for you to do or accept, she wants to end
things and there's nothing you can do about it. Trying to get her to
change her mind will only make her want to further her distance from
you. 

After a few months when you get things straightened out in your life
and can think rationally about the current situation, you may want to
try to reconcile. But don't count on a reconcilation. Things don't
always work out the way you want them to.

Just be glad she's telling you why she wants to end things. It would
be much worse if she broke contact without explanation.
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Doug Rudoff          Motorola, Seattle    INTERNET:rudoff@mdd.comm.mot.com
                                            USENET:uunet!mdisea!rudoff   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: rkf@wildrose.infoserv.com (Ray Fink)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Ugly hands
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 23:02:01 MDT
Distribution: world
Organization: Wild Rose Refugee Camp

lemay@lorelei.Eng.Sun.COM (Laura "Treekiller" Lemay - IWTFM) writes:

> A friend-of-a-friend read the palms of a bunch of us a couple 
> weeks back at lunch and explained that on the left hand on men and on
> the right hand on women, a single unbroken line across the palm signifies
> potential for great violence.
> 
> I was OK; mine was on the left side.  :-)

Is this the part where somebody asks "so what did that mean?"   Or the 
part where we all take turns guessing?  Where *is* my soc.singles
manual, anyway?

Violently dyslexic?

BTW, what becomes of great nicknames in this age of CD-ROM?

-- Ray

Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.couples,soc.men,soc.women,soc.motss
From: hays@TECHNET.NM.ORG
Subject: Re: BOINK! BOINK! BALLOONBOINK IN ALBUQUERQUE!
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 01:09:14 GMT
Organization: New Mexico Technet   Albuquerque, NM
Reply-To: hays@TECHNET.NM.ORG

In article <1992Aug13.125052.1407@csd.brispoly.ac.uk>, pm3_norr@csd.brispoly.ac.uk (Paul Norris) writes:
>In article <0iJFPB4w165w@wildrose.infoserv.com> rkf@wildrose.infoserv.com (Ray Fink) writes:
>}johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>}
>}> I can just see Ron and Larry meeting people at the airport...
>}> 
>}> "Welcome to Albuquerque, here`s your banana."
>}
>}I've seen pictures from prior Balloon Festivals...some of the balloons
>}are not just traditional hot-air-balloon-shaped, I've seen dinosaurs,
>}Tony the Tiger, the Planters "Mr. Peanut", etc.
>
>"specialty" canopies took to the skies - two beer cans, an oil container and
>a 40' Rupert the Bear.  Previous years we've had all sorts of weird and
>wonderful designs.  I counted 80 in total on Sunday and it was a glorious
>sight.  700....  if you can get along I'd suggest you do.

I've also seen a saguaro cactus, a pink tennis shoe, and a cow jumping over
the moon.

Not to mention, of course, the balloon operated by Disney shaped like
Mickey Mouse's head and fondly referred to as 'Ear Force One'.

Please, do come to the boink and the fiesta.  If it will help, I'll make
sure everybody gets a bananna.

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

"Welcome to Heaven, Here's your harp"
                      "Welcome to Hell, Here's your accordion"  - Larson
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (eleanor.j.evans)
Subject: She's Ba-a-ack!!
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 03:54:59 GMT
Summary: The return of Piglet.


An adorable little girl with blonde hair is watching a flickering
TV set.  The screen starts to snow.  An evil smile spreads over her
face.  She leans back, grins, and says, "She's ba-ack."  Mwa-ha-ha.

Yes, it is I!  Rather like Livingstone in the jungle....  No, silly,
that has no apparent relevance.  Just try something more straight-
forward.  Oh, I've got it!  Just say "hi"!  Yeah, that's it, that's
the ticket.  And stop babbling already.

Hi, everyone!  I've returned!!!  And didn't you all miss me.  (Wait
for it....."why, no, we didn't"....and thanks for _your_ contribution,
too.)  Hey, it's late, I'm tired and silly.

To all you boneheads who missed my party at the Boink with NO Name,
PLBHBHBHBH!! (with lots of extra spit).  To all those lovely people
who did show, hehehehehe, let's not tell them the good stuff, ok?

Piglet, who will now shut up and stop babbling.  If you're lucky.....
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: Gagging Sloth Records
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 21:26:39 GMT

In article <l8kqsbINNlij@news.bbn.com>, dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:

|> Yeah, people getting attached to her was a big problem.  She speaks very
|> highly of how effective the counseling was in helping men start and keep
|> relationships, but from the way she talked about these men falling for her
|> I wonder how good it really was for them.

I wonder statistically how many of these men were noticably better off after
this particular treatment.


|> Her husband didn't mind, but she did keep coming home with sub-clinical
|> diseases -- clients were all screened for syphilis etc, but she kept
|> catching undefined bugs -- and of course, he caught them all too.  She
|> describes this as the best job she ever had, but it sure doesn't sound
|> great to me. 

Hmmmm...I don't think I would take it quite so well as her husband.
Even without the bugs! No, it doesn't sound so great to me either.
Although I must admit...certain aspects of it are attractive! Maybe
just as a hobby?  :-)

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: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 21:32:21 GMT

In article <8#9m-=.aahz@netcom.com> aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius) writes:
>In article <1992Aug16.212441.29735@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
>>In  <thurlow.713977621@convex.convex.com>  thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes:
>>>
>>> In fact, if you can't get out of the habit of mainly posting huge
>>> line-by-line rebuttals, you should save net bandwidth and use your
>>> time to go out and try to find a life, because I promise you that
>>> fewer people are going to trouble themselves offering you advice.
>>
>>Funny - I asked my girlfriend what Kevin should do, and she said,
>>   Get off the fucking computer and go out and get a life!
>
>1)  Larry, Larry, Larry, haven't you figured out by now that fucking his
>computer is the last thing that Kevin wants?
>
>2)  How is getting a life going to solve his problem?  (See below)

Actually, unlike some previous posters (Edward V. Wright comes to mind),
I think Kevin is getting a positive benefit from the conversations on
this newsgroup--though he may be inclined to argue with many of the
things said, he appears to be open to them and willing to change both
his mind and his actions.  Additionally, I get the impression that he
needs to hear "things are possible" messages, perhaps many times, to
help buttress his confidence when going out into that confusing world
out there--indeed, perhaps part of the reason he argues is because he
really wants and needs to be convinced that more is possible than he
has been able to do so far.

Trygve   (Kevin--sorry if my armchair psychology is running amok; hope
          you're not offended by my reading things like this into what
          you write.) 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rudoff@mdd.comm.mot.com (Doug Rudoff)
Subject: Criteria for friends and lovers
Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 20:45:49 GMT


In my searches for an SO it has come apparent to me that I have
basically the same criteria for a woman I want to be friends with and
for a woman I'm interested in a romantic relationship with. Most of
the women (not all) that I've known as friends, I wouldn't have minded
being more intimate with them.

This is a usual male lament here on soc.singles: Why are my female
friends only interested in being friends? Doesn't it make sense that
two people that are romantically involved to have friendship as a
basis for their relationship?

But I don't recall a woman on soc.singles saying the same thing. Is
this friend/lover thing a particular male perception?

What faults do women reading this see in the above reasoning? (I know
there are faults in the reasoning - I've never succeeded in a having a
woman who was a good friend become more than a friend, and I've lost a
few friends trying.)

How do the criteria that women have for friends and lovers differ?
(I know all women don't have the same answer, but I'm curious to see
some responses.)
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Doug Rudoff          Motorola, Seattle    INTERNET:rudoff@mdd.comm.mot.com
                                            USENET:uunet!mdisea!rudoff   
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: droe@cs.tcd.ie (David Roe)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin (Computer Science)
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 13:05:25 GMT

In article <l8fjapINN2dn@news.bbn.com> dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
>Some people here will remember me talking about my housemate who used to
>work as a sexual surrogate.  I was telling her yesterday about the numbers 
>of men who've posted here yesterday saying that they've never had dates at 
>all and never had any relationships.  This is the kind of men that she 
>used to counsel, and she had some interesting things to say about the 
>situation.
>
	[stuff deleted]
>Since the kind of counseling that she used to do is now illegal, she thought
							 ^^^^^^^

I read this a few times, but I still dont get it, how can counselling be
illegal?? Please elaborate.

	Dave Roe

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Subject: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:47:28 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.163725.2377@sfu.ca> probst@fraser.sfu.ca (Scott Probst) writes:
>
>well, i can't say i've seen the stats that suggest what you say. also, i have
>some difficulty conceptualising marriage (or any equivalent) as a job. let's
>hear from women out there: do you think it's right to consider that the man
>pays the woman a "salary"?

Well here again is the issue of choice.  If after marriage a person choses
to not contribute income to the household, that's a choice.  In my opinion
it's a selfish lazy choice.  Nobody but a really insecure individual with lots
of problems would chose to live off another person and expect the situation
to work out well.

Right now I wear all the hats in my home - I'm the parent, the provider, the
keeper-of-house, the cook, the car-owner-and-maintainer, the insurance
provider, and the homeowner.  I have no spouse.  Were I to chose one and
find that he did not want to bring income into the home - just, say, stay
home and watch the kids and keep house, he would find his ass out of my
life real quick.  If I were to willfully provide him sole financial support
for a bunch of years knowing that he was not inclined to hold down a job,
I'd be making a choice - a really STUPID one but it's still a choice, and
with it would go some really big risks.

It would be the same for a man in my position.  You marry someone who does
not intend to contribute to the family income, she becomes dependent
on you and as the years pass she will be that much more removed from the
work environment and that less likely to want to return to it.  If you
got into this situation voluntarily, you should realize that if one day you
decide not to be married to her anymore you're at least partly responsible
for helping her trot off on her own and get established in another lifestyle.

It would be like me taking in a mutt off the street and allowing him to live
in my home and feed and provide for him and then decide that it's not
working out and kick him out - he'd be defenseless and would probably starve.
It would be my moral responsibility to find him another home.

But it wouldn't be my responsibility forever.

-Nance

-- 
Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*    o__    *^*^*^*^*  |  Work that body!
att!ihlpk!colucci            _.>/               | Stay fit for life.
                            (_) \(_)                           
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein)
Subject: Re: California Here I Come, Again (San Diego, to be exact)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 23:29:29 GMT

In article <BtBDvw.M2E@iat.holonet.net> cocoa@iat.holonet.net (little 'e') writes:
>johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>: In article <1992Aug18.224245.5672@cbfsb.cb.att.com> sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein) writes:
>: Blacks Beach was interesting.
>:  
>: Let me guess.  That's the clothing optional beach, right?
>
>Yep.  You gotta climb down a steep cliff to get to it. (or so I've heard)

Exactly.....I tried the dirt path down the cliff and scared myself half
to death.  So I took the less suicidal path.  Curiousity got the best
of me.

>If you'd waited a week, I could've showed you around.  I'll be there Labor
>Day weekend.

Guess you can ignore the last post about where your were.  I sent it
minutes before I read this one from you.  Where in Calif. are you??


>He better make it up here soon.  We'll be the only ones who haven't met
>him.  

You might be thinking of another Steve.  I've only met ~3 people so
far off the net.
				steve (from the east)
>Just me,
>
>little 'e'
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjj@mits.mdata.fi (Joni Jarvenkyla)
Subject: Re: single men
Organization: Microdata Oy, Helsinki, Finland
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 17:25:58 GMT

Around here it's enough to dress a little bit wierd and you'll be
classified as gay.

It's funny to know what especially cab drivers think about techno/rave
clubs etc where people really dress up.

And if you go to a club with your male friend both dressed up for a good
evening, o-o-oo! Stinking faggots!

-- 
jjj@mits.mdata.fi     Thanks, Life; thanks, Death    And the other me:
jjj@niksula.hut.fi    for freeing me from self       Jenny L{rv{joki
Newsgroups: soc.singles