HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Women at work (Enquiring minds want to know)
Date: 14 Dec 92 17:15:41 GMT
	<1gfprsINNg7n@FUNCTOR.SYSTEMSZ.CS.YALE.EDU> <Bz8141.28G@CAM.ORG>
Distribution: usa
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: souchay@CAM.ORG's message of 13 Dec 92 23:26:24 GMT

In article <Bz8141.28G@CAM.ORG> souchay@CAM.ORG (Francois Souchay) writes:

   Best damn C coder I *ever* worked with wore a skirt.

Female, Scot, or transvestite?
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
     "Oh God, please help me be civil in tongue, pure in thought, and able
      to resist the temptation to laugh uncontrollably.  Amen." -- Rob T
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: gds@york.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner)
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Originator: gds@york.cs.ucla.edu
Reply-To: gds@cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner)
Organization: in your face!
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 00:14:10 GMT

In article <102647@netnews.upenn.edu> crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
>If someone invites you over to their house for dinner -- not a close
>friend, not a platonic friend, but a new potential romantic interest
>-- what would you think if you got there and the inviter says "Oh,
>didn't you bring your own dinner?  I only made enough for me"?  What
>were your expectations, based on the invitation?  Were they met?

The assumption here is that if you are invited to someone's house for
dinner, they are actually going to provide it for you.  I think that
is a reasonable assumption.  However, it's still an expectation on my
part that may or may not be met.  If it isn't, I can choose to

1) fix dinner there
2) go out, buy dinner, and bring it back
3) leave in disgust

but the point is I'm not entitled to anything the host doesn't want to
give me.

>I don't see any difference between somebody inviting me to dinner at a
>restaurant or at his house.  My assumptions will be the same.  If I
>don't know him well, and if I'm sure this is a "date" as opposed to a
>casual get-together, I assume he's providing the meal he invited me
>to.  If I do know him well or we've been out more than once together,
>I'll offer to split the cost, take him out to dessert, whatever.  

If he didn't say "I will treat", you should not assume that he will.
However, there seems to be something that causes you to believe this.
I am questioning your assumption that because it is a "date", and
there is "a potential romantic interest" it translates to "he's
providing the meal."  I would like to know why you believe this is
true.  I'm not saying you have no right to believe this; you can do
whatever you want.

>And if a guy on a first date asks me to pay my way, I'll assume I got my
>signals crossed and he just wants to be friends.  Which may or may not be
>a disappointment.

It seems like you're saying that someone's willingness to spend money
(on you) on the first date is an indication of someone's romantic
interest (in you).  This is as faulty an assumption as assuming that
someone who does not offer to contribute is not appreciative of your
generosity.  (This is what I said before and I've retracted my
statement.)

I try to avoid this whole issue by going on free or inexpensive dates
early on.  That way, no one needs to feel that they are being
pressured to reciprocate in any way in exchange for something, and no
one needs to feel that they are giving something without getting
something in return.  Instead, we can focus on getting to know one
another.  Some examples are a walk in the park, a free concert, a walk
on the beach, a bicycle ride, etc, with a little something to eat
afterwards.

--gregbo
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.women,soc.men,misc.legal,alt.abortion.inequity
From: kendall@adobe.com (Janice Kendall)
Subject: Re: Pre-Sex Contract
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:51:30 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.035144.2394@zooid.guild.org> Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes...
>LLC> So how would the discussion go, say, 10 years down the road?
>LLC> "Better not try to find Daddy, Brian; he'd rather you didn't exist.  See
>LLC> this contract I signed?  This was so Daddy wouldn't have to deal with you.
>LLC> That part?  That's where he said he'd help pay for the abortion.  No, he
>LLC> didn't want to pay for anything else; he really didn't want a son just then
>LLC> Don't worry about it, dear, it was just one of those things ..."
>
>
>This is disingenuous in the extreme, Lauren, as you to seem to be trying to
>guilt-trip the man for not having wanted a child.  Are you as willing to
>condemn *women* who don't want a child?
>
>BTW, would you tell the same thing to a child whose mother's doctors had failed
>to abort succesfully?
>
>---
>Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
>ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
>(416) 322-7876
>
>"Cthulhu for President in '92 - Why vote for the _lesser_ of two evils?"
>                                                          - Bronis Vidugiris
>---
> * SLMR 2.1a * Captain, spare me your inspirational anecdote, dammit!

I would guess this is the pain that many adopted children go through.
Especially in the past, before there were open adoptions.

 Janice Kendall    kendall@adobe.com    ...!{decwrl|sun}!adobe!kendall

		"Creativity overcomes violence."
				John Bradshaw on "Homecoming"
From: martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Pre-Sex Contract
Date: 12 Dec 92 03:13:06 GMT
	<1992Dec7.050700.26777@netcom.com> <1992Dec11.045801.23110@netcom.com>
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: rohwerwd@netcom.com's message of 11 Dec 92 04:58:01 GMT

In article <1992Dec11.045801.23110@netcom.com> rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster) writes:


	I see that you have stooped to an ad hominem attack.  Next time you
   reply use a reasoned argument, if you can.

God, I love self-deconstructing statements like this.
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
     "Oh God, please help me be civil in tongue, pure in thought, and able
      to resist the temptation to laugh uncontrollably.  Amen." -- Rob T
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith)
Subject: Re: What is gold-digging?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 14:53:31 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.004123.11907@netcom.com> marcia@netcom.com (Marcia) writes:
>In article <8fKV03UOc35G00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jsp@pls.amdahl.com writes:
>>This is a prime example of why so many men today are so confused.  To
>>some women, if the man doesn't pay then he's got no class.  To other
>>women, if the man does pay then he's not treating the woman as an equal.
>
>Women are just as confused. If the guy wants to split the check, is it 
>because he wants to start off as equals, or is it because he's just cheap?
>(Men can be "goldiggers" just as much as women can.)
>
>Personally, I've always felt that the person who asks should be prepared to
>pay. And when I have asked, I have paid. I've even paid for both of us even
>when I haven't asked, just because I enjoy treating someone to a meal. I also
>enjoy being treated. This is what is meant by equals to me - we are both
>capable of giving and receiving.
>-- 
Bravo, Marcia!
I have no problem with splitting the tab, or taking turns picking up the
tab, or even where one picks up the tab, while the other picks up the tip,
but this business of folx expecting the man to foot all dating expenses,
all of the time, simply because he is a man, can get "old" really quickly.
I have been in situations where I was un/under-employed, and was expected
to pick up the tab when dating a woman who had a good job.  I have also
loaned money to a man-friend-or-three who was un/under-employed, so that
_he_ could date a woman who was gainfully employed.  It simply amazes me
that a man and a woman could exhibit _the same behaviour_, in the case of
wanting the other to foot at least _some_ of the expenses, and have the
man be suspected of being "cheap", but not the woman.  This does not look
like equality to me.

Again, thanx for a nice post!

Keith R
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Marcia Bednarcyk                                  ADDRESSES: marcia@netcom.com
>"Sweaty Snugglebunnies."                                     mlb@cisco.com
From: fred@walter.UUCP (Fred Walter)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: How come we aren't getting it?
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 92 00:16:05 GMT
Organization: GRW Enterprises

jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
>Do tell. I feel we're avoiding the aforementioned opportunities in a 
>somewhat symbionic desire to toe the line, hold the gains. Therefore I
>propose we join as one to stananktify the very core of the essence that
>perpetuates the desire to remain different as juxtasupposed to a joining
>of the minds. That is to say, to mold the very existence of mankind and
>womankind into a greater whole for the betterment of the mext generation.
>Pip, pip and all that rot. Cheerio and milk. Tar Tar and white fish.

I actually understood this.

Really.

	fred "Burp, eh. Pass me another cold one Barney." walter
--
Fred Walter fred@walter.UUCP fredw@mks.com F.WALTER1(GEnie)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Attraction -> Acquiantance or vice versa?
Organization: Intergraph
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 16:57:33 GMT

In article <bkt.724112029@blacks.jpl.nasa.gov>, bkt@blacks.jpl.nasa.gov (Barrie Trinkle) writes:
> krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith) writes:
> 
> >You misunderstand quite a bit.  Most women that I know have a real problem
> >with "outside women" calling up or coming over:
> >	he:	Oh, she'e just a good friend.
> >	she:	Yeah, right!!!
> 
> >Women that I have known, even as "just friends" have a real problem with
> >a man that she might be out with _even noticing_ another woman while
> >they are out together, much less, going to talk to her:
> >	he:	She's kinda' cute.  I think I'll go and talk to her.
                ------------------
Talking to somone of the opposite sex for the above reason alone makes
it understandable that she would get POed.

> >	she:	Take me home!  I'm red' t go!
> 
> >Women that I have known, and women that my homeys known are jealous enough
> >as it is, of the time that a man spends with his homeys, much less, areound
> >female "just friends".

I had one "girl" friend who got terribly POed when I got a letter from a
female friend, and really hit the ceiling when I explained that the female
friends would be invited to the wedding we were planning.

> 
>   You call these people "women".  Are they actually over the age of, say,
>   16?  (Doesn't sound like it.)

That is why I called her "girl", physically she was over 16 but mentally,
I'm not so sure.

Larry
Xref: sparky soc.singles:34042 alt.pagan:14306 alt.romance:15327 alt.sex:39698 alt.polyamory:2159
From: rstevew@deeptht.armory.com (Richard Steven Walz)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.pagan,alt.romance,alt.sex,alt.polyamory,talk.religi
Subject: Re: Truth/Psychiatrists and homosexuality.
Date: 16 Dec 92 06:05:01 GMT
Organization: The Armory

In article <1992Dec9.194922.9024@athena.cs.uga.edu> tedr@athena.cs.uga.edu (Ted Kalivoda) writes:
>In article <1992Dec7.005114.14512@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec6.234615.9660@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> mritchie@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Michael S Ritchie) writes:
>>>is it nature or nurture?  A "truth" about homosexuality *used to
>>>be* that it was an illness, but very few psychiatrists would
>>>espouse that particular "truth" these days.  Truth is a construct
>>
>>
>>	I'd propose that this is incorrect.  The removal of homosexuality
>>	from the roster is accepted by most people to have been purely
>>	political.  In fact, an article in the paper sometime last
>>	week pointed this fact out, along with the interestingtidbit
>>	that some 70%+ still considered it to be rooted in mental illness.
>>
>Intersesting, for what it's worth, I just read this last night in a recently
>published book by Steven Goldberg, "When Wish Replaces Thought".  2/3 of the
>APA said they thought homosexuality was a disorder AFTER the vote which
>declared homosexuality normal.
>T. Kalivoda
>UGA
------------------------------------
Yes, but that was privately, and a suspicion, not a canon vote. It's
just that after researching it quite a while the APA committee said
that if it was a disorder that it had no other effects on personality
and also that they didn't know how to categorize it except by its
name. The fact that a majority suspect it might be a disorder doesn't
mean anything. High blood pressure is a disorder, but we didn't have
any drugs for it for a long time that weren't worse than the disorder.
Also they were hedging their bets. It's good to have it down on the
books so they can write I told you so books and papers later. But at
the same time they knew they had no more evidence that it's a disease
than nail-biting or joint-popping, even though some arthrologists will
hedge their bets and say that it might be a Bad Thing,
knuckle-cracking, but that they haven't any proof yet. Bottom line,
they haven't any proof but wish they did because they need a bigger
pool or a new car.
- Steve

-- 
* Richard STEVEn Walz   rstevew@deeptht.armory.com   (408) 429-1200  *
* 515 Maple Street #1   * Without safe and free abortion women are   *
* Santa Cruz, CA 95060    organ-surrogates to unwanted parasites.*   *
* Real Men would never accept organ-slavery and will protect Women.  *
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Woman: will you go out with shorter man?
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 18:11:02 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In <75570@apple.apple.COM> pooh@Apple.COM (Pooh) writes:
>In the referenced article, margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
>>
>>I've found that in bed, height differences don't generally matter...
>
>I beg to differ!  In certain positions, differing thigh lengths
>can make a frustrating difference ...

Note "generally".  Widely differing oral-genital interspatial distances
can also be a problem for some activities.  But certainly for a good-night
kiss, there's no problem.  (You just might have to take turns kissing some
areas, instead of doing it simultaneously.  :-)
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Giving and Receiving
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:07:59 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16f by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In <lj18u9INNn3s@news.bbn.com> dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
>
>Which reminds me that I've been meaning to congratulate you.

Thanks.

>Someone will probably comment on the appropriateness of you ending up with a
>professional clown, but I won't do it.

Nope.  Not you.  :-)

>Will you be having a weird wedding story to add to the other thread,
>or are you going to be conventional?

Well, we're planning on being more or less conventional - she won't let
me have a dominatrix of honor, so I won't let her wear a clown costume or
perform magic tricks during the ceremony - but there's always a chance for
a weird story despite our best intentions.

Back on the topic of this thread - Laurie has *lots* of nieces and nephews;
one thing she's done is pick up T-shirts and sweatshirts at a discount place
for 50 cents to a dollar each, then decorate them with fabric paint, air brush,
etc. so each kid gets something appropriate.
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: loosemore-sandra@cs.yale.edu (Sandra Loosemore)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Am I banished?
Date: 18 Dec 1992 17:17:34 -0500
Organization: staff hacker @ Yale Haskell project
Distribution: na
	<248@cnmhnet.UUCP> <1992Dec18.075450.18676@netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: functor.systemsz.cs.yale.edu
In-reply-to: gerg@netcom.com's message of Fri, 18 Dec 1992 07:54:50 GMT

I seem to have missed the flame that was posted in response to my previous
article.  (I was offline for a few days due to hardware/software upgrades
happening, and articles expire in less time than that at this site.)

Anyway, as I said in the article in question, it was impractical for
my brother and his new wife to have a big wedding because neither of
them had any money to pay for one.  And the fact that they were married
in Upper Michigan while the bride's family all live in Japan and the
groom's parents live in Florida also had something to do with it.

-Sandra
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rossi@mtu.edu (Rossi)
Subject: Re: How come we aren't getting it?
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 03:59:47 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.141836.21106@cbfsb.cb.att.com> jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
> 
>Desperately seeking Daniel Moscny. Daniel Moscny are you out there.
>We've taken a hit. Loosing altitude. SOS. SOS. I can't fight the good
>fight w/o some fertilizer. Lets change that to fodder. Plenty of fertilizer.
>Where for art thou.
> 
>Do tell. I feel we're avoiding the aforementioned opportunities in a 
>somewhat symbionic desire to toe the line, hold the gains. Therefore I
>propose we join as one to stananktify the very core of the essence that
>perpetuates the desire to remain different as juxtasupposed to a joining
>of the minds. That is to say, to mold the very existence of mankind and
>womankind into a greater whole for the betterment of the mext generation.
>Pip, pip and all that rot. Cheerio and milk. Tar Tar and white fish.

   Poor, poor jjd.  (Jumpin Jack Daniels in my lexicon)  I hope you pull 
out of this impending crash.  Where would I be without you?  Lost.  
Wandering from post to post without an able compass to guide my 
innermoist bean.  (I bee leave he composted his undies again!)

   songbird - me thane you tar -zan

{
tar: z: unknown option
tar: usage: tar -{c....

}
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Greeting service at Madison Wisconsin (MSN) airport.
Date: 16 Dec 92 19:09:45 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Sep17.232531.22191@fullfeed.fullfeed.com> lampman@fullfeed.fullfeed.com (Ray Lampman) writes:
|I've always found it more pleasing to be met at the airport  than
|to arrive alone. If you feel the same, please read on.
|
|I'm willing to meet you at the Madison airport (MSN) and help you
|find  your  way  to  where ever you're going. I can provide local
|transportation, and information about the Madison  area.  In  ex-
|change,  we'll each get to meet someone new, with the possibly of
|beginning a friendship. I live near the airport, but I  can  also
|greet you at other local transportation points.

This is easily the most imaginative way that I've ever seen suggested
for meeting people.  Anyone that would have the suggest such a technique
is either quite interesting or will meet you wearing an orange robe and
bearing flowers.

I believe this technique has also been tried in bus stations around 
the country as there always seems to be a few people hanging around
the bus station to meet me.

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.women,soc.men,misc.legal,alt.abortion.inequity
From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: Pre-Sex Contract
X-To: LAUREN L. CRAWFORD
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 05:03:00 GMT

crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes...
LLC> So how would the discussion go, say, 10 years down the road?
LLC> "Better not try to find Daddy, Brian; he'd rather you didn't exist.  See
LLC> this contract I signed?  This was so Daddy wouldn't have to deal with you.
LLC> That part?  That's where he said he'd help pay for the abortion.  No, he
LLC> didn't want to pay for anything else; he really didn't want a son just then
LLC> Don't worry about it, dear, it was just one of those things ..."


This is disingenuous in the extreme, Lauren, as you to seem to be trying to
guilt-trip the man for not having wanted a child.  Are you as willing to
condemn *women* who don't want a child?

BTW, would you tell the same thing to a child whose mother's doctors had failed
to abort succesfully?

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876

"Cthulhu for President in '92 - Why vote for the _lesser_ of two evils?"
                                                          - Bronis Vidugiris
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * Captain, spare me your inspirational anecdote, dammit!
From: dhardin@bbn.com (Dawn Hardin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Bad Timing
Date: 11 Dec 1992 17:55:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <1992Dec10.010621.20013@boxhill.com>, shri@boxhill.com (Shriram Krishnan) writes:

> But I think that a big part of love is experiencing the whole spectrum of
> emotions with someone else, not just happiness. I guess it adds that much 
> more depth to the relationship when it goes through bad times, so 
> your feelings for that person become stronger over time. 

I agree with that, but I don't think it's just a matter of bad times with
each other.  How would you/she react about stress like exams or family
problems or financial problems?  Do you feel confident that she'd help 
you out or that you'd want to help her out in case of bad health or a
long depression?  These kinds of things will either strenghten a
relationship or kill it.

(This was something I thought about after I posted about not fighting.)

> I may be in imminent danger of 
> being LJBF'd but it doesn't appear to be for the usual "soc.singles" reasons. 

Please, don't believe anything we tell you.  We're all full of shit around
here.

> She said that alot of women see SOs as one of 2 types:
> Those you passionately love, and those you end up marrying. Not only that, but
> if you dont end up marrying the first type, you probably never will. 
> Do you all think this is true? Can a relationship be so intense that you 
> can never again experience the same with another, no matter how "perfect" 
> they are"?

I'm not really sure what you mean here.  I'd guess that this sounds like
an unhealthy view of love on her part -- that the passion and intensity
is more of an unhealthy, addictive kind of thing than a good thing that
can be maintained.  After all, a broken bone is more intense than an
orgasm, if intensity is what you're looking for.  That "I gotta have him,
gotta have him, I'd do anything to keep him" thing is very intense but
it's also pretty stupid.  But I'm not sure that this is the kind of thing
your friend meant -- I'm not sure what you were trying to say.

Dawn

Joseph Campbell gave me hope and now I have been saved.
"Folk Song" by Bongwater
Newsgroups: soc.singles