HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jcr@milton.u.washington.edu (Mr. EuStress)
Subject: You can't (financially) rape the willing
Reply-To: jcr@milton.u.washington.edu (Mr. EuStress)
Organization: University of Washington
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:50:21 GMT

Bob Kirkpatrick writes
> jcr@milton.u.washington.edu (Mr. EuStress) writes:
> -> karen dawn writes
> -> > jcr@milton.u.washington.edu (Mr. EuStress) writes:
> -> > >  The government should use our tax money
> -> > >  to insure people`s sexual contact.
> -> > >  If a child is born then the insurer 
> -> > >  (the government) should reward money
> -> > >  to the primary care giver.  The Insurer
> -> > >  would do its damndest to prevent conception.
> -> > >  Thus men would not be made slaves to women.
> -> > nonsense!
> ->     Of course you say "nonsense!", you're a woman -- 
> ->     the benefactor of injustices against men.
> ->     If the minority can be enslaved then the majority
> ->     will support it.
> Nonsense!

  Oh yea, I forgot, Bob (a.k.a. "Let's have more kids") 
  is also a "forced family" benefactor -- because, for him, 
  it's a choice and not slavery.

  You can't (financially) rape the willing.
  Bob reasons: "If I don't THINK I'm a slave then I'm not one."
  and "Damned be anyone who chooses an `alternate' lifestyle."

Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,alt.child-support,alt.abortion.inequity
From: walsh@starbd.enet.dec.com (Thomas Walsh)
Subject: Re: Right To Not Support
Reply-To: walsh@starbd.enet.dec.com (Thomas Walsh)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 00:43:55 GMT


In article <1992Aug13.205747.4123@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com>, bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris) writes:
>In article <1992Aug12.152547.9278@ryn.mro4.dec.com> walsh@starbd.enet.dec.com (Thomas Walsh) writes:
>)It is more accurate to say 
>)
>)WOMAN:  Choice 1:  Participating in becomming pregnant
>)        Choice 2:  Dealing with Choice #1
>)
>)MAN:    Choice 1:  Participating in a pregnancy
>)        Choice 2:  Dealing with the woman's choice #2
>
>Actually, it's probably more accurate to say:
>
>Generic choice for men & women
>
>1) Live
>2) Die
>
>though there are a very few unlucky people who may not even have this much
>choice (POW's & such).
>
>So, since there is almost *always* a choice (you can always commit suicide
>if things are really bad) anything goes, right?

So what's your point?  A man's choice in reproductive freedom should be 
parenthood or suicide?  You could say the same about the woman and make 
abortion illegal.  Is that what your recommending?


--
___________________________________________________________________________
Thomas Walsh 		walsh@via.enet.dec.com		Nashua, NH

:opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my employers
Xref: sparky soc.men:15200 soc.women:15476
From: shomer@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: mandatory service
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 22:04:07 PDT
Reply-To: shomer@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us

<stricher-160892164315@stayman.ocean.fsu.edu>

In article <stricher-160892164315@stayman.ocean.fsu.edu>, 
stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul) writes:
> shomer@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us wrote:
> 
> > joining the military for the G.I. Bill). Men have plenty of 
> > privilege; why should we resent one of the few that women have?
> 
> Because that mail privilege has been systematically assaulted and
> dismantled in the name of equality and progress. 

Perfectly reasonable, and a good illustration of why I've always thought
that the women and pro-feminist men who say feminism's good for
men are really, really stupid. I support feminism because I think sexism
is wrong, not because I think my life will be better after the feminist 
revolution (though I dream it will be!) It's easier to appeal to self-interest
than to idealism, but as you point out we men benefited from male 
privilege. We disagree, obviously, about whether that's still the case.

> [...] If we are to 
> have equality and progress, then things have to be determined
> irregardless of the maleness/femaleness of the person(s) involved.

If I start out rich and you start out poor, and the law treats us equally,
I'll probably stay rich and you'll probably stay poor. If "justice" means 
that you should (at least) get into the middle class, "blind" justice
won't be just. That's why I support affirmative action. 
 
> One of the bastions of female privilege is in the custody of their
> children, simply because of their sex. It's neither fair, nor just,
> but I suppose in your scheme of things, it's ok.

It's not very relevant to me personally. 
In any case, female privilege in custody is fast eroding. 
It's still true that women are more often the primary
caregiver for children, and when this is true I think the law should favor
the mother in custody. It's funny: when I talk about custody issues with 
women, they're always asking "what's good for the kid?" 
Men seem more concerned with their property rights over the kid. 
-- 
_________________________________
Steve Homer  shomer@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,alt.child-support
From: hamton@byron.u.washington.edu (MrEuStress)
Subject: Bob is NOT the benefactor that he claims to be.
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 21:19:38 GMT

(Bob Kirkpatrick) writes:
>hamton@byron.u.washington.edu (MrEuStress) writes:
>->   You can't (financially) rape the willing.
>->   Bob reasons: "If I don't THINK I'm a slave then I'm not one."
>->   and "Damned be anyone who chooses an `alternate' lifestyle."
>
>For you to make the bullshit statement above only serves to ratify my
>decision to disengage from helping you any longer. When you chose to
>abandon the process when it was 90% of the way done, in order to be a
>belligerent to the court, your ex and her lawyer, I suspected that you
>weren't interested in what you claimed was your goal; . . .
> . . . Some people just don't
>get it that some of us may have different opinions on what we think is
>right, but are willing to accept a different point of view, and even
>try to help 'the opposing view' get what they want for themselves. What
>we manifest in our various debates here has little to do with how we
>will react to specific circumstances.

   Thanks for the "help", Bob.
   So you refuse to help me -- What's new?
   You never intended to help me.
   I don't require your help.
   Just stop claiming that you've legally helped people --
   Dispite my inquiries, I've seen no evidence of such claims.
   
   I have several problems with you, Bob:
     - You don't support, in word or deed,
       "(More) Equal Male Choice"
     - Dispite my repeated requests -- 
       you would never give me the name
       and address of someone who you (claim)
       to have helped to "effectively"
       terminate his support duties via
       an "agreement" *SIGNED BY THE JUDGE*!*!*!
     - When I decided that I wanted to pursue direct
       "Parental Termination" via the state
       code on adoption -- you abandoned me.

  If I want to act "pro se" (like you) -- then that
  is MY CHOICE.  If I want "parental termination"
  rather than an agreement between me my ex and the
  judge then that is MY CHOICE.  If you want to
  duck out of helping me then that is YOUR CHOICE.
  But let the netters know that you are not the
  benefactor that you claim to be.




Newsgroups: soc.men
From: stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Some Politically Incorrect questions
Date: 16 Aug 92 03:52:36 GMT
Followup-To: soc.men
Distribution: na
Organization: Murasami Labs

In article <1992Aug15.182203.4092@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>,
(kamchar@ibm.cl.msu.edu (SunCat)) wrote:

> I would be terrified to take on the role of househusband.  Bad enough 
> what the law does to married men who work in the 9 to 5 world.  I 
> could be fairly sure that I would receive no protection in case of 
> divorce.  The law grew out of the simplistic predudices of an 
> earlier, fictive age--Jerry Falwell's.  

Oh, Idunno. There's always the cause of Joan Lunden of ABC's _Good Morning
America_. She's been ordered to pay alimony. I forget what the rate is,
pretty high, something like $20k per month. But what does she make? 10
times
that?

K'Char
Xref: sparky soc.men:15306 soc.women:15579 alt.child-support:2831 alt.dads-rights:2045
From: PNCSPPC@CCVAX1.CC.NCSU.EDU
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Vicious woman bus conductor (China News Digest excerpt)
Date: 18 Aug 92 18:14:16 GMT

Subject:      CND-Global, August 18, 1992
To:           Multiple recipients of list CNDUB-L <CNDUB-L@UBVM.BITNET>
 
              * * *  C h i n a   N e w s   D i g e s t  * * *
 
                              (News Global)
 
[Reuters 8/16/92] SHANGHAI -- A 24-year-old bus passenger, Dong Huibo, died
in the street, after tangling with one of the city's dreaded woman bus
conductors.   His nightmare began inside the bus when the ticketpuncher
snarled an insult about the shape of his backside.   She swore at him,
slapped his face and broke his glasses, made a grab for his testicles, then
stood back and aimed a vicious kick at his private parts.  As he scrambled
out of a window, the driver -also a woman- slammed her foot on the
accelerator pedal and sent him flying. (From: Di Bi Cao)
                        ____  ____  ____  ____

I wonder what he did to provoke this sort of treatment.
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Chiro-quackery (was: Backrubs and Body Massages)
From: steiner@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu (jason "Think!" steiner)
Date: 14 Aug 92 19:18:40 EST

i dunno anything about 'subluxations' but when i injured my back i was
really glad to have a chiropractor around. saved me a lot of money
& my back hasn't given me problems since. i've had the dubious pleasure
of dealing with a hospital since then & they did less & charged me more
for something that wasn't nearly as serious. (i oughta get into this 
"keeping someone for observation" business. they make a haul.)

anyone know anything about the benefits of ultrasound on strained muscles?
i'm not sure exactly how it works, but after my father nearly broke
his back (the second time. silly man.) the people in the hospital were
deriding him for going to a "chiro-quack" & telling him they had this
"great new ultrasound" thing they could fix him up with. of course,
he'd been getting ultrasound treatments for his back for a long time
from his chiropractor...

jason

--
"In my world there's just us 3: U, me and G-O-D." - Arrested Development, U 
`,`,`,`,` part 2 in the "quotes from songs titled U" .sig series ,`,`,`,`,`
`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,` steiner@jupiter.cse.utoledo.edu `,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`,`
From: stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Right To Not Support
Date: 17 Aug 92 02:13:30 GMT
Followup-To: soc.men
Organization: Murasami Labs

Alton Harkcom wrote:

> Don't avoid this responsibility...  Give your child a life!

Do you tell this to men only, or to women considering getting
an abortion???

K'Char
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Woody Allen Charged With Molesting his Kids in Custody Battle
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 07:08:26 GMT

In article <Bt96AM.3Av@nntp-sc.Intel.COM> tjehl@sedona.intel.com writes:
>
>In article <1992Aug19.211458.17292@ads.com>, charleen@ADS.COM (Charleen Bunjiovianna) writes:
>|> 
>|> Uh, he's also admitted that he's having an affair with Farrow's (what,
>|> 18-year-old?) adopted daughter, which is likely to blow his custody suit
>|> right out of the water, according to some sources.
>|> 
>   I believe she is 21, but don't see what difference her age is, so long
>as she has reached her majority.  I also don't see what the woman's
>relationship to Farrow has to do with the custody suit.

The age is unknown, because Soon-Yi Previn has no birth certificate.

Allen's been a "father figure" to Soon-Yi since she was nine, so must
judges would look unkindly to his getting custody of the three children
he's the father of (natural or adoptive).

One of the adopted children, Moses Farrow, has indicated he wants nothing
to do with Allen.

>   I can, however, see a possible link between this relationship and the
>possibility that Farrow has made purely vindictive allegations.

Unclear; Farrow's known about the affair since January.  And it's unknown
whether police are involved because Farrow made a report, or the family
doctor made a report (or Farrow made a report to the doctor, who's required
by Connecticut law to report all allegations to police.)
-- 
             ......................................................
             ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu | std disclaimers
             the university of chicago law skool, chicago, illinois
             you can't throw me to the lions -- i'm charlton heston
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,soc.penpals
From: kramerbr@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Brian Robert Kramer)
Subject: Re: DANGER!!!!
Organization: University of Cincinnati
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 92 04:46:15 GMT

In article <713984707.19715@zooid.guild.org> taralee@zooid.guild.org (tara lee) writes:
>From: casmith@acs.harding.edu
>>I am posting this to warn the public of a great, grave danger that lies 
>>ahead. Bill Clinton is running for president....if he gets it we will 

<Stuff about Bill Clinton deleted.> 

>>seem like a saint. No, I am not a Republican trying to discredit Clinton.
>>I am just an honest person who doesn't want to see a snake elected to
>>office. Thanks for your time.
>>                                               Craig A. Smith
>>Bill Clinton sells snake oil!

So, you're just reminding us that we have to choose which one is the lesser
of two evils?  :)

Until next time...
Brian


*******************************************************************************
*                                                                             *
*  This E-Mail is courtesy of the University of Cincinnati's new Extinct      *
*  Technology Program (which is barely being sponsored by our 9% increase     *
*  in tuition).  Lack of funding for this E-Mail is also thanks to the        *
*  generous support of Governor Voinivich (who's campaign platform was based  *
*  on being "The Education Governor") and his state budget, which cut funding * 
*  for higher education by 30%.  Thanks to everyone involved for your         *
*  undying support.                                                           *
*                                                                             *
*******************************************************************************
From: mikep@hpmwtd.sr.hp.com (Mike Powell)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Another right to not support?
Date: 13 Aug 92 03:15:51 GMT
Organization: HP Santa Rosa Site (NMD MTA MWTD)


	
	OK....

	How's this angle....

	A woman currently has the 'right' to put "her" child up for
	adoption at birth right?

	Should a man have the same right?  (ie: put "his" child up
	for adoption)

	-Mike-
Xref: sparky soc.men:15217 soc.women:15493 alt.child-support:2803 alt.dads-rights:2029
From: jggoslin@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Whiplash Smile)
Subject: Re: DANGER!!!!
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 19:41:24 GMT

You've got to be kidding me.  Pinch me and tell me it ain't so.  *sigh* it's so
says the man.  POLITICS IN SOC.PENPALS!!!  What's the world coming to.  It's
a SIGN!  A symbol of destruction!  A signal that the gods on high are
displeased.  So they infect our lovely sanctuary of happiness with this filth
about someone who is destined to destroy our lives no matter who he is, simply
by assuming the title of "President".  This is truly a sad day.

(ps.  Don't try and tell me you're not a republican, that was perhaps the most
propagandistic set of truth "stretch-marks" I've seen in a while)

well, later...peace


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  "Only the dead see the end of war."     |        Whiplash Smile    	|
|  "Conformity is the cradle of boredom."  |     BUBBA   Jeff Goslin	|
|=======================================================================|
|		       jggoslin@vela.acs.oakland.edu       	        |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


Newsgroups: soc.men
From: ra@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Starcap'n Ra)
Subject: Re: Woody Allen Charged With Molesting his Kids in Custody Battle
Organization: soc.men
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 00:14:20 GMT

tjehl@sedona.intel.Com (Timothy Jehl) writes:
> charleen@ADS.COM (Charleen Bunjiovianna) writes:
> |> Uh, he's also admitted that he's having an affair with Farrow's (what,
> |> 18-year-old?) adopted daughter, which is likely to blow his custody suit
> |> right out of the water, according to some sources.
> |> 
>    I believe she is 21, but don't see what difference her age is, so long
> as she has reached her majority.  I also don't see what the woman's
> relationship to Farrow has to do with the custody suit.
>    I can, however, see a possible link between this relationship and the
> possibility that Farrow has made purely vindictive allegations.

     "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned" is
the link I believe you're looking for.  Or is it
"If you think Hell is bad, try a woman scorned in
favor of her stepdaughter on for size."

     What a shame all this is for two talented and
artistic people to wind up in a cesspool like this.
And perhaps I've fallen a bit behind and shouldn't
have been, but I must say I was surprised to see
the supposed legal purist Alan Dershowitz show up
with a straw.

--Starcap'n Ra       {ames,gatech,husc6,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!kennedy
                        {allegra,decvax,ihnp4,oddjob}--^
                                          ^---------------The Wrong Choice
                             internet: kennedy@asuvax.asu.edu
Xref: sparky soc.men:14991 soc.women:15257 soc.penpals:1693
From: wilde@husc9.harvard.edu (Robert Wilde)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,soc.penpals
Subject: Re: DANGER!!!!
Date: 14 Aug 92 20:03:59 GMT
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Aug14.123439.606@ualr.edu> casmith@acs.harding.edu writes:
>[various aspersions against Clinton deleted]
>                                               Craig A. Smith
>Bill Clinton sells snake oil!

Not to blow my top, but get this sh*t off of these groups.  In now way are
any of your points germane to soc.penpals,soc.women, or soc.men.  I'll not
even bother challenging your claims, since politics has no place on these
groups and you make no cogent arguments.

Try soc.politics, and try discussing the issues rather than your vague scare
tactics.  <flame off>
Bob

-- 
|                      | "Why use an ox-knife to kill a chicken?"
|Robert Wilde          | ...
|wilde@husc.harvard.edu| "My disciples, what I just said was only a joke!"
|                      |   -The Analects of Confucius 17:4
Xref: sparky soc.men:15131 soc.women:15398 alt.child-support:2782
From: bevans@carina.unm.edu (Mathemagician)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,alt.child-support
Subject: Re: Equal Male Rights
Date: 18 Aug 92 12:56:53 GMT
Organization: Society for the Preservation of E. coli

In article <1992Aug17.045933.20323@practic.com> brunner@practic.UUCP (Thomas Eric Brunner) writes:
>In article <1992Aug14.000117.23988@nsc.nsc.com> jrr@nsc.nsc.com (Jerry Roe) writes:
>>If she chooses to give birth and give up the child for adoption, the
>>man has no right to the child, in almost all jurisdictions.

>This is not the case in California, I don't have a case law cite handy but
>I'm 99% sure that the non-married putative father may move in family court
>for a custody hearing, and retains standing in dependency hearings. There
>may even be a dependency-direct route for the claiment parent, as there is
>for other persons with standing for visitation in family court, and who
>are parties at interest in dependency court.

But notice that he has to go to court to get custody of his child.

She, on the other hand, simply has the child handed over.

However, I'm a bit confused by the legalese.  What phrases in the
above paragraph relate to him being able to sue her for child support
should he wish to acquire custody of his own child?  That is, if she
puts the child up for adoption, and he goes to court to get custody,
can he ask for child support from her?

-- 
Brian Evans                |     "Bad mood, bad mood...Sure I'm in a bad mood!
bevans@carina.unm.edu      |      I haven't had sex...*EVER!*" -- Virgin Mary
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Woody Allen Charged With Molesting his Kids in Custody Battle
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 07:10:08 GMT

In article <2339@tymix.Tymnet.COM> baba@Tymnet.com (Duane Hentrich) writes:
>In article <1992Aug19.232305.17467@u.washington.edu>, jcr@milton.u.washington.edu (Mr. EuStress) writes:
>|>    Woody's new lover is 21 -- not 18.
>
>The paper I read this morning says that the daughter in question (diq) is
>a Korean with no birth certificate. 21 is the most commonly reported age 
>for her.
>
>I will use this opportunity to repeat my feeling that, in cases such as this,
>the media and public should STAY THE HELL OUT of the proceedings. It is
>a family affair, not entertainment. 
   ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^
Freudian slip, no?

If the family really wanted to keep it quiet they wouldn't
(1) have hired Dershowitz to be a lawyer [Mia], or (2) held a press
conference to announce the affair [Woody].
-- 
             ......................................................
             ted frank | thf2@midway.uchicago.edu | std disclaimers
             the university of chicago law skool, chicago, illinois
             you can't throw me to the lions -- i'm charlton heston
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: DANGER!!!! (Danger! Will Robinson!)
Date: 15 Aug 92 18:01:46 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Aug14.204826.22837@cbfsb.cb.att.com>, joni@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (joni.dunlap) writes:

> Why would the
> news media say that the literacy rate in Arkansas has risen greatly if it
> wasn't true?

That's an easy one!  The news media is in Cohoots with Clinton and Gore and
they KNOW that illiterates can't read so how are they gonna find out about
this LIE!!!!

Vote for KIBO for president!  Or vote for me!  I'm finally old enough!!!!

Terry "100% serious" Wood
-- 
        INTERNET: tjw+@pitt.edu         BITNET: TJW@PITTVMS
"Laugh while you can, Monkey Boy!"                        - Lord "John" Warfin
"There can be only one!"                                  - The Highlander
"There should have been only one. I want my money back!"  - Terry
Xref: sparky soc.men:15187 soc.women:15459
From: tjw@vms.cis.pitt.edu (TJ Wood)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: mandatory WIMPS
Date: 19 Aug 92 17:05:39 GMT
Followup-To: soc.men
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

> )Probably about as many as the number of men who refuse to walk alone at 
> )night, as a form of protest against rape. :-(

My office mate and I were wondering how many men are "Pro-Rape"?
These men who "refuse" to "refuse" to walk alone are obviously "Pro-Rape".


> There's probably more of the later.  There's a fair number of 'mehn' 'myn'
> 'Marp', etc types out there who just love to do really stupid things, as long
> as they're 'for women' (no matter how bizarre the logic) and not themselves.

I've seen some interesting mYn at womYn's rallies on ABC World News Tonight
crying about how awful men are.  They have scruffy beards and quivering lips
and would gladly have a sex change to be on the "winning side".

Sheesh!  What WIMPS! ;-)

Terry
-- 
        INTERNET: tjw+@pitt.edu         BITNET: TJW@PITTVMS

"Just say NOE to spelling"! -- Dan Quayle
From: mikep@hpmwtd.sr.hp.com (Mike Powell)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 05:17:26 GMT
Subject: Re: REQUEST:  TOP 20 WAYS TO ASK A FRESHMAN GIRL OUT
Organization: HP Santa Rosa Site (NMD MTA MWTD)
Newsgroups: soc.men

	
	One of the best...


	"I love you.  Please take my wallet."


	--- runner-up from the search for the "seven most powerful words..." 

	-Mike-

Xref: sparky soc.men:15151 soc.women:15419 alt.child-support:2790