HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ailsa%ailanth.uucp@wang.com (Ailsa N.T. Murphy)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Who cares
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 13:08:49 EST
Organization: Ailanthus Project

rna@crystal.med.umn.edu (Ryan Alexander (BMEC)) writes:

> In article <V4gBoB5w164w@ailanth.UUCP> ailsa%ailanth.uucp@wang.com (Ailsa N.T
> >tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM (Todd Hoff) writes:
> >
> >> You bet I'm defensive. Are not blacks defensive about racism? Is it PC
> >> to blame people for things they didn't do? I thought the sins of the fathe
> >> thing went out 2000 years ago.
> >> 
> >your analogy is fucked.  black people are not defensive about racism, as 
> >they do not practice it.  they defend themselves against racism, a 
> >completely different thing.
> 
> 	You are commiting a form or racism by stating that 'all blacks' do or
> do not do any particular action.  I *know* that it happens.	
> 	What makes you think that any given race is incapeable of wrong 
> doing?
> 
i did not say that they are incapable of wrongdoing, just that black 
people in this country do not practice racism.  only white people can do 
that.  black people can be bigots, but it is not the same thing.  racism 
implies a social structure tio back it up.  no social structure backs up 
black rage, any more than it does queer anger.  so far as i'm concerned, 
i think the best tactics would be for all the oppressed groups to get 
together, bury their differences (for example homophobia in the black 
community and racism in the gay male community) and overthrow the man.  
together there's a lot more of us than there are of them.  and ALL of us 
who are white need to overthrow whatever traces of the man exist withion  
ourselves...

                                        -ailsa

ailsa%ailanth.uucp@wang.com   or   io81409@maine.maine.edu
 
are you on fire         what will replace the rent with the stars above,
from the years,         replace the need with love,
what will you give      replace the anger with the tide,
for your kid fears?     replace the ones, the ones, the ones that you love?
From: tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM (Todd Hoff)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Who cares
Date: 21 Jul 1992 16:08:19 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: oogoody.corp.sun.com

In article 25296@geppetto.encore.com, aaldrich@geppetto.encore.com (Al Aldrich) writes:
>tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM (Todd Hoff) writes:
>
>I am hearing a lot of defensiveness about the injustice of being one of
>the priveleged and getting blamed for it..so let me play a little
>devil's advocate here..
>
>:-)
>

You bet I'm defensive. Are not blacks defensive about racism? Is it PC
to blame people for things they didn't do? I thought the sins of the father
thing went out 2000 years ago.

>It's good that you do't/didn't do all of the above, but NOT doing is as
>good as condoning in practice.
>

I reject this out of hand. You are witch burning and don't even realize it.
From: egnr76@castle.ed.ac.uk (A Kashko)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: More Crone Images (was re: stereotypes)
Date: 30 Jul 92 09:11:22 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <y9sooB1w164w@ailanth.UUCP > ailsa%ailanth.uucp@wang.com (Ailsa N.T. Murphy) writes:
 >yup, i don't know how i missed that.  kali is NOT a crone.  she is 
 >usually shown as being either grotesquely ugly or young and beautiful.  
 >but grotesquely ugly does not equal croneliness.  kali is not a celtic, 
 >or really even an indo-european goddess.  she isn't part of the 
 >maiden-mother-crone trilogy...

	Interesting. So where did kali come from, if not indo-european?
Suggests to me Kali may be an outsider figure, or maybe related to
a trickster. Now to go away and think about this.
From: Frank.Perricone@f814.n355.z1.therose.pdx.com (Frank Perricone)
Sender: postmaster@therose.pdx.com
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Who cares
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 17:57:00 -0700

In a message dated 19 Jul 92  21:17:37, Leo Smith wrote:

 LS> If you start your argument from the a priori assumption that the
 LS> social world is oppressive and patriarchal, you will end up with a
 LS> miserable life.

But what do you do if it *IS* oppressive and patriarchal: hide from it?  The
fact that she starts from that assumption is no counterargument.  If it *IS*
then she has every right to be upset and to mouth off far more than she did.
From: krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us (D. 'krikket' Krick)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: stereotypes - and a request
Date: 20 Jul 92 08:50:08 GMT
Organization: The Meltdown - A Team Star BBS

In article <fP8NKIC@quack.sac.ca.us>, pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
writes:
>In article <krikket.4663@meltdown.chi.il.us> 
>krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us (D. 'krikket' Krick) writes:
>>I also see a bunch of feminists who don't want equal rights, but superior 
    ----------------
>>rights.  That is it is before THAT point that I feel the pendulum shold 
>>be stopped at!
>
>Would you tell me more about these feminist who don't want equal rights.
>Are there any Congresswomen whom you think are in this group? How about
>Barbara Jordan? How about the novelist Susan Faludi? What types of
>proposals have this group of feminists that you are warning about put
>forward that would remove rights from men? Can you be specific? And can
>you define at what point, as you say, the pendulum should be stopped?

Okay...  Thanks for quoting me *OUT OF CONTEXT*.  This entire line of debate
from >MY< end, has been refering to the *STEREOTYPICAL* feminist.  In this
case (from my perceptive) the EXTREMISTS (which are in the MINORITY) get
this dubious "award".

As for where the pendulum should be stopped, idealy it would be when the difference of the sexes would make as little difference as the difference of eye color.  (And please no smart-assed remarks along the lines of "So you mean when men carry 50% of fetuses in their woumbs  (sp?). )  (As a side comment, I feel that quotas are harming the cause, rather than helping it at this point...  Unless requested, I'll refrain from quoting specific examples...)

>What should men be prepared to give up and what should we refuse to give
>up? Where should the battle lines be drawn? What about doing dishes or 
>laundry or housework? Should we refuse to do these traditional women's 
>tasks at all cost? And what do you see as the downside potential? What
>if we men lose? What rights are we most likely to lose first? Will our
>young boys become pansies? Will all boys be required to take classes in
>sewing and home economics? Will we have to wear dresses and high heels?

Get a grip on reality!  I've already stated what the ideal would be (IMHO).  Now it is a matter of working toward that goal.  We are NOT talking about the removing of rights from men.  Or the giving of rights to women.  We are talking about allowing people to accept one another for who they are, rather than what kind of body their brain is housed in.

Krikket               ! krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us ! USnail:3 Danada Square E.
a.k.a Doug Krick      ! Team Star Charter Member   !        Suite 246
Data ph# 708/665-9732 ! #include<std.disclaimers>  !        Wheaton, Il 60187

 'If you are what you eat, then I'm Dead Meat'  -- Timbuk 3 "Grand 'ol Party"
From: ba@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (B.A. Davis-Howe)
Subject: Re: Lithuania
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 03:08:19 GMT

wolfe@wolves.uucp (G. Wolfe Woodbury) writes:

>In article <1992Jul17.180730.3377@burrhus.harvard.edu> 
>canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson) writes:
>>
>>	Well, of course.  That's Europe (more importantly non-US) where
>>there's an ethnically homogenous population with a real frigging folk
>>tradition steeped in pagan stuff.  When I lived in England they Morris
>>dancers and things on May Day (for another example).  Great stuff!

>Ethnically homogenous?

>HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

>{Wolfe is Rolling on the floor in a fit of laughter....}




>Whew.

>Ethnically homogenous?  Are you sure that is what you meant to write?
>Are you really trying to say that "Europeans" are a single culture, and
>of a uniform ancestry?

Wolfe, I think that the writer meant that each area of Europe is homogeneous.
While it is not perfectly true, from an American point of view the homogen-
eity of individual locales in Europe is nothing short of incomprehensible.
What is incomprehensible often becomes legendary.

              Merry meet, merry part, merry meet again,
                               Br'anArthur

Queer, Peculiar, and Wyrd! :-)
From: wolfe@wolves.uucp (G. Wolfe Woodbury)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Lithuania
Date: 22 Jul 92 00:06:42 GMT
Organization: Red Wolfe @ The Wolves Den
X-Md4-Signature: 3f36e5578cc8afab304c4ae93f3c016c

In article <1992Jul17.180730.3377@burrhus.harvard.edu> 
canders@isr.harvard.edu (Carl E. Anderson) writes:
>
>	Well, of course.  That's Europe (more importantly non-US) where
>there's an ethnically homogenous population with a real frigging folk
>tradition steeped in pagan stuff.  When I lived in England they Morris
>dancers and things on May Day (for another example).  Great stuff!

Ethnically homogenous?

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

{Wolfe is Rolling on the floor in a fit of laughter....}




Whew.

Ethnically homogenous?  Are you sure that is what you meant to write?
Are you really trying to say that "Europeans" are a single culture, and
of a uniform ancestry?

Excuse me!  The cultures of Europe are about as diverse and heterogenous
as can be found in any part of this small planet.

As for "real frigging folk tradition....."

The same traditions occur in North America, since the immigrant
populations brought them with them from Europe.

Whew, I'm sorry, this just hit me as one of the most unintentionally
funny items to pass my way recently.  If the poster truly meant
"homogenous" (as in uniform) then it is one of the most clueless
statements I've seen in a long time.

				Wolfe
-- 
G. Wolfe Woodbury @ The Wolves Den UNIX, Durham NC         [use the maps!]
UUCP: ...dukcds!wolves!wolfe   ...duke!wolves!wolfe    <Standard disclaimers>
Domain: wolfe%wolves@cs.duke.edu    wolfe@cds.duke.edu
    Above all, we celebrate.   Celebrate the Circle Statement of Purpose
From: brewich!donal@lobster.hou.tx.us (Donal)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Hello alt.pagan!!!
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 09:27:10 CDT
Organization: The Brewer's Witch BBS, HouTx, +1 713 272 7350

Hello Ailsa, Hello Janis, Hello everyone else I have exchanged e-mail 
with! The lurking is over!!! We finally found the problem with my 
newsgroup posting and I am so very glad to announce that the Brewer's 
Witch BBS in Houston, Texas is glad to now join alt.pagan,already in 
progress :)
I intend to be a frequent and vocal contributor here, and hope to get 
to know everyone here as well as I am familiar with your posts.

Blessed Be!


--------------------
Donal, Sysop of The Brewer's Witch BBS -- +1 713 272 7350
(Internet) lobster.hou.tx.us!brewich!donal 
(SCA) Ld. Donal Dubh, IC of Dun Bruddair, B of the Stargate, K of Ansteorra
From: krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us (D. 'krikket' Krick)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: alt.wicca, anyone?
Date: 24 Jul 92 12:08:50 GMT
Organization: The Meltdown - A Team Star BBS

In article <76438@ut-emx.uucp>, amadeus@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Susan Harwood
Kaczmarczik) writes:

>On the subject of creating an alt.wicca newsgroup, I would ask just
>what topic(s) do we want to see here?  Is the idea to be more specific
>than paganism?  To just include Wicca in all its various forms, but
>omit that which is not Wiccan?

At this point, there is very little that cannot be blended with Wiccan, and
the result not still be considered to be Wiccan.  (And I'm certian that there
are exceptions to this too...)  In short, in my opnion, it would have to be
fairly much open to anything that people feel like labeling "Wiccan", since
there isn't that good of a definition of "Wiccan" to start with.

As for subject topics to see there, personally, I'd like to see a discussion
about the mechanics and theroy lying behind the Wiccan Magickal practices...

>The reason I am asking, of course, is that I don't consider myself
>Wiccan (although many of you might consider me as such if I told you
>what I did and how I believed).  Wicca to me is a much more specific
>word than Witchcraft; I consider myself a Witch but not a Wiccan.

Agreed.  And there are Wiccans who don't consider themselves to be Witches.

Krikket               ! krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us ! USnail:3 Danada Square E.
a.k.a Doug Krick      ! Team Star Charter Member   !        Suite 246
Data ph# 708/665-9732 ! #include<std.disclaimers>  !        Wheaton, Il 60187

 'If you are what you eat, then I'm Dead Meat'  -- Timbuk 3 "Grand 'ol Party"
            
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: radzy@ICSI.Berkeley.EDU (Tim Radzykewycz)
Subject: Re: stereotypes - and a request
Organization: International Computer Science Institute, Berkeley, CA, U.S.A.
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 15:25:18 GMT

pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey) writes:
> maybe women do have a vicious side and have just been pretending
> to be sweet all these years, I just don't see it.

Of course they do, Paul!  They're human, and they have all the same
qualities that the rest of humanity has: viciousness, greed, lust,
sympathy, love, honor, and all kinds of other things.

Paul: if you don't see *all* those things in *any* group of people,
whether it's women, blacks, men, indians (either kind), Russians,
or any other group of people, then there is one of two problems:
1) you don't know very many of them at all, or you don't know any
of them very well, or
2) you refuse to see the way they truly are.

With the kind of postings I've seen from you, I suspect you're guilty
of putting women (in general) up on a pedestal, that is, you refuse
to see the way they truly are.


holzman@fnalo.fnal.gov (Daniel B. Holzman) writes:
> >Have you seen the latest issue of Green Egg?  A fellow by the name of Bird
> >Brother has called for men to surrender all policy making power to women.

pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey) writes:
> I don't know the details but would that be like having a woman for President?
> Or a woman for a boss?

Nope, it would be like having a woman for president, AND having a woman
for vice-prez, AND having a woman in every position in congress, AND
having a woman for every "boss" position in industry, AND having women
run the universities, AND having women responsible for all the household
finances (including how much your weekly allowance is), AND having women
for all the law-enforcement and judicial positions, AND ....., AND HAVING
THIS AS A REQUIREMENT.

While I don't think this would be significantly worse than what we
have now, I also don't think it would be significantly better.  We
don't just need a change, we need an improvement!

Of course, if you feel that women are the untarnished superhumans that
I think you do, then you'll disagree with me about whether a women-ruled
society would be better or worse than the current men-ruled society.

Blessings!

------------------------------------------------------------
					|  An it harm none,
	-- radzy			|  do as ye will.
					|
	Tim Omelan Radzykewycz     	|  "Just pray for a
	The Incredible Radical Cabbage	|  tough hide and a
					|  tender heart."
	radzy@icsi.berkeley.edu	        |    -- Ruth Graham
					|
------------------------------------------------------------
> Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in!
From: cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Subject: Re: Who cares
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 22 Jul 92 01:44:51 GMT

In article <l6pb7kINNa0@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM> tmhoff@oogoody.Corp.Sun.COM writes:
>>> 10. Elect Bush. I didn't do it.
>>> 11. Burn the witches. I didn't do it.
>>> 
>>> There's a lot more I didn't do, but I'll stop here.
>
>>>>Again I say, so then since it isn't your mess, you have no
>>>>responsibility to clean it up.  Wonderful ethics. 
>
>Major leap here, don't fall. For you to determine my
>ethical system from one post is laughable. You know zip
>about me, certainly not enough to judge me. But I guess
>that doesn't matter. 

No more than your leap to my accusing you personally for perpetrating
every crime against minorities just by blowing off steam and trying to
get PROFITABLE discussion started.

Major leap, there.  Don't fall.

Janis
From: krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us (D. 'krikket' Krick)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Women, men, scum, and wicca . . .
Date: 22 Jul 92 11:22:36 GMT
Organization: The Meltdown - A Team Star BBS

In article <70282@apple.Apple.COM>, russell@Apple.COM (Russell Williams)
writes:

>I have to agree with Janis: when I hear people  complaining about
>affirmative action or men complaining about women-only
>groups, etc. my reaction is: get real. You're just a selfish kid
>who's had all the toys and is complaining about having to share them.

I would like to point out that there is a rather big difference between affermative action groups and women-only groups.  What is the difference between a white-male-only golf course and a (select any group, Black, Female, etc.)-only function?  Both are blatent discrimination!

>As for thousands of years of guilt, though, I don't accept it. I'm
>not big on guilt in the first place, and I've only had 36 years to
>accumulate it. I don't believe in "even unto the
>third and fourth (or whatever it is) generations". I'm responsible
>(a word I much prefer) for what *I* do, not for what anybody else
>does, and certainly not for what dead people did. A history of 
>thousands of years of oppression of women by men certainly affects 
>women (and men) differently than would a single lifetime's worth,
>but that doesn't add up to an interest-bearing guilt account. 

Bravo!  I concur 100% on this point!

>Most would say that Hitler bore more guilt than the millions who
>followed him, but his existence gave others the responsibility
>to oppose him. I'm not guilty of thousands of years of male
>domination, but I have a responsibility to help change it.

I claim the responsibility to help change it, not because other white-males made the situation the way it is, but because it's the decent thing to do.  But I won't help create status-quotas, because they only help segreate, and hinder the cause, rather than help it in the long run.

Krikket               ! krikket@meltdown.chi.il.us ! USnail:3 Danada Square E.
a.k.a Doug Krick      ! Team Star Charter Member   !        Suite 246
Data ph# 708/665-9732 ! #include<std.disclaimers>  !        Wheaton, Il 60187

 'If you are what you eat, then I'm Dead Meat'  -- Timbuk 3 "Grand 'ol Party"
            
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
From: leighann@sybase.com (Leigh Ann Hussey Oster)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: Question about St. George the Dragon Killer Story
Date: 22 Jul 92 16:55:36 GMT
Organization: Sybase, Inc.

In article <5368@m1.cs.man.ac.uk> lilleyc@cs.man.ac.uk (Chris Lilley) writes:
>
>There is a school of thought that the solar hero destroying the dragon
>represents the destruction of pagan land-honoring systems of belief by the
>newer church. Purposeful, certainly.

Actually, the hero destroying the monster is considerably older than
Christianity, and may be found in nearly every culture.  IMHO, what's
going on there is a myth-making based on peoples' fear of the dark and
the unknown; the sun goes down, it gets Dark, people disappear never to
be seen again (killed by predators? stolen by the faeries?), there are
wierd noises and strange sights (witchfire/foxfire, apparitions, etc).
The sun comes up, light returns to the world, all things are revealed
and known.  Simple as that.  So insofar as there is a correlation
between St. George/Dragon and Ra/Apep (I think that's the right serpent)
there is, well, a correlation, but nothing like proof that the one evolved
out of the other.

>
>Interestingly, a folklore society with pagan leanings recently revived a
>wandering George/Dragon processional play in York, England. They worked out
>the traditional route, which passed several places that had the word
>'dragon' in them in Norse, and also the reputed site of a Templar house.
>According to some Earth Mysteries type folks, the route passed over the
>main ley lines (dragon lines) through york, which is an interesting
>coincidence or fairly significant depending on your system of belief.
>
>The play itself was modern and drew on the genre in general. It culminated
>in George killing the dragon, which revived and killed george ;-)

I heard a similar story; in NY or some such place, they had a George and
Dragon play, and all the little kids were rooting "DRA-GON! DRA-GON!
DRA-GON!"  As somebody who has myself been a Caput Draconis as part of a
ritual, I can certainly appreciate that sentiment... ;-)

B*B
	- Leigh Ann
--
Leigh Ann Hussey Oster
leighann@sybase.com
Siobhan ni hEodhusa
"They're mine!  All mine!  And what's mine is mine!" - Daffy Duck
From: sylvan@trigger.ksu.ksu.edu (Thad A Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: alt.wicca, anyone?
Date: 22 Jul 1992 20:00:35 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: trigger.ksu.ksu.edu

In article <1992Jul20.114528.6597@ac.dal.ca> jblain@ac.dal.ca writes:
>Br'an suggested forming an alt.wicca newgroup. i'd support this. I'd read it, 
>not _instead_ of alt-pagan, but in addition, as a group with a much more 
>precise focus . . .
>-- 
>
>	Jenny		Jblain @ ac.dal.ca
>__________________________________________________________________________
>	I was in many shapes before I was released:
>	.....
>	I was a path, I was an eagle, I was a coracle in seas;
>	I was a bubble in beer, I was a drop in a shower;
>	I was a sword in hand, I was a shield in battle.
>	I was a string in a harp enchanted nine years, in the water as foam;
>	I was a spark in fire, I was wood in a bonfire;
>	I am not one who does not sing; I have sung since I was small.
>
>						[from The Book of Taliesin]

You've got my vote. A more precise focus would be good, plus my Kill
file wouldn`t be so big! :)
                                 BB!

                                    Ari
From: pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey)
Newsgroups: alt.pagan
Subject: Re: >suggestion<
Date: 22 Jul 92 01:41:40 GMT

[Regarding info on the ancients]

pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey) writes:
There are paleolithic, pre-literal, tribes surviving to this day.

billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
It tells us a bit about what such societies may have believed or practiced,
but that is all.

Well, of course there is no absolute proof that their beliefs are the same
as the ancients. There is a lot of scientific evidence that that is the
case with the obvious caveat that nothing is stationary, not even the written
word. But at the minimum, paleolithic beliefs are significantly different than
modern beliefs. They would seem to be a valuable source of other ways to
view the world. Just the development of reading substantially changes the
ways we view the world, not to mention anything about the domestication of
plants and animals and the dependency on just a few sources of food.