HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dswartz@sw.stratus.com (Dan Swartzendruber)
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men
Subject: Re: The Politics Of Appeasement
Date: 7 Oct 92 21:15:41 GMT
Followup-To: soc.women
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Oct7.194728.17929@u.washington.edu>, rons@hardy.u.washington.edu (Ronald Schoenberg) writes:
> In article <1992Oct7.171051.21225@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> jrmo@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (joseph.r.moore) writes:
> >
> >

[deleted]

> >Ultimately, without AA, people would lose accounts because of racism,
> >businesses would lose money, and people on their own will begin to
> >see that the biases are unfounded and eliminate them.
> >
> 
> Have businesses lost money because of white male affirmative action?  I
> believe so, but that doesn't seem to have forced anyone to do anything
> about it.

You believe so?  So in other words, you don't really know?  Well, don't
let facts interfere with your agenda.

> >AA offers a crutch to people, an excuse for failure, assigns blame
> >unjustly.  EEO offers an avenue for people who are truly denied employment
> >because of race, color, gender, or other non-job related condition.
> >AA has nothing to do with that.  In fact it's the opposite.  You must
> >deny qualified people jobs for less qualified represented minorities.
> >AA has nothing to do with fairness, justice, or equality, just paybacks.
> >Only the ones being forced to payback, aren't the offenders; and those
> >who profit by the paybacks aren't the one's who were denied justice.
> >
> 
> What are you planning to do about white male affirmative action?  It
> seems to me that before we do anything about female and black
> affirmative action, we should first get rid of white male affirmative
> action.

There is no such thing as white male affirmative action.  There *is* a
problem wherein white males sometimes get jobs non white males don't;
but that is a problem with social priorities and prejudices which does
need to be addressed.  Affirmative Action is a officially mandated policy
wherein members of certain "disadvantaged" classes receive preferential
treatment to non-members of those classes.  A lot of people feel that even
if AA was an acceptable mechanism for rectifying inequities, you are going
to run afoul of basic human nature.  A lot of people resent this kind of
arbitrary system, right or not.  And by the way, it's not just white males
who lose with AA.  Consider AA in university admissions.  The group which
is most screwed over by AA there is asian students.  The reality there is
that they are if anything more qualified academically than white males.  So
are you going to tell me there is an old asian network in this country?  If
not, how do you justify this?  And how do you expect people like Joe and me
to buy into your program?



-- 

Dan S.
From: silverm@bcstec.ca.boeing.com (Jeff Silverman)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Mattel and math avoidance in girls
Date: 13 Oct 92 06:12:13 GMT
Organization: Boeing Computer Services, Seattle

sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen) writes:

>In soc.women, peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:

>    dwelch@mpd.tandem.com (Dan Welch) writes:
>    >>"Teen Talk Barbie" which says...
>    >>"Math class is hard".

>   >I phoned Mattel to express my dismay at their choice of phrases.
>   >They defended their choice by stating that Barbi says lots of other
>   >things too, like "school is fun".  They also pointed out that 
>   >Barbi is blonde. 

>As a blond female mathematician, I fail to see what 'blond' has to do with it.

I called Mattel, as the daddy of a future Blue Angel, and asked them how my
little girl is ever going to master the F-14 Tomcat if she's getting programmed
in the 4th grade that Math Is Hard?  The P.R. twit at the other end of the line
asked me if I was a computer expert, and then asked me if there is some kind
of network of computer experts.  Evidently, we're making an impact on the 
P.R. twits.
I shouldn't call him a twit, since his sole function in the company is to
answer the phone and take complaints, but he was so easy, I knew the twit
was, well, a twit.
If this talking Barbie sells well, we'll soon see a Ken who "can't cook".

Jeff Silverman

P.S. She wants to be a Blue Angel, not an Air Force thunderbird.
From: gee@col.hp.com (Ken Gee)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Women's Empowerment Seminar
Date: 8 Oct 92 20:40:39 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division


Seminar Announcement:

	Womens Empowerment: Coping in the Age of Tailhook
	  Develop Self-Protection as a Lifestyle

sponsored by Colorado NOW

Issues:
	Sexual Harassment
	Physical Self-Protection
	Gender Communications

Location:
	First Baptist Church
	14th & Grant
	Denver,CO

Time:
	9 AM - 1:30 PM
	Saturday, Oct.,17

Cost:
	Advanced registration:  (by Oct.14)
			Single: $40.00
		With a Friend : $70.00 for 2

	At the door: $50.00

Advanced Registration:
	Name, Phone number, and Check to:
					Colorado NOW
					1552 Pennsylvania St.
					Denver, CO
					80203
	Check payable to Colorado NOW

Proceeds go to EPOCOLORADO to defeat Amendment 2
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.singles,soc.penpals
From: cs261159@ucs.usl.edu (Yu Ying-Bin)
Subject: Wanted Straight Female
Organization: Univ. of Southwestern La., Lafayette
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 09:56:36 GMT

          I am looking a warm and sinceer women. I am 25, from
   R.O.C and I don't bother which part of country are you from. I
   am looking for the person not any nationality,color or race. I
   am a very honest person. Please send email at cs261159@ucs.usl.edu.
Xref: sparky soc.women:17506 soc.men:17502 alt.feminism:2260
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Affirmative Action
Date: 9 Oct 92 03:49:52 GMT
Distribution: usa

In article <1b24h8INNonl@gap.caltech.edu> peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
>beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
>
>>>One of the saddest things about modern society is that in our mobile
>>>nuclear families the kids grow up without little siblings and cousins
>>>and neighbors kids, and they never get much opportunity to interact
>>>with children (practice parenting) until they bear their own.
>
>>Yes.  I'd also point out that role models are very important.  As long
>>as our biased system continues to produce seven times more single-mothered 
>>families than single-fathered families, and continues to put greater 
>>pressure on men to leave the home, kids are not going to learn by seeing,
>>either.  
>
>You missed my point completely.  I said that kids should learn by
>*doing*, not by *seeing*.  I don't think the gender of the primary
>caretaker is nearly as important as whether the kid him/her/self
>has the opportunity to do *hands-on* childcare of littler kids.

Oh, well in that case, I disagree.  I think that it is essential
for each child to believe that his/her future will include taking
care of children.  In a "traditional" setting, even if a boy helps his
mom out (and dad is not around much), I have a feeling that his talents 
may lie dormant later on.

On NPR a night or two ago, I heard the interesting comment that
(roughly) "outsiders" (minorities) need role models much more than 
"insiders" (white males) think, referring to education and employment issues.

If that is the case, I would expect that boys need role models
of men actively doing childcare -- and that women, who already
hold the "power," would tend to underestimate this need.

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Newsgroups: soc.women
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.discrimination
Subject: Re: Biological Sex Differences? ("Women only" excusable ?)
From: <RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Date: Thursday, 15 Oct 1992 15:19:20 EDT
Distribution: na
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

-From: jrmo@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (joseph.r.moore)
-Subject: Re: Biological Sex Differences? ("Women only" excusable ?)
-
-Perhaps some are correct in saying that men are more inclined then women
-at mathematics.  What good is that information, other than to use it to
-discourage women from pursuing mathematics?
-
No, it CAN have another purpose.  Let us consider four groups:

WM:  women with interest and ability for Math
WN:  women lacking either interest or ability in Math
MM:  men with interest and ability in Math
MN:  men without either interest or ability in Math

Now suppose that group MM is larger than WM.  Then it means that we should be
cautious about affirmative action or quotas.  However, it says nothing about
a typical member of WM vs. a typical member of MM.  In other words, IF a woman
IS interested in Math and has ability for it, there is ABSOLUTELY no reason
why she should be deterred by the fact that the group WM to which she belongs
is smaller than the group MM.  Of course, I do not really know about the size
of groups MM and WM.   However, there is some tentative evidence that MM may be
larger. This does not mean that members of WM are less able at Math
than members of MM.  However, it DOES mean that we should lay off
extreme forms of AA which may result in discouraging males from Math.

Rohit Parikh
Newsgroups: soc.women,talk.abortion
From: dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King)
Subject: Re: ABSOLUTELY NEW REMEDY FOR CONTRACEPTION IS OFFERED !!
Organization: Numerical Aerodynamic Simulation Facility NASA
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 14:26:44 GMT
Reply-To: dking@raul.nas.nasa.gov (Dan King)


kl>In article <92281.215441KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> Kurt Ludwick <KEL111@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
bm>In article <1992Oct6.123631.2439@brandonu.ca>, mcbeanb@brandonu.ca says:

bm>Doesn't anybody believe me?  Abstinence is *not* a very reliable form
bm>of contraception for a sexually active couple to attempt to use.
bm>Sure, some people can abstain for great lengths of time (virgins
bm>everywhere do), but not *everybody* is reliable enough to adhere
bm>to abstinence.  Jeepers.

kl>First of all, it -is- reliable, and reasonable, for single people.
kl>   Some ignore this foolproof method, at their own peril.
 
I am a single person.  My sex life is absolutely none of your 
business unless I invite you to get involved in my sex life.
I will be the one to decide if abstinence is reasonable for 
me.  You have no say in the matter.  
 
kl>Second, not *everybody* is reliable enough to adhere to the pill or to
kl>condoms, either.  Jeepers.
 
Damn good thing abortion is still safe and legal. 
 
kl>Kurt Ludwick

Dan King
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men,alt.feminism
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Subject: Re: Affirmative Action
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 05:29:29 GMT

In article <1b01e7INNqup@gap.caltech.edu> peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
>beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:
>
>>We need to increase societal pressure (positively,
>>not via complaints about "helping out," which is derogatory and
>>+detracts+ from the purpose)  on men to learn parenting and 
>>to increase their opportunity.
>
>>But how?  Affirmative action?  GI-Joe's that say, "Hand me a diaper!"?

>One of the saddest things about modern society is that in our mobile
>nuclear families the kids grow up without little siblings and cousins
>and neighbors kids, and they never get much opportunity to interact
>with children (practice parenting) until they bear their own.

Yes.  I'd also point out that role models are very important.  As long
as our biased system continues to produce seven times more single-mothered 
families than single-fathered families, and continues to put greater 
pressure on men to leave the home, kids are not going to learn by seeing,
either.  

That's where AA for men could have a potential effect -- but I doubt 
it will ever happen.

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Oscillators (Was: Re: Women in groups)
From: rivero@mdcbbs.com
Date: 16 Oct 92 09:29:06 GMT
 <1992Oct11.005059.6801@ulysses.att.com> <1992Oct12.230913.19059@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> <1992Oct15.164342.4056@midway.uchicago.edu>
Organization: Electronic Data Systems, Unigraphics Division, Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: sparks

In article <1992Oct15.164342.4056@midway.uchicago.edu>, pynq@quads.uchicago.edu (George Jetson) writes:
> In article <1992Oct12.230913.19059@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris) writes:
> 
>>I tend to think of it as a simple case of 'injection locking' - a technical
>>term for how two oscillators, running at the same frequency, will tend to
>>oscillate at the same frequency given any means of coupling.  Rather than
> 
> I don't get it.  If the oscillators are (already) running at the same
> frequency, why do you need coupling to make them run at the same
> frequency?


  To keep them running "in phase", i.e. peaks and valleys together?  :)


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero rivero@mdcbbs.com  "Middle-aged Mutant Ninja Animator" |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|  "The great masses of people. . .will more easily fall                 |
|  victims to a big lie than to a small one."                            |
|                                          --Adolf Hitler                |
|                                                                        |
|   "All men are potential rapists, and that's _all_ they are!"          |
|                                 -- Susan Brownmiller                   |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Help! I need romantic ideas.
Date: 9 Oct 1992 18:19:27 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

mlemmerm@nl.oracle.com (Mick Lemmerman Publisher) writes:

>But, but, but, my (then) girlfriend really did like the things I tried to 
>avoid. If being romantic is something you share, then you should both enjoy it
>for similar reasons. Or, does it not matter what you think of it as long
>as your partner appreciates it? 

You've almost got it.

If you and your partner don't enjoy the same things...
If you have to force yourself to do things that you'd rather avoid...
in the name or romance...
Then perhaps you and your partner shouldn't be partnered.

It sounds like she caught on, even if you didn't.

							--  Michal
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 19:58:24 GMT
Subject: Re: What a Problem!!!
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA
Newsgroups: soc.women

In soc.women, noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:

   >In soc.women, noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer) writes:
   >>
   >>    ...the interesting part is that they don't think there is
   >>    anything wrong with the young man's father being forced to pay for his
   >>    college tuition because of a divorce decree....
    
   >in some states
   >the law forces non-custodial parents (85% of whom are fathers) to pay
   >for the college expenses of their children.  They are not given any
   >choice.

   >I don't know which states have such a law or how many states have this law
   >- but there is at least one - Indiana - and I have heard there are more.

I had never heard of such a law and there certainly does not seem to be one
in California.

   >If the non-custodial parent "wanted" to pay for his son's college
   >expenses and had the money, there is nothing to stop him.  However, in
   >this case, it appeared the non-custodial father was forced by law and was
   >given no choice.

I think we were both reading between the lines.  I noticed nothing in the
original post that said the law forced him.  My ex agreed to pay at the time
of the divorce but wife #2 and 10 years time may change his mind -- only time
will tell (my sons are 12 + 15).  

   >BTW, my ex2b paid her own way through college - none of her
   >brothers did.

I have 2 brothers and 1 sister and I am the only one to get a 4 year degree
but my dad did not pay for it due to the "you'll just quit and have babies"
excuse.  

  jsw@cray.com (Jon S. Wood at Cray Research) adds:
   >Once a divorce is "final", it's usually FINAL. No judge
   >is going to go back and MODIFY a decree.

Oh, to be so naive and innocent again !!  Judges go back and modify decrees
all the time.  They change visitation, custody, financial stuff, you name it.
It might be unusual to have a blanket change such as the "no more college for
all divorces from 1965-1983" type stuff this thread has been hinting at but
I know from personal experience that decree changes are certainly done.  Four
years after my divorce, I had to pay $4000.00 in lawyer's fees in a battle
with my ex to try to keep him from modifying everything he had changed his
mind about.  I had little success.
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men
From: barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry)
Subject: Re: An Old Male Fantasy that needs to pass
Organization: QQQCLC
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 05:24:10 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.095106.1@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
>In article <1992Oct13.053612.21273@netcom.com>, barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes:
>> In article <1992Oct12.104534.2616@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com (Michael Rivero) writes:
>> Not that Roman
>> gladiators have a damn thing to do with modern warfare in any case.
>
>  The whole point of the debate was whather women will be equally effective
>soldiers against men in a non-mechanized combat environment.

	That's _your_ point; Everyone else's is, wake up and smell the
machine oil.

>In every
>maor war, desite the claims by the ruling bodies that war has become automatic
>and easy, it never ends that way. Even the highly mechanized German army of WW2
>wound up having to carry their own supplies by hand when the fuel ran out.

	Women are very good at carrying things. Many hunter-gatherer
cultures made the women carry everything; guess they didn't find it such
a strategic disadvantage.

	You know what those highly-mechanized, all-male German army
units did when they ran out of fuel? They lost. You don't do well
against an armored column without gas.

>  So, find an example of women fighting men one-on-one in a non-mechanized
>combat environment and winning consistantly, and I'll change my position.

	Better yet, find an example of this ever occurring, no matter
who wins, Mr. Macho. War ain't a goddam wrestling match. Your
stick-and-stone battles are fantasies, and so is your history. I know
Roman history a lot better than the history of WW II, but when somebody
gets the former wrong and can't even be bothered to acknowledge that
fact, I ain't gonna trust his "facts" on the latter, either. You're a
classic bullshitter.

						Kayembee
From: debra@creatures.cs.vt.edu (Debra Potts)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Personal "Ads" Looking for "Babes"
Date: 15 Oct 92 16:27:46 GMT

Things I've seen recently from various posters: 

>| Look guys it won't work here. I posted one for the honeydew melon
>|of my dreams and all I got was NADA, ZILCH, SQUAT.
>| Hey, it's lonely out in the garden.
>  
    >Consider yourself lucky.  When I posted a request for my melon of choice
    >(casabas, if you must know) all I got were rotten tomatos.
>
>You mean you haven't met that cute little Triumph with the big twin
>pipes?  


		-----------------------------------------
			Now....
		-----------------------------------------

			Can Someone Answer My Question:

		Is this newsgroup

		    (a) For MEN, to use as a personals
		        column to search for women and
		        make stupid remarks that will
	  		virtually ensure that they will
	 	 	never find one who has even a modicum
			of normal brain cells between her ears?

	or....	    (b) For discussions and postings of
			issues and happenings that are
			pertinent to WOMEN?

			Or did I just accidentally subscribe
			to the wrong newsgroup?

	Since I have subscribed I've seen almost as much crapola
	as I have seen real and intelligent conversations about
	anything even remotely relevant to the female perspective
	in America (or the world) today.  What is the deal, folks?


deb
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:55:59 GMT
Subject: Re: Book Rec.: _Bodies: Overcoming the Tyranny of Perfection_
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA
Newsgroups: soc.women

In soc.women, tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
   >most women I meet are
   >quite determined to start having children before too much longer, 
   >which makes me, someone who seems to be entirely bereft of whatever
   >strange psychological mechanism that allows people to put up with
   >their children, much less desirable as a long-term possibility. 

You may be looking in the wrong age group.  I know many women who already 
had kids and don't want to start over.  However, if you can't put up with
kids, how could you put up with me?
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men,alt.folklore.urban
From: bhv@areaplg2.corp.mot.com (Bronis Vidugiris)
Subject: Re: The Politics Of Appeasement
Organization: Motorola, CCR&D, CORP, Schaumburg, IL
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 21:06:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.014508.22735@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> lmitchel@nyx.cs.du.edu (lloyd mitchell) writes:
)>)>I wonder, would Affirmative Action be available to men pursuing a 
)>)>secretarial job (95% plus female)?  Does anyone know?
)>)>
)>)>Sue Larsen
)>)>slarsen@berlin.helios.nd.edu
)
)When I worked for NASA in California several years ago, there was an
)active (although not particularly successful) program in place to recruit
)and hire male clerical and support staff.

The last time I heard a similar story, someone (Glen Cooley) decided to check
it out.  Confirmation was not to be found - in fact, according to Glen, a
rather vigorous denail.  (Glen included a phone # for a contact - however, I
didn't personally call to verify the story.)  I think this (perferential
hiring of men for nurses/clerks) may well be a new urban legend - hence the
xpost.
From: brennan@hal.com (Dave Brennan)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Help! I need romantic ideas.
Date: 11 Oct 92 23:01:54 GMT
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Austin, TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: yosemite.hal.com
In-reply-to: rivero@mdcbbs.com's message of 6 Oct 92 16:36:47 GMT

>>>>> On 6 Oct 92 16:36:47 GMT, rivero@mdcbbs.com (Michael Rivero) said:

>   My suggestion is that you play a bit of detective and find out as much
> as you can about how your love mate fantasizes about herself, and play to
> that role both in tokens, and mannerisms. That should do it.

While this may work in the short term, it seems to me that "playing" a role
that isn't really who you are won't fool someone forever.  I'm no expert
though.  Do you want to be (liked/loved/attractive) because of who you are
or who you pretend to be?  (Of course, this could depend on the situation.
Sometimes short term may not matter to you...)

On another topic, I noticed that all the replies to the original posts were
from men.  It'd be nice to hear from some women on this topic.

--
Dave Brennan                                      HaL Computer Systems
brennan@hal.com                                         (512) 794-2855

Visit the Emacs Lisp Archive: archive.cis.ohio-state.edu:pub/gnu/emacs
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men