HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mlloyd@ocf.berkeley.edu (M. Lloyd)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Understanding
Date: 24 Dec 1992 21:33:38 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: earthquake.berkeley.edu

Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>I'd venture to guess that it is easier to define yourself in opposition
>to the principle source of attributable external pain than it is to
>take responsibility for yourself in the way neccessary to have a self
>definition founded in your inherentency.
                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^
Blissful.  Presumably a mix of "inerrancy" and "heritage" - the deep
truth (ha!) of tradition, what Bruce Cockburn called The Gospel Of
Bondage (and no, he didn't mean BDSM, more's the pity).  What *would*
fit there?  "Inherentness"?  "Inherency"?  "Inherent existential nature"?

(A good point, btw, but to say so distracts from the joyous linguistic
mudbath.)

>(The Usage Inquisition is going to get me for this one...)

Aha!  Nobody expects ....

(Our chief weapon is surprise; surprise and a dictionary ...)

hugs
Mike, only slightly drunk
-- 
Mike Lloyd, B0/1 h- f- t w- g+ k+ s m- e? |    "Bloody nose and burning eyes
      Retro-hippy, music nut, bi and      |  Raised in laughter to the skies"
          backrubber of devotion          |                 - Bruce Cockburn
               --The end of confusion is the beginning of death--
Xref: sparky soc.bi:17311 soc.motss:53769
From: kn@dciem.dciem.dnd.ca (Keith Niall)
Newsgroups: soc.bi,soc.motss
Subject: Re: Imitating Turing (was: Liberty (was: (never mind)))
Date: 24 Dec 92 15:53:14 GMT
Followup-To: soc.bi
Organization: Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine


I had heard (from a straight academic, no less) that Montague died
as the result of a hard sex scene with a trick. That translates 
into found strangled with a chain in his bathtub. Is there anything
in this ? It seems like pure urban legend to me.

-- 
*** Keith Niall ******  kn@dretor.dciem.dnd.ca  *****************************
Kisses as pure as the sky is blue / In Dreams
As it carries the thoughts I have of you / In Dreams
                                                           B-52s
From: pclary@mushroom.csc.calpoly.edu (Ellen Clary)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Understanding
Date: 3 Jan 93 17:59:55 GMT
Organization: Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, CA - aka Barnum & Bailey

Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> wrote...
>Does significant mean 'lie awake at night torturing self with what
>you'd like to be doing with the attractee'?  'Tendency to act like
>an idiot in the presence of'?  'Outright languishing'?  'Occaisonal
>fantasizing'?

Yes. ;-)

Ellen
ellen@dgi.com
From: idx009@cck.coventry.ac.uk (the Crisco Kid)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: More words stuff
Date: 23 Dec 92 15:12:20 GMT
Organization: Eris's Restaurant

In article <1992Dec23.120723.19895@thelema.uucp> STella@thelema.uucp (STella) writes:
>In article <9212230237.AA03758@pizzabox.demon.co.uk> gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
>>	>Tim, Tim; glass houses, dear friend.  "A hysterical... media"?
>
>>	Kay, Kay, Kay; you're sweet, you're adorable, and you're wrong.
>>
>>	"Media" is a collective noun, which may be referenced in the
>>	singular _or_ the plural, depending on context...
>>
>>Surely the distinction is that the 'new' meaning of media is mass noun
>>(whereas 'medium' was a count noun) and it's *still* wrong to use 'A'
>>as a quantifier?
>
>Duh, I kinda thought, coming into this thread partway through, that
>someone must be flipping shit for using such a sexist word as
>"hysterical".  As a rule of thumb, substitute testicular.

Nononono.  The male analogue of the uterus (= Gk 'husteron') isn't
the testes.  I can't remember where it is, but it's probably one of
those things that no-one other than urologists has ever heard of, like
the bulbo-urethral glands, or some other stuff.  It's there, I've read
a book on human reproductive embryology, I just don't have it in my
head.

				Kay

-- 
6'2", dark short hair, blue eyes, bisexual and horny as ....
Kay Dekker, Dept of Industrial Design, Coventry University, Coventry UK
37 Old Winnings Road, Keresley Village, Coventry   |B0 f t+ g++ k++! s+ e r p!
Phone: +44 203 838668 (work) +44 203 337865 (home) |Deflowerer-of-innocents
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: iwatters@cix.compulink.co.uk (Ian Watters)
Subject: Re: Imitating Turing (was: Liberty (was:
Reply-To: iwatters@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 22:49:00 +0000

Kay :
> Yes.  I've read both of the Turing biographies (I had to, in self
> defence; there were just too many computer-nerds coming up to
> me and saying "Hey, you're gay, would you like to have a look
> at some nifty Z-80 code I just wrote for handling the Deferred
> Queen's Gambit?" or some such.  Still, it's better than anoraks

Look, what's wrong with computer chess, Kay?  (OK, I'm writing a book on
computer board game playing, I confess!)

[ Anyway, you should have told them that, if you have to use an 8 bit CPU,
the 6502 is better than the Z-80 for writing chess programs, that'd have got
rid of them for a while... ]

>>And "chess player"? Maybe you're confusing him with C. H. O'D. (?)
>>Alexander, who was, I think, another WWII codebreaker, who could also
>>slaughter Turing at chess. (As a chess wimp myself, I identify with this.)

> Turing played chess, didn't he?  [Racks brain]  I'm sure that somewhere
> I've read some of his writings about chess - and quite good they were,

Yes, he did (one of?) the first papers on computer chess and, along with
Claude Shannon, the person to blame for all those people wanting to talk
"Z-80 gambits" with you.  As Gus says, in real life, he was crap.

The Bletchley operation did include other chess players, I can't remember if
Alexander was amongst them, because it was thought that along with crossword
fanatics they'd be the right sort of people.  In fact, as Fischer in
particular has shown, being very very good at chess is more usually a sign of
being someone to avoid for anything else.

>>codes? I don't see it. Indeed, I'd have thought that helping, in a big
>>way, to defeat the Nazis would make him a big role model (for all those
>>enigmatically clueless people out there who are impressed by such things).
>:-)

>No.  Because I don't think he cared about any moral implication of his
>work, that he'd have done it just as happily whether it saved or
>slaughtered millions.  He just did it because it was Clever.

He certainly did it because it was Interesting -- if it wasn't, he would have
avoided it in the same sort of way as he avoided actually serving in the Home
Guard(? reserves?) -- but I don't think, from my reading of the biog, that he
would have partaken in a project deliberately designed to kill millions.

---
iwatters@cix.compulink.co.uk  |  Hon Secretary of the London Bisexual Group
                              |  c/o BM BI, London, Great Britain  WC1N 3XX
<< Never mind the LBG, *I* disagree with everything here, including this >>

>>>MATRIX version  1.21e
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: sthor@ctp.com (Sarah Thornburg)
Subject: Re: Lurkers
Organization: Cambridge Technology Partners
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:35:41 GMT

In article <BzLCKw.Mun@ibmpcug.co.uk> shelly@rachel.ibmpcug.co.uk (Shelly DelVeccio) writes:
>In article <1h3amsINN9d9@agate.berkeley.edu> rsr@soda.berkeley.edu (Roy S. Rapoport) writes:
>>
>>So I may inspire different people to mail me than you, Graham ... 
>
>My recent de-muffinning was followed by three lurker-type mail messages
>(remember I've been reading for a year and know the regulars' names by
>heart), and two of them were *real doozies*. So maybe you're just luckier,
>Roy...;-)
>
>-sh

You know, it might be useful to get that new copy of the FAQ out and posted
regularly, because I think alot of the lurkers, especially the new ones
*really* have no clue what is and is not appropriate.  I mean, I *know* alot
of people are nervous and cautious, but sometimes it seems like people
expect you to open up and tell them all your most intimate life details
wihtout even telling you their own name.  I try not to push people for
details about themselves too much, but there does come a point where if
you're going to be friends and write back and forth, it has to be a give and
take.  It takes trust on *both* parts.

I haven't yet gotten any requests for hot sex, email or otherwise, from
unknowns, but have gotten requests on how to go about posting for such.
(what, am I now somehow supposed to be an expert?????  Gee, when did I miss
that post of mine? I haven't even gotten a chance to start *flirting* here!)

So that *might* cut down on some of the problems, or at least give some
information out there to people who want it so that there isn't as much
email with the same questions over and over.  I thought the last version was
pretty good, by the way.

*Sarah* :)
-- 
Sarah Thornburg                    | "Love that dirty water.... 
Cambridge Technology Partners      | Boston you're my home." 
sthor@ctp.com                      |   
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: miket@hermes.tcs.com (Michael Turner nmscore Assoc.)
Subject: Re: Purity
Organization: Teknekron Communications Inc.
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 23:20:19 GMT

In article <93001.140156SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>Getting to be too much to quote.
>
>My favourite, if grammatically incorrect, response to 'what are you?'
>questions is 'a people'.  If they stop blinking after 5 seconds or
>don't scream at you for being a wiseass you're probably ok.

What about when they smile condescendingly and erase you from the list
of "peoples" with whom they can hope to have an adult conversation?

I liked Whitman's "I contain multitudes" a little better, but both are
just a tad insufferable in casual company, no matter how you put it.

>[several good points, deleted however.]
>
>The other thing is that sticking people in bins works just fine
>in fairly homogeneous enviroments, which most e[n]viro[n]ments are.
>It leads to a narrow view of the world and no good poetry known to
>me. (which last is a significant condemnation.)

T.S. Eliot and Ezra Pound, to name just two, were somewhat antisemitic.
Both wrote some very good poetry, despite dumping far too many people
into the "Jew" bin, all the more heinous in view of how few of them
ever returned during this time (the thirties and forties).

Poets have all the failings of the rest of us, and often many more.
I suppose they tend to stick people in bins somewhat less often than
ordinary folk, but that doesn't mean they never do.  Even some brilliant
poets have this failing.
---
Michael Turner
miket@tcs.com
From: robear@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Jay Michael)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Het males & bi-fems
Date: 29 Dec 92 04:11:49 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

Hi y'all it's me again.  I seem to have made the ironic blunder of starting
this thread while 1) everyone is out on vacation, and 2) by the time they
get back, _I_ will be on vacation for two and a half weeks, and will have 
missed any pertinent responses.  So I guess if anyone reading has any insights,
I would be most grateful if you would e-mail me at robear@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu.

Since I only have two more days to enjoy this thread at my leisure, I may as
well post my final loose ended thoughts on the matter before disappearing for
quite an extended period of time.

First thought is, is this a topic worthy of discussion?  It seems to be
somewhat common place, and as a distinction of sexual behavior, I wonder
if it would survive as it's own newsgroup, inbetween soc.bi and alt.polyamory.
Knowing typical het males, interest level would be maintained if there were
enough bi-fems to go along with it, but from what I've seen, there aren't a 
whole lot of bi-fems here to begin with, and also I would imagine that the
psychological differences between the two groups would not be conducive.  I 
guess that is all conjecture.

This whole concept, to me at least, seems very surreal.  Finding an
attractive woman, who finds me attractive, and together we find another
woman mutually attractive . . . . that situation does not mesh with the
world as I know it.  Every gain seems to mandate a loss, and such a situation
seem to be purely gain, which would logically seem to imply there is something
flawed with it.  Social feedback, I guess . . . such a situation would not
be mainstream acceptible, only underground mainstream acceptible.  I've
never experienced any social feedback to such a situation, and neither can
I say I've met anyone who I knew at the time was bi or homosexual.  It's just
something you don't readily find out in day to day interaction, go figure.

Well, thanx for reading & replying, and have a great new year! 

Robear

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
| A soul in tension, that's learning to fly               "Learning to Fly"   |
| Condition grounded, but determined to try             ____ Pink  Floyd ____ |
| Can't keep my eyes from the circling skies             \__\/\/\/-\/\/\/__/  |
| Tongue-tied and twisted, just an earthbound misfit, I   ~~~^^^^^^^^^^^~~~   | 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
From: orc@vpnet.chi.il.us (david parsons)
Subject: Re: Het males & bi-femmes
Summary: kiss goodbye to nontrivial signal/noise ratios...
Organization: Department of Atomic Text Units
Date: Sat, 2 Jan 1993 21:06:32 GMT

In article <1hvl5sINNj9g@smurf.sub.org> urlichs@smurf.sub.org (Matthias Urlichs) writes:
|I'm immortal. I'm bored. Let's party.
     ^^^^^^^^
    (I read this as "immoral", and it made perfect sense to me :-)
                 ____
   david parsons \bi/ blatant e-slut
		  \/
Newsgroups: soc.bi,soc.motss
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: My 5-year HS Reunion... the results!
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 05:03:02 GMT

In article <1htjc0INN6hm@plts.uucp> tal@plts.uucp (Tom Limoncelli) writes:
:>> I got to talk with Amanda Zwacky,
:
:>Really!?  She sort of sounds like a past (or past-perfect ?) 
:>relative of Arnold Zwicky's ?  :-)
:
:I told her that.  It seems that there are lots of
:[SZ]w[aeiou]*ck{ie|y}'s out there.

Hey, while we're on the subject, will someone please tell me what the heck
a 'zwicky box' is.  I get really tired of reading Heinlein stories with
lots of Americanisms in them that he never bothers to explain.  I've tracked
most of them down (like Gandy dancer, and Therblig), but that one still
has me stumped.

Tnx

G
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (Piglet)
Subject: Re: Introduction, or De-Muffining
Organization: AT&T
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 16:08:20 GMT

In article <BzH541.9ny@cck.coventry.ac.uk> idx009@cck.coventry.ac.uk (the Crisco Kid) writes:
>By that line of reasoning, I never have a good hair day.  It's
>either too short or too long, a nondescript dark-brown, straight,
>prone either to being sticky-up or floppy-down, depending on the
>length, full enough of static to zap my nose when I pull a sweater
>off.  It's too fine, and it takes centuries to dry if it's long,
>and it *scrunches* if it's not scrupulously dry before I do anything
>at all with it.

Oh.  Well, I never used to have good hair days.  At least, not more
than once or twice a year.  My hair is either too short or too long,
a non-descript medium-brown, straight (but not completely), limp,
thin and fly-away.  Now that I've discovered Aussie Moist *shameless
plug*, I actually have good hair days more like once or twice a week.

>  Its only worthwhile function is to
>reveal a small interesting scar which people sometimes ask me about.

What an interesting small scar.  How did you get that?

>...it's like when I tell people I come from York.  "Oh, how nice," they
>say, "I'd really like to live there."  That's because they never have.
>They can just wander over, admire, and don't have to live with the
>reality of something that survives only by going back to 70AD, having
>walls you can walk around, and being chokka with o-so-cute Ye Olde
>Nintendoe shops.  I'm talking about York, not my hair, you understand...

But I _liked_ York.  Hmph.  70AD has lots of appeal for me, antiquity
snob that I am (also Latin snob, etc.).

>I bet *you*'ve got nice hair, Piglet.  And if you have, I shall
>be grumpy.

Well, actually, no.  I've managed to fool it into thinking it's nice
hair, but that only works for 1-2 days a week.  No grumpiness
necessary.

It is, however, wonderful to run your hands through.  An _ex_ boyfriend
of mine used to say that it wasn't much to look at, but it sure felt
great.  (You can see why he's an _ex_.)



Piglet, fluffing her brown tresses....
From: vashti@concave.cs.wits.ac.za (Vashti Galpin)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Generalisations (Was: Seperatists etc.)
Date: 21 Dec 92 13:56:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: concave.vashti.724946204
Organization: None worth mentioning

In <1gu2heINNdco@agate.berkeley.edu> rsr@soda.berkeley.edu (Roy S. Rapoport) writes:
>The problem is that there is a very big difference between separatism and
>discrimination.  In SA, the whites don't practice separatism.  They practice
>discrimination, the discrimination against people on the basis of their skin.

Ouch!  Finally, someone said enough to make me enter the fray. Roy, I
would have preferred it if you had written this so that it read some
whites (or even most whites) practice discrimination. There were some
whites that didn't; I tried not to (once I had overcome the shit I was
taught at school)--- I think in general I succeeded (I'm not trying to
make myself sound like some kind of hero, I wasn't; and I gained
benefits from apartheid that I can only try to put back into the
country).

But my initial response to Roy's post lead me to think about
generalisations; and I think that perhaps we need to move away from
statements that generalise like `X's do this' and move to `Some X's do
this'. It seems that this type of generalisation has lead to a lot of
flames recently, partly because people leave out `some' and partly
because people don't read it when it is there.

I don't know if I have managed to express myself clearly, and I really
hope I have not come across as an arrogant white South African or as
an arrogant anything else.
                                                                ____ 
                                                                \bi/ 
Vashti (hoping her country is going change real soon)            \/
From: landman@hal.COM (Howard Landman)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Australians (was Re: accidently out)
Date: 23 Dec 92 00:32:24 GMT
Organization: HaL Computer Systems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: bang.hal.com

>Nick Nicholas (nsn@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU) wrote:
>: (And what is it with
>: bisexuals liking Mahler? Tim, me, Zoe, Kay... ok, ok, small sample size,

Not me.  I find Mahler has some interesting ideas, but he just goes on with
them for SSOOOOO LLOOOONNGG that it eventually becomes rather boring.

Although, I did sit through Mahler's 7th live this year and actually enjoyed
parts of it.

I have similar preferences in authors.  I like Borges because he comes up
with an amazing idea and disposes of it in a few pages, where some other
authors would take 3 novels to deal less well with the same idea.

I'm not against duration per se.  I like Eco and Nabokov and Delany.  I'm
only against duration without excitement or interest.  Unless I'm trying to
go to sleep. :-)

Of course, I'm only Kinsey 1, so what do I know?

	Howard
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Understanding
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 02:26:28 GMT

In article <MUFFY.92Dec23101424@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
:In article <1992Dec23.173348.22146@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> arodgers@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Angus H Rodgers) writes:
:   due allowances for Freud's mistakes, obscurities, and pioneering
:   dogmatism.
:   ^^^^^^^^^
:read.  I was quite confused at you reference to "Freud's prarie dogs"...

Angus, I object!  That word is clearly speciesist! (speciest? specist?)
Doggone it man, you know what I mean!

G
From: arodgers@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Angus H Rodgers)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Selective Memory?
Date: 21 Dec 92 20:01:34 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London

In <BzL1F1.Bqv@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu>
dbshapco@napier.uwaterloo.ca (Brad Shapcott) writes:

>I'm not saying that we should all love one another and go flakey, but the tone
>of the group seems to be more barbed and uninviting than I recall.  Perhaps
>it is selective memory.

No; the change seems real to me, too.

>[...] I certainly
>left on a sour note, perhaps I'm just returning during a particularly bad
>time?

I've been reading it since you introduced me to it -- for which, many,
many thanks -- except for a couple of intervals of a week or so,
during both of which intervals, some flaming had been going on. The
second time, I felt almost too scared to un-muffin myself; but needs
must, so I did (with the help of some e-mail to/from some kind people
-- and , yes, Mike was one of them :-) ). 

Anyway I think the real change occurred with the War Of Muffy's Hand.

And what I want to say is that this change in the tone of soc.bi, far
from discouraging me from un-muffining, acted as a positive encourage-
ment: because up to then I just hadn't felt fluffy enough to measure
up to it. (I do hope to get a lot fluffier, with practice!)

Soc.bi seems to be getting more like soc.motss (from which, you may
remember, I was recoiling in hurt, at around the time of your "The War
Between Us"). But not too much like it, I think.

But then, I'm odd, really odd.

>Anything you say now seems to be an affront to another's sensibilities, or
>to invite some very plain cruelty.

It's also getting a bit more like the world outside. (But, again, not too
much like it, IMO.)

>Weren't we once better than this?  Didn't we once make a lot more effort at
>liking each other? 

And do you know what? Somebody just posted here for the first time
yesterday. and *NOBODY HAS TRIED TO DE-MUFFIN HIM YET*! This is an
emergency! The honour of soc.bi is at stake! For all I know, people
might be getting all afraid of causing offence to newcomers. This
cannot be tolerated!

So, if nobody else is going to do it, I'm going to have to start acting
out of character ...

[Hitches up skirts invitingly. Attempts a sexy smile -- which comes off
as a leer. Daubs on some lipstick, inexpertly. Starts to totter around
on high heels, bandy-legged.]

Muffin? Muffin! Where *are* you? ... Guy, I know you're around here
somewhere ...
--
Gus Rodgers,  Dept. of Computer Science, |  [Profound thought for 1993]
Queen Mary & Westfield College, Mile End |     "Philishave is about
Road, London, England.   +44 71 975 5241 |      personal choice" 
E-mail (JANET):   arodgers@dcs.qmw.ac.uk |             -- TV advert
From: mlloyd@ocf.berkeley.edu (M. Lloyd)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: My first Hug Request :)
Date: 22 Dec 1992 01:59:49 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: earthquake.berkeley.edu

rsr@soda.berkeley.edu (Roy S. Rapoport) writes:
>May I be hugged please?

Affirmative.  

hug
          hug
 hug
         hug
  hug
        hug
   hug
       hug
    hug
      hug
     hug
    *HUG*

(well, *I* thought it might look interesting ... :-p )

One more,
Mike
-- 
Mike Lloyd, B0/1 h- f- t w- g+ k+ s m- e? |    "Bloody nose and burning eyes
      Retro-hippy, music nut, bi and      |  Raised in laughter to the skies"
          backrubber of devotion          |                 - Bruce Cockburn
               --The end of confusion is the beginning of death--
Newsgroups: soc.bi