HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: erc@unislc.uucp (Ed Carp)
Subject: Re: PMS
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 12:35:43 GMT

cohler@vxcrna.cern.ch (Mike Cohler) writes:

: Just seen a couple of these about PMS (or PMT as we call it in the UK)
: Jout out of interest, I wonder if anyone has found any method at all
: which really does produce an improvement in the mood changes during PMT ?
: My partner has tried the vitamin B12, and other methods but they dont seem
: to have any effect at all.  Most of the time she is wonderful, but at PMT
: times she can change a lot, and she recognises it as it happens, and often
: comments that she is in a bad mood although I usually already see the
: changes in facial tone etc, and try and accommodate accordingly.  Does anyone
: know of a REALLY effective method of alleviating the changes, or is it
: something that both partners have to live with permanently (at least until
: the menopause !)

My ex-wife used to take Optivite (some sort of vitamin she found at a
health food store).  She said that they helped.
-- 
Ed Carp, N7EKG		erc@apple.com	<-- preferred email address!
"In wildness is the preservation of the world."  - Henry David Thoreau
** Member, Linux port team - uucp division ** :)   801/269-8125
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: weaver@jetsun.weitek.COM (Michael Weaver)
Subject: Re: SH&LC: Totally f*cked up.
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 19:14:58 GMT

In article <Brr4A6.L7C@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> shulick@yankton.ucs.indiana.edu writes:
>
>WELL.. how do you help a hurt person?  She's realy depressed, but it's not
>because of me.  She only told me that she's sick of friends screwing her
>over and stuff lke that.. I called her, but I didn't get to say a lot
>before she said "I gotta go" and hung up.  How can I talk to her?  Do I just
>wait for her to call..?  Or do I .. what??  What the hell am I supposed to
>do?

Usually, all you can do is listen, and you can't do that unless the other
person will let you. You can let her know that you are concerned and
willing to listen (of course, if it is something you can't listen to,
say, problems with old boyfriends, don't pretend to be willing to listen).

If she does choose to talk to you, remember that the point is to let her
talk it out, so don't try to give advice, or tell her how she should feel.
You should talk just enough to let her know you are following what she
is saying.

Michael.
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: cherokee@b11.b11.ingr.com (Lori Ludick)
Subject: Re: AIDS: What the Government Isn't Telling You
Reply-To: cherokee@b11.b11.ingr.com (Lori Ludick)
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 18:57:40 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.113342.1@eagle.wesleyan.edu> mzener@eagle.wesleyan.edu writes:
>Eric T. Jue <etjue@lbl.gov> writes:
>> I heard an interesting talk show this morning concerning a new book
>> titled "What the Government Isn't Telling You About AIDS."  The author of
>> the book, Dr. Lorraine Day of UC San Francisco, offered her findings on
>> the air and fielded questions from listeners.  According to her, research
>> has shown that the AIDS virus is not a fragile virus and that it may
>> survive up to 7 days in a dry environment and up to 14 days in a moist
>> one.  It follows from this that AIDS may be transmitted through all types
>> of bodily fluids and not just through blood.  She mentions other
>> interesting findings on AIDS which she says the government is
>> intentionally hiding from the public. 
>
>   There has _never_ been a case of AIDS that must have been transmitted
>through any means other than blood or semen.
>
	what about from mother to fetus, or from fetus to mother.
	what baout latest studies about breast milk carrying the virus?
	Never is a very strong word, I cannot believe that it is
	impossible for a virus to do almost anything.


>   The government has no interest in hiding AIDS information.
>
	I would say they have a lot of interest.
	Not to cause panick and not spending the money that is needed
	seem like 2 very strong points.


>   Scientists who work for the government wouldn't care even if it did.
>
>   The governemnt _does_ have a vested interest in making sure that AIDS
>information is rigorous and correct, instead of shoddy and sensationalist.
>
>   I'm sure Dr. Day means well, but I doubt if the studies she used were very
>good.  BTW, what is her PhD in?
>
>Max

	You are knocking someone then aking for credentials,
	why not see what this person has to say, what the background of the 
	people working on have done in the past, and either accept it or
	not, instead of looking at it with blinders on.

	HIV is virus that scientists now believe have mutatiated so that
	AIDS symptoms are produced but the virus cannot be found, all the
	research that can be done is very neccessary.
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: AIDS: What the Government Isn't Telling You
From: dayrton@eagle.wesleyan.edu
Date: 28 Jul 92 18:37:56 EDT
Organization: Wesleyan University

In article <Bs2BMx.3uq@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>, shulick@yankton.ucs.indiana.edu ("sam hulick") writes:

>>It follows from this that AIDS may be transmitted through all types
>>of bodily fluids and not just through blood.
> 
> No kidding.  What do you think happens during sex, anyway?  Blood transfers?
> AIDS is supposedly transferred through saliva.  One case was that a man with
> AIDS was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon for spitting at someone.

That's probably close to urban legend -- the arrest may have taken place,
but probably wasn't prosecuted.  The last time I browsed the CDC's AIDS
handbook, HIV had been isolated in _all_ bodily fluids and secretions,
including saliva, tears, urine and sweat.  However, and it is a big however, the
documented transmission rates for the last three was zero, absent broken skin
or accidental injection.  For what it is worth, there are several bacteria that
are normally found as residents of your nose that will kill you faster than
AIDS, but sinply because their presence can be demonstrated doesn't mean that
you are going to keel over tomorrow.

Now, Hepatitis B, _that's_ a horse of a different color...  

Newsgroups: alt.romance,talk.bizarre,misc.test
From: afdenis@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (Stephen Dennison)
Subject: Re: oh, puh-leeze...(was: ed is lord)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: Ancient Souls Inc.
Date: 25 Jul 1992 10:23 EST  

In article <1992Jul24.174629.15076@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov>, cfar@lambda.msfc.nasa.gov (Carol Farquhar) writes...
>nelson@eastrg1.cray.com (Christine Nelson) writes:
> 
>>i don't know about all the other women of the world, but i for one
>>am sick and tired of men assuming that whenever a woman gets upset, she
>>must have PMS.  men are allowed to act like witless bastards at will,
>>because they're MEN, and they're not responsible...it's the 
>>testosterone.  but women?  nope...they're supposed to remain like  
>>mrs. brady, or mrs. cleaver, or mrs. cunningham (now aren't they
>>realistic role models?  chee-yah, right).  
> 
>Ditto!!
> 

Ok, Chris... Carol ... I'm going to be serious for just one post. Don't get 
used to it. :-)

From the male perspective... there is nothing more confusing and hurtful 
than to be going along in a relationship with someone and have them go 
screwy on you ... lash out for no good reason ... come *way* off the wall 
with hurt feelings or mind games that have no *possible* useful goals.

Since I try to establish only honest and open relationships be they 
platonic or otherwise, I have often been told at a later date that it was
`my time of the month' and been asked to excuse or forgive the behavior. I 
usually do depending on the situation (I try not to condone murder... :-)), 
but the psychological damage is done ... the pattern is established. 

(Chris now ...)
Often, the manifestation of PMS is hostility. Since we had nothing to guage 
your posts against, and since you posted with obvious hostility for a while 
and then mellowed out only to come back a `suspicious' number of days later 
with more hostility, it was a possibility that had to be addressed.... OK, 
it didn't *have* to be addressed, but it certainly was the first thing that 
occurred to *me*, even though my *first* `PMS' jokes were just that. 

Granted, men have mood swings as a part of their day-to-day activities but
no more than women have non-pms related mood swings. I often hear it used 
by *women* to excuse inappropriate behavior, so where do you think *we* got 
the idea that hostile behavior might be a result of PMS? Hmmmmmm ?

Methinks thou dost protest too much ...

>Carol

Oh, and Carol tells me she's found a way to eliminate the mood swings 
anyway. She's just hostile *all* the time. :-) :-) (Now *this* is a joke... 
gee, hope I caught her during the three weeks I can get *away* with a joke 
like this. :-) :-))


-- Stephen

	The smallest light offered in total darkness is a blinding
	beacon of hope.
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: erc@unislc.uucp (Ed Carp)
Subject: Re: ed is lord (was re: cologne)
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 17:33:39 GMT

nelson@eastrg1.cray.com (Christine Nelson) writes:

: oh...okay, i get it now.  it's okay for ed to flame people, and
: call them names, but beware anyone else that does it.  
: 
: i guess this means that ed is alt.r's official net god, and those
: people wishing to express opinions other than those of ed 
: (aka. almighty master of the USENET) should please check with 
: him first.
: 
: it all makes sense now...

Who called who names?

Um ... it's been just about 28 days since Christine's latest rant, right?

At least we know Christine's period is regular...or at least her PMS.
-- 
Ed Carp, N7EKG		erc@apple.com	<-- preferred email address!
"In wildness is the preservation of the world."  - Henry David Thoreau
** Member, Linux port team - uucp division ** :)   801/269-8125
From: nev@stl.stc.co.uk (Neil Vince)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Females more likely to receive kindness from strangers
	(was Re: Why ? Was:I don't know why I am posting this...)
Date: 31 Jul 92 10:02:05 GMT
	<1992Jul28.175122.19947@bnr.co.uk>
	<1992Jul29.131524.5871@cbnewsi.cb.att.com>
Followup-To: alt.romance
Organization: STC Technology Ltd., London Road, Harlow, UK.


>   Does anyone else find this very distrubing?  Is it true that women
>   think so little of men in general?  If so, why is that?
   -- 
>   Brian Charles Kohn  


Disturbing? 
No
True?
Not really
Why?
Woman + strange man -> one of them feeling more vunerable: who?

	Do you ever hear many case of females sexually attacking men?

	If I was female I wouldn't be to keen on stange men either.
From: dswt@bnr.co.uk (Stewart Tansley)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Going, going, ...
Date: 30 Jul 92 12:17:45 GMT
Reply-To: dswt@bnr.co.uk (Stewart Tansley)
Organization: BNR Europe Limited, London Road, Harlow, Essex, GB

In the referenced article saqx@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes:
>As many of you have undoubtedly heard by now, the New York courts recently
>made it unmistakably clear that barring some overt lewdness (whatever
>that is), women's bared breasts are A-OK for public display.  As a 
>resident of this great welfare state, I must say:  where has all the romance
>gone? ;-)  What's next, people walking around buck naked?  Imagine what a 
>boring world that would be.  Take away the imagination and you'd probably
>be surprised how much zest is lost.  What do you think, a grass roots 
>campaign, "BRING BACK CLOTHES"? ;-)
>
>#  Jeff Wilson                                               #

I am an Englishman who was in North America at this time & saw the news
reports. I was quite surprised at the apparent "backwardness" of NA over this.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a trivial issue, and I don't want
to get in a flame war with my NA colleagues; it's just how I reacted.

Bare breasts are still a hot topic (;-)) over here in the UK too, but my 
reaction was more based on my knowledge (limited) of continental Europe, 
where bare breasts for the beach have been very popular (err, I mean *common* 
:-)) for years.

Even more seriously, I know you were only joking Jeff (from the smileys),
as I have done a little herein, but often the problem is that some people 
actually believe the sort of thing you are saying, in a serious way -- ie. 
that public bare breasts has actually got something to *do* with
romance/couples/relationships/sex, etc. IMHO, the whole point (of debate?)
is that bare breasts do *not* have anything to do with this -- they are
just naked natural flesh.

Ok, debatable may be, but not in a.r? I don't think this issue in your
news has *anything* to do with romance & to suggest it has is dangerous & 
wrong. (ie. women do not bear their breasts to attract men, in general, in
this context, eg. on the beach in continental Europe and now, by the looks
of things, in the US and Canada.)

As for discussing nakedness (& degrees thereof) *in romantic situations*
(ie. not just vaguely 'in public situations'), the place for that *is*
here: In my case, I must admit I do find naked bodies rather attractive;
but beautifully clothed ones are more sexy *&* romantic. I especially like
flowery dresses (on the *woman*! ;-)) and white blouses, lacey preferred.

===========================================================================
Stewart Tansley     | BNR Europe Limited              |  'Be cool, or be
                    | London Rd, Harlow, CM17 9NA, UK |    cast out...'
dswt@bnr.co.uk      | +44 279 429531 x2763 (ESN 742)  | Subdivisions, Rush
===========================================================================
  'You know how that rabbit feels -- going under your speeding wheels...'
===========================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: Michel Goudeseune <marcelg@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: How Come ...?!?
Organization: ZOOiD BBS
Date: Mon, 20 Jul 1992 05:37:27 GMT

kjell@elixir.e.kth.se (Kjell Rilbe) writes:
>
>I'm have no experience in romantics and relationships, so I just don't have
>any advice to give. 
>
>But I *LOVE* to read this newsgroup! So intense with caring and affection. And
>maybe I can pick up some advice to help me in my relationships (hopefully) to
>come.
>
>Are there more of my kind out there?
>

Yes, there certainly are.  I'm amazed I never found a.r. until now -- I've
been on the net for about 2 years now.  In that time, I've been through
several situations that didn't work out for various reasons, but I've learned
from them.  The advice I've been reading here very closely echoes what I've
been learning in real life.

So basically, great newsgroup!  Now I just need to bug my sysop for more
online time to keep up with the traffic here and in ARC :-).

New .sig ...

Michel Goudeseune -- marcelg@zooid.guild.org

Thought that I was destined, destined to be nothing, destined
To be nothing in this world and then I Met You.
                                             -- The Proclaimers
From: weaver@jetsun.weitek.COM (Michael Weaver)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Advice on this problem much appreciated...
Keywords: advice, romance, touching, advances
Date: 27 Jul 92 20:39:43 GMT
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <hbsperki.712210591@kraken> hbsperki@kraken.itc.gu.edu.au (James Perkins) writes:
>I am currently in the beginning stages of a relationship with a friend of
>mine, and it seems to be going OK at this point.  She has come over to my
>place for dinner, and we have gone out for coffee and a long chat.  It's
>been fun.
>
>However, I have a question: I am unsure on how to proceed.  For too long I
>have been unsure of myself with regards initiating physical intimacy.  I
>know that this relates to my upbringing (and I could enter into a big debate
>here, but I won't), but it is still difficult for me.  What I suppose I am
>asking is: how do I know when it is appropriate to give a hug or a kiss or
>other expressions of affection?  I haven't even established at this point
>whether she is looking for a platonic or romantic relationship.
>

As one who has been there...

If you are uncomfortable with touching now, you probably always will be
that way to a certain degree. But if you see it as a problem, you can
teach yourself to be more comfortable with it. It really doesn't have
anything to do with your age.

There are other ways than touching to express you desire for romance.
Think of all the cliches like candle-lit dinners, moonlight walks,
flowers...you can probably think of something appropriate. Actually,
touching can be pretty ambiguous (sex? love? comfort?), so there may be
some advantages to these other approaches.

The important thing is that you don't need to let this get in the way
of a sucessful relationship...if you express how you feel in other
ways, and are open and honest about your attitudes toward touching,
it shouldn't get in your way.

I know you want to get off on the right foot with your relationship,
but you are not going to change overnight. You are going to have to
accept how you are, and eventually you will have to share this with
your friend if you are going to be intimate. At this point, you
probably don't know how she feels about touching, and you may not be as
far apart as you think. 

If other things are going well, you and your friend will probably enjoy
getting you more comfortable with touching...what are friends for ;-)


Michael.
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.couples
From: amymw@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Amy Wisotsky)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Update (was Re: confused by physical contact, need advice)
Date: 23 Jul 92 16:55:56 GMT
Organization: Brandeis University

me@my.school.edu writes:

>First a heartfelt thank you to all who responded.

>Things have taken a quite dramatic turn. She's agreed to be my girlfriend
>as what it commonly means. I'm very happy about this. Of course there's
>chance things won't work out, but I think it's not higher than that of with
>anyone else.

>I think the reason for this change was the long hours of talk (and other
>things). I did find out what she wanted was much closer to what I did than
>it appeared (thanks Amy ;). And she was convinced it's worth a try.

>Best wishes to all,

>Me


*big happy-for-you hug*  Glad things worked out.  Best of luck to you.


								-Amy-
								 :)
----                                      
Amy M. Wisotsky -- amymw@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu 
"Once upon a time, in your wildest dreams...." 
				-Moody Blues   
        				  ----
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: mvb@po.CWRU.Edu (Michael V. Barreca)
Subject: Re: Females more likely to receive kindness from strangers
Reply-To: mvb@po.CWRU.Edu (Michael V. Barreca)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 17:35:40 GMT


>More intriguing was the observation that when women asked men, the men
>were "very open-armed" and friendly 
>The ramifications of this are equally disturbing.  It could mean that
>in the building of a relationship, women seek the flaws they assume are
>there and then commit strongly to the relationship only after they find
>that their assumptions are wrong, while men go into a relationship
>"worshiping the object of their affection" only to be disillusioned
>when they are suprised by flaws.  This would surely explain why men
>tend to go barreling into relationships and women are typically
>resisters, and then men lose interest just when women want to put a
>stake in the ground.
>
I disagree.  I think that if you are to be in a serious relationship,
you have to be able to see the problems of your RP and accept them.
Nobody is perfect, and going into a relationship thinking this will
get you nothing but trouble.  You have to realize that you have flaws,
and your RP has flaws, but as Eddie Murphy says, "You're both fucked
up the same amount, so you should be happy."

>
>-- 
>Brian Charles Kohn             E-MAIL: att!hoqax!bicker  (bicker@hoqax.ATT.COM)
>Poet of "Quality"
>    'Hope, not fear, is the most positive advocate of action.' - S.R. Lawhead
>                   Stamp Out "SO": "RP" = "Romantic Partner"
>
-- 
"Hey, Hobbes, I was thinking..."
"On a weekend?"
"Well, it wasn't on purpose."
 				-Calvin and Hobbes
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Tuesday, 28 Jul 1992 20:15:20 MST
From: S. A-L <ICSAA@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject:    How to ask someone out?

About how to approach women "in bars, on the street" and ask them out (did I
get that one right?  As a woman, one with a pretty active Inner Victorian,
don't ask women out in bars or on the street, although that's just me and my
I.V.'s opinion.  You see, you haven't been "properly introduced."  Now, what,
you are probably asking, in this day and age, constitutes a proper introduction
?????.  Almost anything except a bar or club.  If friends introduce you, great.
Even if you're simply engaged in similar activities, like staying up all night
at the computing site at school, waiting for a late bus, doing laundry, sitting
at a party, walking your dogs... The point is that asking someone out, IMHO,
involves context.

I've gone out with total strangers after a "cute meet," as well as people I kne
w for a long time in a different context - and _that's_ the one that lucky me
married.  Not generally applicable, maybe, but one woman's story.

 Also, with the crime rate in the U.S. the way it is, I don't know many smart
women who will go out with strangers off the street.  If they do, they probably
have lots of faith in their own "maniac detector."  You want to appear sane and
rational, if that doesn't interfere with wonderfully sexy.  No, no, that's
not what I meant at all!  You get the picture, I hope.


  Stefani the Archaeology Widow
  Hey, can someone e-mail me, and tell me how to append bits of other's posts
   to my replies?  I feel so left out.
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: puter@no1home.nashvil.ingr.com (PuterDude)
Subject: Re: romance = sex ?
Organization: None, today. Thank you.
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 17:50:57 GMT

 jlewis@astro.as.arizona.edu (Jeff Lewis) writes:

	[deleted stuff about meeting girl thru e-mail]

>I talked to my new would be girlfriend about how I felt..and now
>I am wondering if she thinks I don't find her physically attractive.
>Which is about the furthest thing from the truth as you can get.

>I guess what I am getting at is ... why am I getting all this input
>from people about how I should WANT to jump into bed this woman and
>there is probably something fundamentally worng with the relationship
>if I don't...and she will give me the 'Lets just be Friends` if I
>don't make a move toward the bedroom...

Whoa, Jeff.  Whether the 2 of you go to bed or not is y'all's business.
This has nothin' to do with your "friends". They need know nothin'
about your sex life. This is between you and your partner. Just because
people are askin' questions, that doesn't mesn that you have to answer
them. 

The decision to make love (or have sex, or whatever) is only between you
and your partner. Keep it that way and the 2 of you will be MUCH
happier.

As to the question "does love = romance = sex", I don't think so. These
are all words which have different meanin'. I have never believed that
one *HAS* to lead to the other. *YOU* and your partner will do whatever
comes naturally as the relationship progresses. The beautiful thing
about people is there are no 2 the same. You need to talk a little more
with your e-mail pal about the physical side. You say that you are
"falling in love". Have you told this person that? Have you expressed
an interest into proceeding with "goin' to bed" with them?

Follow your *OWN* heart. Let *YOUR* relationship progress as *YOU* 
feel it should, not what your "friends" think. After all, your "friends"
are not in this relationship, are they?

Good Luck!!!

-- 
Puter	puter@no1home.nashvil.ingr.com	.sig by Generic Labels
(Put obnoxious title here)		(Put phone # here.)
(Put irritating quote here. Please make it as long as possible.)
Newsgroups: alt.romance