HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Date: 18 Dec 92 17:57:23 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Dec17.232133.22957@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor) writes:
>In article <15966@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
|
|>Mel, my sweet, I would be delighted to take you out to dinner.
|
|Yeah, sure....
 
She said YES!  She said YES!

|>All I expect in return is air fare, a "thank you very much for dinner 
|>tonight. I had a wonderful time", and maybe a blowjob.
|
|Oh, great, FINE!  Everybody else gets off with a kiss on the cheek and
|*I* have to cough up a blowjob.  You want air fare  -AND- a blowjob???!!!

That's just because you're special.

|Boy, the greediness of some people.  All I gotta say is, it better
|damn well include dessert.
 
What do you think the blowjob was supposed to be.

|Glad we got these negotiations outta the way ahead of time.....  do
|we shake now?

That was easy.  Maybe I should have negotiated for a full body massage too.

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Subject: Re: What is gold-digging?
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 92 13:33:03 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <oneil.724335981@cwis> oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil) writes:
>And like I said before, if he really, really, really wants to open the door
>for me -- the last guy I went out with (shortly) always did -- then it is 
>fine.  But it's not something I feel comfortable with and I would have 
>preferred that he did not.
>Sharon 

Hell, usually I open my car door for whomever mostly because I'm the one with
the bloody car keys... :)
r.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: cocoa@netcom.com
Subject: Re: Size 8? (Re: What is NOT attractive to "SINGLE" men)
Organization: Bourbon Street
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 20:37:53 GMT

In article <7901@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>In article <1992Dec12.214837.24675@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>>
>>Hmmmm...does that mean if I'm unspeakably rude to you that you'll come over
>>and sit on my ribcage for a few hours as well?  (Though I should warn you--
>>I'm awfully sturdy, so you might want to make the punishment even worse by
>>shifting variously forward or back and bouncing up and down a bit....)
>>
>>Trygve   (Looking for his 'Don Rickles Jokebook'....) 
>
>Trygve, I have the greatest confidence that you (and Charlie too, for
>that matter) could survive this kind of treatment for quite some time.
>Perhaps a woman could more effectively torture the two of you by
>*refusing* to sit on your ribcages for a couple of hours?  

Or perhaps by standing on a man's ribcage while wearing spike heels that have
the plastic heel peice gone, so that the nails are sticking right into the 
man's flesh.  And then walking up and down his chest a few times.

Just me,

little 'e'

(Still working out my "moving" agressions),  (Hi Beth!)


-- 
*  *  *    Chocolatier at Arms, and Castle Wetware Liason            *  *  *
*  *  *    e-mail: cocoa@netcom.com   -    voicemail: 415-337-4940   *  *  *

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Stoke Dat Pizza Oven
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 08:06:32 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16e by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In <1992Dec13.033039.28911@netcom.com> rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster) writes:
>In article <MARTINC.92Dec12161856@hatteras.cs.unc.edu> martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec12.090324.9958@netcom.com> rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster) writes:
>>
>>  >In article <1992Dec11.032838.25983@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA writes:
>>  >>>>[deleted]
>>  >>>>                Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
>>  >>>[deleted]
>>  >>>               Sesquipedalian
>>  >>[deleted]
>>  >
>>  >[deleted]
>>
>>My, that was certainly enlightening.
>>
>
>     Inside joke.

Probably shoulda kept it inside, too...
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Xref: sparky soc.singles:34333 soc.women:21637 soc.men:21390 ba.singles:2724
From: keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.women,soc.men,ba.singles
Subject: Re: Vasectomies (was Re: Pre-Sex Contract)
Date: 18 Dec 92 18:21:13 GMT
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: California-Nevada Methodist Homes

In article <1992Dec17.183400.4327@island.COM> don@island.COM (Don Hermes) writes:
>All this debate about a pre sex contract has made me start to consider 
>a vasectomy. I'm 35, already have one kid, and don't have anyone who 
>I would want to have another with. My only real concern is that
>if I do have one and I change my mind, is it reversable ?
>Can anyone out there discribe the experiance ?

Oh Don, how could you or any man even consider getting a vasectomy?
As a man, I feel that the spermal excrement is at the essence of
my experience as a man.  Most of the women I used to date really
enjoyed the excitement of seeing me spray my "love juices" over their
pulsating bodies.  How a man can even think of depriving himself of
that pleasure, is beyond me.  If you don't want to have younguns,
then use a condom and have the babe use the female condom, and the 
pill, and norplant and RU-46 when it is available shortly.  Then
you won't have to worry about pregnancy and enjoy the feelings
of being a whole man.
--Keith

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 00:09:58 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16f by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In <15966@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.233933.6617@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor) writes:
>>In article <15932@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>|>I would much prefer a "Thank you very much for dinner tonight.  I had
>|>a wonderful time", and maybe a kiss on the cheek than 25% of the tab and
>|>a handshake.
>|
>|So, John, when are you going to take me to dinner?
>
>Mel, my sweet, I would be delighted to take you out to dinner.
>
>All I expect in return is air fare, a "thank you very much for dinner
>tonight. I had a wonderful time", and maybe a blowjob.

The latter, of course, only being a sign of affection, and in no way
"bought" by your treating her to dinner.
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Organization: Intergraph
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 15:52:24 GMT

In article <1992Dec16.212243.26513@cbnewsk.cb.att.com>, krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith) writes:
> In article <15932@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
> > 
> >I would much prefer a "Thank you very much for dinner tonight.  I had
> >a wonderful time", and maybe a kiss on the cheek than 25% of the tab and
> >a handshake.
> 
> Are these options mutually exclusive?  Can a woman not enjoy the company
> of a man _and_ be considerate enough to share the expenses of dating?
> If a man picks up the tab, does that mean that the woman will give him
> a kiss, rather than a handshake?  Should a man foot the bill if he
> hopes for a kiss, rather than a handshake?  Suppose the woman hopes
> for a kiss, rather than a handshake?  Is that when she should pay?
> (after all, what is the differrence between going out on a "date",
> and "going out with the homeboys/homegirls")
> Why the double-standard?
> 
> Keith R
> >

Could someone help me out here, I seem to have lost my copy of the "rules for
reading the net", could someone repost them for me.
The only rule I remember clearly is:
Always, take EVERYTHING everyone says in it's VERY worst possible connotation.

For example, John's statement above, I thought that he meant he perfered
not to insist or strongly indicate to his Prospective Romantic Interest that
she must pay her "part".  The reason I felt he would not want to do this is
that it might upset her (assuming she did not expect to pay in advance) and
if she was upset she might be less inclined to peck him on the cheek.  He
did not say (and I did not read it into his post) that him paying was in 
any way forcing her to "be appreciative" in any way, form, fasion, or manner.

I realise that this is my mistake, and that is why I attempted to reread my
rules, so please send me a copy so I don't make any more mistakes.

Thank you in advance.

Larry

PS: :)
-- 
Larry

             This .sig file has been purposely left blank.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 05:57:55 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.194604.26101@linus.mitre.org> lkahn@mitre.org (Larry Kahn) writes:
>
>Seems to me it shouldn't matter who asks who, you both want to spend time 
>together.  IMHO the truly objective approach would be to split it up 
>approximately according to income.  Not that I think you have to go into 
>great details, but if one person is an attorney (ugh) and one is a teacher 
>something like a 75-25 split might be in order.

The more I read about this, the more unnecessarilly complex it seems--
personally, I think a reasonable rule of thumb is, if you're going to 
ask someone out on a date, the activities you suggest ought to be 
within your budget.  Certainly your date might offer (or even insist)
on paying at least a portion, but you shouldn't put yourself in either
an emotional or financial position where you'll be put out if it's your
treat.

Now, if things work out and it ends up being a longer-term thing, my 
preference is for the people involved to each suggest various activities
and, in most cases, trade off treating each other.  If one has a 
considerably lower cash-flow than the other, then he or she might suggest
activities like picnics, candlelit dinners, and other things that might be
less expensive but perhaps more preparation-intensive.


>And another thing, why do women expect you to open the car door for them just because they're female?  If there's a good reason (like you're carrying a pizza or physically unable to, sure I'd do it (for a man also)), but I don't think women should be treated THAT differently just because they're women.

I don't know that many women *expect* car doors opened for them (any more
than they expect the Spanish Inquisition); yet, for some reason, doing nice
and courteous things that make someone you care about feel good is fun.

Trygve   (Of course if opening car doors was expected, I'd probably stop
          doing it.) 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ac@cheshire.oxy.edu (Aileen Cho)
Subject: Re: Surrogate companion
Organization: Occidental College, Los Angeles, CA 90041 USA.
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 17:50:03 GMT


  Well, yeah, you see. I told you about this editing thing...Now play the
puzzle game and guess where those two lines at the bottom were supposed to
go in the main body of text!  Expect the best in mental exercises from
ac postings! 
                                            ruefully,    
                                                    --ac

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine)
Subject: Re: Over 40 and single....Anyone that "OLD"?
Organization: Don't blame me, I voted for Bill 'n' Opus
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 19:25:23 GMT

In article <1gpnecINNqe7@mirror.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>In article <3b+rr8q@lynx.unm.edu> blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
>}r. (a 28 year old generation X baby-buster child, and proud of it :)
>
>Let's see:  1992 - 28 = 1964, which was the final year of the baby boom.

Depends who you talk to.  I've seen it placed anywhere from '60 to '65.
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

"Would you like some toast?!"
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: morrison@boi.hp.com (Glen Morrison)
Subject: Re: People who give too much in a relationship (was Re: Attraction...)
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 20:18:33 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Hewlett-Packard / Boise, Idaho
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]

This definately fits my ex-SO. I went to school full time and she stayed
home and helped her mom clean the house and waited for me to pick her up
after class.  I tried serveral times to convince her to do something like
get a part time job or take a class, but she got real pissed if I even 
mentioned it.  She therefore wanted to be with me during all my spare time
leaving me no time with my friends and study.  When we broke up, because I
didn't spend enough time with her, she did get a job and loved it. By then
it was too late.  How can you time share with friends and mate without being
'whipped' and without hurting your SO?

-gdm-
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: bill@rchland.vnet.ibm.com ()
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:18:27 GMT
Distribution: usa
Reply-To: bill@tran.fishkill.ibm.com ()
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

> >
> >>
> >>Even on a formal date, I will offer to split the check, but I won't be 
> >>offended either way...  There are exceptions.  If I had a lousy time, 
> >>and I NEVER want to see the other person again, I'll stick 'em with
> >>the check (but only if they did the asking).  I've also grabbed for the 
> >>check, when I had a really great time...  
> >
> >Heh! Funny, I do just the opposite. If I want to see them again, I feel
> >comfortable letting them pay for the first date because I know that when I
> >ask them for that second date I'll pick up the cost. Guys I don't
> >necessarily want to see again are the ones I don't want to feel any
> >obligation towards so the books are balanced immediately. 
> 
> Oh, but when I said "sticking them with the check", I meant it.
> The check comes, it sits between our hands, and I just smile
> across the table and ignore it, with an air of being able to
> sit there all day, as if I have no idea why we're even sitting
> here...  Really shakes them.  I've only done this to 2 guys,
> and neither of them managed a way of getting out of it, even
> though I could tell they _really_ wanted to.  They were dying
> to ask me to split the check, but just couldn't figure out
> how.
> 
> This is why I was so shocked that keith r liked my posting.
> Hey, keith, did you miss this part the first time around?
> 
> In all fairness, these two really were _dates from hell_.
> Details furnished on request...

sure, let's hear it, *datefromhell* stories are always entertaining...

> 
> 
> Piglet

bill the cat....
From: martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Real News
Date: 16 Dec 92 16:32:02 GMT
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA's message of 15 Dec 92 19:46:39 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.194639.9515@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (dreas) writes:

   Mr. Tickle Monster IS a net.personality [TM]

However, whether he is a sentient being is open to question.
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
     "Oh God, please help me be civil in tongue, pure in thought, and able
      to resist the temptation to laugh uncontrollably.  Amen." -- Rob T
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Bad Timing
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 22:51:24 GMT

In article <1992Dec10.010621.20013@boxhill.com> shri@boxhill.com (Shriram Krishnan) writes:
>
>She said that alot of women see SOs as one of 2 types:
>Those you passionately love, and those you end up marrying. Not only that, but
>if you dont end up marrying the first type, you probably never will. 
>Do you all think this is true? Can a relationship be so intense that you 
>can never again experience the same with another, no matter how "perfect" 
>they are"?

No, but I do think it's an excellent excuse not to let yourself get that
emotionally involved with another again, thus sparing yourself the risk
of the pain that would result from another intense relationship breaking
up.  For a very large number of people, that's the most comfortable mode
to operate in long-term--they focus on "the one who got away" (often 
without even having known that one all that well) and as long as they make
sure everyone else pales by comparison, they protect themselves from the
risk of pain (and from emotional closeness and security too--which can be
even scarier).

Sometimes, someone will have one relationship that is incredibly intense
compared to those (if any) that went before and then internally define
"true love" and "intense feelings" not as the feelings themselves, but as
being exactly like that first intense relationship--and no matter how
strong the feelings are, no matter how close you may be, it still doesn't
count as "true love" or "intense" unless you are perceived as being the
same person as the one in that first intense relationship.  

Trygve 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor)
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 23:59:36 GMT

In article <8061@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
John said:
>>I would much prefer a "Thank you very much for dinner tonight.  I had
>>a wonderful time", and maybe a kiss on the cheek than 25% of the tab and
>>a handshake.

>WHAT DOES PAYING PART OF THE TAB HAVE TO DO WITH KISSING?  Are you really
>saying that you think the kiss is contingent on the contribution, that
>you feel that if you pay for dinner she should kiss you in gratitude, whereas
>if she chips in for half she can get away with a handshake?  Oh, boy.

Lessee.... clue check.

1. I would much PREFER.....
2. and MAYBE a kiss on the cheek...

Given the choice of getting 25% of the tab and a handshake, or a 
"Thank you very much for dinner tonight.  I had a wonderful time"
and maybe a kiss on the cheek, I'd prefer the latter, too.

Maybe implies a hope of something freely given, not something expected.
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a thank you.
--
              For flavor, instant sex will never supercede 
              the stuff you have to peel and cook. 
                                  -- Quentin Crisp
From: howeird@hpl.hp.com (Howard Stateman)
Subject: Re: Okay, what *is* that view? (was: Re: Pre-Sex Contract)
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 06:00:12 GMT
Organization: HP Research Grants Program
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]

Charleen Bunjiovianna (charleen@net.bio.net) wrote:
: Agreed.  I've known men who were completely uninterested in sex, men
: who had a healthy interest in it, men who were obsessed with it, men
: who valued intimacy more than sex, and men who would not have sex
: outside of marriage.
: 
: Not too terribly different from women in that regard.
: 
Ah, but this is like saying "I've known men who were completely
uninterested in murdeing their SOs, men who had a healthy interest in it,
men who valued intimacy more than murder, and men who would not murder
outside of marriage"

The catch is that *the number* of men you have known in each category
varies enormously. So much so that one can generalize with a high level of
accuracy.

I suspect that the number of men obsessed with sex is a far greater
percentage of the population than the number of women obsessed with sex.
And the numbe of women who value intimacy more than sex is far greater than
the number of men in that category. If you accept this theory, then you
would also accept the generalization that men and women view sex
differently, on the whole.

================================================================ 
Howard Stateman    howeird@hpl.HP.COM  [Not an HP spokesman]
"I have the heart of a little child, and the brain of a genius
                     -- and I keep them in a jar under my bed"
================================================================ 
Anatomically Correct Bulletin Board (415) 8-jovial [Adults only]
================================================================ 
Xref: sparky soc.singles:33867 ba.singles:2615
From: erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,ba.singles
Subject: Re: Victims of Denial!!!!
Date: 14 Dec 92 22:01:27 GMT
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: Bleeding Edge Technologies - 'Sliding Down The Razor Blade Of Life...'

In article <1992Dec10.214852.16800@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:

>1. Do You consider Orgasm to be an Addictive/Obsessive Behavior?

>If You answered NO to question #1, you
>are CLEARLY in DEEP DENIAL and should
>seek therapy....

>ps: >>IT<< CAN be cured....

Yes, it can.  Just make an appointment with Dr. Ed (aka the talking horse),
and Dr. Ed will cure you... :) :)  Look for my ad in the Yellow Pages:

"Orgasm inhibition - fear of orgasm - fear of not having an orgasm..."

"All these can be CURED!!!"

"Surface or deep tissue therapy available (both at once at a slight
additional charge)"

"Call today - you'll be surprised at how inexpensive you can be cured, and
how quickly!  Call TODAY!"
-- 
Ed Carp, N7EKG                    erc@apple.com                   801/538-0177
"This is the final task I will ever give you, and it  goes  on  forever.   Act
happy, feel happy, be happy, without a reason in the world. Then you can love,
and do what you will."           -- Dan Millman, "Way Of The Peaceful Warrior"