HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: jjh00@diag.amdahl.com (Joel Hanes)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.men,soc.women,alt.flame
Subject: Re: Duck and Jive (was Re: Pre-Sex Contract )
Keywords: wholly an asshole
Date: 21 Dec 92 21:06:09 GMT
Reply-To: jjh00@diag.amdahl.com
Organization: Amdahl Corporation  Sunnyvale California

In article <1992Dec18.085047.23945@netcom.com>, 
rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster) 

   amply demonstrates that all those female posters who took one
   look at his "pre-sex contract" and said

     "No way I'd sleep with someone like you, dude"

   knew _exactly_ what they were talking about:


>     I would rather die than fuck you.  I saw you at the party and
>although you are physically pretty, I think that, overall, you are an
>extraordinarily ugly bitch.
>
>  ...
>
>>	The subject is dead.  Leave it there.  Understand?
>
>     And you lost, bitch.


Wotta maroon.

Reading postings like this makes me sympathetic to those
women who claim that most men are swine. 

---
Joel Hanes
From: boserj@netcom.com (Jeffrey Boser)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Financial first-date negotiations
Date: 30 Dec 92 08:26:27 GMT
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)

markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
>Somebody's got to be arrogant, otherwise roles would have never come to be
>defined in the first place.
>
>History demands that roles be periodically redefined and renewed as the old ones
>become dangerously outmoded.  That is the purpose, the perogative, and even
>the duty of our generation.

I dont agree with this..  history is nothing more than recorded information,
it doesnt 'demand' anything.  I do think that changes in our culture cause
changes in the roles of its individuals.  Now..  if only I could figure
out the exact relationship, I could make a fortune..

if you are interested in the forces of cultural evolution, there are some
good sci-fi works that deal with this specificly..  Asimov's foundation
series, The Final Encyclopedia (not sure author off hand, but dont tell
me I can find out easily) and its related works..  and there are surely
others.  I find the questions interesting, namely why are we as we are
today, and where will we be in the future?

I dont think it is our duty to mess around with these forces, personally..
they hold too much power, the power to end lives, or cause them to go
this way or that.  too much like playing god.  I do think, however, that
it is an individual's nature to try to control these forces in his
immediate vicinity.  or hers.  I think that this is what individuality
means to me, to choose one own's path.

enough preaching..  how about a question:  where do you think personal
relationships are going to go?  meeting others, especially potential
mates, is quite different than it was 50 years ago.  where do you
think we will go?  more open or backlash and more repressive?  I
think it will be more open, but thats just opinion.

....jeff
Xref: sparky soc.singles:35161 alt.abortion.inequity:6239
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.abortion.inequity
Subject: Maternity/paternity insurance
Date: 2 Jan 1993 21:14:02 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

daniel@clsi.COM (Daniel S. Barclay) writes:

>stcroix@Cadence.COM (Bill St.Croix) >
>> > ...
>> And if people drove more carefully, we'd have fewer accidents too!  But,
>> then again, that is why we have INSURANCE on our cars.  The Pre-Sex contract
>> is just that...insurance, just like a pre-nuptial agreement/contract.

>Not exactly.  The pre-sex contract isn't insurance (it doesn't pay money to
>try to make up for other effects).  

>Hey, that's what we need: paternity/maternity insurance!  Then we wouldn't 
>have to argue about forcing abortion, or withholding child support from 
>children, or insulting with contracts.  Why hasn't someone thought of this yet?

This is rich!  Would we require all men to carry such insurance?

Seriously though.  Driving is a priviledge that is granted (and can be
revoked) by the state.  Fertility is not.  
What about reproductive freedom?


-- 

                                                --  Michal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course there's no reason!  
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster)
Subject: Re: Females have it easy!
Organization: The Tickle Palace - Moonyvale, CA
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 03:59:42 GMT

In article <1hiaj3INN5n9@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark) writes:
>In article <oneil.725199192@cwis> oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil) writes:
>>tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>>Nah.  I think that the guys that they were inviting over were jerks because
>>they wouldn't have considered these girls for various reasons, including
>>the fact that they weren't fashion model lookalikes.  They weren't 
>>unattractive, but they weren't Christie Brinkley either.
>
>I think it's time to let you in on a few secrets.  Men don't consider Christie
>Brinkley attractive.  One, she's married (last I heard).  Two, she looks too
>much like a TV spokesmodel, family-oriented platonic beauty in all its
>blandness.  Three, women are the only ones I ever hear referring to her as
>attractive, which just goes to prove that you really have to be a man to know
>what turns on a man.

     I just could not let this go by without responding.

     I think that Christie Brinkley is one of the most attractive
women alive.  She is very sexy, pretty and has beautiful hair.

     Obviously, you do not know how all men think.

-- 
"Blind faith in your leaders or anything will get you killed." B. Springsteen
                                         +---------------------------------+
  +-----------------------------------+ /  On Vacation:  12/21 to 12/27   /
 /   // Mr. Tickle Monster   // Amiga ++---------------------------------+
|  \X/   W. David Rohwer   \X/  3000  /  Internet: rohwerwd@netcom.COM  /
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
From: tw1u+@andrew.cmu.edu (Tse-Sung Wu)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: chinese girl seeks caucasian man
Date: 30 Dec 92 18:06:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.YfEb6wS00iUyA2u2tM
	<1992Dec30.201836.544@clsi.COM>
Organization: Doctoral student, Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

On 30-Dec-92 in Re: chinese girl seeks cauc..
user Kevin Cameron@clsi.COM writes:
>In article <C01u81.EI2@research.canon.oz.au>,
naylor@research.canon.oz.au (Will
>iam Naylor) writes:
>> 
>> Hi!
>> 
>> I'm a 26 years old Singaporean Chinese, English-educated,
>> about 5 ft 3 in tall, with shoulder-length hair.  I'm a Catholic
>> and I'm looking for an educated caucasian Catholic between 27 to 30
years old,
>> a non-smoker, honest, and family-oriented.
>> 
>> My hobbies are travelling, reading, cooking, and I love children.
>> I'm a secretary with Singapore Airlines.
>> 
>> If you have similar interests and are looking for a permanent relationship
>> like myself, write to me now at this mailing (not e-mail!) address:
>> 
>>     Blandina
>>     Block 55, Marine Terrace
>>     #02-09
>>     Singapore 1544
>>     Republic of Singapore
>> 
>> I'm willing to consider migration.
>                          ^^^^^^^^^
> 
>Seasonal romance ?   - must be the cheap air fares :-)
> 
> 
>Kev.
Hmmm, sounds more like a *passport* to the West...

Tse-Sung
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: rossi@mtu.edu (Rossi)
Subject: Re: Attraction -> Acquiantance or vice versa?
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 22:51:55 GMT

In article <75861@apple.apple.COM> pooh@Apple.COM (Pooh) writes:
>In the referenced article, mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor) writes:
>>The REAL test is can they write their name in the snow?
>>The beauty of the test is that it shows not only manhood, but
>>literacy and dexterity, as well.
>
>Actually, I think their names look better with MY handwriting ... ;-)
>
>Cheers,
>Pooh
>	pooh@apple.com

   As long as you warm your hands first dearie!  ;)

   songbird
From: jsmt@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Julia Smith)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Women: would you go out with a man dumber than you
Date: 21 Dec 92 19:41:06 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

The question:  Women: would you go out with a man dumber than you
 
The answer:  depends on what you mean by "dumb."
  
I strongly believe that there is more than one type of intelligence, and
that not all types are equally important in my decision of whether or
not to go out with a guy.  For example, I would and do (and must) go
out with guys who are "dumber" than I am in algebraic topology, differential
calculus, inferential statistics, and organizational theory.  On the
other hand, I go out with guys who are much smarter than I am in repairing
automobiles, solving complicated network design difficulties, understanding
medeval literature, and conducting qualitative research.  None of this
seems particularly relevant.  
   However, I have consistently found that I have no success with guys
who are "dumb" in human relations.  A guy who doesn't have a clue how
to be comfortable and happy around women is not a fun date.  Similarly,
a guy who is "stupid" in the ways and means of finding out about (and
respecting) the person behind the vagina is not someone I am likely to
spend much time with.  In general, I would not want to continue to date 
a man who had no social IQ to speak of.
 
--j
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: Females have it easy! Especially Jessica.
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 19:13:34 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.185739.19198@oz.plymouth.edu> j_babylo@oz.plymouth.edu (Jessica L. Babylon) writes:
>>
>>It's just that the grass is always greener, ya'know, and with something
>>like 80% of net folks being male, that green grass on the other side of
>>the fence is mostly female.  But cheer up -- on the whole, we're every
>>bit as miserable as you are.
>>
>Sigh, so tell me how to be as miserable as you guys please please
>please?  My lord, i think that subject header is a damn dipshit
>flamebait thing but i'll flame it anyhow, sure females have it easy we
>get to pick and choose through every geek(net or no) who thinks he is
>god's gift to everyone, and this is just the non-jockish(itch for that
>matter) male bimbo people...sigh...so how can i get them to stop?
>Sometimes i don't feel like putting up with guy shit, and i feel
>guilty when i want to put up with wimmin shit. Boy am i confused. Feel
>free to offer analysis and flame at will...
>
>- Roofus "trying to be as miserable as possible" the Goddess

I'm kinda partial to that header.
I think you could use some sensitivity training.
 
Ok lets feel empathy for the men.
Ok scratch your balls.
Your done.
Congratulations.
 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
                                 doh#0000000005
================================================================================
From: exudtn@exu.ericsson.se (Derek Nelson, xt-dL)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Women: would you go out with a man dum
Date: 21 Dec 92 22:46:47 GMT
Reply-To: exudtn@exu.ericsson.se
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.
X-Disclaimer: This article was posted by a user at Ericsson.
              Any opinions expressed are strictly those of the
              user and not necessarily those of Ericsson.

In article 28201@cbnews.cb.att.com, eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (Piglet) writes:
>In article <92353.015428SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> writes:
>>In article <1992Dec17.201312.2999@exu.ericsson.se>, exudtn@exu.ericsson.se
>>(Derek Nelson) says:
>>>>>In article <1992Dec16.172504.29957@cbnews.cb.att.com>
>>>eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (eleanor.j.evans) writes:
>>>>>   I have to.
>>>>In article 92Dec16200914@hatteras.cs.unc.edu, martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu
>>>(Charles R. Martin) >writes:
>>>>No you don't.
>>>Yes, she does if and only if, she is smarter than every man on the planet.    h
>>>Whic
>>>may or may not be the case depending on your point of view. :-)
>>>Derek
>>
>>If Piglet is up in the cerebral wattage zone where it gets damned
>>hard to quantify, she may be making an assertion about her ability
>>to get along with male type people of the same general wattage.  Or,
>>to be sure, their ability to cope with her.
>>
>>It doesn't neccesarily mean she thinks she's got a brain the size of a
>>planet.
>
>And you want me to open the door?!?
>
Uhh. No.  Just interested in the method of quantification of your
cerebral wattage zone.  Please, do tell.  

Derek
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Subject: Just a quick one...
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 00:20:36 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

Wishin' a Merry Whatever and a Happy New Life to everyone :)
peace!
r.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Subject: Re: Tell Me Something about Balls
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 14:48:56 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.045819.1873@mtu.edu> rossi@mtu.edu (Rossi) writes:
>In article <1992Dec22.192504.26760@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
>>
>  The most torturous thing is a scratch that can't be itched.


Tell me about it.  Yesterday I had my face numbed up by the dentist
and when it started waking up my lip began to itch and when I'd scratch
the itch I couldn't feel the scratching and it kept on itching.

Talk about going NUTS.  And speaking of which ...


-- 
-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+
Nance Colucci                                      att!ihlpl!colucci
"It'll be better than before.  Yesterday's gone.  Yesterday's gone!"
-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+-+*+
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.romance
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: About Dating Outside One's Group....
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 10:43:58 GMT

jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) writes:
] In article <lk168jINN42f@news.bbn.com> pdsmith@bbn.com (Peter D. Smith) writes:
] >
] >Shelley -- keep up the search!  Compromise is possible on so many things,
] >but not on (deeply felt) religious principles.  Dating someone outside of
] >one's faith goes well for a while, but how can you respect someone whose
] >entire religious beeing is based on error?
] 
] Which pretty well encapsulates anyone with religious beliefs.

James,

prudence dictates that you back off on this one.

I will skip past my usual posting method and point
out that there is a lot of unintended irony in your
kivetch about 'religion.' You might take the time to
pause and check that you have not gored any of your
own sacred cows.

When it comes to Core Values, it is prudent NOT to
go wandering a field in pursuit of 'romance.'

That someone else may have come to a position that they
hold a set of core values very distinct from your own
is no reason to go deriding them for advancing that
they have those core values, and that they are looking
for those core values in someone they wish to be most
deeply and intimately involved with.

I may chide my lady friend from time to time, in private
and on the net, about her failure to understand some
specific point from my "well just EVERYONE knows" list
of details. But I would feel safe to say, that when we
get down to real core values, rather than implementation
specific details, we do NOT compromise. [1]

May you be so fortunate, that you are able to come to
understand YOUR OWN core values, as well as to be able
to share them with someone special in your life.

ciao
drieux

[1] I will leave to my lady friend her 'bragging rights' as
to why I consider her within my core value group. Suffice it
to say that when we all went off to her mother's birthday
party, and her brother showed up in Black BSU's with
the sniper patch on the shoulder.... I knew I was home.




-- 
Modern Day Problems:

This is Not a .sigfile addendum to the Post.
You are just reading beyond the edge.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: lkahn@mitre.org (Larry Kahn)
Subject: Dating survey (Only 2 questions)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 15:18:21 GMT

Hi,
   I've had this discussion with a number of friends and decided to put it 
on the net and compile the results.  I've also posted this to alt.romance 
so please respond only once.  
   Question 1 - (Only relevant if you're married, been married, engaged, 
or in a fairly formalized permanent relationship).  How many different 
people did you have to date until you found the person that you ended up 
with and how old were you when it happened?  For my purposes, "date" 
includes any specifically arranged meeting, even if you only saw them once 
(like meeting via a personal ad) but wouldn't include going to a party and 
meeting a bunch of people there.  Obviously, if the number is large just 
give a reasonable order of magnitude estimate.
   Question 2 - Approximately what percent of the people that you meet/met 
did you feel at least have/had a reasonable chance of being a good match 
for you?  Or conversely, what percent could you rule out fairly quickly? 

   If you'd like to respond, please e-mail (preferable, so as not to 
clutter up the net) or post, and I'll post the results in a few weeks.  
Thanks,
                    Larry

   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
   | Larry Kahn                       |                                  |
   | The MITRE Corporation            |   BE REASONABLE. DO IT MY WAY.   |
   | lkahn@mitre.org                  |                                  |
   |---------------------------------------------------------------------|
   |  These opinions may not coincide with my employer's (not that they  |
   |  pay any attention to an insignificant lackey like me, anyhow).     |
   -----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Attraction -> Acquiantance or vice versa?
Date: 23 Dec 92 17:40:54 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

pooh@Apple.COM (Pooh) writes:
|
|>mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor) writes:
|>>The REAL test is can they write their name in the snow?
|>>The beauty of the test is that it shows not only manhood, but
|>>literacy and dexterity, as well.
|
|>Actually, I think their names look better with MY handwriting ... ;-)

This little boy had to go pee-pee.  "Would you like me to  help you", his
mother asked.  "No", the boy replied, "I want Grandma to help".  "Why
Grandma", his mother asked.  "Because her hand shakes", the little boy said.

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: earhard@ug.cs.dal.ca (Mark Earhard)
Subject: Re: Strangest in a Strange Land
Keywords: Snow,Ice,Cats,Hospitality
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 13:18:34 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.215727.6681@wetware.com> drieux@com (drieux, just drieux) writes:

>Mr. USKustomsInspektorDudeDroid axed moe dese t'ings:


Direux, this post has made the most sense of any I have seen since
GRITZ disappeared.  It is very intersting how both of you have this wierd,
quirky way of seeing things, and talking(Writing) in a Truly *ODD* way...

Refreshing, really...

Tanx, eh?

Marcus.
-- 
__
Mark Earhard -      earhard@ug.cs.dal.ca -       05marcus@ac.dal.ca
Reclaimer:  GIVE ME THAT BACK THIS INSTANT!      BRING THE NOISE!
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.women,soc.men,ba.singles,misc.legal
From: whedon@netcom.com (Bill Whedon)
Subject: Re: Pre-Sex Contract
Keywords: Hasta la vista, too, from me
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 08:53:22 GMT

Yeah, after that last feeble shot of mine, I finally realized that, like unto
Jackie, I weary of the whole thing.  Kevin, David, enjoy the silence.  Bye.
Bill Whedon   whedon@netcom.com


-- 
-- If I ain't programmin' I ain't awake! --
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: What is gold-digging?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 13:52:39 GMT

In article <1992Dec21.215254.29553@cbnews.cb.att.com> eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (Piglet) writes:
>>}         blow job--unlike Muffy, I _don't_ get off with a kiss...
>>}         ok, so sometimes...._definitely_ wrong newsgroup...>
>>
>>Drop on by anytime, but I gotta warn you; I"m very good.
>
>With your tongue firmly planted in _your_ cheek?  This I gotta see.
>
>
>Piglet <hey, Jeem, what're you doin' tonight?  Wanna get together
>        and wax Dawn's mutant sweetie?>
 
Yea and then we'll take em for a lil swim with the fishies.
Gosh my first date. I'm really not worthy.
I'm packing my depends as we type.

 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
                                 doh#0000000005
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: vincent@Micor.OCUnix.on.ca (Victor W. Wong)
Subject: Re: Women, Cats, & Chocolate
Organization: M.B. Cormier INC.
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 22:28:42 EST

You know, this subject line just gave me the idea for codification
of LAW No. 5 OF INTERNET POSTING:

The relevance of a subject line to a posting diminishes exponentially
with the amount of time during which the subject is discussed.

Now if only I could figure out the other four laws ...

======================================================================
                            VICTOR WONG
                     vincent@micor.ocunix.on.ca
----------------------------------------------------------------------
            "Closed minds lead short lives."--Anonymous
======================================================================

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: skc@Turing.ORG (Shriram K. Chaubal)
Subject: Re: Ankle bracelets
Organization: The Turing Project, Public Access Internet Host
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 16:09:15 GMT

In article <1992Dec24.022312.8061@netcom.com> stevek@netcom.com (Steve Kile) writes:
>I'd like to ask the ladies of the net (tm) to answer a question for me.  I
>frequent a couple of restaurants where the waitresses wear ankle bracelets
>(is that the correct terminology?)  These girls are mostly high school or
>college age.  I don't recall this type of jewelery being worn during my high
>school or college days.  Is this a new fad?  What is the significance of
>wearing it on the right versus left ankle?  Thanks.
>

Hmmmmm .... are these velcro bracelets with matching earings???? :-) :-)

Shri
>