HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rkornilo@nyx.cs.du.edu (ryan korniloff)
Subject: Looking for Telent servers in PA
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 92 05:42:06 GMT




I am about to visit my father in Pennsylvania and would like to keep in
touch with sites that I am on while I'm away. Can anyone supply me with
some Telent server numbers in the Buck's and Montgomry counties?


        -- Ryan Korniloff
        -- rkornilo@nyx.cs.du.edu

Please respond by mail or I might not get your reply. Thanks Many!

Newsgroups: soc.net-people
From: cordelkj@ucunix.san.uc.edu (Kevin John Cordell)
Subject: Looking for anyone at UNLV
Organization: University of Cincinnati
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 14:27:21 GMT

I am thinking of moving to Las Vegas,  and would like to find out from
someone at UNLV about the programs in Information Systems or Computer
Science.


kevin
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin J. Cordell
Cordelkj@ucunix.san.uc.edu

Newsgroups: soc.net-people
From: hall@satie.psu.edu (PeggyHall)
Subject: Salem-Teikyo University 
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 01:00:05 GMT

Hi there!!!
I was just wondering if anyone who reads this is from this school..
If so, send email to this acct...

Thanks!!!

-Peggy
Organization: Mythos/Xcalbrin Inc.
X-School: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 14:40:56 EDT
From: <TXK9@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.net-people
Subject: e-mail address of EDS?

Could any one help me get the e-mail address of EDS the software company.
I am on look out for an old friend. Thanx!!!
From: bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby)
Newsgroups: soc.net-people
Subject: Re: Doug Moore or Joe Warren at Rice CS Dept.
Date: 20 Aug 92 21:02:58 GMT
Reply-To: bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU
Distribution: usa
Organization: Fluent Inc., Lebanon NH


Address found!  Thanks, folks.
-- 
   Brice Dowaliby, Fluent Inc., 10 Cavendish Court, Lebanon, NH  03766
                         bd%fluent@dartmouth.edu        
             I don't speak for them, they don't speak for me
Newsgroups: soc.net-people
Subject: Debbie Gaffikan (sp?)/Seattle/Holy Names H.S.
From: jf@pacnet.wesleyan.edu (JOHN FINN)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 16:20:20 GMT
Organization: Wesleyan University, Middletown, CT USA


I'm looking for a friend who may be living in the Seattle area. I believe 
her name is Debbie Gaffikan (unless changed) and she would have graduated 
from Holy Names H.S. in Seattle about 1976.

John E. Finn
Wesleyan University

jfinn@eagle.wesleyan.edu
From: dasher@well.sf.ca.us (D Anton Sherwood)
Newsgroups: soc.net-people
Subject: Champaign-Urbana, Illinois, in the Seventies
Date: 21 Aug 92 05:17:48 GMT
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link


I'd like to hear from University High (Urbana) students, classes of '75-'78;
also from anyone who was a member of the Champaign-Urbana Science Fiction
Association in '77-81.
-- 
D Anton Sherwood *\\* dasher@well.sf.ca.us *\\* +1 415 664 2229
Libertarian candidate for California Assembly, 12th district
From: lkk@panix.com (Larry Kolodney)
Newsgroups: soc.net-people
Subject: Claudia Braude at Cornell U.?
Date: 15 Aug 92 17:07:05 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

I'm looking for any information (address, phone#) about Claudia
Braude, who I've been told is currently a grad student in literature
or jewish studies at Cornell University.



-- 
larry kolodney:(lkk@panix.com) 
_(*#&)#*&%)@(*^%_!*&%^!)*&#+!*&$+!?&%+!*&^_)*&#%)*&^%#+&
The past is not dead, it's not even past.   - Wm. Faulkner
From: userLIBE@mts.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Sherlock Holmes)
Newsgroups: soc.net-people
Subject: Looking for UVic Grad Student Patricia Anne Evans
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 00:29:50 GMT
Organization: MTS Univ of Alberta     

Subject says it all.  I would like some information concerning the 
above mentionned friend and how I can get a hold of her currently.
Reply-to: yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca
Newsgroups: soc.net-people
From: scannon@bluemoon.rn.com (Sam Cannon)
Subject: Columbia Military Academy - Early Sixties
Organization: Blue Moon BBS ((614) 868-998[024])
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 20:28:03 EDT

Looking for anyone who went to CMH in 1962-3-4.  
 Tinker Rogers
 Bottles
 BKW Simms

 
scannon@bluemoon.rn.com      --------------------------------------------
sam@resource.com              The Eupsychian Network - Abraham H. Maslow
CMHC Systems, Inc.           --------------------------------------------
                                           
              "Support Mental Health or I'll kill you"
From: gt0869a@prism.gatech.EDU (WATERS,CLYDE GORDON)
Newsgroups: soc.net-people
Subject: Looking for John Klym- NE U.S.
Date: 16 Aug 92 01:11:39 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

I would like to know if anyone on this forum had bumped into a guy
named John Klym lately. He was originally from Colchester, Vt., went
to SUNY Buffalo (I think I remember that right), went to Georgia Tech
a while, and last I heard from him he was at Hamilton Standard in
Hartford Ct.

John was undoubtedly the coolest roommate I ever resided with; I would
like to see what he is up to lately...

Thanks,
Gordon.
 

-- 
WATERS,CLYDE GORDON-Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta Ga 30332 
******<LANGUAGE IS A VIRUS! - Laurie Anderson-Home of the Brave>******* 
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt0869a
Internet: gt0869a@prism.gatech.edu
Newsgroups: soc.net-people
From: james@brock.b17b.ingr.com (James Brock)
Subject: test
Followup-To: soc.net-people
Keywords: test
Reply-To: James A. Brock, Jr.
Organization: Gesellschaft Praxis
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 00:33:11 GMT

But a test.........
Newsgroups: soc.net-people
From: sss@netcom.com (Small Systems Solutions)
Subject: Re: Looking for anyne in Niort France
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 00:02:06 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Aug20.233032.13607@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> 
	au021@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Roland Behunin) writes:

>If anybody in, or near Niort France has email, please email me.

Moi aussi!
-- 
Small Systems Solutions                   1563 Solano Avenue, Suite 123
sss@netcom.com                                  Berkeley, CA 94707-2116

The above-expressed opinions aren't necessarily
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: kendall@adobe.com (Janice Kendall)
Subject: Re: Another right to not support?
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 03:00:22 GMT

In article <stricher-140892175244@stayman.ocean.fsu.edu> stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul) writes:
>Janice Kendall wrote:
>
>> 1) A man should be able to figuratively abort the fetus ONLY while the women
>>    can legally, physically do so (so if abortion is contitutionally banned,
>>    the man can no longer figuratively abort).  He must inform the woman in
>>    some sort of legal document that he is doing so during this period so 
>>    she will know that she is going it alone if she continues the pregnancy.  
>>    The man then gives up all parental rights and responsibilities.  He can 
>>    not change his mind later and interfere in the life and choices of the
>>    woman.
>
>This will require a notification of the man in question. Anyone care to
>speculate how that will go over with the pro-choice crowd that was irrate
>over notifying a *husband*? 
>
>This is perhaps the most touchy area in this entire debate. A woman can
>legally deprive a man of his children, and the children of their father,
>if they decide to go it alone and not tell him.
>
>K'Char

You just flipped the situation here.  The issue I am responding to is men
being forced to pay support for children they claim to not have wanted.
You are talking about the issue of the man wanting the child.

Spousal notification is in regards to abortion.  In healthy relationships,
the man will be informed of the pregnancy and will be involved in discussions
on whether or not to keep the child.  In other situations, the woman may not
feel that she can bear the physical stress of (usually) yet another child
-or- she may be trapped in an abusive relationship into which she does not
want to bring a child (and make it harder for her to escape to a better life).

If a man wants children, he should find the right mate and they should be
in agreement on starting a family.  In this situation, there will be no
problems of women "depriving a man of his children".  Men should not
have the right to force themselves on women in order to impregnate them,
which is another way of looking at what you're saying.

 Janice Kendall    kendall@adobe.com    ...!{decwrl|sun}!adobe!kendall

		"Creativity overcomes violence."
				John Bradshaw on "Homecoming"
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Hating Men with Full Force
From: rivero@mdcbbs.com
Date: 20 Aug 92 10:45:43 GMT
Organization: Electronic Data Systems, Unigraphics Division, Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: rivero

In article <1992Aug19.162420.4446@tc.cornell.edu>, shore@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Melinda Shore) writes:
> In article <92232.29425.6069870@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM> 6069870@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
>>this sounds like a dame who never gets any.
> 
> Funny, that sounds exactly like the kind of thing a guy who
> never gets any would say.  What, precisely, were you intending
> to contribute to the conversation with that remark?
> 
> I am not surprised that there are women who hate men.  What
> surprises me is *which* women hate men.  No, it isn't the
> radical feminists or the lesbian separatists who make sweeping
> and general anti-male statements, it's the heterosexual housewives
> and the rather ordinary, run-of-the mill women who engage in
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

  Without intending to, you have revealed one of the sadder aspects
of the recent feminist movement; the assumption that housewives
and mothers arr somehow socially inferior and are to be looked down on.
Not a major attitude problem, but subtle and very pervasive; it has resulted
in great confusion among those same women, who feel ashamed for wanting
what they want at this time in history. Their frustration may be
directed against a convenient male. But this particular attack on her self
esteem is arriving from a slightly different quarter!

  In the long run, it will be seen that feminism told women to abandon one
set of artificial expectations, only to replace them with another just
as arbitrary.


<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero rivero@mdcbbs.com  Middle-Aged Mutant Ninja Animator   |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| "Oppression doth never prosper, for if it prosper, none dare call it   |
| Oppression!"  with apologies to Bill Shakespeare.                      |
|                                                                        |
| In the Middle East, women are raised to always cover their faces with  |
| viels. Modern feminists point to this practice as proof of how these   |
| women are oppressed. Yet here in the Western (so called) Civilized     |
| countries, women are raised to cover their faces with cosmetics, to    |
| the tune of 50 billion dollars a year. In this regard, American women  |
| are just as oppressed as their eastern sisters while having to pay far |
| more for the priviledge. Why do the feminists pay such scant attention |
| to this most visible abuse of women's skin, health, and wallet?        |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: shore@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Melinda Shore)
Subject: Re: Hating Men with Full Force
Organization: Cornell Theory Center
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 16:24:20 GMT

In article <92232.29425.6069870@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM> 6069870@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
>this sounds like a dame who never gets any.

Funny, that sounds exactly like the kind of thing a guy who
never gets any would say.  What, precisely, were you intending
to contribute to the conversation with that remark?

I am not surprised that there are women who hate men.  What
surprises me is *which* women hate men.  No, it isn't the
radical feminists or the lesbian separatists who make sweeping
and general anti-male statements, it's the heterosexual housewives
and the rather ordinary, run-of-the mill women who engage in
outrageous male-bashing.  And it's the men who behave in the
most disgustingly sexist manner who are confused and angered by
it.  Ironic, huh?
-- 
       Melinda Shore - Cornell Theory Center - shore@tc.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: soc.women
Newsgroups: soc.women

In soc.women, shore@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Melinda Shore) writes:


>   I am not surprised that there are women who hate men.  

I am not surprised there are women who hate men either.  You seem to be 
an example.  And I'm not surprised that there are men who hate women.
I might actually hate a few (oh, hate is probably too strong).

>   What surprises me is *which* women hate men.  No, it isn't the
>   radical feminists or the lesbian separatists who make sweeping
>   and general anti-male statements, it's the heterosexual housewives
>   and the rather ordinary, run-of-the mill women who engage in
>   outrageous male-bashing.  

I think radical feminists and lesbian separatists are indeed making 
general anti-male statements.  The woman who made those misandrous
remarks claims from the start to be a feminist.  And from all I ever 
read from you, a "feminist bisexual" (I gather from your posts), there has 
never been heard an encouraging word toward anyone in general.  How
can you state that all the "housewives" are complaining?  Where's your
data from?  Maybe true, let me propose the following possible answer:

Remember what the pretty girls in high school were attracted to?
Guys in football uniforms, those who wore outrageous attire, drove fast and
drank and did drugs?  I remember that I wasn't all that popular with 
the women in high school because I didn't act cool like that.  That's
what the boys are taught to act like to catch the "babes".  Then the babes
lash out at all men when they marry one of these "studs".  I should laugh,
it's like revenge of the nerds.  So maybe you're right, the housewives
are the ones who hate all men.  They probably had to grow up to understand
that they got what they asked for, and now it isn't so cool anymore.  So
why are you surprised that these people often get fed up with men, Melinda?
Surely you don't mean to imply that most heterosexual women hate all men?
Most people were not trained to be in the "in" crowd.

>   And it's the men who behave in the
>   most disgustingly sexist manner who are confused and angered by
>   it.  Ironic, huh?

It's just a matter of training at an early age that men behave in disgust-
ingly sexist manner.  And you bet they'll be confused when it blows up 
in their face suddenly. It's also ironic that women complain later what
earlier they praised in their scoundrels. 

Okay, if that wasn't a good answer, what is?  All men are truly scum and
housewives, who hang around them long enough, know it best?   Now what am
I supposed to do about that?  Applaud and present myself for sacrifice?
I think there are plenty of women everywhere displeased with men and for
some good reasons.  My reason for replying is because I saw the irony of
your own statements which sounded like, "people like me aren't the real
misandrous people, you contemptible male swine."  And I've read that from
you before.  It's pretty amusing.  (I think she dost protest too much.)


By the way, I'm getting enough at home. :-)
Xref: sparky soc.women:15264 alt.activism:14839 alt.sex:26660
From: mari1@troy.uucp (21114-kapon)
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.activism,alt.sex
Subject: Re: Feminism & Pornography
Summary: What pornography literally means
Date: 10 Aug 92 13:26:09 GMT
Followup-To: poster
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ


> [...]
> So pornography, which means literally ``writing about prostitutes''...
> [...]

'pornography' means literally 'dirty writing' stemming from the
ancient greek words 'pornos' and 'graphein'.



==========================================
   m.grundmann    mari1@bellcore.cc.com
==========================================
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: biow@cs.umd.edu (chris biow)
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men,sci.bio,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Biological Sex Differences?
Date: 12 Aug 92 13:18:24 GMT
Followup-To: soc.women
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742

In article <PPESSI.92Aug12013431@vipunen.hut.fi> ppessi@vipunen.hut.fi (Pekka Pessi) writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.185523.11073@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> kachun@astro.as.arizona.edu (Ka Chun Yu) writes:
>>>	I thought that normal rate for chimpanzees is 50 times a day.

>>Somebody should double-check this with a more creditable source, but I remember
>>them saying the rate for chimps is only several times a year.

>	According Jane Goddall's book a female chimp have its heat
>	once a month,

Don't confuse Goodall's chimps with bonobos ("pygmy chimps") which are a 
different species and have much more "promiscuous" habits.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
From: jpl3@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (Joe Lucia)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Yet another _Ad Hominem_ post (was: Biological Sex Difference
Date: 14 Aug 92 15:01:17 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University


Robert Sheaffer writes
>
>Notice how Brian the Charitable uses the above to "prove" that I am guilty
>of either willful misrepresentation, provincialism, or gross stupidity.
>As I said before, SOME people can stick to the facts when arguing
>highly-controversial issues, but Brian Siano is NOT one of them. When
>his blood pressure rises, he starts slinging layer after layer of mud
>at the PERSONAL CHARACTER of his opponent.
>
>If he had the facts on his side, he wouldn't need to stoop so low. So
>instead, he tries to persuade you that only a dirty little @#$% would
>argue thusly, hoping to divert attention away from a reasoned examination
>of the issue.
>
>
     Note, in the above, how Sheaffer claims that Brian Siano has mounted an
     _ad hominem_ attack, yet Sheaffer's response is all spleen and
     derogation.  I'd like to say, as a third party observer, that Siano's
     posts _have never_ struck me as mud-slinging of any sort.  Rather, they
     seem incisive, carefully thought through, and balanced.  I'd says it's
     Siano's thorough-going refutation of Sheaffer's repeated claims
     (mostly unsubstantiated asserations) that's got Sheaffer's ire up here.
     Interesting that our advocate of "competition" and "dominance" resorts to
     a kind of verbal pouting when he encounters a foe he can't outwit.
-- 
 =======================================================================
 Joe Lucia                             Phone: (215) 758-4999
 Library Systems                       FAX:   (215) 882-2907
 Lehigh University
 Bethlehem, PA 18015                   jpl3@lehigh.edu
 =======================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.activism,alt.sex,alt.usage.greek.ancient
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Feminism & Pornography
Organization: Kalamazoo College
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 15:19:41 GMT

mari1@troy.uucp (21114-kapon) writes:
>
>> [...]
>> So pornography, which means literally ``writing about prostitutes''...
>> [...]
>
>'pornography' means literally 'dirty writing' stemming from the
>ancient greek words 'pornos' and 'graphein'.

Not according to my little Liddell.  "Porne" means "prostitute," whence
we get derivative words like "porneion," a brothel, "porneuo," to
prostitute [oneself], "pornidion," the diminutive form, i.e. "little
whore," "pornoboskeo," to keep a brothel, and so on.  The
not-quite-prudish Liddell and Scott translate "pornos" as "fornicator."

"Writing about prostitutes" is a correct literal translation.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy      Internet: k044477@kzoo.edu      AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 "I'm kind of like a Zionists [sic] worst nightmare."        - a B-CPU user
From: dswartz@sw.stratus.com (Dan Swartzendruber)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Opinions wanted on Faludi's _Backlash_
Date: 20 Aug 92 20:28:41 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <5753@transfer.stratus.com>, Laurie Mann writes:
> elizabeth writes
> >I just finished reading Susan Faludi's BACKLASH and would like to know
> >what you all thought of it...does it make sense or is it a bunch of crap?
> >I'm not going to post my own opinions yet so as not to bias the replys
> >I get :).
> 
> Mostly pretty good, accurate about 90% of the time, and a little
> strident in places.  But, she was mad as hell, and she wasn't going
> to take it any more.  And I don't blame her one bit.

Gee, I bet this thread is going to be chockfull of objectivity. :)


> 
> *  NeXT: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com * GEnie:  Laurie.Mann  *
> **** Vote to can George and Dan! **  Vote for CHANGE in 1992!****
> **********    Member of the cultural elite and PROUD!  **********
> 
> 

-- 

Dan S.
Xref: sparky soc.women:15189 soc.men:14915 sci.bio:2919 sci.skeptic:14232
From: revpk@cellar.org (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano)
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men,sci.bio,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Biological Sex Differences?
Date: 13 Aug 92 03:26:13 GMT
Organization: The Cellar BBS and public access system

sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) writes:

> In article <cmgyoB4w164w@cellar.org> revpk@cellar.org (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano)
> 
> >        His closing sentence in the above is also revealing; if we reject 
> >what he sees as feminism, we cannot regard the current status of women as 
> >wrong, he maintains. Evidently, such ephemeral, 'politically correct' 
> >concepts as equality, justice, and egalitarianism have no place in Robert's 
> >ideal society; they contradict what he sees as the 'harsh dictates of 
> >nature.' And if women don't like it, apparently, they have no right even to 
> >complain.
> 
> Once again, we see the false dichotomy: "If he won't accept the radical's
> demands for special treatment and greater power, then he must be a fascist
> who thinks women should be treated like dogs!"
> 
        Robert, once again you seem to demonstrate your inability to parse 
the English language. No dichotomy was ever invoked; the above excerpt 
clearly illustrates that your comments about women's status-- that if the 
societal differences between men and women are biologically innate, we cannot 
call any disparities between their power and status as 'wrong'-- are, simply, 
a way of disregarding any concepts of justice or equality. There was no 
'dichotomy' set up at all. You yourself said that disparities between the 
power and opportunites between men and women are innate, and can't be called 
'wrong.'

        But this is typical of Robert; he either intentionally misses the 
point, when sticking to relevant issues would mean ruin for his provincial 
world-view, or is simply unable to understand what people say to him.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian "Rev. P-K" Siano                                  revpk@cellar.org
"What? They have BIGGER DICKS?! _BOMB THEM!!!!_"
                        Our Leaders, paraphrased by George Carlin