HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: Rape After Rape After Rape
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 13:26:40 GMT


	Question for your consideration:
 
	How many dipshits are going to post and repost
	this damn, biased, op ed piece?? 
 

-- 
       "If you can't eat sand, why the hell are you living in a desert?"

     Equality is a delusion, suffering is a fairy tale and God is a fantasy.
       Blaming society for inequality is like blaming the sky for rain.
From: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Living in a State of Siege
Date: 21 Dec 92 15:01:09 GMT
Organization: UniSQL, Inc., Austin, Texas, USA

In article <1992Dec21.131621.9826@cbnews.cb.att.com> lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib) writes:
>> [ men are all pigs ]
>Who made Roe v. Wade the law of the land?
>5 men.

	Huh?  Reckon we're all dumb, too, 'cause I don't understand this.



Newsgroups: soc.men
From: aaldrich@encore.com (Al Aldrich)
Subject: Re: Parallel situations
Organization: Encore Computer Corporation
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 19:40:28 GMT

jay@UUSERV.CC.UTAH.EDU (Jay Deuel) writes:


>P.S. How about the Chicago couple that left their kids "home alone"?

Yeah..how about that huh? I wouldn't leave my cats home alone for a
week, much less a 9 and 4 year old child .. Geez, how stupid can people
be? Man .. talk about parents rights.. These people definately should
not have any..

al

-- 
Al Aldrich aaldrich@encore.com 305-797-2335
"Mythology: The body of a primitive people's beliefs concerning its
origin, early history, heroes, deities and so forth, as distinguished
from the true accounts which it invents later." -- Ambrose Bierce
From: chpetk@gdr.bath.ac.uk (Toby Kelsey)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Gender differences - Sophie Germain
Summary: Most sex career differences derive from parenthood options.
Date: 22 Dec 92 06:47:14 GMT
Organization: School of Chemistry, University of Bath, UK

>>In article <michael.724427507@glia>
	michael@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Michael) writes:
>>>In the long run it won't matter.  But in the short run, there is still
>>>pressure in our culture against women becoming a part of scientific
>>>fields.  This cultural pressure is a leftover from the days when women
>>>didn't enjoy the same rights men did.  Its slowly dissappearing, but it
>>>hasn't gone yet.  

It is risky to assume that underrepresentation means discrimination
against those in that area.  For example if proportionately
fewer homeless men are white this doesn't mean that the Black
Homeless Men's Old Boy Network is preventing white men from
being thrown onto the street.

So why do fewer women choose science, or other demanding careers?
Undoubtedly there are biases in the market (in both directions).
However if you ask teenagers what they are going to do,
most women say they want to get married, have children and
be kept (after some period of independent earning), in
contrast to men who know they will have to work.  The bias
at this stage far outweighs later biases IMHO (in the UK anyway).
It would be possible to quantify their relative magnitude.
To claim that this bias is a cultural assumption that can be
'educated away' is, I believe, naive.

I know couples where the woman has decided it is time
'they' had children, and furthermore she needn't go back to
work afterwards.  Many women do not need to do this, but the
(socially and legally sanctioned) option is available, if
her partner gets awkward.

In contrast when a man wants a family he has to impress his
partner with the size of his bank balance and his future
career prospects, so she will feel his support is secure
enough to start a family.

In the same way that men who have other options available
can choose not to be homeless, so fewer women work in
demanding fields simply because they have more options.

If men were allowed to decide when and if they became
fathers, then parenthood would have to be based on mutual
consent.  The status of fatherhood would rise to that of
motherhood (respect would follow choice), hopefully
leading to equal legal status.  Women would lose the
security of total control on procreation and childraising;
the financial status of men and women would become equally
important; and career differences would largely disappear.

I believe that this would only come about with
  (a) Choice for men, or
  (b) an *effective* male Pill.

Soc.men often has separate discussions about (the lack of)
choice for men, and about sex ratios in employment, but
few seem to make the connection.

Toby
From: pepke@dirac.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: shaving
Date: 3 Jan 93 05:48:30 GMT
Reply-To: pepke@dirac.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Organization: Florida State University, but I don't speak for them

In article <1992Dec31.185559.19825@wam.umd.edu> rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
>	In my case, the hairs are quite popular and *very* fast growing,
>	but there are conspicuous bald patches (lord knows why).  So I
>	shave (plus, I'm young, and peoplemy age do not wear beards).

I found that there were a number of bald patches on my face as well.  What 
I did was wait six months or so.  The hairs from neighbouring principalities
stepped forth and filled the gap.

I suspect it has something to do with the Nyquist theorem, but I'm not sure
how.

I quite like the fact that most people my age don't wear beards now, and I
do.

-EMP
Xref: sparky soc.men:21684 alt.feminism:6430
From: baba@Tymnet.com (Duane Hentrich)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: shaving
Date: 26 Dec 92 22:19:25 GMT
Organization: BT North America, San Jose CA.

In article <1992Dec22.191410.27029@plx.com>, asgard@sparky (J.R. Stoner) writes:
|> I use Gillette Foamy basic cream without ukky stuff like menthol.
|> I have tried 'gels' and found the effect on my face, after finishing,
|> was more like a stucco wall rather than the smooth velvet normally found there.

I'd vote for Foamy if ya gotta get it from a can.

I've found that the best way to get a good shave is by soaking the beard
area with a HOT wet towel for as long as you can stand. After that,
I can use whatever is available, even soap, and get a great shave.

But then, I just love wet heat.

-- 
d'baba Duane M. Hentrich	baba@Tymnet.Com

We have yet to learn that the thing uttered in words is not therefore affirmed. It must affirm itself, or no forms of logic or of oath can give it evidence. 
The sentence must also contain its own apology for being spoken. - R.W.Emerson
From: gazit@duke.cs.duke.edu (Hillel Gazit)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Boycotts (was Re: Why are many low-income women fat?)
Date: 30 Dec 92 19:56:28 GMT
Reply-To: gazit@cs.duke.edu (Hillel)
Organization: Living In Harmony

In article <C02zFx.5Eq@news.cso.uiuc.edu> 
levine@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Lenore Levine) writes:

>Good always has to be defined, ultimately, case by case. I don't think 
>there is any one concept which will define it in *all* circumstances. 

>Which is not to say there might not be concepts which define it
>in *most* circumstances; but these concepts form a practical,
>not a theoretical definition of good.

There are two problems with this approach:
1) A not very clear of definition "good" let people manipulate the
   system.  If they are honest it can make a lot of good, but this
   kind of power attracts McCarthy-type people, and so it
   usually makes a lot of bad.

2) Unwritten laws and "you should have known that that was 
   forbidden" is unfair.  That's why the citizens of Athens 
   demanded written laws *long* time ago.

>>If you have a machine that works reasonably well then it is not
>>a good idea to "improve" it before you understand it.

>Agreed. But even in this "Bronze age of oppression" (to quote
>another poster) *some* people understand the machine enough
>to make *some* improvements.

Would you mind to give some specific examples?

>>It seems to me a better idea to start fixing what does not work.
>>E.g. finding out why NY has the highest state taxation on an
>>average family in the nation, but it gives lousy services.

>Alfonse d'Amato? You should hear my mother -- who lives in New
>York -- talk about him!

>(And let me be nonpartisan and mention David Dinkins...)

You see the problem as the people, I see the problem in the kind
of system that attracts those people.

Because the system was supposed to create "social justice," it has
*taxed* the middle class people.  As a result the government had a 
lot of money to spend, and people like d'Amato and Dinkins have
been attracted to it.

In my opinion, part of "social justice" is reducing the power of the
government.  Do you reject this approach?  Can you give an example
where a powerful government stayed (more or less) "clean handed"?

>Please! This is a quote from Yamanari, **not** from me.

I'm sorry for my mistake and I apologize.

>Lenore Levine

Hillel                                      gazit@cs.duke.edu

"Moderated newsgroups are set up and run by industrial-strength
control queens as jealous of their monopoly as a five-year-old 
with his first chocolate bunny."  --  STella@xanadu.com	
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: cgates@mitre.org (Curt Gates)
Subject: Re: How come?
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 14:25:40 GMT

In article <4444@unisql.UUCP> wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes:
> Yaaahhhh, I was waiting for someone to say that.

I knew you would appreciate it, my friend. Thats why I tossed it in. 
Meanwhile, I have done some field research on the subject --I raised the 
question at breakfast this morning, and my wife said virtually the same 
things Amy did, with almost identical examples.  So then I reminded her of 
how I could still see my aunts (now desceased) haggling over the last 
penny at Miss Duttons Tea Room. And then haggling over how to divide the 
tip! She even topped that by remembering an incident, totalling 30 cents, 
that involved  her mother in law!  Now that hit pretty close to home.  So 
I said I thought it had a lot to do with cultural background and maybe the great depression.  And she said she considered herself to be a generous person.  And I agreed with that.  So we gave each other hugs and kisses and left for our respective jobs.  So much for that research work!  This is not a trivial question you raise, Wharfie.  Intuitively, I feel that it hits on something really basic to *traditional* gender roles, and I dont know exactly what it is.  What s your theory?


Xref: sparky soc.men:21624 soc.women:21791
From: shimeall@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil (timothy shimeall)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Living in a State of Siege
Date: 19 Dec 92 00:06:05 GMT
Organization: Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey CA

[I've removed alt.feminism from the Newsgroup list -- my site doesn't
  carry it.]

In article <168C1CB92.SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu> Diane writes:
>Deal with it.
>We have dealt with it, are dealing with it, and we're sick of it. You're
>going to have to get your sympathy from somewhere else.

I would invite you to reread the quoted lines.  Imagine it said to a 
woman who is repeating her fears of being battered by her boyfriend/
husband.  Imagine it said to a girl who is denigrated in class because
of her sex.  Sounds cold, doesn't it?  Threatening?  Harsh?

Think about it.  Then think about how to build a non-sexist society.
				Tim
Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.feminism
From: rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari)
Subject: Re: Living in a State of Siege
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 22:10:59 GMT

In article <16B49D768.SURGDM@mizzou1.missouri.edu> news@mont.cs.missouri.edu writes:
>In article <1993Jan1.032047.18124@panix.com>
>gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
> 
>>About the length of lives: men have a higher metabolic rate
>>(on the average) than women.  Thus it seems likely that their
>>bodies wear out faster.  One could disprove this by showing
>>some social arrangement where men lived longer than women,
>>other things being equal; but I don't know of one.
>>--
>Women are less likely to develop heart disease prior to menopause
>due to the action of estrogen (it retards the build-up of cholesterol in
>the arteries). 


	In trade for this, men have a statistically irrelavent
	incidence of breast cancer.


>This means that, on the average, men have a 30-40 year
>'head start' on diseases of the vascular system, such as stroke, angina,
>and general hardening of the arteries. 


	Thebig vascular problems come from chloresterol.  Studies
	with youngsters (i.e. grade school kids) show that the 
	cardiovascular problems start _early_ in kids--both male
	and female.


>Also, until the last decade or so,
>a higher percentage of men than women smoked, which translated into a
>higher mortality rate.


	Very true.  Now its young girls.  The cigarrette companies
	need to find 1,000 new clients a day to replace just those
	who die.



>Prior to the modern, *sterile* age of obstetrics, the mortality rate
>associated with childbirth made the average lifespan of women much lower
>than men.
>(please add any qualifiers I may have missed! ;) )
>Diane


	The big reason for the life expectancy is the way averages are
	calculated.  Men are much likely to be fatalities in violent
	crime (not to mention wars).  Add to this auto accidents (higher
	for men) and you have some numbers that help account for the
	<10 year difference in "average" lifespan.

	Of course, there are those little extras.  Stress, for one.  Women
	are starting to get heart attacks, too, those with man-style
	careers at least.  

	I expect, excluding any military actions, that the average
	life expectancy for women will drop enough that the difference
	between women and men will be minor.  



-- 
	Blaming "society" for your problems is like blaming clouds for rain.

         ---  boycott == censorship == closed mindedness == cowardice  ---
		   	     Pain teaches.   <for mailing and other info, .plan>
From: steve@Celeborn.lvunix.com (Steve Slade)
Subject: Re: shaving
Newsgroups: soc.men
Distribution: na
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: 23 Dec 92 08:56:30 PST
Organization: Not even Close

I've come to like using gillette's sensor with thier the edge shaving gel.  I
tried bic's tracer version. (one time to many) 

I would like someone to recomend an electric shaver that doesn't tear up ones
face or leave a rash.
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer)
Newsgroups: soc.men,misc.legal,ba.singles,soc.singles,soc.women
Subject: Re: Pre-Sex Contract
Keywords: sex, agreement, legal, contract
Date: 23 Dec 92 01:52:48 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories

>In article <1992Dec18.150754.5625@netcom.com> bob@netcom.com (Bob Becker) writes:
>GET A CLUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>99% of the people on here think you're an ignorant jerk.

99% of statistics are made up.

Aaron L. Hoffmeyer
TR@CBNEA.ATT.COM 
Newsgroups: soc.men,misc.legal,ba.singles,soc.singles,soc.women
From: noraa@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (aaron.l.hoffmeyer)
Subject: Re: Pre-Sex Contract
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 02:03:07 GMT
Keywords: sex, agreement, legal, contract

In article <1992Dec19.160857.900@netcom.com> bob@netcom.com (Bob Becker) writes:
>
>YOU'VE BEEN SAVING EVERYBODY'S RESPONSES????????
>That  is so  sad.

Well, let me see....  If I meander on over to
/usr/spool/news/soc/men....   What's this?  Geez-o-pete.  Gosh.  Hey,
Emily, come see.  Here's all the posts to this group for the last two
weeks.  Amazing.  Look at this.  If I cd ../../alt/sex/bondage....
Hey, can we try this?

I suppose you thought all these posts just magically appeared when you
fire up the ol' newsreader.

>Get a life.
>

Here's a quarter, kill yourself with it.

Aaron L. Hoffmeyer
TR@CBNEA.ATT.COM 
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: Living in a State of
X-To: WHARFIE
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 21:52:00 GMT

wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie) writes...
>In article <1gth7bINNcfi@gap.caltech.edu> peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Per
>) writes:
>>So this gives you the right to do violence unto others???

>        Since this bozo doesn't read soc.men, could I ask those of you
>who feel compelled to followup to her nonsense to edit your Newsgroups:
>line?  And please, no lectures about killfiles.

OH!

So *that* is why you wanted us not to discuss male choice in soc.men.  I
thought that it was because you didn't think that it should be discussed
in soc.men!

---
Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
(416) 322-7876

"Gravity: It's more than just a fragrance.  It's the LAW!"
   - Will Steeves, President, GOiDS "R" We, Inc.

 * SLMR 2.1a * You have broken into the CIA. Agents are on their way...
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
From: acp@cray.com (Anthony Peterson)
Subject: Re: Living in a State of Siege
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 23 Dec 92 12:12:37 CST


	It's amazing to see so much babble over such a simple issue.
	If women can acknowledge the fact that men are the victims
	of violence and men can acknowledge the fact that women are
	the victims of violence then what the hell's the problem?

	Violence is the problem. Not violence against men or violence
	against women but violence. Even if you wiped violence
	against one gender or the other off the face of the earth 
	violence would still be a problem to both genders. 

	It seems to me that unless you are working toward ending
	ALL violence, you're just pissing in the wind.
Xref: sparky soc.men:22054 soc.women:22075 ba.singles:2916 soc.singles:35206
From: erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,ba.singles,soc.singles
Subject: Re: If he bothers you, put him in your KILL file, please.
Date: 3 Jan 93 21:32:26 GMT
Followup-To: soc.men
Organization: Bleeding Edge Technologies - 'Sliding Down The Razor Blade Of Life...'

In article <1993Jan3.195101.2450@netcom.com> desiree@netcom.com (Desiree Champagne) writes:
>In article <1993Jan3.012348.21961@zooid.guild.org> Will Steeves
> <goid@zooid.guild.org> amuses me on a Sunday morning with:
>
>[my comments about people forwarding articles just to get my attention 
>deleted]
>
>>If he bores you so much, then put him in your KILL file!  You needn't waste
>>bandwidth with insults of "Don't bother me with your crap," when you need
>>only place him in your KILL file and you won't have to worry about seeing
>>anything that bothers you.
>
>	Thanks for the Introduction to Usenet.  Much appreciated.  But
>you see I have this thing about kill files -- I don't believe in them.

Then quit your bitching.  You *do* have a choice - either ignore it or put
up with it.  The whole of usenet isn't going to revolve around Desiree's
desires, much as you would like it to.  Sorry to be the one to tell you.
-- 
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"
Xref: sparky soc.men:22013 alt.feminism:6727
From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Living in a State of Siege
Date: 2 Jan 93 20:54:30 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

| >gazit@cs.duke.edu (Hillel) writes:
| >| ...
| >| 4) Is not it interesting that when women are the losing side (e.g.
| >|    more men learn math), the default assumption is that society
| >|    is to be blamed, and the poor weak women need some compensation,
| >|    but when men are the losing side, the "pro equality people" are
| >|    ready with long explanation why it is just biology...
| >

gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch) writes:
| >should not be investigated.  But the biological element should
| >not be discounted either.  In other words, there's probably not
| >enough hard information around -- except, of course, if you want
| >to use the issue for propaganda.

rsrodger@wam.umd.edu (Yamanari) writes:
| 
| 	Ahh, well.  Then I would like to make the statement
| 	that women are inferior to men at mathematics.

Go ahead.  It's sort of your style...

| 	Remember, I'm not saying that the possible social causes of
| 	the differences should not be investigates, but, the biological
| 	element should not be discounted either.  In other words, there's 
| 	probably not enough hard information around (but that doesn't
| 	seem to dissuade anybody).

It's a different issue.  Education and jobs involving
mathematics are manifestly social constructions.  Longevity
isn't (unless we socially knock a lot of people off).

May I recommend that you not rely on echolalia as a method 
of argumentation?  
-- 

 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: MD04MXS <MD04MXS@MUSIC.TCS.TULANE.EDU>
Subject: RE: Utne Reader on Men and Women
Organization: Your MUSIC System
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 17:43:46 GMT
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-26340]: music.tcs.tulane.edu

In article <1992Dec31.203415.11478@cbfsb.cb.att.com> colten@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (marc.colten) writes:
>The new Utne Reader (Jan/Feb 1993) has a collection of articles
>under the header "Men & Women  Can we get along?  Should we
>even try?"
>
>There are too many articles for me to start typing them in (besides
>copyright and the fact that Utne Reader has a login on Usenet) but
>I recommend the issue and look forward to any discussion.

Do you have their email address???

>There are also a number of sidebars from other publications.  Some
>of the articles are incredibly one sided while others try to
>be even-handed.  You will also learn that there are some radical
>people out there.  One example:

The great thing about Utne Reader is that it EXISTS to generate
discussion. They certainly don't necessarily AGREE with
everything that they publish (or else they have some very
strange multiple personality disorders :-) ). Sort of a
"thinking man's Reader's Digest"....

>I'd be interested in any discussion we can get going on these
>articles.

Sounds good....now I just need to take time to READ them all...



-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth Milstead              Internet: md04mxs@music.tcs.tulane.edu
Tulane University             Prodigy: bkfs62a
New Orleans, Louisiana        Snail Mail: Who still uses it???
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Xref: sparky soc.men:21806 soc.women:21913 talk.abortion:52951 alt.feminism:6538
From: regard@hpsdde.sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women,talk.abortion,alt.feminism
Subject: Re: Parallell situations (was Re: Muffy becomes anti-choice)
Date: 24 Dec 1992 07:49:14 -0800
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

In article <1992Dec23.201300.13785@news.cs.indiana.edu> "Amy Young Leith" <alyoung@kiwi.ucs.indiana.edu> writes:

>Oh please, this is not talk.abortion, no need to dance around the real
>issue. 

Well, Ms Leith, if you'd care to glance at the newsgroups line, you'd
discover that this *is* talk.abortion.  Which, for those of us who are
posting from there, *is* a real issue.

If you don't like the distribution in the newsgroups line, you have to
go on up there and edit it.

Adrienne Regard

Newsgroups: soc.men