HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: petitc@vccsouth04.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Re: Girls can be confusing...
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 01:06:54 GMT

Donny <MC90SANU@MIAMIU.BITNET> writes:

[ Story about how girl flirts with him, then ignores him, then acts as his
friend deleted ]

>  Here is my problem:  I can't "just have fun" with Jane too much longer
>without getting attached (this happens quickly to me) and wanting a
>relationship.  I am afraid to confront her and ask her how she feels
>about me and all this, for fear of "scaring her away."  I think my
>just getting out of a long-term realtionship makes me paranoid about
>everything or something.

  Well, I don't mean to be cruel, but you have a right to be worried.  She
doesn't want a relationship right now---at least not with you.  Just because
she's attracted to you (or you THINK she is), doesn't mean she wants to have
a relationship with you.  From the way you said she acts, I'd call her 'flaky'
and say she just doesn't get deeply emotional about anyone, at least not right
now.  If you can, back away.  If you can't, be warned that she probably will
pull the Monty Python technique ("Run away!  Run away!") whatever you do.  But,
if you wish to try, the best way is first to ferret out how she really DOES
feel about relationships---roommates may not be the best sources of information
about a person.

  You could try finding out why she broke up with her last boyfriend (e.g. was
it something he did, like hurt her feelings, or was she just tired of him).
From there, you can determine if she probably really cares for you or not.
And if she does care, then tell her you care.

>  Well, reading over this, I am regretting posting it now, for all the
>flames I'll prolly get, but, hey, I'll listen to what anyone has to say!

  Why would we flame you?  It's almost a FAQ, but it's still important to you,
right?

  That reminds me---what would people like to see in the FAQ (I'll compile
one we can post weekly or monthly)?

  o Why Women Choose Jerks Over Nice Guys
  o What to do if a woman flirts off and on

  Anything else? :&)

-- 
"Protect endangered species!  Contribute to the Exxon Supporter's Fund!"
"Pay no attention to that little man behind the keyboard."
"If you want to look for fish, best not to look in desert."
"The greatest beauty in the world is beauty that is private."
Xref: sparky alt.romance:16392 alt.polyamory:2470
From: becher@molbiol.ox.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: ++ Am I paranoid? ++
Date: 22 Jan 93 17:30:42 GMT
Organization: Oxford University Molecular Biology Data Centre
Nntp-Posting-User: becher

In article <1jmsr3INNo16@bHARs12c.bnr.co.uk>, dswt@bnr.co.uk (Stewart Tansley) writes:
> In article <C176LE.B6D@brunel.ac.uk> mr-woried writes:
>>
> [Lines running for "longest line in the universe bar none" deleted ;-)]
> [Oh yeh, they were saying that this guy's in an LDR and his RP keeps
> talking about another chap...]
> 
> 6 years ago this happened to me. I thought, and others around me thought, I
> was in the most stable, loving relationship on the planet.

Ditto, here. I had been going out with my boyfriend for 2.5 years, when he 
suddenly started talking and talking about this woman who works in the same 
place as he does . i live an hour away, but haven't got enough money to 
commute every day.
 
> She slept with the guy a few weeks later and then dumped me. She was my
> fiance. 

He dumped me first and then slept with her.
 
> One of these days I'll get less bitter ;-). 

Luckily, he decided otherwise after I started seeing someone else he knew a 
couple of months later. We are now back together again.

> My only advice to you is: believe
> it, it can happen. Prepare yourself for the end. It may not happen, but
> *prepare* yourself *now*.

I wouldn't be quite as pessimistic. Just keep your eyes and ears open, and 
most of all, don't voice your suspicions to her. After I had told my boyfriend 
mine, he later accused me of  "pushing" them "over the brink by being so 
suspicious"...

> 
> I'll leave the more practical advice to Micahel, Christopher, Sharon and co.
> It just sounds like deja vu to me. :-(
> 
> =========================================================================
> Stewart Tansley     | BNR Europe Limited              |  'Be cool, or be
>                     | London Rd, Harlow, CM17 9NA, UK |    cast out...'
> dswt@bnr.co.uk      | +44 279 429531 x2763 (ESN 742)  | Subdivisions, Rush
> ===========================================================================
From: marcia@netcom.com (Marcia)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Curious?
Date: 26 Jan 93 23:11:08 GMT
Organization: The Dolphin Conspiracy, Phase II

In article <728047933.1943@minster.york.ac.uk> aaron@minster.york.ac.uk writes:
>I for one, and I noticed someone who agreed with this, find independent
>women more attractive than dependent. Someone who has enough of a 
>personality and self esteem to go out and do things for themselves tends
>to be more interesting than someone who becomes dependent or feels the
>world owes them something. It is one thing to be willing to compromise
>in a relationship but another to be totally malleable. I want someone
>to speak up for themselves. I don't want to go out with someone that is
>so weak that I unaviodably wield ultimate power because that is not what
>I want to do. (Far more likely to be the other way round)

And if you substitute "men" for "women" in the second line above, it still
holds true. 

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcia Bednarcyk                                  ADDRESSES: marcia@netcom.com
"Sweaty Snugglebunnies."                                     mlb@cisco.com
From: pezzillo@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Amy J. Pezzillo)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Curious?
Date: 22 Jan 93 17:49:06 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <1jotbbINN9ll@bHARs12c.bnr.co.uk> dswt@bnr.co.uk (Stewart Tansley) writes:
>In article <1jmt1uINNrhj@srvr1.engin.umich.edu> ap.6575@cupid.sai.com (AJ) writes:
>>How many men are intimidated by extremely independent women?

>
>Me me me! I *loathe* those women who are so damned 'sorted out' that they
>don't need me or any goddam man in their lives.
>
>Or, what do people *mean* by 'independent'? Can run a country? Can run a 
>multi-million dollar company? Can live on their own? Can go shopping on their 
>own? Can go to the bathroom on their own? What does it *mean*?
>
>To me, I would call a woman 'independent' if she could take or leave a
>relationship with a man. This sort of woman is not for me. I want one who
>would love me, want me and *need* me. I would want to reciprocate.
>
>Does 'need me' mean she isn't independent? If I 'need her' too? Does it
>mean I have low self-esteem?
>
>Bah! I *loathe* 'independent' women. And I resent the assumption in this
>group that you are a wimp if this is the case.
>


How about the notion of interdependence?  You know, two people who are
"people" in their own right, with their own interests and beliefs, but
who can need each other and rely on each other.  

I really believe that you can't have a successful relationship unless
the people involved can be their own people outside of the
relationship.  Otherwise, you're just parasites, living off of each
others' borrowed lives.  I went through more than one relationship
where I did not have a life or much of a personality of my own.  This
is NOT healthy and leads to all kinds of messy stuff when you break up
and are forced to be your own person again.

Much better for two people who are already comfortable with who and
what they are to come together and share that and learn to need each
other without losing the abitlity to do things for themselves.

On the other side, I've also dated someone who refused to need another
human being at all.  The "me agains the world" attitude.That was
REALLY frustrating.  So I definitely think the interdependence is a
happy medium.

ajp
From: weaver@jetsun.weitek.COM (Michael Gordon Weaver)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Help...?
Keywords: ex-boyfriends
Date: 25 Jan 93 18:20:40 GMT
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1993Jan24.150231.13906@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> mreinker@nyx.cs.du.edu (matthew Reinker) writes:
>Disclaimer:  I'm using my current boyfriend's account to do this, and it
>is my problem.  I'd rather not use my name so I'll use "Companion".
>
>THE PROBLEM: I was home recently from college to do taxes(yuck) and went
>through what little mail I have there.  Mostly bank statements but then I
>got to the envelope that had been left sitting conspicuously on the piano. 
>	It was a Valentine's Day card from an ex-boyfriend, to be
>truthful, an ex-fiancee. He says he still is always been thinking of me,
>he apologized for "whatever" he did wrong in our relationship and he said
>something to the effect that he would like to get back together if I'm not
>"already engaged to someone else".
>
I don't think there is a problem. I would not say he is obsessed, this
sounds like normal behavior for an ex-boyfriend who was not happy about
the breakup. It has been only a year since you broke up, he needs time
to get over it. He had/has problems with sleeping around, and may have
been fascinated with you because you wouldn't sleep with him, but this
does not mean his feelings for you were not deep, or that the breakup
did not hurt him.

It sounds like you are sure you don't want to get involved with him
again.  In truth, it sounds pretty clear to me that you shouldn't. I
would suggest you ignore him. Trying to explain or make him feel better
would only prolong his interest in you. It may not be very satisfying
to ignore him, but I don't think there is anything better you can do
for him.

Peace,
Michael.
Newsgroups: alt.romance,alt.romance.chat
From: lastuka@acs.ucalgary.ca (Tina Lastuka)
Subject: Re: I'm baaaaaack.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 23:46:28 GMT
Organization: The University of Calgary, Alberta
Keywords: I was here before, I am here again. 

In article <1993Jan18.080522.28058@csus.edu> beckerd@juliet.ecs.csus.edu (David Becker) writes:
>Once upon a time, long, long ago there was a romantic named
>'Beaker' who used to read this group.  (Ok, so it wasn't THAT
>long ago...)  Beaker suffered an inferiority complex, and
>stopped reading these groups, and instead turned to the more
>questionable alt.sex heirarchy...  Beaker slid deeper and 
>deeper into his pit of self-doubt, and just when he thought
>he could slide no further, he fell in love.  Suddenly, he
>became a new person.  His self assuredness was restored,
>his romantic feelings sprung alive and filled his heart
>with joy.  Doubting that anyone would remember him anyway,
>he has adopted a newer handle with special meaning, and is
>now starting fresh.  Ladies and gentlemen, I AM BACK!
>
>				-=[GoldenHawk]=-
   Welcome back!  Congrats on finding love... gives those
   of us there who have given up some hope!

   *HUGGLES*

   tina


-- 
          **********************************
          * TINA THE HAPPY LITTLE OPERATOR *      lastuka@acs.ucalgary.ca
          **********************************

Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: bross@spartan.ac.BrockU.CA (Brian Ross)
Subject: Re: "Orgasms" posts belong in alt.sex, not here.
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Brock University
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 22:08:34 GMT

fippen@ux2.cso.uiuc.edu (J. Fippen) writes:
: 	alt.romance is for posts concerning romance, not sex. Now I know 
: the "flames" will say that sex is a part of romance and therefore their
: posts belong here. Not so. Romance is a far more gentle aspect of being than
: the raw sex you describe. The key word of your sex posts are: orgasm, laid,
: the "f" word, getting "some", and other such words common to whores and others
: of their acquaintance. The key words of romance (never mentioned in the sex
: posts) are:dating, walking, first kiss, two hearts meeting, love, commitment,
: marriage, long term goals, childern, solidarity for life, etc. You get the 
: idea, so sex posters please move to your area of acceptance: alt.sex.

Hear, hear! Alt.romance is not the forum for posts describing carnal 
lustings befitting the beasts of the field.

-- 
Brian Ross                          
bross@sandcastle.cosc.brocku.ca            
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: petitc@nuge112.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit)
Subject: Re: Princess Bride ... AGAIN!
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 14:25:14 GMT

hf10@crux2.cit.cornell.edu (FieryPhoenix) writes:

>     About the condensending thing.....if you think, in the movie, he was
>condensending, you should read the book!  I'm up to the fire-swamp and so far
>the movie portrays Buttercup in much more of a favorable light than the book.

  Heh.  If some people insist that Wesley also acts condenscending, and
Buttercup does too...It must be True Love!  I mean, hey---if you can only
love someone else as much as you love yourself, these two must REALLY love each
other.  ;&) :&)


-- 
"Protect endangered species!  Contribute to the Exxon Supporter's Fund!"
"Pay no attention to that little man behind the keyboard."
"If you want to look for fish, best not to look in desert."
"The greatest beauty in the world is beauty that is private."
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: phantasm@iastate.edu ()
Subject: Re: Women in engineering...
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:10:30 GMT

David Palmer writes:

>> My SO is an engineering major, and she is extremely intuitive and
>> passionate.

Mr Rossy replies:

> I have deep regret for her. Engineering is the most B-O-R-I-N-G subject I
> have ever had the misfortune to study.

Congratulations David... The unfortunate belief that engineering disciplines
are cold and logical and that engineers fit this mold seems to shape the
views of society much more than I would have thought... For those of you
that are not engineers, or who tend to avoid engineers, you may not know
what you are missing...

I am curious David... What do/did you study?

phantasm
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: fippen@ux2.cso.uiuc.edu (J. Fippen)
Subject: I knew I couldn't get married now.....
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 23:31:02 GMT

I really knew I couldn't get married now.

	It was 1947 and I was home living with my mother for the summer 
when the phone rang. It was Elizabeth, a girl I'd asked for a date a year 
earlier and she wouldn't date me because she was a UI employee and I was a
student. I was delighted to hear from her (girls didn't generally call boys in 
those days), but I was going to school on the GI Bill, and during the summer
I had no money at all; I told her this. So she said something to me I'll never
forget: "You don't need any money to see me". I knew right then that if there
was a heaven on earth, I had found it.
	I saw her every night that summerI could
not marry her because I hadn't finished my education, no job, no money, 
nothmester, I thought only of HER. I nearly flunked out of school, and in those
days jusjust 5 min before she got off work at the hospital. I asked her to take the 
nest to see me." She did. And on a warm September night, lying on the grass at the 
campus of UI, looking at the stars, I knew, urgently, positively, that I had to
have her; this was not a temporary thing, just sexual, it camerom the heart
and I knew intuitively that this feeling would never go away. She loved me and
I knew that. My lust for her was unbearable; could I allow myself to have her
now and marry her later? Then I asked myself, am I a human being or a lower
annimal? Do I have the honor that my mother taught me? (if I don't have honor,
I don't have anything) So with great pain, with love overwhelming me, with
desire so strong my mind was nearly blank, I asked her to marry me.
	We were married when I graduated. I will never forget that night, nor 
will she. But all the agony was worth i because now we have a strong 
marriage, and I count her as my greatest blessing in life. My wish is that 
everone reading this post will have this same great experience.

		John Fippen             fippen@ux2.cso.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: younger & more experienced man
From: soswald@charlie.usd.edu
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 21:28:49 GMT
Reply-To: soswald@charlie.usd.edu
Organization: The University of South Dakota Computer Science Dept.

In article <1993Jan21.112335.23590@e2big.mko.dec.com>, elnsys@muhpm1.enet.dec.com (Gravity Storm account) writes:
>Hum,
>	Don't know about 6 years. But it appears between 9 and 10
>years age difference does cause some sort of problem from my
>past experience. In getting to know a woman recently, she was 10 years
>younger then  I, I found no problems when communicating over the
>network with her and even when talking with her. It appears though
>that she had some problems with the age  as she has recently 
>been rather cool about taking the relationship any further. 
>
>I think age plays a  bigger role when one is in their 20's ,as this
>is when a lot of major changes take place in ones  personailty. 
>Just think at this point the younger of the two people may not even
>be out of university and the older of the two may well  be into their
>chosen  career. The older person will probally have sown most of their
>wild seeds also, while the younger still has the desire to plant a few more 
>gardens  ).
>
>But on the other hand, this type of age difference can be good because 
>their is a lot the older person can teach the younger person. The older
>person usally has much more time for romance also as he has a lot of
>the getting started in a career stuff out of the way. The older person
>probally would be a much more patient lover and listener as he 
>has learned (hopefully) from past relationships what being a thoughtful
>partner is about.
>
>The younger person would be good for the older in that they would 
>bring a much more youthful way of looking at life back to the older one.
>They could do this in such ways as new music, food, friends etc..
>I  can also attest to that the younger person helps the older one to
>re-look at everything in his life again and start his mind thinking about
>things that have long been dormant.
>

I'm in a relationship with a man who is 10 years older than me, and the best
part of the relationship is that he seems to have his priorities straight. 
Before meeting Jerry, I mostly went out with men my age or younger, and the
main *priority* for these guys was to get laid, if it happened enough, there
was a relationship, if it didn't, the relationship went bye-bye.  Communication
with me took second (if not third) fiddle,  it was almost like.....once we were
in a relationship, I no longer mattered(?). (Of course, it could be just the
type of person I'm attracted to, but I'm working on that!! *grin* ;-)

It is refreshing to be in a relationship where we actually communicate, laugh,
and enjoy similar things. 

The down side is that  I don't know if we can combine lifestyles successfully.   
He's used to doing things one way and the way I do things won't necessarily
mess very well. There's compromise of course, but . . . . . 

Love can be so hard.

-Sandy Munkvold
SOSWALD @ charlie.usd.edu 

Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: jggoslin@vela.acs.oakland.edu (Gorilla Welfare)
Subject: Re: Princess Bride ... AGAIN!
Organization: Oakland University, Rochester MI.
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 21:24:03 GMT

cs64wag@sdcc8.ucsd.edu (Jeremy Friesner) writes:
>Everybody's been talking about how Princess Bride is
>a really romantic movie, but... in the later sections
>, after Wesley has returned from being the "dread
>pirate Roberts", he seems really aloof and condescending
>towards the princess.  That doesn't seem romantic at
>all!

I believe the whole point of his being aloof and condescending was to
show that he believed that she had agreed to be married of her own
accord, and was not forced to be married as was truly the case...
Misinformation is a powerful motivator.  He believed that she no
longer loved him, and thus was quite irate.  I can understand that...

Gorilla Welfare
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: fippen@ux2.cso.uiuc.edu (J. Fippen)
Subject: We do not choose love; love chooses us.
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:43:30 GMT


t choose love; love chooses us.
	Love is shy. It is beautiful, yet it is shy. Love is not found
in loud brash places; rather it is found in the quietness of a wood, or
perhaps walking along a beach or path. Love is not found in smoke
filled rooms or bars full of pushy people, because love is too quiet
to esist in such an atmosphere. Not everyone will find love; they may
find sex, but they will not find love. We do not choose love; love 
chooses us. And if we are to achieve the greatest happiness on earth,
we must follow love. Someone said to me recently on this net "to find
love we must take the big gamble" and this is a beautiful thought,
because it recognizes that love does not come when we call, love 
come to us when we least expect it, and if we do not follow, love 
may never come to us again. We all crave love, yet few will heed the
call when love looks our way, so we do not see. Some of those who
heed the call will achieve that sublime state called "one". They will
not sustain that lovely state, but they will be close to it, and they 
will spend the rest of their lives trying to again reach "one". This is
life's highest state, the ultimate achievement for us all. 
	I wish in vainhat we could all be there all of the time.

				John Fippen   fippen@ux2.cso.uiuc.edu

Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: gthkoh@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Koh Thong Hwee)
Subject: Re: Valentine's Day gift suggestions needed!!
Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 05:26:03 GMT

Michael Haardt (michael@gandalf.moria) wrote:
: In article <1993Jan14.175335.25532@pony.Ingres.COM>, kyle@Ingres.COM (Kyle Smith) writes:
: > 		I have always felt that the best present a guy can give his gal
: > 		falls under one of the following categories:
: > 		1) perfume (make sure you find out what kinds she likes first,
: > 		and don't but buy her the cheapest version of the scent, 
: > 		buy the real perfume or whatever costs the most)
: > 				    or
: > 		2) lingerie (make sure you buy something silk)
: > 				    or
: > 		3) something she really wants that she does not expect you to
: > 		get for her (especially if you can remember something she told
: > 		you once but she didn't make a big deal out of it...it will 
: > 		totally impress her that you remembered)

: The last seems the best of all three to me: Listen to your SO when she
: speaks to you, and remember it.  About buying something expensive, "or
: whatever costs the most": Do you think she will like it more than when
: you hug her, look deep into her eyes, stroke her back in a caressing way
: for a while, and tell her how very much you love her?

: And if you additionally want to present her something, present something
: she really likes to have, and that is individual for each person!

: Michael

I agree with Michael here.  The last option shows that you have been attentive
to her all your times together.  It means that you value her a lot -- what
she say or do or feel.  Buying such a gift is most thoughtful on your part
and it definitely shows that you love her and appreciate her.  I also feel
that a thoughtful gift need not be expensive but that it must express the
idea that the friendship between both of you is highly valued by you.  Hence
such a gift expresses the esteemed friendship between you both because it
emphasized the times you spent together.

It is definitely romantic (to me at least...)

TH