HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: keithd@stallion.oz.au (Keith Duddy)
Subject: Re: Grrrrr.
Organization: Stallion Technologies
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 05:33:08 GMT

In <9211041631.AA07504@access.digex.com> glenn@access.digex.com (D. Glenn Arthur Jr.) writes:

>Dear Editor,

>I eagerly and anxiously opened today's paper seeking the results of two 
>ballot initiatives, one in Oregon and one in Colorado.  While I did not 
>expect to see Oregon's proposition nine and Colorado's proposition two 
>covered as prominently as local questions such as Maryland's question
>six and DC's death penalty question, I did expect that questions of grave 

Here in Brisbane (Australia) there was a small but prominent article on
page 2 of the Courier Mail on Oregon and Colorado (which also mentioned
Portland's win and Tampa Florida's probably loss on city 
sexual-orienatation legislation). The Courier Mail is the only real
morning paper, and given their complete avoidance of our local pride
march and rally I never expected to see this so promptly and prominently
covered. I didn't notice anything about the death penalty or Maryland's
question 6 - whatever it may be.

Keith
---
\\\\\                                                                   /////
////                   keith duddy - slave to the rhythm                 \\\\
\\\  stallion technologies - 56 sylvan rd, toowong, qld 4066, australia   ///
//     ph              fx                 mail                 uunet       \\
\+61-7-870-4999  +61-7-371-8881  keithd@stallion.oz.au  uunet!staltec!keithd/

       ^^I write software for this company - not policy statements^^
From: mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: I'm Not Political (was Re: Colorado's Amendment 2)
Date: 9 Nov 92 20:09:05 GMT
Followup-To: soc.motss
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Nov8.132001.14164@macc.wisc.edu>, anderson@macc.wisc.edu
(Jess Anderson) wrote:

> friend has done its duty: an inert citizen being quite
> unpolitical.
> 
> >Rod [catching PEDS (post-election depression syndrome)]
> 
> The antidote is rage, of course.


Well, it's no longer a joke.  Jezeboo *is* a Totalitarian
Tinkerbell in every sense of the word.  I never did think
he was too clear on what the word 'fascist' meant.  One does
not have to be a right-wing Bible thumper to be a 'fascist.'
Tinkerbells can be fascists, too.

Politics is life, life is politics.

If Tink wasn't even less *effective* than his Disney namesake,
this would almost be dangerous.  As it is, I imagine we shall
be the only ones to suffer his totalitarian tirades.  The
People will likely only have to worry about the Fundamentalist
Facsist Threat - as that bunch seems quite capable of following 
through with its words.  Our Totalitarian Tinkerbells make for 
unlikely contenders in the Race to Reichdom.
   
But both are speaking the same language.  

Both seek to coerce the Body Politik with rhetorical rampages.  
Both seek to enshrine *their* view of how the world should work 
in some body of laws.  Both seek to portray other points of view 
as wicked, ignorant, regressive, destructive, or any combination
thereof.  Both claim to be on the side of 'Right.'  

Both are equally repugnant.

*X*
From: squires@mozzarella.cs.wisc.edu (Charles Squires)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: New Zealand gay/AIDS discrim. bill
Date: 10 Nov 92 17:34:39 GMT
Organization: U of Wisconsin Madison - Computer Sciences

patrick@actrix.gen.nz (Pat Cain) writes:

>Within the next two weeks it's expected a bill will be tabled in
>parliament in New Zealand seeking to ban discrimination against
>gays and those with HIV....

One point of clarification.

In American English, "to table" generally means "to remove from consideration
indefinitely."

In British English (and I assume in New Zealand also), "to table" has the
opposite meaning-- "to place on the agenda".

I nearly freaked out when I read the original posting until I say that it
came from a New Zealand poster.

Charlie
-- 
-  Charles S. Squires, Jr.  ---------------------------------------------
   Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin- Madison
   1210 W Dayton St, Madison, WI 53706; squires@mozzarella.cs.wisc.edu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon)
Subject: Re: Oregon & Colorado antigay initiatives
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 00:44:37 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Followup-To: soc.motss

In article <lftr95INN25d@news.bbn.com>, rrizzo@star-trek.bbn.com (Ron
Rizzo) wrote:

> Finally, these creeps said they intend to launch similar political 
> initiatives in Washington, California, Nevada and Idaho.  They'll 
> need a lot of luck in Washington and California:  these states are 
> more diverse and somewhat less redneck than Oregon.  But Nevada and 
> Idaho sound like just the kind of states where their message would 
> receive a friendly hearing.  In any case, their announced plans are 
> still limited to the Pacific Coast and Rocky Mountain states.

Classism.  One of the few.  The proud.  The Politically Correct Isms.

Three questions, one in two parts:

  1.  Do you know anything about Oregon beyond Measure 9?
  2.  What are the criteria you use in determing 
  
      a.  What makes someone a 'redneck?'
      b.  How many 'rednecks' are required for a state to 
          be considered such?

*X*
From: black@sybase.com (Chris Black)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Homsexuals rasing children(question)
Date: 12 Nov 92 01:06:41 GMT
Distribution: na

In article <1992Nov8.045344.5979@meaddata.com>, king@meaddata.com (Mike King) writes:

|> Do homosexual relationships have the long-term stability necessary to
|> raise children?

Some do, some don't.  Given current divorce rates, I think the same
question couls be asked of heterosexual couples.
 
|> Are "children" of homosexual parents ostrisized by the other children?
|> If so, how do the parents deal with it?

Some are, some aren't.  Lots of kids are ostracized for lots of reasons.
Good parents give them support and make sure they have social arenas
where they feel accepted.
 
|> Do the "children" grow up normal?  And no, by normal I don't mean
|> heterosexual.  In other words, do they have any emotional problems or
|> problems with relationships?

No reason why they should.  Lots of kids, of both gay and straight
parents, have problems;  lots don't.

-- Chris
black@sybase.com
From: jns@elea.umd.edu (J. N. Shaumeyer)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Colorado Addresses
Date: 6 Nov 92 00:24:25 GMT
Organization: Militant Homosexual Lobby, Gay Lifestyles, Inc.


Andrew Solovay (solovay@netcom.com) wrote:
 
> The Republicans are heavily divided on gay rights, which is also
> new.

Some people who call themselves republican may
support equal rights for homosexuals.  How nice.

The Republicans are a single party.

The Republicans had one campaign platform.

The Republicans had one plank in that platform
specifically opposing equal rights for homosexuals.

The Republicans are NOT divided on equal rights
for homosexuals.

--jns
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mara@panix.com (Mara Chibnik)
Subject: Re: Historical perspective
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:42:05 GMT
Organization: (getting there)

Sim Aberson (aberson@enh.nist.gov) asks us to remember back to the
days of civil rights victories:

 >I was wondering if some of the older motssers (or those knowledgeable
 >in history could offer some information on the civil rights movements
 >of the 1950's and 1960's, and how, if at all, the experience of those
 >movements might be applicable to us today.

 >What I'm looking for is information on how the bigots behaved after
 >one of their so-called victories.  Did they vow to take the movement
 >nationwide?  Did they feel they would eventually be successful?
 >Is there something we can learn from this period in our history
 >so that we can overcome what may happen in the coming years?

This is a wonderful question.  

The impression that I got, as a young person rather removed from the
(southern) venue of this struggle, was that the victories were
permanent, that there would be no turning back.  Of course, in those
days we weren't considering the de facto segregation in the north.

But the issue where I first felt the fighting back after the initial
"victory" was the matter of abortion rights.  I have been asked--
challenged, actually-- by anti-feminist men why feminist groups
didn't immediately organize local action after Roe v. Wade, to
guarantee the right.  The answer, I suspect has to do with exactly
this point:  We were not accustomed to the notion that such a right,
once established, might be revoked.  

I feel exactly the same disbelief over the pressure from anti-gay
activists.

We must not give up anywhere.  If we are not relentless in
establishing our point of view, the "center" (in the perception of
the mass of population) will be redefined in terms less and less
favorable to us and more and more accomodating to the attitudes of
the homophobes.  I really resent having to do this.  As people have
said already here, it takes a lot of energy and it takes nerves of
iron to face this opposition all the time and never to be able to
consider that a war has been won.  Still, with (dare I say it?) more
sympathetic leadership in the Executive, we do have some hope that
we have the momentum moving in our direction, finally.


-- 

  Mara Chibnik
  mara@panix.com                Life is too important to be taken seriously.

Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas)
Subject: Re: Genetic oversimplification of homosexuality.
Organization: Gordian; Costa Mesa, CA
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:10:45 GMT

In article <Bx9KHE.IF4@scd.hp.com>, mdrayton@sr.hp.com (Mike Drayton) writes:
> Michael A. Thomas (mike@gordian.com) writes:
> Apparently he's forgotten that a number of us here _do_ have
> children, and I, for one, disagree with his description of us.
> My turn to get pissed off.

  Oh chill, hon. I was being a smart ass.
-- 

		Michael Thomas	(mike@gordian.com)
	"I don't think Bambi Eyes will get you that flame thrower..."  
		-- Hobbes to Calvin
		USnail: 20361 Irvine Ave Santa Ana Heights, Ca,	92707-5637
		PaBell: (714) 850-0205 (714) 850-0533 (fax)
Newsgroups: soc.motss,talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic
From: lungtt@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Terence T. Lung)
Subject: Re: Genetic oversimplification of homosexuality.
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 92 19:47:44 GMT

In article <16842@umd5.umd.edu> jns@elea.umd.edu (J. N. Shaumeyer) writes:
>> Bill Rea (cctr114@cantua.canterbury.ac.nz) wrote:
>> > 
>> > Actually just because an animal engages in homosexual sex doesn't mean
>> > its a homosexual. We used to raise bulls on the farm and they were always
>> > fingering each others rears, but I suspect that most of them would have
>> > preferred a cow if given half a chance. 
>...Nor is your verisimilitude enhanced by the gratuitous 
>addition of offensive clarifications like "I suspect 
>that most of them would have preferred a cow...."
I should add that if you read some age-old stories as is found in
Judges Chp 19, you will find that when the laws of the wild take
over, homosexual activities are not performed uniquely by homosexuals.
In the Judges 19 story, the townspeople came along "Bring out your
meat" calls, only to be disappointed but sufficiently satisifed with
the women thrown out to quench their desires.  They preferred the
men for their lusts.  Does this mean that all the townspeople were
homosexual?  Statistically speaking, probably not.

Terence

A time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine,
but instead, to suit their own desires...
From: roger@quantime.co.uk (Roger Phillips)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: A Dumb Question, But...
Date: 6 Nov 92 01:14:20 GMT
Reply-To: roger@quantime.co.uk (Roger Phillips)
Organization: Quantime Ltd, London (software for market research)

In article <1992Nov5.035805.20856@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu>,
fvaughn@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (Frederick Vaughn) writes:
> I'm just curious as to what the "O" stands when people write "LGBO" in
> their posts. Other? Something else I haven't thought of at all?

I know what you mean.
I've just discovered that
after seeing the term GOP all over the place for months
nobody I know here seems to know what it means.
-- 
Roger Phillips                            roger@quantime.co.uk
"*holoptic* having the eyes meeting in front"
-- Chambers English Dictionary (1988)
Xref: sparky soc.motss:46692 soc.bi:14853
From: snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass)
Newsgroups: soc.motss,soc.bi
Subject: Re: What to do about Colorado
Date: 9 Nov 92 09:33:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: lclark.1992Nov9.093301.2384
Organization: Lewis & Clark College, Portland OR

In article <1992Nov6.165031.11842@rmtc.Central.Sun.COM> bartlett@rmtc.Central.Sun.COM (Terry Bartlett) writes:
>In article <1992Nov6.034417.26763@reed.edu> nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar) writes:
>>In article <1992Nov5.224144.14823@ncselxsi.uucp> fisher@ncselxsi.uucp
>>(Chuck Fisher) writes, pondering Measure 9's defeat in Oregon but
>>Measure 2's success in Colorado:


It really concerns me when I hear people asking that things not
be critized.  I do not think in any way that we need to pull
apart and finger point at the 'cause' for what went wrong
in Colorado, but I feel that it is VERY important that we
look at what did go wrong and what worked for our fight
in Colorado.  Folks that is what the Right wing people are
doing and they are winning.  So don't go getting your
feathers in an uproar.  Most of us feel very nauscious about
what has happened in Colorado and I can guarrantee you that
you have our prayers, sympathy and support COLORADO!!!!

Besides I do want to see my parent before they die!!!!

Bil Snodgrass III

>Criticizing the people who fought the fight and lost is counterproductive.

We as a community in Oregon had Measure 8 from 1988 to look at and
we knew what our down falls were.  One was apathy and putting too
much reliance on the polls.

Of course you will miss this in Colorado since you are not going
to go back a critique your battle.

>
>Terry Bartlett			   bartlett@rmtc.Central.Sun.COM
>Sun Microsystems		   "You've got to stand for something,
>Rocky Mountain Technology Center    or you'll fall for anything..."
>Colorado Springs, CO 80918         
Newsgroups: soc.motss,soc.bi
From: miket@hermes.tcs.com (Michael Turner nmscore Assoc.)
Subject: Re: What to do about Colorado
Organization: Teknekron Communications Inc.
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 22:49:18 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.224144.14823@ncselxsi.uucp> fisher@ncselxsi.uucp (Chuck Fisher) writes:
>I was sad to hear about the loss in Colorado.  It was strange that we
>had heard so much about #9 in Oregon and very little about Colorado.
>Was it because everyone thought it had little chance to win?  Were
>folks in Colorado complacent?

Maybe the #2 people in Colorado had a different strategy: run a quiet
campaign.  The #9 stuff was all over the news here in CA, in part because
the #9 promoters were so inflammatory.

Another possible difference: Colorado is much more sharply divided,
politically, into urban liberal sophisticates clustered around Denver
(self-styled, anyway) and rural conservative ... uh ... is "rubes" too
inflammatory?  Denver is the city that gave us two, count 'em, TWO liberal
presidential candidates in one election year (Gary Hart and Patricia
Schroeder).  The rest of the state, however, has a lot of people
driving pick-up trucks with shotgun racks, if I may stereotype slightly.

Oregon is similarly divided, but much blurrier.  Its diversity is more
homogeneous.  The whole #9 issue, interestingly, came up there at the
instigation of ex-Californian "family-values" right-wingers from around
L.A., whereas I imagine that #2 in Colorado was more indigenous.  I have
no doubt that some of the ex-Northern-Californian Oregonians played a
significant role in defeating 9 there, as the north of our state is more
liberal, generally, and sends lots of refugees to Oregon, many of them to
relatively out-of-the-way places.  This relatively greater degree of
dispersion of ex-Californians probably both helped to bring on the crisis
and to move the state past it as well.  To simplify outrageously, Oregonians
were deciding what they could live with, whereas in Colorado, country
people were trying to tell urbanites what they wanted to live without.

Any Coloradans or Oregonians care to comment on this?
---
Michael Turner
miket@tcs.core
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas)
Subject: Re: Thugsy twins to run against each other!
Organization: Gordian; Costa Mesa, CA
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 00:53:11 GMT

In article <1dud83INNf1e@morrow.stanford.edu>, AH.PBL@forsythe.stanford.edu (Mark) writes:
> (I guess this means that Dannemeyer no longer favors "term limits"?)
> 
>   I don't know where he's going to get the money to run.  He did so
> badly in the republiKKKan primaries this year.  At first, I laughed at
> the thought of him even coming close to winning a US Senate seat.  But
> then I remembered how close Bruce ("I'm going to Washington to cut my
> pay and drive myself around town in a Yugo") Herschonsohn came to winning.
> If Dannemeyer is able to hide his real agenda, like Herschonsohn did, then
> he might have a chance.

  Ah, but fear not. Dannemeyer holding his tounge is an impossibility. 
I'll take odds that the republicans handlers cannot sanitize him. There
is just to much kruft and krust with ol' Dannemeyer for that kind of 
cleansing. It may play well in Fullerton and Garbage Grove, but it'll
never happen on a statewide level. Unless of course the Dem's ran 
Tom Hayden against him (cringe)...
-- 

		Michael Thomas	(mike@gordian.com)
	"I don't think Bambi Eyes will get you that flame thrower..."  
		-- Hobbes to Calvin
		USnail: 20361 Irvine Ave Santa Ana Heights, Ca,	92707-5637
		PaBell: (714) 850-0205 (714) 850-0533 (fax)
From: harris@gallium.cs.unc.edu (Trey Harris)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: New Republic editor openly gay
Keywords: New Republic, mainstream press, magazines
Date: 14 Nov 92 02:39:14 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

In article <lg5rniINNgik@news.bbn.com> rrizzo@BBN.COM (Ron Rizzo) writes:
>I just heard on NPR that the magazine The New Republic now has an openly gay
>editor, Andrew Sullivan!

Yes.  He's, I believe, the president of the National Lesbian and Gay
Press Corps.  He's not only gay, but Catholic and conservative.

What has happened to the New Republic, anyway?  The Republicans are
taking it over...

Trey Harris
--Stranger in a Strange Thread!
From: Furr@cup.portal.com (George Dalton Madison)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Pat Robertson, Buchanan, Helms, VOTE!!!
Date: Sat,  7 Nov 92 22:23:49 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Nov5.213450.4701@netcom.com> <1992Nov6.001702.8730@netcom.com>
  <1dcj77INNhq3@mizar.usc.edu>

adolphson writes:
>solovay@netcom.com (Andrew Solovay) writes:
>> And on civil liberties, it's more or less a wash between the two 
>> parties, as always. 
>
>That is egregiously false.  Which Republican Party are
>you referring to that comes remotely close to the Democratic
>Party with regard to civil liberties?

I never thought I'd agree with Arne about anything, but this I
do agree with, 100%.

The Democrats aren't perfect, mind you -- but I doubt they would
have concocted the idea of using RICO against neighborhood video
stores that had more than one porno tape available to rent, or
trying to harrass companies out of business by getting them 
indicted in several different jurisdictions simultaneously. (This
happened to Bijou Video as I recall -- fortunately, the tactic was
blocked by court order.)

It's not as visible here in California, but I've seen the list of
states that video companies don't DARE send their tapes to
blossom over the past few years.  (I'm on Palm Drive Video's
mailing list, and have been for some time.)

Something else we can ask for from a Clinton administration is
an end to this war on *erotic* thought the ReaganBush
assministration (spelling intentional) was waging.
 
() If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.
()      -- Florynce Kennedy
-----
[> George D. Madison | NBCS: B8f+t+w-e+s+k+a!cv | Just say NO to razors! <]
[> It's a BEAR thing -- you wouldn't understand. <|> furr@cup.portal.com <]
From: aberson@enh.nist.gov
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: RE: Marching on Washington and Protesting Bigotry
Date: 9 Nov 92 16:06:50 GMT
Organization: NIST

In a previous article, tal@plts.uucp (Tom Limoncelli) wrote:
>I hate to be a downer, but MOW93 is so broke right now I don't think
>it's going to happen.  They have to pay TONS of money before the event
>starts, and can't count on collecting money at the end of the march (at
>the end of MOW87 there were buckets that you could drop money into, I
>didn't see many people giving money).
> 
>Time to start fundraising!  Remember all the money you AREN'T going to
>send to Colorado?  Send it to MOW93!

Have an address or phone number?




       Sim Aberson   Ft. Lauderdale, FL   aberson%3328.span@sdsc.edu
"It's always Beach Party Barbie, or Malibu Barbie....  That shit does not
prepare you for the true horror of a real woman's life.  Where is Single,
Abused, Trailer-Park Barbie?"             - Roseanne Arnold
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca (Ken Dykes)
Subject: Pumping
Organization: Thinkage Ltd.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:52:50 GMT

In article <Bx2sxF.EH@agora.rain.com> bcapps@agora.rain.com (Brent Capps) writes:
>jeffy@syrinx.umd.edu (Jeffrey C. Burka) writes:
>>It's amazing how so many people, especially straight, seem eager to *want*
>>to believe the rumors (much like the <absurd quantity> of semen found
>>in the rock star's stomach (a rumor I believed when I first heard it in
>it was supposedly Rod Stewart; this must have been in '77 or '78.
>What other personalities have supposedly gone under the stomach
>pump?
>
>Brent, who has been known to get pumped on occasion

*BIG* *RED* *PUMPS* ???

-- 
   - Ken Dykes, Thinkage Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario, Canada    [43.47N 80.52W]
         kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca   postmaster@thinkage.com   thinkage!kgdykes
         harley-request@thinkage.on.ca             kgdykes@math.uwaterloo.ca
From: adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Frogs
Date: 5 Nov 92 08:43:45 GMT
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu

In article <1992Nov2.182910.20542@sun0.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> 
gsmith@kalliope.uucp (Gene W. Smith) writes:
> In article <1cq37jINN503@mizar.usc.edu> adolphso@mizar.usc.edu
> (adolphson) writes:
> >Did you somehow manage to miss all the fun, Matt?  Day after day of
> >long, long, long articles?  When I was being flamed by Jess, Jojo,
> >Clay Bond and others for weeks on end?
>
> I certainly remember.  I read this article, and thought "what a wonderful
> article!"

Why thank you!  Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to have 
done much good.  Have you seen the labored, lumbering,
anti-art, anti-beauty, idiotic article by Diana Fuss (editor
of _Inside/Out_, the volume that occasioned my outburst) in
the Summer (or perhaps Fall) 1992 _Critical Inquiry_?  It's
all about fashion photography.  It's *horrifying*.  Fuss
is so busy with her Frenchified Freud that she doesn't stop
to think about the development of Western aesthetics over the
last, oh, 2500 years or so. 

> It then got flamed for something I hadn't even noticed,
> but which leaped right out at others...

I was young then and didn't know the ways of the net.
Silly me -- I assumed that people would focus on the
content of my objection to the kind of junk that lots
of academics produce in GL studies rather than on the
way in which I expressed myself.  

Arne