HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: probst@fraser.sfu.ca (Scott Probst)
Subject: Re: Marriage
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: soc.singles
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 01:19:28 GMT

In article <BvB9Au.uo@inews.Intel.COM> gbennett@frx781.intel.com (gbennett) writes:
>
>I would like to pose a hypothetical question to any single willing to
>respond.  Here it is:
>
>   Would you be willing to give up a career, a new home, and a new car
>   for an everlasting and loving marriage?
>
well, what else do you have to offer?

scott

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Asking advice
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 92 16:55:56 GMT

In article <117@cnmhnet.UUCP> keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard) writes:
>
>however, it is a generally accepted Psychological Theory, that 
>Public Displays of Affection [PDA] are a symptom of insecurity
>on the part of one or both of the parties involved. 

Ah, but as insecurities go, it is one of the most enjoyable ones--
personally I think it's great fun both to do and to watch.  
(Escalators are especially good for brief moments of serious PDAing,
I've found.)

>  Consequently, the old
>cliche that states "...the meek shall inherit the earth..."
>has merit.

"...in small plots, about three feet by nine." 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith)
Subject: Re: New Orleans vs. Fox TV
Organization: Gagging Sloth Records
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 22:16:54 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.153911.26937@cbnewsd.cb.att.com>, nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:

|> I heard on Chicago's WLS radio this morning that the Fox Network
|> has issued an apology to the City of New Orleans after hearing
|> of the city's outrage over a portion of the most recently-aired
|> episode of the Simpsons.
|> 
|> It's the episode where Marge gets a part in the parody of "A Streetcar
|> Named Desire".  In the play, there is a musical number in which a
|> chorus line sings a song about New Orleans.  The lyrics are VERY hard
|> to understand but if you listen closely they go something like this:
|> 
|> "New Or-lee-uns!  Home of pirates, drunks, and whores
|> New Or-lee-uns!  Tacky overpriced souvenir stores New Or-lee-uns!"
|> 
|> And then there is something like:
|> 
|> If you wanna go to hell you'll get there quick by the bile of
|> the Mississip, etc., but I haven't played my videotape yet to listen
|> closely.  Were any of you able to understand the lyrics?  The commentators
|> on the radio played the song and their consensus was, "Yeah?  So? It's
|> TRUE!!"
|> 
|> Sure.  Anyone else have an opinion??

Yeah...SO WHAT?! Do these people really have nothing better to do than
get all upset because someone pokes fun at their city?! It's comedy, guys...
relax!

jds

***************************************************************************
                               * Health and knowledge and wealth and power,
Jeff Smith                     * Passion and poems and sex
smith@fl08-g.comm.mot.com      * I wear a smile like a leather glove,
                               * I won't shut my mouth for less.
                                                - shriekback
***************************************************************************
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Subject: Re: E.W. - It's my birthday today!: )
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 17:17:56 GMT

In <1992Sep26.002440.17788@schbbs.mot.com> CENG51@maccvm.corp.mot.com (Craig Witkowski) writes:

>>In <29247@hydra.Helsinki.FI> taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina) writes:

>>>In <ewillims.717332447@unix1.tcd.ie> ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) wri
>>>> It's my birthday today!:)  [or should that be
>>>>a depressed smiley?? (*grin*)]

>>>Happy birthday Emma.  You are exactly two days older than me.
>>>Hopefully you don't think that younger men are a no no. :)

>>   Not at all!:)  I just have that much more to teach them!
>>                       (*GRIN*)


>Dating a teacher isn't so bad.  If you do something wrong,  she'll make
>you do it over and over again!

>Happy B-day Emma!

	Very good, dear!:)  Now show the rest of the class how it's done!
						(*Laughter*)
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Cars and such
Date: 28 Sep 92 23:11:06 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

I found this string over in ba.general and thought it would be more 
appropriate here...

|>>Happy owner of a new Mitsubishi Expo.
|>
|>Happier owner of a new Mazda RX-7.  Wanna drag for pink slips?
|>
|
|Confident owner of a new Sears Riding mower. Yeah, I wanna race for pink slips!

I thought about taking up his challenge but I'd rather race for blue teddies.
-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira     | Auspex Systems | "Auspex does not share my opinions.  |
| johnf@auspex.com | Santa Clara CA |  So Why am I still working here?"    |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Dating an older woman
From: wall@hel4.brl.mil (Jeff Wall)
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:02:46 EST
Distribution: world
Organization: U.S. Army Human Engineering Lab  Aberdeen, MD

In article <1992Sep25.154107.21029@tinman.mke.ab.com> incorban@mke.ab.com
(Isaac Corban1) writes:
>Heres the story.  I'm a guy in his mid 20's and I've recently started dating
>a woman in her upper 30's (maybe 40? I haven't asked).  The difference in
>age doesn't bother me but there is one thing that has me a little concerned.
>She is divorced with two children, an 18 year old daughter and a 12 year old
>son.  If you stop and think about the fact that the I'm closer in age to the
>daughter than to the woman I'm dating, well I'm worried about how her kids
>are going to react.  Intellectually I believe that it should not matter.
>Years of conservative social indoctrination has got me confused about the
>entire situation though.  Anyone out there been in a similar situation?
>anyone got any advice for me?

I dated an older woman for about a year.  I was 23 and she was 36.  She had two
boys, 6 and 10 years old.  This was really no problem in my situation the kids
were young enough that I wasn't going to be identifying with them.  The
realationship went really well, the only reason we aren't seeing each other now
is that I had to move.  :-(
I really had no problem with her age, in fact I enjoyed the more mature aspects
of our relationship.  There wasn't the insecurity that I've experienced in
other relationships.  Also, the relationship was much more laid back and
calmer, there wasn't the petty whining the I have experienced with women my own
age or younger.  I attribute this to her maturity.

Hope things work out.

Jeff Wall
wall@hel4.brl.mil
From: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Engaged Psychobitch from Hell Syndrome
Date: 2 Oct 92 16:35:11 GMT
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin

In <1992Oct1.003747.8622@leland.Stanford.EDU> richwing@leland.Stanford.EDU (Rich Wingerter) writes:

>In article <ewillims.717613572@unix1.tcd.ie>, ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams) writes:
>|> 	Oh C'mon!  We're splitting hairs here!  Yes, of course, I'm
>|> committed to my relationships with my friends and family and cats!:)
>|> But we are talking about life-long commitment with a mate here.....
>|> would you be seriously committed to a brief fling with a girl/boy
>|> who you never intended to date for any length of time?

>Yes, if "committed" means doing my best toward that relationship, doing my best
>to make it work.  The length of time doesn't change my experience of the
>quality of the relationship.  I might be sad that it only lasted a short time,
>but that's a different thing.

>Maybe "committed" isn't the right word.  I think it has taken on a specialized
>meaning when applied to relationships.  To many people it just means
>"monogamous".

>If you mean that when someone promises to be monogamous that they should live
>up to that "commitment", then I agree.  People should keep their agreements.
>Not keeping agreements, I suppose, shows a lack of "commitment".  I just don't
>think people should make that kind of commitment, generally.  Under rare and
>specific circumstances, it would be appropriate.  For example, if you found
>that one person in 5 billion that was exactly perfect for you, and you happened
>to be that one person in 5 billion that was exactly perfect for them, then by
>all means.

	Oh I see!  So, there's no point in making a "serious commitment"
in any average relationship because the person in question has only a one
in 5 billion chance of being perfect for you so therefore it's not
worth bothering?
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Re: Bar/Club Scene
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 22:39:38 GMT

In article 10909@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu, jderagon@nyx.cs.du.edu (John Deragon) writes:

>	The way I basically handled it is, I walked over to the 
>pretiest one, and said, "Hi, my name is John...", and things sorta
>just rolled on from there.

Did the evening roll well?

>	When I got home, I thought there had to be a better way,
>or line to use in a situation like that.  I was ofter told that
>the best line-of-attack is humor, as puts the situation on a non-
>threating mode, and eases the tensions, but it is awful hard to think
>of a cunning/funny/witty line in the heat of the moment.

If you were trying to think of better ways, I guess the evening was not
to your liking. There is no line of attack. There is no line of approach.
Lines are detected and seen as such. I would not have bothered going up
to these obvious flirts. I would have motioned them to join me. If they
have the guts to join me, we could take it from there. If they just stay 
there and keep up the charade, they are TEASES [TM] and not worth wasting
my time over.

In their eyes you likely came across as a NICE GUY [TM], and nobody is
a better victim for a TEASE [TM] than a guy who appears to be a NICE GUY [TM].
If you appear to be just a guy, and don't fall for the flirting, they will
try harder. If you give in, they will probably play their game with other
guys in the club. When they try really hard, a simple hand gesture will
suffice, they are, after all, watching you. 

My method gets their curiosity going. The only defence for game playing is
more game playing. Since the girls are reversing roles with you by staring,
you can do the same by motioning,*Come Here!* This way you are protected
from looking like a PUTZ, the ball is in your court.

Andy.

PLEASE EXCUSE MY OBVIOUS IGNORANCE.

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: bolsen@mcs213f.cs.umr.edu (Brian Olsen)
Subject: Re: What we find attractive
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 23:40:44 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri - Rolla

In article <1992Sep27.181250.26579@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>Here are some results from various psychological studies expressed as
>correlation coefficients:
>
[deleted stuff]
>
>The physical traits included height, weight, hair color, eye color, and
>skin color.  However, they also included nose breadth, earlobe length,
>wrist circumference, distance between eyes, and lung volume.  One of the
>highest, though, was length of the middle finger (+0.61), which seems to
>be more important than either intelligence or hair color.
>
>The lengths of my middle fingers are 7.8 cm (left) and 8.0 cm (right).
>
>-- Herb Huston

By the way, how do you measure your finger?  From the middle of the
knuckle?
If so I should have women falling all over me on that alone
(12.4 cm left, 12.5 cm right).  Any takers?

Brian

".sig" No such file or directory
From: blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Date: 27 Sep 92 09:50:10 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque

In article <ewright.717353057@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>A couple of people asked, "what other qualities or
>interests do you have that might attract someone,"
>I am open-
>minded and believe in judging people on their abilities and
>their actions, not on physical appearance.  I believe in doing
>what is right, rather than what is expedient or popular.  I am
>committed to my beliefs and do not compromise on principle. I
>consider myself to be religous (Christian) but do not find most 
>churches to my liking.  

I'll buy everything you wrote, execept the 'open-minded' part.
You'll listen to what I have to say, but there is no way that
you'll ever change your mind?
What, then, is the point of discussion?
r.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 12:06:43 GMT

In article <MARTINC.92Sep29211457@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.024031.15354@access.digex.com> huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston) writes:
>
>   In article <MARTINC.92Sep27233135@grover.cs.unc.edu> martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>   >On the other hand, humans do seem to be *extremely* dependent on vision,
>   >more so perhaps than any other mammal.  Not as good as birds, but
>   >certainly we depend on vision more than most or all other primates.
>
>   More so than the pro-simians, e.g., lemurs, aye-ayes, pottos, and (my
>   favorite) galagos, all of which have wet noses.  About as much as
>   tarsiers, monkeys, and apes, all of which, like us, have dry noses
>   (colds don't count).
>
>I'm not sure how to measure "dependent on vision"....

I think it was vision as opposed to smell.  The wet-nosed primates make much
more use of smell than do the dry-nosed primates.  They have longer snouts
relative to the rest of the head, and the smell centers in their brains are
relatively larger.  Some scent-mark their territories, much like our canine
friends, and some engage in stink fights.

>Or what "most
>other primates" really means.

The order used to be divided into two infra-orders, pro-simians (almost
monkeys) and anthropoids (man-like).  However, tarsiers didn't fit well 
in this scheme.  It was replaced by the wet-nose/dry-nose infra-orders.
The effect was to move tarsiers from one infra-order to another.

Tarsiers are neat, and I got to see one when I visited Duke University's
Primate Lab late in 1990.  If you put together a small group, you can
arrange to have one of the grad students show you around.  Since the lab
is more or less broke, a small contribution is appreciated.

>   >Shit, I'm also known for my short thick fingers.
>
>   Look for women with short fingers.  You may already have been doing so
>   without realizing it, though.
>
>All that work to set a joke, and see what happens?

Sorry.  I'll try to do better next time.

-- Herb Huston
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: yyz@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (donald.w.coons)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 20:11:03 GMT

In article <ewright.717447783@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>In <1992Sep25.142142.2520@cbfsb.cb.att.com> yyz@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (donald.w.coons) writes:
>
>>I remember taking a reading comprehension class around the 3rd grade, perhaps
>>Eddie was sick.
>
>Well, I do remember having a case of pneumonia last year.  In June,
>I think.  Is that around the time you were thinking of?

Well we all know that a sedentary lifestyle, leads to a great chance of 
illness. But that would mean exercise, and we all know how you feel about
that, don't we.

I have to commend you, you got my message. Maybe it was my single line
response that helped you.
From: schico@PICA.ARMY.MIL (Stephen Chico (CCAC) <schico>)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Two's an aphrodisiac
Date: 29 Sep 92 00:57:52 GMT
Organization: U.S. ARDEC, Dover, NJ


Some recent personal experiences and a number of postings have
brought forth some thoughts about one of the FAQs in this group.

"Why is it that as soon as I get in a relationship it seems available 
MOTAS come out of the woodwork?"

Thoughts:

1.  Your confidence and attitude generally increase in the begining of a
relationship.  I am not saying it was bad to start with, but it generally
improves.  {Atractive Vibes enhanced}

2.  If you are no longer actively looking for a date it probably reflects in
some subliminal way that you're not on the make {Unatractive Vibes
lessoned}.  Every relationship I have had, has begun at times when I wasn't
particularly looking (Available, but preoccupied).  I have just seen several
posts which made reference to "what's a good pickup line", and "line of
attack".  For the most part women don't want to be attacked.  Do you? (ok,
maybe once in a while)

3.  You may also be more relaxed in approaching or conversing with MOTAS
because your not trying to woo them, therefore conversation and
attitude can be more natural {Attractive Vibes enhanced}.

4.  Of course there is always the pheromone theory, but I am in a LDR
and the oportunity to engage in the proper activity to embellish myself 
with the supposedly enticing subliminal scents does not present itself 
often enough to explain any increased attraction of MOTAS.    

SteveTheEverVaticEngineer
My thoughts and opinions are my own, but now that they have been posted
they are irrefutable fact and implicitly apply to all who read them
without exception.   Now where did I put that asbestos suit? ;-)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 14:08:17 GMT

In article <ewright.717559558@convex.convex.com> ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright) writes:
>
>>The problem isn't in how you *look*, Ed.  It's in who you are.  When you
>>take some steps to fix *that* you'll be on your way.
>
>And here we see what's really bothering you.  That there are people
>in the world who do not think exactly the way you do.  Yes, if I want
>to get anywhere in life, I've got to change myself, conform, be just
>like you.  Sorry, Charlie, but what I'm looking for is someone who
>will love me, not the spineless, gutless Charlie Martin clone you'd
>like me to turn myself into.
>
>Unfortunately, Charlie, you never question anything from the one
>person you really should question -- yourself.
 
 DAMN Charlie I thought you had him and daggummit if he didn't figure
out about our spineless gutless Charlie plot. He's too smart. Just too smart.
We'll never be able to pull the wool over Edward's eye's.
 How can anyone argue with someone so smart that he knows there are 80
women in texas that are eligible to be Eddieized.
 No matter how hard we tried to make his life horrible, he didn't fall for it.
Nope. Just too smart.
 Let me be the first:
 I swear alliegiance to Edward V. Wright.
 He is my master.
 Only Eddie knows the one true way.
UGhhhmmmmmmmmm. EDDDIIIIIIIEEEEEE EDDIEEEEEEEEEEE EDDDIIIIEEEEEEEEE.
UGhhhmmmmmmmmmm.
 Eddie is the master. Excuse me MR and Mrs Japanese tourists but for a 
nominal donation you can further the teachings of Eddie and pay
for the bible according to Eddie, which I just shoved in your bag.
 
 Eddie BOINK 93. Coming to a drive-in near you.

 
================================================================================
 Sesquipedalian's 'R' Us. ZX-10. DoD#564. There ain't no more.
================================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 17:31:17 GMT

In article <5683@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>
>Okay, Kiran, you've got my vote.  (Hi, by the way!  Where've you
>been?)  I've tried to post some reasonable stuff to Ed, to which he hasn't
>responded.  My conclusion is that he really isn't interested in 
>exploring issues, but would rather fight with Charlie until one or
>the both of them expire of exhaustion.

I know how you must feel--he didn't respond to my last missive either.
Still, you have to remember that he's got a tough enough job, supplying
half the bandwidth of soc.singles as it is, and doesn't have to to 
respond to everything, I'm sure. 

>ANYWAY.  Anyone out there got any good techniques for soliciting backrubs
>from total strangers?  This life of solitude and studious labor I'm leading
>seems pretty cool so far, except that when I'm under stress I don't
>get tension headaches, I get tension backaches.  

Well, let's see...you could

  Announce "gosh, I could sure use a good backrub right about now" 
    (this technique works best when there are other people in the room.)

  Stand next to Aahz for more than a minute or two

  Grab a convenient person's hands and place them on your trapezius area

  Sit down on the floor against the legs of someone sitting on a couch

  Post your desire to receive backrubs on the net and include your 
    home address and telephone number (crosspost to alt.personals,
    alt.sex, alt.sex.bondage, alt.romance, alt.romance.chat, and
    alt.binaries.pictures.erotica if you want a line forming at your
    door)

  Show up at one of my parties

  Wear a t-shirt or button reading, "give me a backrub before I kill again"

  Walk up to a total stranger, steal his nose, and announce that you won't
    give him his nose back until he gives you a backrub

  Wear a "Backrub Bodysuit" by MEGO Industries--trying to teach someone
    to give good backrubs?  Just slip on the "Backrub Bodysuit"--all the
    directions for a complete backrub, complete with extensive 
    illustrations, tables, and diagrams are printed right on the back.
    (Plus, if you buy a "Backrub Bodysuit" before January 12th, MEGO
    Industries will throw in a coupon good for $10 off on a new 
    "Kama Sutra Suit" (also by MEGO Industries; available in both
    men's and women's models).)

Trygve   (Really, these things work!)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: wkaufman@us.oracle.com (William Kaufman)
Subject: Re: First Lady?
Organization: Oracle Corporation, Redwood Shores CA
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 00:14:40 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <9209261723.AA09042@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com> GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu (Broward Horne) writes:
] 
]        always pushing Bill
]                          to fulfill
]                                   the American dream

    Well, I try, anyway.

]        I
]         could have sworn
]                        that you were a woman
] 
]        cause you are a hard,
]                            hard,
]                                hard,
]                                    Hilary-ous thing

    That was brilliant, Broward, but, as a Clinton supporter, I'm forced
to hope the Soup Dragons sue.  Nothing personal, you understand.

    Followups to talk.politics.rave.

                                           -- Bill K.

Bill Kaufman,          | "Hush my darling / Be still my darling /
Corporate Lackey       |  The lion's on the phone,..."
wkaufman@us.oracle.com |              -- "The Guitar", They Might Be Giants
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: loosemore-sandra@CS.YALE.EDU (Sandra Loosemore)
Subject: Re: Acceptance!
Organization: staff hacker @ Yale Haskell project
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 17:11:10 GMT

GCTHORNE@idbsu.idbsu.edu ("Broward "Peter Pan" Horne") writes:

	 Actually, MY goal is hang out on campus forever.  Peter Pan knew
      a good thing when he saw it.

I seem to be managing to hang out on campus forever myself (without
even trying very hard!), and it's not all it's cracked up to be.  You
get old, the students stay eternally young, and you see all the people
your own age settling down with "real" jobs and getting married and
moving out into the suburbs.  It can be a pretty lonely life.

-Sandra the cynic

Newsgroups: soc.singles