HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rowe@engin.umich.edu (Steven Rowe)
Subject: Re: accidently out
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 00:00:56 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

In article <28005@castle.ed.ac.uk> moragw@castle.ed.ac.uk (Alloy Serving Woman) writes:
> [ accidental coming out anecdote deleted ]
>usual.  Every thing felt quite surreal and I suppose if he'd leapt up in
>a rage demanding an explanation or if they'd talked distractedly and
>left hurridly it would have seemed more believable.  Ignoring it
>completely threw me.
>
>When they left, after big hugs and dad's usual contribution to the poor
>student daughter fund, I felt really unnerved.  They know about me and
>they're politely leaving me to talk about it if I want to, not forcing
>me or anything, which is great, I suppose.  So why does it feel so
>stomach churningly weird ?  Don't know what else to say, just wanted to
>share my feelings, maybe get some reassurances.
>
>						Mo

I think the reason you feel unnerved is that you don't *know* how
they feel about it.  Fear of the unknown is a lot harder to deal with
than (1) acceptance or (2) bigotry [at least you can argue against
bigotry].
Anyhow, this gives you a golden opportunity to bring up the topic
of your sexuality without offending anyone, e.g. "Er, Mum, did you
notice that calendar on the wall in my flat?  What did you think of
it?"  This, of course, only if you decide that you want to talk about
it.
Your parents took it better than mine.  Consider yourself at least
half-lucky.  Sure, they could have said, "Dear, we saw your GLBO
calendar, and we support you in whatever lifestyle you've chosen
for yourself."  But maybe they thought that that would be intruding?
Perhaps that's what they'll say if you bring it up.
As for reassurances, I can't give you any (that's what parents are
for, in this case), except that I can say that the uneasiness is
pretty natural under the circumstances.  I can also give you e-hugs
and blow you e-kisses.
                                        Steve

p.s.  I am aware that my use of the phrase "...lifestyle you have
chosen...", which indicates a choice (rather than an innate orientation)
may offend some of the LGB community.  Please understand that I meant
no offense.

-- 
Steve Rowe: B0 f- w- c g+ k+ s- e+ r-
     These folks who don't believe in evolution
are the ones who look the most like they could use some.
                                   -Frank Allison
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: dwells@lonestar.utsa.edu (Darren . Wells)
Subject: Re: New Age Androgynous Bisexuals...
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:54:01 GMT

In article <BxBLKn.1y6@ibmpcug.co.uk> gtoal@ibmpcug.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
>
>I am sick of being told that because I'm a member of an 'oppressed group'
>that I should automatically side with all sorts of people with whom i
>have nothing in common.

I wasn't implying that it had anything to do with being a member of an
'oppressed group' (at least I didn't mean to), or even that you had to
side with anyone you don't agree with.  My point was that there is a
connection between accepting other people's right to a different view on
things and having one's own [different] point of view accepted.  I don't
think it's all that fair to expect the latter without a little bit of the
former.  I wasn't trying to be PC; I was merely making an observation.
Sorry if it didn't come off that way.

>. . . I have no time whatsoever for people who have the intelligence
>to know better, who indulge in blatantly irrational beliefs like
>dowsing maps with pendulums, predicting the future with chicken guts,
>or tarot cards, or believing that the dead will rise from the grave on
>the day of judgement.

Is that how you see the whole New Age movement?  No wonder you think
they are a bunch of kooks!

>. . .  Just because I made an innofensive joke at Ciaran's expense . . .

Oops.  I missed that.  Guess that will teach me to jump into the middle
of a thread after not reading for a week . . . Again, my sincere apology.
Please allow me to unruffle your feathers.  ;)
(No, really, I insist . . . )

>  This group has lost its sense of humour and sense of proportion.

Or maybe we're just really good at poking each other at sensitive
spots in their psyches . . .

>G

Darren
(stuffing his pendulum and chicken guts back in the glove compartment)
From: gtoal@ibmpcug.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: bi bi baby
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:15:06 GMT
Organization: The IBM PC User Group, UK.

In article <1992Nov11.194827.16336@dsg.cs.tcd.ie> cjmchale@dsg.cs.tcd.ie (Ciaran McHale) writes:
>
>Does anybody remember the Bay City Rollers? (Is anybody willing to
>admit it?:-) If so, you may remember one of their big hits was "Bye bye
>baby". The lyrics are as follows:

I'm embarrassed to admit that I lived a couple of blocks along the road from
where they practised in Young Tam's shed all bloody day.  They were
crap then and they were still crap when they became famous.  The
surprising thing was that Les turned into a reasonable musician
about 15 years later (I guess he had time to practise) but sadly
totally failed to make a comeback because no-one could shake the
image of the Rollers out of their heads, and it was hard to take
him seriously when you looked at him and kept imagining rolled-
down ankle-socks and a tartan Tammie.

G (Bay City inhabitant and long-time Panner)
--
From: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Finally Doing It ... Coming Out
Date: 11 Nov 92 12:36:23
Organization: Natural Language Incorporated
Distribution: world
	<1992Nov9.192631.28625@athena.cs.uga.edu>
	<1992Nov9.225742.15759@midway.uchicago.edu>
	<MUFFY.92Nov10110212@remarque.berkeley.edu> <iw.721498806@tosser>
	<1drpnoINNn3o@cuda.add.itg.ti.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
In-reply-to: winsor@geek.NoSubdomain.NoDomain's message of 11 Nov 1992 20:16:56 GMT

In article <1drpnoINNn3o@cuda.add.itg.ti.com> winsor@geek.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (js) writes:
>In article <iw.721498806@tosser>, iw@tosser.Rational.COM (The_Devine_Dolly) writes:
[theory of wanting a particular gender]
>|> At the same time I am not sure that I really believe this, because
>|> one of the reasons that I freak out about longterm monogamy is the
>|> thought of not being able to have sex with the other gender.  
>Then change your definition of monogamy.

To what, exactly?  Any change in the definition won't be terribly useful
unless you can get your partner(s) to agree to it, in which case all
you've really done is redefined the relationship to be non-monogamous.
So, why do you think it is useful to change your personal defintion of
monogamy?

Muffy
--

Muffy Barkocy                               muffy@mica.berkeley.edu
~Weavers' fingers flying on the loom/patterns shift too fast to be
 discerned/all these years of thinking/ended up like this/in front
 of all this beauty/understanding nothing~ - Bruce Cockburn
From: winsor@geek.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (js)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Finally Doing It ... Coming Out
Date: 11 Nov 1992 20:16:56 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments Incorporated, Austin
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: geek.teng.ppd.ti.com

In article <iw.721498806@tosser>, iw@tosser.Rational.COM (The_Devine_Dolly) writes:
|> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
|> 
|> >It's not exactly this, but I have been having a very weird experience
|> >along these lines lately.  Ever since looking into the eyes of the
|> >beautiful woman in our philosophy class, I've been thinking about (and
|> >lusting after) all the attractive women I have met.  Somehow, I just
|> >seem to want "a woman."  In the past, I have wanted *specific* people,
|> >or I have wanted "sex in general" (*grin*), but I've never had this
|> >feeling of wanting the in-between "sex with someone of a particular
|> >gender."
|> 
|> 
|> Yes, I certainly have this feeling.  For me it seems to
|> happen when I have not really been able to express my interest in
|> both men and women.  Like when I spend alot of time with lesbians, then
|> I kind of begin to feel like I am about to go on a man frenzy.  My ration-
|> alization is - when I am in an atmosphere where expressing interest in both men
|> and women is  encouraged then this feeling of wanting a particular
|> gender goes away.
|> 
|> At the same time I am not sure that I really believe this, because
|> one of the reasons that I freak out about longterm monogamy is the
|> thought of not being able to have sex with the other gender.  
|> 
|> Iseult.

Then change your definition of monogamy.
js
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: dwells@lonestar.utsa.edu (Darren . Wells)
Subject: Re: New Age Androgynous Bisexuals...
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 17:24:29 GMT

In article <Bx649I.AG0@ibmpcug.co.uk> gtoal@ibmpcug.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
>In article <Bx5wpp.HyM@cck.coventry.ac.uk> idx009@cck.coventry.ac.uk (the Crisco Kid) writes:
>:In article <Bx5r3r.2Gu@ibmpcug.co.uk> gtoal@ibmpcug.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
>:>In article <1992Nov3.144854.13696@athena.cs.uga.edu> kraig@athena.cs.uga.edu (Kraig Count) writes:
>:>>Not all people who belive in tarot or astrology are new age
>:>>fanatics.  Granted, most of the people you run across in
>:>
>:>No, but they're still raving nutters whatever brand of lunacy
>:>they adhere to.
>:
>:Graham, dear, have you ever in your life heard me rave?
>
>Oh No!  Not you too!  Please tell me you don't... actually... *believe* it?!
>
>Another illusion shattered. And he seemed so <sensible>...
>

He is.  It's possible to actually  "*believe* it" and still be sensible.
In fact, accepting that someone with a very different belief system than
our own can be sensible is important.  At least I think it should be, in
this newsgroup.  Surely you can see a connection here . . .

We don't have to be in agreement on everything for both of us to have
valid points of view.

As for you, Kay, I've never seen you rave.  *blows kiss*
Although that might be fun sometime . . .  ;)

Darren
Yes, another *sigh* one of THOSE people
From: seamus@ravel.udel.edu (James G Dilmore)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: wups!
Date: 11 Nov 92 17:34:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.BxKBHy.8wI
Organization: University of Delaware

In article <1dpi1tINNips@cuda.add.itg.ti.com> winsor@geek.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (js) writes:
>It occurs to me that I did not de-muffin properly...
>
>"This is my first (ahem, second) post.  What is a muffin?"
>
>pls don't answer - I know.  And I am not anymore.
>
>js

Hello there.
hugs, hugs, hugs, hugs.
:>
Nice to see you out and about.

the man who has recently become prolific,



-- 
Jim Dilmore - seamus@brahms.udel.edu    
               SILENCE = DEATH    
This is not a black and white world,
to be alive I believe the colors must be swirled- Live.~
From: kmj1@PL122e.cc.lehigh.edu (kate marie)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Really blatant flirtation
Date: 11 Nov 92 17:46:02 GMT
	<1992Nov10.202905.16713@Princeton.EDU>
	<1992Nov10.231442.21973@midway.uchicago.edu>
Organization: LUCC Student Konsultants

In article <1992Nov10.231442.21973@midway.uchicago.edu> orc@amber.uchicago.edu (David Parsons) writes:

>>Wow.

>>Where is princeton, anyways?

relatively close to the Lehigh soc.bi contingent anyway...
or at least closer than Chicago.  :)

welcome to soc.bi, you pure muffin you, and we'll see if we can do 
anything about that...if you like. or just come visit us at Lehigh!

*hugs* and *snuggles* and things...

kate
--
--

______
\  __/___      kathleen marie jones          My other computer is a Cray.   
 \ \/   /      LUCC Student Konsultants     Subvert the Dominant Paradigm!
  \/\  /       kmj1@lehigh.edu         
     \/        Lehigh University: Home of the Marching 97!
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: vashti@concave.cs.wits.ac.za (Vashti Galpin)
Subject: Re: a tiny bit more out
Organization: None, I'm taking a break this week
Date: 10 Nov 92 08:58:24 GMT

In <1992Nov6.061443.24427@midway.uchicago.edu> orc@amber.uchicago.edu (David Parsons) writes:
>   I tend to wear badges and/or pins and/or earrings and/or etc
>pretty much all of the time (including job interviews, work
>assignments at client sites, you get the picture...) and I don't
>really expect anything one way or another.  I wear them because I
>am trying to define my space (to myself) as queerspace, and if
>other people recognise them, well, it's a little something extra. 

I find that I dislike wearing T-shirts with slogans (I tend to live in
white T-shirts, jeans and sandals) and I don't wear any jewelry at all,
except for a watch. There is the additional small hitch that I don't
know if there is any bi-stuff available in the country. There is also
the problem that there are a few people on campus to whom I have no
wish to announce my sexuality because it is totally personal and
absolutely none of their business.

Ideally I need a watch strap with pink and blue triangles --- perhaps I
can get one made locally. I guess it would be subtle but there (and I go
into a flat panic every time I think about it).

(Off the topic a bit, I have one T-shirt with a design which is
essentially a comic strip about envying cats. My father bought it for
me in the UK recently, and I am still amazed every time I wear it, that
my fairly insensitive father managed to buy me a T-shirt with a design
that I willingly wear -- I'm stunned.)
                                                                ____ 
                                                                \bi/ 
Vashti, who is very proud of her new sig (stolen, of course)     \/

(I just hope it is right, this time)
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Vashti Galpin                      vashti@concave.cs.wits.ac.za
Department of Computer Science, University of the Witwatersrand
2050 Wits, South Africa.  Tel 27(11)716-3295 Fax 27(11)403-1926
From: pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: PC (was Re: New Age Androgynous Bisexuals...)
Date: 10 Nov 92 01:51:54 GMT
Reply-To: pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Organization: Do they make a washing powder called Caliban Automatic?

In article <1992Nov7.060947.9856@leland.Stanford.EDU> mlloyd@westmark.Stanford.EDU (Mike Lloyd) writes:
>sconley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Stephen M Conley) writes:
[steve slights PC]

>So speaks a white male.

You've met, then?  What's Steve like in person?

Telling your political opponents that they've no right to speak on the
subject is an 'ad hominem' argument -- in fact, no argument at all.  An
exchange overheard: "What do you know about racism?  You're not black!" 
"And what do you know?  You're not a racist."

>That is why PC-speak is a vital part of changing the world.

You haven't argued *this* point at all; you've merely pointed out that
there's oppression and drawn this conclusion.

>So you don't want the government to enforce fairness and free
>competition.  How else is it going to come about?

Over here the Government spends a good deal of its time enforcing
unfairness and unfree competition.  What makes you look to your
oppressors for liberation?

>PC: *politically* correct.  It's about power, the stuff of politics.

*correct*, the stuff of school teaching.  I had assumed that the term
"PC" was coined by the Right, to give the impression that left-wingers
were trying to stifle original political thought.  That anyone would
identify with this term depresses me.

>There are unempowered people all around us, and we (I use the term
>broadly) keep them down.  PC-speak is just basic civility: seeing what
>effect the society we are part of has on its minorities and oppresed
>groups, and acknowledging their justified complaints against us.

You can only sustain this "I am the oppressor" idea if you have no idea
why a given group in society is oppressed, if you start from no analysis
beyond the fact that oppression exists.  If you had some theories on
that, you might start attacking the causes.  Instead you indulge in this
exercise in self-flagellation.

>malicious redefinition of "liberal" and "family values" by American
>politicians of recent disempowerment (hah! still gleeful about that,
>btw).

* in what possible way could family values be good?

* hasn't the time come to be very, very cynical about the Clinton
administration?  Or are you going to wait until they kick you in the
teeth first so we get to say "Told you so!"?

>Mike, PC and unashamed

That takes some doing.  Excuse the excessive heat I always generate when
I get into a political argument... it is 1:51 in the morning.
  __                                ____
\/ o\ Paul Crowley pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk \  /
/\__/ "I'm the boy without a soul"   \/
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: sa121@cl.cam.ac.uk (S. Arrowsmith)
Subject: Re: .sig
Reply-To: SA121@phx.cam.ac.uk (S. Arrowsmith)
Organization: Glad to be Sad
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 13:57:54 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.223945.9300@infodev.cam.ac.uk> MJW19@phx.cam.ac.uk (M.J. Williams) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.215823.7915@infodev.cam.ac.uk> SA121@phx.cam.ac.uk (S. Arrowsmith) writes:
>>address of aber.ac.uk and following up to Mike Williams its not hard to
>                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Mike. aka Michael Williams, but not Mike Williams, hokay?
>
Sorry -- my brain's been turned off this week for urgent repairs.  The
problem lies in the existence of other Mikes and other Michaels....

--
\S
SA121@phx.cam.ac.uk   | There's nowt |"And in this moment, I need to be needed
sarrowsm@nyx.cs.du.edu| so queer as  |"When my self-esteem is sinking,
                      | folk....     |"I like to be liked" -- Peter Gabriel
From: winsor@geek.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (js)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Homophobic garbage
Date: 13 Nov 1992 01:03:43 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments Incorporated, Austin
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: geek.teng.ppd.ti.com

In article <BxMJuC.J70@ibmpcug.co.uk>, gtoal@ibmpcug.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov12.071816.29439@vpnet.chi.il.us> orc@vpnet.chi.il.us (david parsons) writes:
|> >|1)   You need to include <stdio.h> if you're using printf
|> >
|> >   Not necessarily.  You'd only need stdio.h if you were using a compiler
|> >or system that did something bizarre with arguments and had to tell cc
|> >that printf is really and truely warped.
|> 
|> By coincidence, I have a program before me this very minute which
|> contains the line: #include <nonstdio.h> - seems *far* too appropriate.
|> 
|> G
|> -- 

Touche!
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: MJW19@phx.cam.ac.uk (Michael Williams)
Subject: Re: .sig
Reply-To: MJW19@phx.cam.ac.uk (M.J. Williams)
Organization: The National Society for the Inversion of Cudddly Tigers
Distribution: soc.bi
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 03:58:49 GMT

In article <27778@castle.ed.ac.uk> bethand@castle.ed.ac.uk (Bethan Davies) writes:
>Ummm... have a <big> demuffining hug.... if I can _reach_ that is....

Well, there are some people around here who seem to manage okay 8-).

>Mind you, the excessive height is a bit suspicious...

I'll have you know that all the short people in my family are English...

><HUGS> to those that want them....

I think I'll decline. If I get hugged any more around here I'll burst.

Mike.
--
____________________________________________________________________________
\  /  / Michael Williams                     Part II Computer Science Tripos
|\/|\/\ MJW19@phx.cam.ac.uk                          University of Cambridge
|  |(__)Cymdeithas Genedlaethol Traddodiad Troi Teigrod Mwythus Ben I Waered
From: wendy@sundown.mil.wi.us
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Androgynous, Feminine and Masculine Bisexuals...
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:49:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: mr.1992Nov5.194908.28151
Organization: Nowhere
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]


 (cyan@uhura.cc.rochester.edu) wrote:
> In article <yVLRTB11w165w@Micor.OCUnix.on.ca> panda@Micor.OCUnix.on.ca (Elizabeth Holden) writes:
> >
> >Hmmm.  Some of us like androgyny AND femininity AND masculinity.  Why 
> >limit humanity to one type?  
> >
> >Everyone is welcome to his or her favourite styles; I wouldn't tell 
> >anyone what to think.  And I like to think of myself as a bit of a New 
> >Age type.
> >
> >Namaste,
> >Elizabeth
> 
> Well said Elizabeth! *I* enjoy being masculine and feminine, although I don't
> expect other bi-folk to be like me. It can be truly a pleasure identifying with
> both genders, as well as a cause for extreme inner turmoil. Our culture expects
> males to dress like "men" and look like  "men". Someone like me (and many
> others) who like to dress and look like  women, but are unable to do so
> convincingly, are subject to harrassment, derision and sometimes violence.
> We can only express ourselves publicly "at our own risk". It's a damn shame
> things are this way.       
> 
> Sherri 

Yes, it sure is. Transgenered people are sometimes subject to more harrassment 
than gays. Families will go balistic when they find out way before they will
if you are gay.

For those interested, the newsgroup  alt.transgenered has been created. My
sister Celeste does a lot of posting there and soon I will be too.

Wendy
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
Subject: Re: Homophobic garbage
Originator: elf@halcyon.com
Reply-To: elf@halcyon.com (Elf Sternberg)
Organization: Pendor, UnLtd.
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 10:26:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov10.014818.676@ab.wvnet.edu> onda@ab.wvnet.edu writes:

>this is posted from my friend not me but you can reply to this account
>he states that:

>all you guys who are bisexual are freaks because how can you find
>other men attractive but women on the other hand are beautiful and
>should find other women beautiful so it is cool that women have sex
>with each other.

   I always love these discussions.  Tell me, if men are so
unattractive and women so otherwise, how would any girl want to look at
your hairy butt?

   Elf: 1, Assorted assholes: 0
-- 
      __        | The post you have just read is real, but it could
      \/        | have been avoided.  Inbreeding is everyone's
Elf Sternberg   | problem.  Contact your local Mormon church and 
elf@halcyon.com | be sure you aren't marrying a close relative.
From: sa121@cl.cam.ac.uk (S. Arrowsmith)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: This has probably already been asked...
Date: 8 Nov 92 15:56:10 GMT
Reply-To: SA121@phx.cam.ac.uk (S. Arrowsmith)
Organization: Surrealists against Lobsters

In article <dbarber.721164647@crash.cts.com> dbarber@crash.cts.com (David C. Barber) writes:
>Why is the lack of acceptance from the gays as bad as the lack of
>acceptance from the hets?
>
An answer is something along the lines of "because `we' are suffering from
the same (sort of) discrimination as they are, hence they should be more
understanding and not add to `our' oppression."  Amongst other things, this
is totally ignoring irrational (ie normal) human behaviour -- it's crazy
to expect every minority goup to automatically side with every other.  Then
there is the unjustified (but not neccessarily untrue) transformation of
"lack of acceptance" to "oppression."  But the point remains that it feels
uncomfortable to see someone suffering in the same way refusing to accept
that you are in the same situation.

--
\S
SA121@phx.cam.ac.uk   | There's nowt |"And in this moment, I need to be needed
sarrowsm@nyx.cs.du.edu| so queer as  |"When my self-esteem is sinking,
                      | folk....     |"I like to be liked" -- Peter Gabriel