HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pooh@Apple.COM (Pooh)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Date: 20 Dec 92 12:17:45 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Internet Refugee Camp

I have a policy that works well for me in every situation
(and will probably get me in trouble once I reveal it):

If I am asked out, I go prepared to pay the check.
If I do the asking, I also go prepared to pay the check.

I'm at the point in life where I consider myself financially
independent, and I don't do *anything* I can't potentially
pay for.  I don't like to depend on anyone else or be caught
without money.

That way, it really doesn't matter to me who pays.  If he
wants to pay, I smile and thank him, and state my intentions
to treat the next time (if there is a next time).  As often
as not, I'll pick up the whole check just because I feel like
it.  

Pooh
	pooh@apple.com


Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.men,soc.women,alt.flame
From: rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster)
Subject: Re: Duck and Jive (was Re: Pre-Sex Contract )
Organization: The Tickle Palace - Moonyvale, CA
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 08:50:47 GMT


In article <1992Dec18.072101.14111@netcom.com> desiree@netcom.com (Desiree Champagne) writes:
>
>In an obvious attempt to provoke more amusement, the Sensitive Beast
>crossposts an article from soc.men just to make sure that I see it:
>
>>     I found this over in soc.men.  Since I do not know if you read soc.men,
>>I am posting it where I thing that you will see it.
>
>	Give it up Creature.  I've already said you bore me.

     If you are so fucking bored, why the hell are you responding???

>  Don't
>even try to fuck with me.  
>

     I would rather die than fuck you.  I saw you at the party and
although you are physically pretty, I think that, overall, you are an
extraordinarily ugly bitch.

>>>In article <1992Dec17.081631.19856@sei.cmu.edu> firth@sei.cmu.edu
>>> (Robert Firth) writes:
>
>[entire article deleted]
>
>	Forget it Firth.  I don't buy it and I'm still (and getting more
>so) tired of the whiny men that complain about the wallet.

     What is this?  Is a meal ticket all that you want?

     Your marriage failed and you got a divorce.  Is that why you
are so condescending to others?

     Get real and learn to respect others before you expect others to
respect you.

>  As I said before,
>if you can't pay the price -- don't enter the game.  The risks are
>there -- even if you don't like them.
>

     Maybe you will get suckers to play your sex games.  And maybe
one of those times, you will become pregnant and he will leave
you cold and wet.

>	If you can't understand that, you can't.  But don't bother me
>with your crap.  
>
>	The subject is dead.  Leave it there.  Understand?
>

     And you lost, bitch.

>
>Desiree
>

-- 
                                         +---------------------------------+
  +-----------------------------------+ /  On Vacation:  12/21 to 12/27   /
 /   // Mr. Tickle Monster   // Amiga ++---------------------------------+
|  \X/   W. David Rohwer   \X/  3000  /  Internet: rohwerwd@netcom.COM  /
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
From: liz@vfl.paramax.com (Liz Loquacious)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Breaking with Tradition (was: Re: Picking up the Tab)
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:31:42 GMT
Followup-To: soc.singles
Distribution: usa
Organization: Paramax Systems

In article <92350.203417SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>, SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA (Graydon) writes:
|> 
|> I mean, I'm seen a couple flip a coin for the bill.  One lady I went out
|> with, it was a case of who could pounce on the thing first (as a game,
|> not a serious run over the waitress behaviour.)
|> 

Your flipping of a coin mention reminded me of some friends of mine who
pulled names from a hat to determine what their last name would be after
they were married.  They wanted one common name, didn't like the hyphenated
idea, so they wrote them down and pulled one out.  Her name was pulled so
he changed his.

Liz Loquacious
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 12:53:17 EST
From: Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: What would you do if...
Distribution: usa
 <1992Dec18.062411.28278@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>
 <92353.225809SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> <1992Dec19.143907.25806@eff.org>

'No gory details' runs smack into a very fundamental problem - primate
curiousity.  People, in general, really *do* want to know.

It is also an honesty issue; if there is something you *can't* be open
and honest about, it is likely to put strain on things.

I persist in the belief that these only work if everyone involved has
a relationship with everyone else; not neccessarily a romantic or sexual
relationship, but a relationship based on something other than being
connected by being in relationship to a third person.

Graydon
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.men,soc.women
From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: Strong women in film
X-To: ALL
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 05:35:00 GMT

patstew@oz.plymouth.edu (Pat Steward) writes...
PS> >Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
PS> >
PS> >>Just like it's a coincidence that all the men in "Thelma and Louise" are e
PS> r
PS> >>killers, rapists, or bigots...?

PS> Nah.  The policeman played by Harvey Keitel was okay.

Okay, okay...aside from *him*!   Otherwise, I stand corrected.

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

"Cthulhu for President in '92 - Why vote for the _lesser_ of two evils?"
                                                          - Bronis Vidugiris
---
 * SLMR 2.1a * Galahad: (confused) The Castle Anthrax??
From: jsp@uts.amdahl.com (James Preston)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Date: 16 Dec 92 23:57:51 GMT
Reply-To: jsp@pls.amdahl.com
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

gds@york.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes:

}As I said before, it has nothing to do with contracts; it has to do
}with consideration for the other person's feelings, which I believe
}was one of the reasons Lauren stated *for* offering to pay on a date.
}It's the difference between blithely letting someone spend money on
}you, and acknowledging that they're spending money on you, and saying
}"hey, I understand, let me share a little of the burden."

Sheesh, you and I sure have wildly different attitudes about this
subject.  Believe it or not, when I ask a woman out I do *not*
consider the paying of the bill as a burden; it's actually something
that I enjoy doing (and before anyone asks, no I certainly do not
expect anything in return other than company and conversation).  I
feel that a woman shows consideration for *my* specific feelings when
she does not ask to pay, becuase my specific feeling is that I want
the date to be my treat.  I certainly don't *expect* the woman to not
ask to pay; that would be silly.  What I'm trying to say here is that
if by some miracle she has tuned in enough to my feelings to know that
I'd prefer to treat, then it bodes well for the future.  Or maybe she's
just a golddigger :-).

As with everything else in relationships, it all comes down to what each
of us wants in a potential partner.  What another poster said about
sorting criteria applies here, too.  If I take a woman out on a first
date and she emphatically insists on paying her own way, it probably
indicates that there will be other areas in which our attitudes are
not in sync.  Whereas for Greg, if the woman does not offer to pay, it
seems likely to indicate that they will have problems in other areas, too.
Wouldn't the world be boring (and the net empty) if we all thought alike
about everything?

--James Preston
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: bacon@mtu.edu (Jeff Bacon)
Subject: Re: Vasectomies (was Re: Pre-Sex Contract)
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 05:02:02 GMT

In article <thurlow.724807100@convex.convex.com> thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow) writes:
>>Oh Don, how could you or any man even consider getting a vasectomy?
>>As a man, I feel that the spermal excrement is at the essence of
>>my experience as a man.  Most of the women I used to date really
>>enjoyed the excitement of seeing me spray my "love juices" over their
>>pulsating bodies.  How a man can even think of depriving himself of
>>that pleasure, is beyond me.
>Jesus, Keith - your prostate gland will produce the same milky fluid,
>it just won't have the little swimmers in it.  It's not like you'll
>start excreting tomato juice after a vasectomy.

well hey, some women might find it tastier, right? :)
certainly more nutritious...

>Spreading misinformed advice does NOT endear you to very many people.
>Buy a clue - I hear K-Mart has them on sale at 3 for a dollar this week.

aisle 5, right next to the lives

-bacon
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith)
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:42:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.232346.1980@cs.ucla.edu> gds@cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes:
>In article <15965@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>>If you get a Christmas present from someone this year will you offer to
>>contribute to the cost of the present?  No, of course you won't.  That's
>>because it's a gift.  Think about it.
>
>I'll answer this.  No, I won't offer to contribute to the cost of the
>present.  However, I don't expect that because it is Christmas, I
>should get a present.  

>This is the attitude that I am objecting to here, that someone is entitled
>to a certain type of treatment because of their gender, or mine, or because
>of tradition.  

Amen, Gregbo!

>It also has been
>my unfortunate experience that women who were unwilling to contribute
>to the cost of a date also felt entitled to be spent money on because
>they were female, I was male, and tradition said that was what should
>be done.  

I have encountered more-than-a-few women with this attitude as well.
It is as if they think that it is their "birthright" as women, to
"mooch" off of men. Folx, I wish that I had a dollar for every time
that I heard a woman say, unabashedly, something like the following:

	If a man is going to take _me_ out he _better_ pay my way!
	I ain't spending _my_ money on no man!
	I'm not chaufeurring a man around! (when the question came
	up about dating a man who either a] did not have a car
	or b] whose car was not running)
	The only way I will go riding with you is if your vehicle
	has a motor!  (when invited to go cycling)
	I wouldn't go out with a man that wanted to "go dutch".
	(overheard in a lunchroom conversation)
	...........the list goes on.............

I hope that folx can see why _I_ am sensitive on this issue.
Then, of course, there is always that %age of women who will
date you, not because of any romantic designs that they might
have on you, but simply because you're buying.

Keith R

>I admit that it was wrong for me to generalize that someone
>who would not chip in on a date has no consideration for my feelings.
>
>--gregbo
From: grohol@novavax.UUCP (John Grohol)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re^2: Truth/Psychiatrists and homosexuality.
Date: 15 Dec 92 16:16:50 GMT
Organization: Nova University, Fort Lauderdale, FL

petitc@jec315.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit) writes:

>Personally, I feel that psychology, as it is right now, is very much too
>focused on dogma and ignores anything that may possibly be really different.

>Also, the therapy techniques I've seen used only make the patient feel better--
>they do NOT solve or cure the underlying problem at all.  Psychological
>novicane (sp?), yeah that's the ticket to good health---NOT!  :&P

C'mon. Making generalizations like those are about as useful as
any generalizations -- which is to say, none at all. Therapy differs
*greatly* from psychologist to psychologist. If you're in therapy
and you feel your therapist isn't really helping you delve into
the deep unknown like you'd like to be doing, leave! Find another
therapist. Or tell your current one the direction you'd like to take!

I go to a graduate school that is currently training over 300 students
for their doctoral degree in psychology. I can assure you, and everyone
else out there, that what we do in therapy is not to "focus on dogma,"
nor ignoring the client's concerns.

Cheers,

-John

-- 
  "We're digging in the dirt       {}{}{}{}{}  John M. Grohol, M.S.
   To find the places we got hurt"  {}{}{}{}   Center for Psychological Studies
    - from "Us" Peter Gabriel        {}{}{}    Nova Univ, Ft. Lauderdale, FL
                                      {}{}     grohol@novavax.nova.edu
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith)
Subject: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 15:03:28 GMT

crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:

>If a man asks me out, and I don't know him very well, I assume he's
>paying.  If he doesn't, he's got no class whatsoever, IMO.  Frankly, it
>hasn't happened to me (though it did happen to a friend of mine).  
>
Lauren,
Let's say that you _do_ know him well (assuming just-good-friends, here);

If he does not pick up the tab (rather than splitting the tab, for instance),
is he _still_ lacking in class?

When you go out with one of your girlfriends, do you automatically expect
her to pick up the tab?

Inquiring minds want to know :-).

Keith R
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Fetishes?
From: cocoa@netcom.com
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 02:00:43 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Bourbon Street

So there's all this argument about intellectual, physical, etc., button-pushing
and fetishes and what does it.  Weirdly enough, my physical fetish is,
round, plump shoulders.  Does anyone else find this extremely attractive?
Or am I just too weird?

Just me,

little 'e'

(My 3 year old nephew Andrew has really cute, round shoulders :)


-- 
*  *  *    Chocolatier at Arms, and Castle Wetware Liason            *  *  *
*  *  *    e-mail: cocoa@netcom.com   -    voicemail: 415-337-4940   *  *  *

Xref: sparky soc.singles:34302 soc.men:21378 soc.women:21626 alt.flame:17017
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.men,soc.women,alt.flame
Subject: Re: Duck and Jive (was Re: Pre-Sex Contract )
Date: 18 Dec 92 17:02:47 GMT
Followup-To: soc.singles
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

Oh, it's Friday, and I'm in a cheery, cheery, mood, and life is good and
all and let's see what we've got on news today...

In article <1992Dec18.085047.23945@netcom.com> rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster) writes:
|
|In article <1992Dec18.072101.14111@netcom.com> desiree@netcom.com (Desiree Champagne) writes:
|>
|>In an obvious attempt to provoke more amusement, the Sensitive Beast
|>crossposts an article from soc.men just to make sure that I see it:
|>
|>>     I found this over in soc.men.  Since I do not know if you read soc.men,
|>>I am posting it where I thing that you will see it.
|>
|>	Give it up Creature.  I've already said you bore me.
|
|     If you are so fucking bored, why the hell are you responding???
 
Oh my!

|>  Don't
|>even try to fuck with me.  
|>
|
|     I would rather die than fuck you.  I saw you at the party and
|although you are physically pretty, I think that, overall, you are an
|extraordinarily ugly bitch.
 
We'll isn't that special.  I've never met Desiree so I don't know if she
is pretty or not but overall I think she's kind of cute.

|>>>In article <1992Dec17.081631.19856@sei.cmu.edu> firth@sei.cmu.edu
|>>> (Robert Firth) writes:
|>
|>[entire article deleted]
|>
|>	Forget it Firth.  I don't buy it and I'm still (and getting more
|>so) tired of the whiny men that complain about the wallet.
|
|     What is this?  Is a meal ticket all that you want?
 
Oh put a cork in it.  Desiree said she didn't like whiny men that complain
about money.  Did she ever once say she wanted any of that money?  Why
can't you get it through your head?  Women do not like whiney men.  Any
woman reading is welcome to correct me if I'm wrong.

|     Your marriage failed and you got a divorce.  Is that why you
|are so condescending to others?
 
Oh, this is a beaut.  Where did you pull this one out of... No, don't tell
me.  I think I have a good idea.  Now, whould stuff back in there with
the rest of your great ideas.

|     Get real and learn to respect others before you expect others to
|respect you.
 
I respect Desiree...Hmmm it's now 9:00am..I even respect her in the morning.

|>  As I said before,
|>if you can't pay the price -- don't enter the game.  The risks are
|>there -- even if you don't like them.
|
|     Maybe you will get suckers to play your sex games.  

Hey, those are the best kind. 

|And maybe
|one of those times, you will become pregnant and he will leave
|you cold and wet.
 
A another brilliant gem.  Stuff this back up there with the rest of your crap.


-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
From: mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: sexual addiction
Keywords: inappropriate,postings,belong,elsewhere
Date: 11 Dec 92 19:17:58 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <Bz37Hp.JF@news.cso.uiuc.edu> cburian@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Christopher J Burian) writes:
>Yeah, sure.  A friend of mine was told by her head-shrinker that she's
>a sex addict.  She's had four partners in five years. Coincidentally,

I would say look at the content and quality, not the quantity, of the
relationships.

>I've had four traffic tickets in five years.  I better go see a 
>therapist about my addiction to paying fines. .

Or a penchant for reckless driving.
--
       Philosophy is to the real world as masturbation is to sex.
                                -- Karl Marx
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: carl@sscl.uwo.ca (Carl Kaufmann)
Subject: Re: Women, Cats, & Chocolate
Organization: Soc.Sci.Comp.Lab., U.West.Ont.
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 23:20:59 GMT

In article <PETRI.WESSMAN.92Dec12142540@lk-hp-19.hut.fi>, Petri.Wessman@hut.fi (Petri Wessman) writes:
> On Tue, 8 Dec 1992 00:34:34 GMT, budn@hpmwtd.sr.hp.com (Bud Noren) said:
> 
>>Will somebody please explain to me the reason so many women have an almost
>>imbecilic fixation on cats?
> 
> Bud> That's easy.  Women look for the same traits in their pets that they want
> Bud> in their men - confidence, independence, etc., almost to the point of
> Bud> rudeness.  Men are more comfortable with the relatively obedient
> Bud> servility of dogs.  
> 
> Hmmm... will someone then explain to me why just about all the women
> (ok, girls) that I know are nuts about dogs and couldn't care less
> about anything that goes "meow" or scratches at the furniture -- and
> why I'm a cat person myself and think dogs are walking drool
> generators? Is this some weird Scandinavian thing? :-)

No, I don't think so.  More likely a northern climate thing.

Just the opinion of a Canadian in love with an American woman,
British cats, and German chocolate. :-)

^ ^
CatGuy-----
||  ||
*****************************************************************************
* See how the heart reaches *  Carl Kaufmann   * No one has to do anything, *
* out instinctively, for no * Soc.Sci.Comp.Lab * except bear consequences.  *
* reason but to touch.      *    U.West.Ont    *                            *
*       -Kate Bush          * carl@sscl.uwo.ca *       -Me                  *
*****************************************************************************

Xref: sparky soc.singles:33601 ba.singles:2582
From: pooh@Apple.COM (Pooh)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Woman: will you go out with shorter man?
Date: 14 Dec 92 14:33:28 GMT
Organization: Internet Refugee Camp

In the referenced article, margoli@watson.IBM.com writes:
>
>I've found that in bed, height differences don't generally matter...

I beg to differ!  In certain positions, differing thigh lengths
can make a frustrating difference ...

Pooh ("Up a little bit ... no wait, back down ... okay, hold it!!")
	pooh@apple.com

Xref: sparky soc.singles:33878 alt.pagan:14249 alt.romance:15227 alt.sex:39553 alt.polyamory:2132 talk.religion.misc:23810
From: lothie@syrinx.umd.edu (Lothie)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.pagan,alt.romance,alt.sex,alt.polyamory,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Truth
Date: 14 Dec 92 23:06:59 GMT
Organization: The House With No Name

Kayvan, that crazy dood, sez: 
>What is this doing in all these newsgroups anyway?
>

Well, actually.....

I have a LOVELY definition of Truth that I'd like to share with everyone.

	Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty; that is all
	Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.

				-- John Keats
				"Ode on a Grecian Urn"


**Lothie, going for the Romantic Definition


-- 
"Darling, it's better down where it's wetter, take it from me!"
				--Sebastian, _The Little Mermaid_
      The GOLAB: lothie@syrinx.umd.edu, wi.4575@n7kbt.rain.com
           Sinking deeper in sin, push us in, push us in!
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Truth/Psychiatrists and homosexuality.
Date: 15 Dec 1992 13:50:05 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com

In article <7867@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
[details of famous psychology experiment deleted]
>          Milgram tried a zillion different variations of this experiment,
>varying subject groups and other variables, and the results didn't change
>much.
>
>It'd be nice if there was a segment of the population which was too
>nice/gentle/loving to fall for a setup like this.  In fact, it's horrifying
>that *anyone* falls for it.  However, if there is such a group, it's
>not women-in-general.  

A similar experiment was conducted by someone else in which the subject at the
switch received a food reward for administering the shock, which was real.
87% of the subjects refused to participate once they understood the setup,
and one went without food for two weeks rather than pull the switch.  Subjects
who had previously been shocked were more likely to decline to administer them.

The test subjects were rhesus monkeys.  The experiment was conducted more than
25 years ago; you'd probably have difficulty getting permission to reproduce it
now.

-- Herb Huston
-- huston@access.digex.com
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ep502ca@pts.mot.com (CHARLES ACTOR X2751 P7091)
Subject: Re: Women, Cats, & Chocolate
Reply-To: ep502ca@pts.mot.com
Organization: Paging and Wireless Data Group
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 17:32:33 GMT

>I have a vague memory of reading about a mediation that when given to the cat,
                                          ^^^^^^^^^

How do you get the cat to meditate?

Chuck

Xref: sparky soc.singles:33686 soc.women:21394 soc.men:21043 ba.singles:2595 misc.legal:21280