HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: heard@franklin.cc.utas.edu.au (George Heard)
Subject: Melbourne - The Aftermath
Summary: None of the keywords relate to the actual posting.
Keywords: sex fun sun onions and cheese dip
Organization: University of Tasmania, Australia.
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 03:49:08 GMT


G'day guys,

       As Laurie 8 is now safely (?) tucked away back in Hobart having enjoyed
a great week on the proper part of the continent it is time to reflect (spread
muck) on the meeting of some of the soc.bi folk and ensure I am never asked
back.

       Thanks to Nick for organising the get-together at the Glasshouse.
Forgetting the abysmal record of buses in Melbourne I of course arrived nearly
an hour late, sweaty and flustered and proceeded to pour portergaffes down
my throat at an alarming rate (for those with taste, a portergaffe is stout
with a dash of lemonade, a drink guaranteed never to be stolen by anyone else
at the table). Once recovered from my strenuous stroll I proceeded to relax
and enjoy myself immensely, especially the bit that involved eating Thai food
and playing havoc with Yvette's elbow (you should know that when using
chopsticks, the left-hander sits on the end of the table...).

       So, where's that dirt I promised everyone about the people we all
know and love (oh, and Nick). Well, here it is after a ^L for those pure of
thought (liars) and anyone who doesn't want to hear my fascist opinions...



       What a sordid mind you must have! Last chance...



       OK, since you are resolved to it.

       Nick is a cool guy, but... beware of Greek's overbearing gifts.
Could be trying to revolutionise the power industry by running on nervous
energy. And he's got a hairy back!

       Yvette (Maxine2) is a really great person and has the tongue of acid
trick down pat. She also wears my jumper much better than I do (well, she
actually has a frame rather than the loosely jumbled together cartiledge that
comprises Laurie 8). I don't want to play her at pool.

       Tim Bell has red hair! Nothing else needs to be said.

       Laurie 8 is a truly pathetic creature - ungainly appearance, dressed
straight from the 70s with these awful glasses (although they hide a lot of
his face, so they can't be all that bad). Keeps making tasteless jokes at
all the wrong times and drinks like a fish.

Well, since I shall now be ostracized from the group forever for preparing
a filth sheet - cheerio for now, and a big thank you to those guys for making
my trip to the mainland an absolute pleasure.


Laurie (official tourism minister for Tasmania) 8

Laurie 8 <heard@franklin.cc.utas.edu.au> | Some Driveways are concrete
Theoretical Chemistry PhD student        | Some Driveways have bricks
University of Tasmania, Australia        | Other Driveways
Unashamed 70s man, glad to be glam.      | Have Pebble-Mix - Laurie 8         
Opinions expressed above are those not only of Laurie 8, but the whole world
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer)
Subject: Re: treating men as sex toys
Date: 04 Jan 93 08:12:54 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <MUFFY.92Dec30100855@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>In article <1992Dec30.063433.23345@microsoft.com> jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec26.052957.4713@news.acns.nwu.edu> Albert-Lunde@nwu.edu (Albert Lunde) writes:
>>>In article <MUFFY.92Dec24114049@remarque.berkeley.edu> 
>>> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>>>>[some men (and women) seem to like sex w/ men for "just sex", but 
>>>>if emotions are in play, they want a woman]
>>>[...]
>>>A man, say, who was not adverse to cheap meaningless sex ;) might find
>>>that men and women responded differently to the idea.
>>I, on the other hand, have maintained that sex can be just a physical
>>act, and that it's not necessarily better or worse than sex as part
>>of another relationship
>
>I didn't really touch on this in my discussion, 

Nope, you didn't...

>but this is exactly how
>I feel.  However, I think this is a part of the individual relationship/
>interaction, and is different with every partner.  

I agree.

>What I was discussing
>originally is the idea of *all* men as "only for sex" and (sometimes)
>all women as "for 'real'/emotional relationships."  I wasn't trying to
>devalue "sex for fun," but I think that looking at *all* men as "only
>for sex" is devaluing men *and* sex with men.

I agree with you. I didn't mean that I thought you said that "sex for
fun" is bad - you didn't mention. But I found it interesting that 
[in this one interaction at least] a man was taking the "'real'
/emotional relationships are the only way to go" attitude. Particularily
when men are often characterized as "cold", "unfeeling", "not good
at communicating", and "unemotional" beings who have sex with women
but don't connect emotionally.

IE, here's real life evidence that looking at *all* men as "only for
sex" is not only devaluing men but in direct contradiction to what
[at least some] men say they want.

(I was more responding to Albert's [tongue-in-cheek] characterization 
of men as "not being adverse to meaningless sex", a not-unheard-of 
stereotype around here [north america] which fits in well with the "men
are uncaring" stereotype and the "men are only good for sex" stereotype
and the "men are cold" stereotype.  Etc.)

-jen
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: What's a "partner"? (was Re: treating men as sex toys)
Date: 6 Jan 93 20:58:16 GMT
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <MUFFY.93Jan6115727@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>In article <1993Jan6.185808.14078@infodev.cam.ac.uk> gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry) writes:
>
>>Hmm.  So your personal definition of bisexual involves having close
>>friends of both sexes?  Good heavens, perhaps I *am* bisexual after
>>all!  (That was a joke, don't all get excited...)  Seriously, I'm
>>sure you meant something more than that, but what?
>
>Umm...that's an "and" up there, not an "or."  Yes, though, my definition
>*involves* having close friends of both sexes...you just seem to have
>missed the part about "as well as sexual partners (of both sexes)."  The
>point being that, to me, the sex of a "sex toy" does not matter, as the
>attraction is then simply for sex, not for a person.  To consider myself
>as attracted to both sexes, I have to want more than simply a sex
>partner (although I must say that sex partners are pretty great...
>*grin*).  If *all* I wanted with people of one sex was sex, then I
>wouldn't feel that I wanted *people* of that sex, just sex-with-anyone- 
>that-will-hold-still.

Ah, so I think what you're really saying is that your sexual partners
have to be close friends -- which I'm sure is true for all sorts
of people of all orientations!

I was originally curious about your use of the term "emotional
partner" because I recently had a conversation with someone who
insisted that a woman who wasn't sexually attracted to other women
could be considered a lesbian if she had an "emotional relationship"
with another woman.  I couldn't understand what it meant to divide
personal relationships into "emotional" ones and "unemotional" ones.
Of course you get more emotionally involved with some friends than
with others, but drawing that sort of distinction struck me as rather
bizarre.

--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk 
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: rowe@engin.umich.edu (Steven Rowe)
Subject: Fantasy question:  Is Tori bi?
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 01:09:08 EST
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: soc.bi

In article <C0pv0t.209@news.udel.edu> jcarroll@bach.udel.edu (James Carroll) writes:
>This seems to be an appropriate place to make my announcement: I've been
>converted!  This weekend I bought the Tori Amos EP _Crucify_.  I love it! 

Congrats on a fine purchase.  I was converted by _Little Earthquakes_ less
than a month ago. (Thanks, Karen!)

>Jesus Jones, she exudes more sensuality and sexuality than Madonna ever
>can.  (No flames from Madonna fans -- I love her work too!)  Tori even
>beats the pants off of Debbie Harry!
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I got to wondering if you mean this literally?  Seems everybody I talk
to thinks Tori is some sort of sex goddess (and I *do* talk to myself).
But, oddly, all those people are bi.  What makes Tori so special??
Anybody out there find her UNattractive?  Let's have a show of hands,
who secretly wishes that Tori is bi?  (My hand is up)

Well, somebody said the group needed some fluff, so here it is.  A
place to fantasize about Tori...  *sigh*



-- 
Steve Rowe: B0 f- w- c g+ k+ s- e+ r-
--
Graduate Research Assistant: Not Just a Job; An Indenture!
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: iw@tosser.Rational.COM (The_Devine_Dolly)
Subject: Re: I'm coming!
Organization: Rational
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 00:16:02 GMT


>In article <1ib8jrINNopk@agate.berkeley.edu> rsr@soda.berkeley.edu (Roy S. Rapoport) writes:
>>
>>Coolness! Hey, we can all have dinner together! And we can invite Dan and
>>Iseult also, and a bunch of other people!! Yeah!
>>

Why how sweet, I love to be invited to dinner???

Iseult
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: seamus@ravel.udel.edu (James G Dilmore)
Subject: Re: muffins anonymous
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 21:24:12 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.004444.24071@fuug.fi> an5402@anon.penet.fi writes:
>Now that I no longer have a reason for lurking (isn't anonymity grand?), I
>wanted to jump in and say hi.  "HI!"
>
Hello. :)
>
>I've suffered the sting of bi-wariness, I've come out to family and friends,
>I've had my share of bad hair days, and yes...I occasionally would like to ask
>for a hug.
>
Hugs for the hair and hugs for the hell of it.

>Thanks to all of you for being here.
>
>Renee

Thanks for showing up and particpating.
bye
-- 
Jim Dilmore - seamus@brahms.udel.edu    or    dilmore@che.udel.edu 
   Deconstruct your Gender          Safe sex doesn't mean no sex.          
If you can't be good,               It just means use your imagination. 
be good at it.  T.B.                     Billy Bragg
From: winsor@geek. (js)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: general dissatisfaction
Date: 11 Jan 1993 19:02:43 GMT
Organization: Texas Instruments
Distribution: world
Reply-To: winsor@geek. (js)
NNTP-Posting-Host: geek.teng.ppd.ti.com
Keywords: hugs, angst

hug-a-hug-hug-hug

and various other fluff, too!

john

-- 
The opinions expressed in the above do not reflect those of
my employer, or anybody connected with my employer.  Including me.
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: leecr@microsoft.com (Lee Crocker)
Subject: Re: A hug request and a general growl at the world
Date: 07 Jan 93 02:17:14 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <1993Jan5.193134.6454@news.columbia.edu> jsb16@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Jennifer S Broekman) writes:
>Personally, I found _The Tao of Pooh_ rather self-righteous and anti-science.
>Not that I think that everything science and Scientism have brought the world
>is wonderful, but the book was extremely simplistic, casting 'Science' as the
>ultimate bad guy and equating it with mindless bureaucracy. If you find Taoism
>interesting, read some of the original sources, such as a translation of any
>of the writings attributed to Lao Tsu. Truer to the trandition and better 
>thought out.

As a devoted man of science and practicing Zen Buddhist, I didn't
find _Tao of Pooh_ either self-righteous or anti-science.  I suppose
one's own point of view affect the way one finds any writing.  I have
a friend who says he found Lao-Tsu's _Tao Te Ching_ to be supportive
of totalitarianism, while I found it meshed perfectly with my own
Libertarian views (in fact it surprises me that all Buddhists aren't
Libertarians).

Anyway, I found it simple (but not overly simplistic) and refreshing.
I think it is a good antidote to the compulsive behaviors common
among many overly ambitious people I know.  BTW, I find the Steven
Mitchell translation of _Tao Te Ching_ the best I know.
-- 
Lee Daniel Crocker    | Free minds; free bodies; free trade.
leecr@microsoft.com   | Libertarian Party  1-800-682-1776
From: rwab1@cl.cam.ac.uk (Ralph Becket)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Bi-wariness
Date: 6 Jan 93 16:03:40 GMT
Reply-To: Ralph.Becket@cl.cam.ac.uk
Organization: U of Cambridge Comp Lab, UK

'Fraid I can't offer much, but here's a gentle *hug*

	Ralph
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: orc@vpnet.chi.il.us (david parsons)
Subject: Re: A hug request and a general growl at the world
Summary: label madness
Organization: Department of Atomic Text Units
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 17:23:24 GMT

In article <C0F82s.MnG@news.udel.edu> seamus@ravel.udel.edu (James G Dilmore) writes:
|I like the label of bisexuality because to me it represents the
|closest position to the rejection of artificial distinctions as I can get.
|But yet with it I can still find an identity and a community.  I think that
|the labels of het, gay, bi and such are intrinsically false and that they
|needn't exist if the above conditions prevailed. 

   They describe behavior and/or orientation, and thus are
perfectly accurate.  They may not be very precise; bisexual applies
to me, a Kinsey 1/4(*), just as it would describe a Kinsey 3/3 or a
Kinsey 5/5.  Use it as a part of a winnowing process to describe
someone - it helps resolve your image of that person.

(* theoretical Kinsey 1, experimental Kinsey 4)

   If you don't use the labels het, gay, or bi, what then will be
used?  It's a wonderful shorthand, so we don't have to spend all day
describing ourselves.  Take a look at this description of myself,
with the common labels and without:

  [Labels]  Orc: a promiscuous bisexual bottom
  [Without] Orc: I sleep around, a lot, almost exclusively with
            friends <pickups and casual flings are okay, but
	    dangerous emotionally, and I don't do them if my brain
	    is working>, and most of them at long distances from
	    where I live.  I am mainly sexually and emotionally
	    attracted to women, sometimes more than I'd like to be,
	    but I do respond quite well sexually to men, and very
	    rarely emotionally.  I'm into pain, but only when it's
	    inflicted in a sexual situation, and only when it's
	    inflicted by the person topping me <this means no
	    whips, clamps, and all those other fun things that seem
	    to be part and parcel of Classic S&M (tm)> and I don't
	    do submission, and fight like mad when I'm tied down.

   The second description is a better one, by a long shot.  But
it takes 15 minutes to relate.  I can casually describe myself with
the labels very quickly, and then relate the gory details at my
leisure.  (In this context, not wishing to use labels is a way of
labelling yourself; as what, I'll leave up to you, but not in
casual discussion because I'd like to get some sleep today!)

    (Of course, my preferred labels for myself these days: 'e-slut'
and/or 'database whore', are even shorter, but I've found that
aside from being good advertising, they aren't really descriptive,
because almost everyone asks me what they mean (mainly 'database
whore', but a surprising number of people ask me about the meaning
of 'e-slut')

    And, for that matter, any of my labels for myself might be a
little off, because people may have already noticed that my
definitions of many things are just a little bit, ah, different
than what everyone else's definitions are!

               ____
 david parsons \bi/ pedantic e-slut
                \/
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: litterst@pecan.cns.udel.edu (Stephen Litterst)
Subject: Conversions
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 06:01:43 GMT

Okay, this is something that came up in a conversation at EveCon and I wanted
to get a ton of opinions on it... While discussing coming out with Brendan
(he's bi, I'm not {yet}) I mentioned that several people had been doing their 
darnedest to "convert" me.  Now I'd never thought about it, but Brendan was
incensed that people were interfering in someone else's soul searching.  He
feels (and I agree now that I think about it) that someone's coming out should
be a personal event/struggle with other people there to be supportive, not
influential.  As I looked around at the bifolk that I was hanging around with
that weekend I heard (what I assumed) to be good-natured joking around about
various people's attempts to "convert" other people.  Im my limited experience
outside of this group, I tend to notice females doing this more often than 
males.  Is this normal?  Is this ethical?  Or am I just being a prude?  

					Thanks for the opinions,
					*HUGS* to all.

					Steve
P.S. Hi Steve. (If you're watching) Lela, too (if you're watching)

-- 
        ---<[{       .sig in stereo (where available)       }]>---
| Stephen C. Litterst           |  Nice guys finish last...              |
| kyraan@bach.udel.edu           \ 	But we do get to sleep in.       |
|_litterst@freezer.cns.udel.edu___\______________________________________|
From: ergazork@anarky.tch.org (Very Silly Party)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Goodness gracious...
Date: 6 Jan 93 01:48:26 GMT
Organization: The Canned Ham, San Jose, CA.



What with all this demuffining, I'm starting to get hungry.

(<WHAP>  Hey!  Get yer minds in the gutter!  Of course that's what I was 
implying!)


--
Warning:  I am not sane.  All attempts at communication may result in a 
loss of sanity and sudden urges to run naked through the streets.
You have been warned.                   ergazork@anarky.tch.org
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Date: Wed,  6 Jan 1993 01:06:36 -0500 
From: Tom Lord <lord+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Daoism, Pooh, and Bisexuals
	<C0EIB4.Kuy@news.udel.edu>


        Let me explain... What I get from the yin-yang is that nothing
        can exist without its opposite.  (motss and motos attractions)

This is something i have a hard time understanding.  In what sense are
sexes polarized?  There are two distinct sets of functions for
reproduction, but:

	- not everyone is organicly programmed for either set of
 	  functions

	- some people are programmed for both

	- in any event, keying _attraction_ on reproductive function
	  is a quaint tradition in some respects but i wouldn't
	  want to read too much into it

Oh sure, there is polarization in social practice (e.g. language), but
where else?

Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: kay@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Kay Dekker)
Subject: Re: Impossible acts
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 16:55:50 GMT

In article <1993Jan9.171853.1@io.tudelft.nl> vdijk@io.tudelft.nl writes:
>I ended a previous message with:
>>>Love & kisses,
>In article <1993Jan8.161024.4145@dcs.warwick.ac.uk>, kay@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Kay Dekker) writes:
>> I shall take you up on that, you know.
>Go ahead punk, make my day.

Ohhh, you're so masterful! <swoon>

				Kay
-- 
the Crisco Kid: quiet, shy, mono, Armani-suited.  Not.  idx009@uk.ac.cov.cck
From: pfieland@citron.sw.stratus.com (Peggy Fieland)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Bi-wariness
Date: 6 Jan 1993 15:43:41 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: citron.sw.stratus.com

I had a personal experience with bi-wariness last night, and
it has left me feeling, well, depressed, saddened, grief stricken,
or whatever.

I've been going to a lesbian rap group. I know, I know, I should
have been going to the bi rap....  Anyway, over coffee, I got
to trying to tell the others why I see myself as bisexual.  Since
I've been through this before, I thought I was prepared for the
"If you want to be with a woman, why don't you call yourself a
lesbian?".  What I had a really hard time with was the open, this
time, admission from a couple of the women, that they'd never, ever,
become involved with a bisexual, the subtext being, as far I could
tell, "Even if we were right for each other, I'd never even ask
you out because you're bisexual".

It was worse this time, because Saturday I went to my first
woman's dance.  I had a great time, did some dancing and a lot
of talking, but felt really broken up again on the way home.

Maybe it's just one of those weeks, but I'm feeling unusally
pessimistic, that I'll never find a woman, never move off this
point in my life.  I'm feeling fragile and in need of support.

Peggy
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: seamus@ravel.udel.edu (James G Dilmore)
Subject: Re: Urgent notice!
Keywords: Make up your own.
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:12:59 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.180243.24063@dcs.warwick.ac.uk> kay@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Kay Dekker) writes:
>In article <C0LLH5.F6y@news.udel.edu> seamus@ravel.udel.edu (James G Dilmore) writes:
>>I have been one of the major perpetrators of these acts, and while I don't
>>apologize I will try to add to the levity of the group inthe future.
>>(boy that was stiff)
>
>Did I tell you that I do (in)decent massage? :)
>
Did I tell you what was stiff?

>>OK boing.  Let me loosen up here.  
>
>By the time I've finished with you...
>
yes yes... don't keep me in the dark.  Or maybe... (whistfully thinks
about blindfolds)

>
>[Kay wonders just how long he can persuade his funding authority that he
>needs to visit Delaware for...]
>
:)

>>Jim, who is posting this in the nude.
>
>And I'm running Michael Nyman through the audio processor.   O joy.
>
>		Kay

Jim, who, having heard of sensory depravation(the blindfolding, ear
covering, and tongue restraing) for the first time yesterday, finds 
himself thoroughly interested.

-- 
Jim Dilmore - seamus@brahms.udel.edu    or    dilmore@che.udel.edu 
   Deconstruct your Gender          Safe sex doesn't mean no sex.          
If you can't be good,               It just means use your imagination. 
be good at it.  T.B.                     Billy Bragg 
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: kay@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Kay Dekker)
Subject: Re: Impossible acts
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 20:31:10 GMT

In article <C0Hu0G.M5s@kathunk.phaedrav.on.ca> nigel@kathunk.phaedrav.on.ca (Nigel M Burnett) writes:
>vdijk@io.tudelft.nl wrote:
>:  'the Crisco Kid: pleasant darkhaired bi smart assertive cutie' ?

>					   ^^^^^ ^^^
>Can we distill it down to this?  :-)}  :-)}  :-)}
> 

Waaaaaaaaaaaaah! I'm going home! [stomps off, thumb in mouth,
sulking hugely]

				Kay
-- 
the Crisco Kid: quiet, shy, mono, Armani-suited.  Not.  idx009@uk.ac.cov.cck
From: C.G.C.vanDijk@IO.TUDelft.NL
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: Impossible acts
Date: 5 Jan 1993 10:55:53 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Elf writes:
>   Nope.  After all, we can't be sure the cat is _enjoying_ what it
> does and hey, some of us humans can do that too, y'know...
>      Elf !!! (grateful for all those yoga classes after all, Mom)

No!  I didn't know!  I stopped yoga because I am allergic to woolen
plaids, and its not easy to relax when sneezing your head off.  And
I did not have a clue that I was going to learn such useful things..

>   What?  A *muffin!?*  *SNUG!*, and welcome to soc.bi!

Ahhh.  A snug from Elf. <faint> <happily dreaming away> 
<floating across the oceans> <hughughug>

Casper
 
Casper G.C. van Dijk               "Broken words,
Delft University of Technology      never meant to be spoken"
the Netherlands                                    Bob Dylan

Newsgroups: soc.bi