HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: weaver@jetsun.weitek.COM (Michael Gordon Weaver)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: How Important Is Being IN-LOVE?
Keywords: Love,Romance, Relationships
Date: 13 Oct 92 20:20:14 GMT
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1992Oct12.222808.308@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> allisson@turing.toronto.edu (H. Allisson Roome) writes:
...
>So to rephrase the question:  How important is ROMANCE for a relationship that
>you have?  Do you need to have it for a relationship to progress from the
>stage where you go out on dates/do things with a person to *only* going on
>dates/doing "couplish" things with that special person (from dating several to
>perhaps dating just one)?  Do you need to be "in-love" versus just loving them
>with the significant other to be physically intimate with them (I'm not
>concerned with what constitutes intimacy for you, use your own definitions)?  I
>suppose the biggest question is if you find yourself in a relationship where
>you do love the person but either a)have no romantic/in-love feelings for them
>and never have or b) find yourself no longer in-love is that a cause for
>ending the relationship or looking to enter another one?
>
Speaking for myself, I would much rather have the romance, but it isn't
necessary to move into an exclusive relationship. I had at least one
relationships like that, and I enjoyed it as long as I could keep my
expectations in line with reality. As for physical intimacy, I think
that if I wanted to be physically intimate with someone with whom I
have a loving relationship, then that would be romance, if not by
definition, then in practice.

If you love someone but you aren't 'in-love', you might hope to get that
way. It didn't work for me when I tried it, but I think it might work
sometimes. I wouldn't want to wait forever, though.

I only had one experience I really felt loving towards someone, and 
felt 'in-love' with them, and then didn't. But in this case, we were
never really more than friends, so there was no need to end the 
relationship. But it sounds to me like this would be the end of 
a close relationship.

>I will say this, I do believe that there is a distinction between "BEING
>IN-LOVE WITH" and "LOVING" someone.  What I wonder about is the relative value
>is for each (i.e., how important one is vs. the other) and whether others see
>the distinction as well or not.
>
I would agree with this distinction strongly. I see it as the desire to be
supported by a certain person (being-in-love) and supporting
a certain person (loving). I think both are necessary for a long term 
relationship. 

Loving is a state of affairs, so you can pretty much force yourself to 
be loving towards someone. Being in love is a state of mind. You can't
force yourself to be in love with someone, or not to be in love with
someone. 

Michael.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Vicky Boink.
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 05:18:23 GMT



   A few days ago, I posted an article asking about Boinks. One of
those mysterious lurkers E-mailed me this week and we sort of came
up with a plan.

   This little get together will start on a Friday evening sometime
around easter(I like to figure things out way ahead of time.) We
thought of commencing with the festivities in a little restaurant
that caters to food lovers who are familiar with food from my home 
town(more on that later.) This restaurant is in Vancouver.

   The boink will take the ferry to Vancouver Island and get into
some of the local nightlife. We were thinking of visiting some of
the local attractions and doing some serious hiking in the mountains.
We could go on a whale watching trip and essentially pack about 
three months of good times into a weekend. Maybe a fire on the beach
would be a good idea, although I'm not familiar with ARSON bylaws.

   These ideas are subject to thrashing around, rehashing and revision,
changing, rethinking, etc, etc.

   I thought of this because the Boinks that I saw announced on the
net were just too far away. Boston, Philly, and so on are a bit out
of this area. Lurkers, don't be shy...This is for you,too.

   I've never organized anything like this before, but I look forward
to the experience.

Andreas. 


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: beutel@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Jim Beutel)
Subject: Lookin for Karen Bishman
Reply-To: beutel@chdasic.sps.mot.com
Organization: Motorola SPS ASIC, Chandler, AZ
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 20:28:22 GMT

Desparately seeking Karen Bishman. Graduated Florida,
Gainsville early 80's Computer Science Major. Worked 
for Lockheed, ARCO, IMS Consulting all in southern 
California.




---
Jim Beutel	

Motorola SPS ASIC            beutel@chdasic.sps.mot.com
1300 N. Alma School Rd       Computer Operations 
M/S CH290  AZ50              office:  (602) 821-4967
Chandler, Arizona 85224	     telefax: (602) 821-4963
From: thurlow@convex.com (Robert Thurlow)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: The Engaged Psychobitch from Hell Syndrome
Date: 15 Oct 92 20:11:10 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In <1992Oct11.190926.4702@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com> smith@comm.mot.com (Jeff Smith) writes:

>That may very well be, but it doesn't explain the fact that in this age of
>enlightenment, sexually speaking (at least relative to 30 years ago or more)
>we have a far higher divorce rate. By the way, I realize that divorce is far
>more socially acceptable now as well. However, I don't believe that that fact
>alone is the reason for the higher rate.

I think you're being intellectually sloppy; there are a lot of possible
contributing factors to the increased rate of divorce.  The time pressures
in our society, the migration from rural areas to cities, the fact that we
have TV showing us a lot of idealized relationships, and the fact that
advertisers hammer us with sex-laden material may all matter more than
any effect caused by people sleeping together before marriage.  I think
when it comes right down to it, though, Marcia has the best idea: just
find someone with compatible beliefs on the topic and don't worry about it.

Rob T
--
Rob Thurlow, Networking Technical Leader
Convex Computer Corporation, Richardson, TX
(214) 497-4405		thurlow@convex.com
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 92 19:19:31 GMT


Here are my vues on the current schoolyard violence thread!

  Why not think about Ghandi? Why not watch the film?

  HE NEVER RESORTED TO VIOLENCE, JUST PEACEFUL RESISTANCE!!

Andreas.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ron@turing.toronto.edu (Ron Wessels)
Subject: Re: Aggression in boys (Was: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!)
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Distribution: na
Date: 9 Oct 92 18:03:41 GMT

jjd1@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (james.j.dutton) responds to Andy Lowry:
>Actually I could care less if you are offended.

Which implies that James does care somewhat if Andy is offended!

Ah, James.  Always the sensative one!

-- 
Ron Wessels		University of Toronto		ron@turing.toronto.edu
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Re: this conference
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 01:52:37 GMT



  In article uupcb@synapse.org, doug.hewko@synapse.org (Doug Hewko)  writes:
>From: doug.hewko@synapse.org
>
>I am new to this conference, and can someone please tell me exactly
>what this conference is for?  Over here, it is called a singles
>conference, but I noticed someone posted a singles ad but got told by
>the moderator (???) that the message was in the wrong place....
>
>               Doug
>---
> . 1st 1.01 #574 . Nothing that is worth knowing can be taught. (Oscar Whilde)
>                                                               


  Uh,uh,uh, oh yes. I've been around this group for about five weeks, and
the way I understand it, This is not a matchmaking service. It can be used
as such, but in subtler ways. Here, I guess we air our views on the exper-
ience of being single. It is a huge topic and anarchy reigns WRT viewpoints.

  How does one meet members of the opposite sex anyway? You join a club
or take a course or go to church or the corner pub. I see it as my local
pub: A friendly place where I can be serious, joke around, tell tall tales,
and be myself. People disagree, people agree, but most importantly people
get to know each others' attitudes, likes and dislikes. If they find 
somebody interesting, they may get a chance to meet at organised social
gatherings AKA Boinks. 

  Don't you think that only a desperate loser would post such an ad?
(no offence, all you desperate losers out there :=\)
  Would you be inclined to agree that even losers more desperate
would answer?

  Those ads say nothing about the people, really. Consider this:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SWF  age 22   5'5   Knockout body   Blonde   Brown eyes.
I love horses, surfing, bungee jumping, white water rafting and S&M.
I study underwater basketweaving at (any school you love to hate).
I live in a nice, three room apartment with my horse.

I love SWM's who are over 6' tall and look like Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Must love horses.

E-mail me if you are into underwater basketweaving!
      ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

  All you know about the poster of this ad is that she's eccentric and weird.
You know nothing of her personality. IMHO personality is more important than
anything else. Do you care what the girl looks like or enjoys if she's a total
psychobitch?

  I think that this is a more interesting way to meet people and get to know
them than a stupid ad. It breaks the ice a hell of a lot.

Andreas.
Xref: sparky soc.singles:27547 alt.romance:12533 alt.romance.chat:19319 talk.bizarre:33827
From: inspecti@ux7.lbl.gov ()
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.romance,alt.romance.chat,talk.bizarre
Subject: Re: How long has it been?
Date: 12 Oct 1992 18:47:49 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory
Reply-To: inspecti@ux7.lbl.gov ()
NNTP-Posting-Host: ux7.lbl.gov

In article <1992Oct11.000500.3636@ichips.intel.com> bhoughto@sedona.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) writes:
>Isn't that rather a personal question?
>
>				--Blair
>				  "Not much of an actor...
>				   but one hell of a cannibal."


thanks blair, i needed that.

next, could you run at that wall as fast as you possibly can?

inspecti
don't ask for much
From: krgjus01@uctvax.uct.ac.za
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: HI, I am a HOMOSEXUAL! Send me mail
Date: 12 Oct 92 13:14:04 +0200
Organization: University of Cape Town

In article <1992Oct9.084848.12572@cam.compserv.utas.edu.au>, sgiles@esk.compserv.utas.edu.au (Stuart Francis Giles) writes:
> Hi! Please send me mail.  Gays only, fuck me!
> 
> sgiles@esk.compserv.utas.edu.au
> 

In Response : 

   Hi Giles

Your invitation to respond was worded in such a way that it leaves me no
alternative but to reply to you personally.
If you could only see me drool while I slowly type out this message.
Your chutney chute stirring my imagination and other parts to greater heights
than ever before.

Sorry to get your cock up but I prefer fucking women up the ass !!
But I'd like to know from an expert in the field - how the fuck do you get the
shit off your dick ?

advice would be greatly appreciated .

Chow Franci

Yours in Shit
The Mouse Man

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (Andreas  Tovornik)
Subject: Re: GREAT GUY IN BROOKLYN
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 92 04:46:35 GMT

In article 135550L13BC@CUNYVM.BITNET, <L13BC@CUNYVM.BITNET> () writes:
>Hi! I'm a great guy! I'm 19, brown hair, blue-green eyes, sensitive, crazy, & f
>un.  Leave E-mail if you wan't more desc.
>
>                                         L8R!


Does anyone care?
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Female geeks
Date: 14 Oct 92 20:09:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnewsd.1992Oct14.200932.8937
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Oct14.185453.6912@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci) writes:
[stuff deleted]
>
>Does that also mean that if you are highly intelligent you read
>instead of perform mundane chores like cleaning your house, doing laundry, 
>preparing meals, caring for children, and personal hygene?  I say
>personal hygene ...

Whoops I guess I should have said "hygiene".  I was too busy this
morning mucking with my hair to consult a dictionary.  :-(
>
-Nance
-- 
Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*    o__    *^*^*^*^*  |  Work that body!
att!ihlpk!colucci            _.>/               | Stay fit for life.
                            (_) \(_)                           
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: morton@rtpnet06.rtp.dg.com (John R. Morton)
Subject: Re: BARBIE DOES IT AGAIN!!!!
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 92 11:57:54 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, RTP, NC.

[stuff about Barbie thinking math is hard deleted ]

The subjugation of woman is one of the cornerstones of our society,
when Barbie has trouble with math, the entire culture is affirmed.

Ken , however, ( an expert in the finite difference method for
linear problems ), loves math, and fears not! ( Except for 
penis size of black males )

cheers
From: jm0i@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (JOSEPH ALOYSIUS MCVEIGH)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Qui est le plus MUSHY?
Date: 16 Oct 92 16:22:59 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University


[In response to]
>>>And a good way to start being a jerk is to make a lot of
>>>unfair and unflattering generalizations about women.
>>How about fair and unflattering generalisations?

julie@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu (Julie Wright) writes:
>I haven't heard any in this thread yet.

Great. That's a typical *woman's* response....

[Deletius Maximus Re: Be/Act Like A Jerk To Score Babes]

Remember, some of us are pure amateurs - we act like jerks just for the love
of it.
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Aloysius McVeigh | "In our work of trying to foresee the unexpected,
   jm0i@.Lehigh.edu     |  it's not impossible to have a nuclear war. That
   * * * * * * * *      | could have a depressing effect for quite a while."
      "N.I.N.A."        | (John Templeton on the possibility of a market crash)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.singles,alt.sex,talk.abortion
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Subject: Rally Round the Flag boys, Rally Once again....
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 20:32:06 GMT

steven@jaynes ( Steve Novak) writes:
] > = Larry Margolis writes:
] >> = (Larry Jewell) writes:
] >>> = (mister rogers) writes:
] 
] >>> yes, i make a lifestyle choice to live near an airbase. i control
] >>> that, i take the risk. i also control exactly where my dick is at
] >>> all times.
] 
] >> Great, tell me how to keep mine from getting tangled in the leg-hole of
] >> my briefs!
] 
] >I find a velcro strap just above the knee keeps it out of harm's way.
] 
] This statement, sirrah, is obviously the Fort Sumter of the
] DickSizeWars!


'Hurry Watson, The Game is Afoot!"
		S. Holmes


or was that Johnny Holmes?


ciao
drieux


-- 
Modern Day Problems:

Don't Just Rock the Vote
Kick OUT THE JAMS!
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: probst@selkirk.sfu.ca (Scott Probst)
Subject: Re: Help! 200 Mile Relationship! And I'm lost on the road!
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 10 Oct 1992 04:47:55 GMT

In article <1992Oct9.151029.14039@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> ron@turing.toronto.edu (Ron Wessels) writes:
>aaf0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (Andrew Aaron Feigin) writes:
>>I have a girlfriend that is 200 miles away and i can't see her for a while,
>>atleast till christmas.  I really love her, but seeing each other once at
>>christmas and then spring break and all next summer really hurts.  I want to
>>make it work, but i'm afraid that it is hopeless, what should i do?
>
>Easy.  Get your pilot's licence, buy an airplane, and fly out there various
>weeknights and weekends.  Even with a small plane, it's only about 2 hours.
>
>200 miles ... pshaw!  I've gone further than that for >lunch<!
>
...and if you can't afford that, there's no help except television and
relentless masturbation.


Scott Probst
              "... if that happens, of course, you will find a packet of 
              sea urchins in your mailbox. To derive full enjoyment,
              take one in each hand and squeeze."         - Dr H. S. Thompson
From: jmd@bear.com (Josh Diamond)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: I need advice on girlfriends fantasies.
Date: 14 Oct 92 19:47:26 GMT
	<1992Oct12.045114.23499@cam.compserv.utas.edu.au>
	<1992Oct13.231836.24533@cam.compserv.utas.edu.au>
Organization: Bear, Stearns & Co. - FAST
In-reply-to: rhoge1@esk.compserv.utas.edu.au's message of 13 Oct 92 23:18:36 GMT


In article <1992Oct13.231836.24533@cam.compserv.utas.edu.au> rhoge1@esk.compserv.utas.edu.au ([Robert James Hoge]) writes:

   Ok, briefly:
   Last night it finally happened, but with an old friend from a couple years
   back.  It was ok, no complaints.  A threesome seems to last longer than
   just 2 people.  It was from around midnight till 7 this morning.  But I
   think we are all a bit sore.  "Big is not always an advantage" -my girlfriend.

I'm curious as to the details -- what was everyone's reaction?
Did it match well with your girlfriend's fantasy?  Better/Worse?
What kind of relationship did the two of you have with the third
before? During the "event"? Now?

Respond by email, if you wish...

				Spidey!!!



--
 /\ \  / /\  Josh Diamond                                          jmd@bear.com
//\\ .. //\\ AKA Spidey!!!                        ...!ctr.columbia.edu!ursa!jmd
//\((  ))/\\
/  < `' >  \                                              Do whatever it takes.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: julie@amazon.chem.columbia.edu (Julie Wright)
Subject: Re: Book Rec.: _Bodies: Overcoming the Tyranny of Perfection_
Organization: The Cultural Elite
	<JULIE.92Oct6221409@amazon.chem.columbia.edu>
	<1992Oct8.221142.18021@fid.morgan.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 16:08:33 GMT

sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:

>julie@amazon.chem.columbia.edu (Julie Wright) writes:
>>kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:

>>>The four food groups are actually Pizza, Chocolate, Ice Cream, & Barbecue.

>>But... how can a perfect diet (ha!) not contain any maple syrup?

>What flavor did you think the ice cream was?

Well, I was assuming it was Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream.  It
*couldn't* be maple, because that would violate the B&J Principle, which
goes:

Whensoever thou partaketh of ice cream, maketh thee sure it's made by
Ben and Jerry and has lots of yummy chunks and things in it.

As far as I can remember, they don't have a maple flavor, so that's right
out.  (Fun procrastinating game: see how many Ben and Jerry's flavors,
or Pepperidge Farm cookie types, you can come up with.  (But don't post
it!))

---Julie
From: mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: How Important Is Being IN-LOVE?
Keywords: Love,Romance, Relationships
Date: 14 Oct 92 00:30:24 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <1992Oct12.222808.308@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> allisson@turing.toronto.edu (H. Allisson Roome) writes:

>perhaps dating just one)?  Do you need to be "in-love" versus just loving them
>with the significant other to be physically intimate with them (I'm not
>concerned with what constitutes intimacy for you, use your own definitions)?  I
>suppose the biggest question is if you find yourself in a relationship where
>you do love the person but either a)have no romantic/in-love feelings for them
>and never have or b) find yourself no longer in-love is that a cause for
>ending the relationship or looking to enter another one?

Hmmm. IMNSHO, it is not necessary to "be in love" to share either physical
or emotional intimacy.  However, if this is a 'romantic' relationship, as
in, are you considering an exclusive relationship with all the trimmings,
then I think it is essential.  It is difficult to damned near impossible
to make such a relationship work if you don't love this person.

All of the choices, experiences, and possible hardships you must face
together must needs that basic bond to make things hang together and
sometimes even that isn't enough.


--
 Life is exactly what you make of it, always has been, always will be.
                                          
                                          --  Grandma Moses
From: wjb@moscom.com (Bill de Beaubien)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Define "Single"
Date: 15 Oct 92 13:49:55 GMT
Reply-To: wjb@moscom.com
Distribution: usa
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford NY
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.3 beta PL7]

nancy.l.colucci (nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com) wrote:
: Does participation in soc.singles imply that you are looking for
: someone to have a relationship with and want to do so by having
: them send you email?
Considering the normal result of posting a "Females please send me
e-mail" message, God, I hope not :-)
-- 
Who needs lime jello?  We had lasagna...
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bill de Beaubien / wjb@moscom.com
From: mel@niblick.ecn.purdue.edu (Meloney D Cregor)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Define "Single"
Date: 15 Oct 92 03:45:47 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <Bw4r6q.KIE@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:

>But I doubt very much it means you want to "have a relationship with"
>someone by "having them send you email."

Why not?

Friendship is a relationship.

I enjoy my email relationships. And ... sometimes you get to meet them.
This is the basic principal of alt.personals, well, at least it used to be.
I just answered a personal with just this in mind. I specifically chose
him because he was far enough away that I probably wouldn't meet him.  Then
again, it might end up as a good excuse for a road trip. Of course, on the
other hand, I could decide he is total sheepshit.  The same is true here.
I've met some pretty terrific people from singles and some of those meetings
started out by "having them send you email".



--
 Life is exactly what you make of it, always has been, always will be.
                                          
                                          --  Grandma Moses