HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gcf@panix.com (Gordon Fitch)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,alt.dads-rights,soc.men,misc.legal
Subject: Re: False allegations of abuse / Chesler's book...
Date: 20 Dec 92 18:40:26 GMT
Organization: mydog in exile

Can someone cite or even quote the passage in Chesler's
book?  I'd like to read it.  My apologies if this was
already done; if so, just send email?  Thanks.
-- 

 )*(    Gordon Fitch    )*(    gcf@panix.com    )*(
( 1238 Blg. Grn. Sta.,  NY NY 10274 * 718.273.5556 )
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (rini)
Subject: Re: feminist sound bytes
Reply-To: mec6@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 04:09:30 GMT

sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) writes:
 
>So, Rini, I take it you now accept the conclusion that male dominance both
>in the classroom AND in the business conference room can be explained
>by the greater aggressiveness of the male? 

Of course. I certainly would agree that men tend to be more aggressive 
than females...  would any feminist say otherwise?

>And hence there is nothing
>(short of forcing the women to undergo testosterone treatment!) that's
>going to change this?

Where you got this from is beyond me. 

rini

Hey -- what about forcing men to undergo estrogen treatment!!!  ;)

Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: sfjr@wam.umd.edu (Steve Russell)
Subject: Re: Mysogynist Bullshit
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 19:35:39 GMT

In article <Bz9G04.6GM@javelin.sim.es.com> biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel) writes:
><Bz2DDM.8M0@javelin.sim.es.com> 
><1992Dec12.021406.13333@u.washington.edu> 
><1992Dec12.043838.13722@midway.uchicago.edu>
>
>mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (rini) writes:
>
>>twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin) writes:
>> 
>>>--Barbara, in love with Heiner, 
>>            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>>**** >>>  So it is BARBARA HLAVIN !!!! <<< ****
>>          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>>Why I outta....   OH!  I'm so mad!! Lime Jello, right Barbara?  
>>Big ol' trampoline, eh Barbara?  Flaunting those San Diego Zoo 
>>connections, is that how you do it Barbara?  I can't believe 
>>this is happening right under my nose!  I just can't believe it!!!
>
>>Well Barbara, I hope you just take note of how old (btw, don't believe
>>him when he says he's 68... he's been 68 for the last ten years....)
>>Heiner's treated me here.  He dumped me; he'll dump you.  
>
>>And just one peice of advice, woman to woman:  say "NO" to his
>>horseradish fetish.  (If you do decide to go ahead with it, please
>>talk to your doctor first!!!)
>
>Ladies, ladies, stop it, this is so unseemly! Why, if I were only ten
>years younger I'd take a switch to the both of you. Can't we handle this 
>like adults? rini, Barbara is a wonderful lady, and the fact that she
>has some interesting friends with the circus is just a side issue. More
>important is the way she makes me feel, and that wonderfully dry, almost
>reptilian skin of hers ( she tells me it's a rare skin disorder, but I
>thing she was blessed ) Let's just see if we can't work this out without
>fighting. How about we all get together at Pete's Bistro - you remember,
>that intimate little dive by the harbor in San Diego, where we met "Muffy"
>for the first time - and work thing out between the three of us, eh? I
>think you might like Barbara; you should see her etchings...
>
>Regards,
>       Heiner

*Steve R shaking his head and laughing*

Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: sfjr@wam.umd.edu (Steve Russell)
Subject: Re: Mysogynist Bullshit
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 19:45:12 GMT

In article <MUFFY.92Dec15111202@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>In article <BzB6vI.4BK@javelin.sim.es.com> biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel) writes:
>> And, how do I maintain an
>> erection while I am raping someone?
>
>I have two words for you:
>
> cock ring
>
>Muffy
>--
>
>Muffy Barkocy                      | ~Can you tell me how much bleeding/it
>muffy@mica.berkeley.edu            |  takes to fill a word with meaning and/
>"amorous inclinations"? Aha! I'm   |  how much how much death it takes/to give
>not "not straight," I'm *inclined*.|  a slogan breath?~ - Bruce Cockburn

*OUCH!*

Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: quilty@titan.ucc.umass.edu (Humberto Humbertoldi)
Subject: Re: Violence
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 19:09:47 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.152429.2331@cs.cornell.edu> jean@cs.cornell.edu (Jean M. Petrosino) writes:
>asgard@plx.com (J.R. Stoner) responded to my post about violence with:

>He continues:
>	Has it occurred to you that the difference of result might be
>	because guilty women are _convicted_ less often than guilty
>	men?  The convicted women are imprisoned less than men?
>
>Wrong.  How can the judicial system be biased toward women when a judge can 
> rule that a five year old girl who was raped was 'acting sexual' and let her
> rapist go free.  
>How can the judicial system be biased toward women when the man who Amy Fisher
> allegedly had an affair with was conveniently absent from all court 
> proceeding and vehemently denies having an affair with her.  He is 
........[massive irrelevant posturing deleted].......

Jean Petrosino in all of the examples she gives (mercifully abridged)
says not a word about a bias in conviction rates, or in sentencing.
All she gives is the same old reactionary nonsense about "victims'
rights" that has become so popular in the carceral society of ours.  I
won't try to go into the particulars of her rants about men who
weren't convicted, but I will observe that it is OVERWHELMINGLY the
case that men get much harsher sentences for the "same" crimes as do
women.  This is what the original poster observed; and this is what is
true.   Whether rape is prosecuted sufficiently, or whatever Petrosino
is going on about, is just a different thread.
-- 
    _/_/_/_/ THIS MESSAGE WAS BROUGHT TO YOU BY: Postmodern Enterprises _/_/_/ 
   _/_/      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  _/_/ 
  _/_/  The opinions expressed here must be those of my employer...     _/_/ 
 _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ Surely you don't think that *I* believe them!  _/_/ 
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: "Privacy Plus"
X-To: RICH PAYNE
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 01:35:00 GMT

From: payner@netcom.com (Rich Payne) writes...
RP> In article <1g0f49INNhv2@agate.berkeley.edu> spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Ste
RP> ope) writes:
RP> >Out here in Berkeley a women-only cohousing group has
RP> >started up called "Privacy Plus".
RP> >
RP> >My information is sketchy and possibly inaccurate, but
RP> >apparently the deal is these folks will purchase property
RP> >on a cooperative or tenants-in-common basis, with
RP> >the restriction that only females can live there.
RP> >
RP> >Does anybody know more about "Privacy Plus"?  Has this
RP> >been done before elsewhere?  And can the women-only
RP> >restriction really hold up when property ownership
RP> >is at issue?

RP> Wouldn't this be a violation of fair housing laws?


Apparently not in Canada, Rich.  I recall the International Women's Day
supplement in the Toronto Star, (I am *still* waiting for an International
Men's Day, and I will probably suffocate if I hold my breath, waiting for
one to be declared...), which mentioned a women-only housing project near
downtown Toronto.

"Ah, it feels so good, without any MEN around!"...  Give me a break.

---
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 * Never eat anything larger than your head.
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: sfjr@wam.umd.edu (Steve Russell)
Subject: Why Poor Women Are Fat-STOP:)
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:41:06 GMT

Sitting down to this newsgroup is a nice pause in my otherwise nasty
schedule.  I enjoy it here, even reading the posts of opinions/people
Id rather do without out.

I like reading alt.feminism and misc.fitness.....SEPERATELY:)
Can we please stop the exercise physiology discourses?*chuckle*
Gender Issues arent discussed in misc.fitness!*LAUGH*


Please, it gives me a sense of disorientation:) *smile*
Steve R


A
A

Xref: sparky alt.feminism:6251 soc.women:21679 soc.men:21448
From: RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.women,soc.men
Subject: Re: Sophie Germain - Gender Differences
Date: 10 Dec 92 02:31:35 GMT
Organization: City University of New York/ University Computer Center

-
-I don't know.  It's kinda interesting to think about it.
-
-rini

I kinda like that!  As long as people think about things, I don't really
give a damn whether they agree with me.  It is the `not thinking and
taking things for granted' that is worrisome.

Rohit Parikh
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (rini)
Subject: Re: Mysogynist Bullshit
Reply-To: mec6@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 04:38:38 GMT

twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin) writes:
 
>--Barbara, in love with Heiner, 
            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

**** >>>  So it is BARBARA HLAVIN !!!! <<< ****
          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Why I outta....   OH!  I'm so mad!! Lime Jello, right Barbara?  
Big ol' trampoline, eh Barbara?  Flaunting those San Diego Zoo 
connections, is that how you do it Barbara?  I can't believe 
this is happening right under my nose!  I just can't believe it!!!

Well Barbara, I hope you just take note of how old (btw, don't believe
him when he says he's 68... he's been 68 for the last ten years....)
Heiner's treated me here.  He dumped me; he'll dump you.  

And just one peice of advice, woman to woman:  say "NO" to his
horseradish fetish.  (If you do decide to go ahead with it, please
talk to your doctor first!!!)

rini
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.men,soc.women
From: michael@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Michael)
Subject: Re: Living in a State of Siege
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 17:54:05 GMT

Hmm.  I see some slight of hand.  Lets attempt to see through it...

>> Just a few questions/answers:
>>  
>> 1) Who are the major proponents of circumcision?
>> - Doctors, the mojority of which are still men.
>Citations please?  In many cases this is a religious issue.  Oh, I forgot -
>these are patriarchal religions, so it's a moot point.

I don't see what cicumcision has to do with anything anyway.  The
whole subject seems a moot point to me.

>> 2) Who does the majority of bullying in school?
>> - Boys
>Who reinforces their socialized roles of toughness?
>- girls/women

*BEEP*  Wrong answer.

Interesting.  I would have said boys/men reinforce socialized roles of
toughness.  That's how it was when I grew up.  Most of the girls/women
I met thought the boys/men were kind of stupid for what they did.  That
is when they weren't shocked at some of the brutality of it.

>> 3) Who tries out for football teams?
>> - boys/ men
>See my response to #2

Well, I'd reference #2, but you got that one wrong. :)

>> 4) Who legislated draft registration?
>> - legislative bodies which are comprised overwhelmingly of men
>Who voted for these legislators?
>- men and women

This WOULD be a point if we could have voted all women into office.
Unfortunately that wasn't possible.  So this is not a point.

>> 5) Who murders the most men?
>> - Men
>Are men who are the victims of violence deserving of it purely because
>they happen to be the same gender?
>- Apparently so.

*BEEP*  Wrong answer.

I don't believe that anyone tried to say that.  Correct answer is
"No."

>> 6) Who the hell forces you to watch boxing on television?
>> - Big Clue: You. Are you a man? 'Nuff said.
>See my response to #3

Well, since #3 referred to #2 which was an incorrect answer, we'll have
to let this one go as well.

>> 7) Who killed the men in Arlington Cemetary?
>> - Men
>See my response to #4

Well as #4 was made no sense, I'll have to let this one go as well.

>> 8) Who sent our brothers/fathers/husbands to Viet Nam?
>> - Men
>See my response to #4

Again, a referrel to a nonsensical point.

>> Are you seeing a trend here?

I'm seeing a trend in the response to what you said. :)  Someone tried
to refute you and made absolutely no sense at all.

    Michael Stanley (michael@glia.biostr.washington.edu)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: jean@cs.cornell.edu (Jean M. Petrosino)
Subject: Re:Violence
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY 14853
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:24:29 GMT

asgard@plx.com (J.R. Stoner) responded to my post about violence with:
	Men commit very little crime, in general.  And don't you forget it.

Okay, then why do we have a crime problem?  Why are the majority of jails 
 filled with men?

He continues:
	Has it occurred to you that the difference of result might be
	because guilty women are _convicted_ less often than guilty
	men?  The convicted women are imprisoned less than men?

Wrong.  How can the judicial system be biased toward women when a judge can 
 rule that a five year old girl who was raped was 'acting sexual' and let her
 rapist go free.  
How can the judicial system be biased toward women when the man who Amy Fisher
 allegedly had an affair with was conveniently absent from all court 
 proceeding and vehemently denies having an affair with her.  He is 
 clearly committing perjury, at least as far as having an affair with this 
 young woman, and the court is looking the other way while she goes to jail and
 he patches up his relationship with his wife.  Yeah, he really has it hard.  
And how can the judicial system be biased towards women when only 1% of 
 REPORTED rape cases end in a conviction (and those convictions average out to
 about 18 months in jail).
And look at the Shirley Kinge case here in Ithaca.  Her son went bizerk, broke
 in to a local family's home, robbed them, tortured them, killed them execution
 style, and set the house on fire.  He went home, gave his mother the family's 
 credit cards, and told her to go buy herself something nice.  She willingly
 went to some department stores and used these stolen credit cards.  When the
 police tracked down her son, he killed himself.  The 'authorities' figured
 out it was Shirley Kinge who used the family's credit cards, so they 
 immediately began to investigate her connection to the murders.  They 
 convicted her as an accomplice to murder on the basis of finding her finger
 prints on one of the gas cans her son used to set the family's house on fire.
 Recently, it was discovered that even this flimsy evidence of finger prints 
 was PLANTED by an investigating officer.  She served three years in jail for
 being an accomplice to murder when in fact, what she was guilty of was  
 forgery.
And what about that case where that women went to jail for what, three years 
 or something, because her husband was sexually abusing her daughter but the 
 courts insisted the father be allowed extended private visits.  Do you really 
 think a woman would go to jail repeatedly just out of spite for her ex-
 husband? NOT!



Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.men,soc.women
From: chrz@tellabs.com (Peter Chrzanowski)
Subject: Re: Gender differences - Sophie Germain
Organization: Tellabs, Inc.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 00:03:04 GMT

In article <92350.085253RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET>, <RIPBC@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:
>   Here is an interesting bit from the Colliers Encyplodia about the Titanic
> disater, 1912.  Of the women and children on the ship 70% got into lifeboats
> and survived.  Of the men on the ship, 20% survived.  Of crew members,
> 24% survived.  Among the dead were several quite well known, wealthy and
> powerful men.   But there were not enough lifeboats and women were
> given preference over men.

           "Votes for women, votes was the cry!"

           "But on the Titanic, when death was nigh,
            Boats for women, boats was the cry!"

--> from a letter to the editor of the New York World (a daily newspaper)
    in 1912.  Even then it was recognized that there was a conflict
    between having special protections for women, and equality for all. 
    

--> Note, however, that the enforcers of the lifeboat ethic on the Titanic
    were mostly men.  Due to incompetance and poor training of the crew,
    many of the Titanic's lifeboats went into the water only half-full.
    Some men were turned away at gunpoint; many were ordered out of the
    boats -- even if the boats were not full.

--> When the ship finally went down, men could be heard crying for help
    in the freezing (38F) water for an hour or so, until hypothermia
    killed them.  Most lifeboats, including those that were not full,
    did not attempt to rescue these men; they were afraid their boats
    would be swamped.

> 

>   Being a man isn't always piece of cake.  True, most of the senators are
> men, but so are most of the people in prisons - and there are far more
> people in prisons than in the senate!   Women do earn les than men do, but
> I suspect that the rate of death and injury from employment is much higherZ
> for men than it is for women.  So let us for heaven's sake, look for the
> welfare of BOTH sexes and stop pretending that men are living in some
> kind of paradise that women are denied access to.
> 
>     Rohit Parikh


Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: mkagalen@lynx.dac.northeastern.edu (michael kagalenko)
Subject: Re: Living in a State of Siege
Organization: Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 02115, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 00:51:26 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.210328.18413@cs.cornell.edu> jean@cs.cornell.edu (Jean M. Petrosino) writes:
>                 ...............................
>better than what women get, it's just slightly ...well, different but the same
>                                                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Isn't it great ! Keep trying, Jean.


>
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: twain@milton.u.washington.edu (Barbara Hlavin)
Subject: Re: CALLING ALL WOMEN..WHERE ARE YOU?
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 17:12:35 GMT

In article <michael.724428525@glia> michael@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Michael) writes:

in re. banter of rini and Heiner:

>Well, I don't see how it could have been anything but a joke.  And so far
>I've enjoyed it immensely. :)
>
>As a matter of fact, its been a wonderful break from the standard fair on
>this group.  


So that's what this is!  A *fair*!  And I thought it was a carnival. 
(Must have been confused by all the side-shows.)

--Barbara


Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: Re: What's Innate and What Ain't and So On (was: Re: Entry level sal
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 19:22:20 GMT

In article <1992Dec8.192955.29712@s1.gov> lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>In article <1992Dec8.052308.28290@netcom.com> sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer) writes:
>
>>  Bullshit! Not a matriarchy among them. Isn't that right, Loren?
>
>>  Just a bunch of Gimbutas articles about how a statue of a Goddess
>>  holding a battle-axe is proof that a peace-loving, matri-centric
>>  (but not "matri-archal") society existed in sweetness and light
>>  just before anyone learned to write history, when it was wiped
>>  out by horrible Indo-European patriarchs.
>
>	There you go again, Robert Sheaffer.
>
>	Marija Gimbutas argues that this "battle-ax" was not a "real"
>ax at all, but a stylized butterfly. And why aren't there any men
>shown wielding this supposed weapon? Or were those Minoans all Amazons?
>
>	Here is a character plot of a butterfly:
>
>                       \    /
>                        \  /
>                         \/
>                         /\
>           $$$$$$$$$$$   ||   $$$$$$$$$$$
>          $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$||$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
>          $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$||$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
>           $$$$$$$$$$$$$$||$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
>            @@@@@@@@@@@@@||@@@@@@@@@@@@@
>             @@@@@@@@@@@@||@@@@@@@@@@@@
>              @@@@@@@    ||    @@@@@@@
>                         ||
>                         ||
>                         ||
>                         \/
>
>	Here is a character plot of a Minoan "double-ax"
>              
>               $         $
>              $$$   |   $$$
>              $$$$$$|$$$$$$
>              $$$$$$|$$$$$$
>              $$$   |   $$$
>               $    |    $
>                    |
>                    |


Yes, how silly of me. Only those wearing the blinders of a Patriarchal
Imperialism could fail to see that what we had assumed to be a battle-axe
in the Goddess' hand was obviously a butterfly on a stick!

Probably the Goddess' favorite kind of ice cream, after Crunchy Frog! :)

Of course, *other* Neolithic sites are filled with battle-axes. But this
one just COULDN'T be warlike, because the Goddess wouldn't hear of it!

Now you see the kind of "proofs" on which the Goddess Garden of Eden
rests. Butterflies on a stick!
 
And STILL no Matriarchies - isn't that right, Loren? Brian Siano screwed
up again, when he claimed you hade sent me a whole box filled with proof
of the reality of matriarchies.


-- 
  
        Robert Sheaffer - Scepticus Maximus - sheaffer@netcom.com
  
 Past Chairman, The Bay Area Skeptics - for whom I speak only when authorized!


     "Mystical explanations are considered deep. The truth is that
      they are not even superficial."

                   - Friedrich Nietzsche    (The Gay Science: 126)
Newsgroups: alt.feminism
From: mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (rini)
Subject: Re: Keep Scratching
Reply-To: mec6@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 21:30:15 GMT

HGERBER@vm.ucs.UAlberta.CA (Hjalmar) writes:
 
>>> I don't know what "feminists" think.  I try to understand what individuals
>>> who claim that they are adherents of feminism, are saying...
 
>> Wow -- are you saying that (adherents of feminism) != (feminists) ?
 
> I believe that the collective "feminists" does NOT exist, except in the
> minds of people.  There are INDIVIDUALS who adhere to the (quite varied)
> belief systems that are collected under the banner "feminism", but such
> adherence is far from having a common, standard purpose of BEING "femi-
> nist".  What is the purpose of "feminists"?

"Feminists" is basically shorthand for saying "adherents of feminism."
(The suffix "-ist" indicates "one that adheres to or advocates a doctrine
or code of behavior.")  Your distinction seems rather... well, non-existent.

> The fact that I subscribe to SOME, definitely NOT ALL, of the ideas that
> is claimed to be "feminist", does not make me an adherent of feminism. 
                    ^^^^^^^^                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Nor does the fact that you subscribe to SOME, definitely NOT ALL, of the
ideas that are claimed to be part of "feminism" make you a feminist. So?
Did anyone imply otherwise?           ^^^^^^^^             ^^^^^^^^

> It
> makes me an individual who subscribes to some ideas.  Please quit trying
> to pin a lable on me.  Please quit trying tell me how I think or what I
> should think and do - simply because I have the secondary characteristic
> of "male".  Please quit telling me that I should feel guilty because of
> what some other individual who shares a secondary characteristic with me
> had done.  

Who are you talking to?  What are you talking about?

> Adolf Hitler adhered (mostly) to a vegetarian diet.  Does this make
> others who, for whatever reason do not eat meat, co-conspirators in
> what transpired under Hitler's regime?

YES!  DEFINITELY!!!  What are you?  Dense?  Sheez.   ;)

rini
Xref: sparky alt.feminism:6305 soc.men:21517 soc.women:21715