HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Moment of poly self-discovery
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 12:03:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.171403.4868@sco.com> daveu@sco.COM (Dave Uebele) writes:
>
>
>I really don't understand why having lunch is ok, but dinner is not
>or shaking hand is ok, but hugs are not or kissing but not light fondling.
>Everyone seems to have a different sense of what is the line that should not
>be crossed. I refuse to limit physical contact with close friends just
>because they are not my primary partner.
>

Those are the kind of arbitrary "group rules" that I've always had trouble 
with.

One of the fuzzy ones is dancing with someone else's spouse.  With some
of the more uptight among us, this is completly verboten.  With others,
fast dancing is ok (because of physical separation, perhaps?), but slow dances
are not (maybe because of a romantic connotation here?).

The lunch-dinner thing can get strange, too.  Usually dinner in a group (that
is, more than two people) is considered harmless.  But there are some 
hairy creatures out there who see even this as a threat to their territory!

In my experience, lunch is ok, but a picnic lunch is usually not.  Then
again, there seem to be rules about just how often one can do lunch.  If 
there is a business connection, "how often" gets relaxed considerably, but
it's still there.  Without such a connection, the ground gets treacherous
quickly.

Recently a group I know went on a white-water rafting trip.  One of the
men almost had to cancel because an unescorted female expressed a desire
to join the group.  This man's wife would not conceive of he and five
other men going off in the company of a woman!  (When the woman in
question heard of the problem, she rolled her eyebrows, sighed, shrugged,
and decided not to go.)

So incredibly silly: yet the unwashed majority takes it all so seriously...


		Tony

Lawrence & Clark, Inc		(617) 762-0707	(206) 323-2864
Xenix/Unix support,etc 	 	 Boston		 Seattle
From: stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: Getting the idea across...
Date: 29 Jul 92 06:48:22 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

awozniak@zeus.calpoly.edu (The WOZ) writes:

>What's the best way to explain the concept of polyamory to someone
>who has never heard of the idea before?

I once explained it thus: "I like to be sexually/romantically involved with 
the same sorts people that I like to go on long walks with. And just as I don't 
want to choose one exclusive walking partner, I don't necessarily want to
choose one exclusive romantic/sexual partner."

He was strictly monogamous and didn't agree that long walks and sexual
involvement were similar activities, but I think it helped him understand 
where I was coming from.

--
Stef                 In the force if Yoda's so strong, construct a
stef@apple.com       sentence with words in the proper order then
                     why can't he?                               /fortune
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: asuccop@milton.u.washington.edu (Annemarie Succop)
Subject: Re: Getting the idea across...
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 06:52:55 GMT


	when asked about marriage, i'll often married for a year & 1/2
	in college to my next door neighbor to get florida state
	residency & financial independence from my parents.  & soemtimes
	i'll say i've coinsidered domestic partnering w/my (platonic)
	housemate to get her healthcare benefits.

	then sometimes if i feel like it i'll make the distinction
	b/w 'legally married' which i have been, 'partnered' which i
	relaly haven't been, & 'ceremonially married' which i also
	haven't really been.

	but these are all for fairly in-depth conversations.

	annemarie
	asuccop@u.washington.edu

Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: apl@world.std.com (Anthony P Lawrence)
Subject: Re: Re:Hello
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 20:27:09 GMT

In article <Bs6sz6.528@well.sf.ca.us> jrussell@well.sf.ca.us (Jerry Russell) writes:
>     On the other hand, the emotional content of my remarks still represents
>my reality.  I'm tired of being too conservative or too liberal or too old
>or too young or too thin or too shy or too forward or too sensitive or too
>insensitive.  I want to be water brothers, grok?
>

Try not being.

Old, old advice: be yourself.

If you have trouble with that, maybe it's because you haven't become
comfortable with whatever and whoever you really are.

Amazing thing: when you like yourself, other people start copying
your lead  :-}

	Tony


Lawrence & Clark, Inc		(617) 762-0707	(206) 323-2864
Xenix/Unix support,etc 	 	 Boston		 Seattle

Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: asuccop@milton.u.washington.edu (Annemarie Succop)
Subject: Re: Getting the idea across...
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 17:55:06 GMT


	i feel like it's impt *not* to try to talk a new person 'into'
	polyamory; just as i wouldn't try to 'make' a monosexual person
	bi or a vanilla person leather, i wouldn't try to make a monogamous
	person polyamorous.

	i actually usually go for some 'traditional' description like 'we
	both see other people' if i'm already talking about a partner, or
	'i see a bunch of people'.  if they ask more, i say more.

	this method has ven kind of worked on my *mother* (who is fairly
	conservative); she feels as if i'm nothing like her & is often
	looking for ways in whcih we're similar.  when she asked if i had
	'a boyfriend' & i said 'i see a lot of people', she *immediately*
	said 'oh, like me dating & playing the field before i married your
	dad'.  well, not *quite*, but at least a little bit close, & we
	could work from there.

	then again, i'm not neccesarily 'committed' to polyamority as a 
	permanaent lifestyle; i may well be monogamous someday.  no sense 
	painting myself into a corner, either...

	annemarie
	asuccop@u.washington.edu
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: fks@vax.ftp.com  (Frances K. Selkirk)
Subject: Re: Moment of poly self-discovery
Nntp-Software: PC/TCP NNTP
Reply-To: fks@ftp.com
Organization: FTP Software, Inc., Wakefield, MA
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:04:32

    In article <1992Jul16.212236.23390@sfc.sony.com> weaver@sfc.sony.com (Eric Weaver) writes:
    >
    >I would like to ask the readers to whom it applies: What was it that
    >made you aware of your own polyness (or perhaps the mononess of others
    >and your difference therewith)?
    
I have to join the crowds who say the latter. I was a rather clueless child,
:-) and somehow passed off all the monogamy around me as "old-fashioned" 
stuff that would be immaterial once I reached the more cosmopolitan world 
of college. I expected that real people my age (once they got out of their 
teens and relaxed) would have fluid, overlapping, and shared relationships, 
(and also that they'd all be bi), and that it was just a matter of a 
generation for television to catch up. I never talked about any of this, of
course, but I have stories that I wrote as a high-school freshman, and they 
have character pages noting relationships, and they're all positively baroque!

Prior to college, I was never aware of sexual feelings for a person, so my
own desires had little influence, and there were no dates to impose other
attitudes on mine. Once at college, my first year was rather rough. Group
sex happened easily, but the group affection I expected just wasn't there.
I never agreed to enter a monogamous relationship, though, and only put up
with one attempted switch to monogamy. (He cried and I gave in. It was such
a disaster that I realized it would have been kinder to continue refusing.)

I've still never found that perfect group thing, though. After a number of
large households, I decided I probably wouldn't like it anyway - I'm just
not social enough to share a house with that many people. (A neighborhood,
now...)

--

Frances Kirk Selkirk		 fks@ftp.com	           (617) 246-0900
FTP Software, Inc.		 26 Princess Street, Wakefield, MA  01880

Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: jrussell@well.sf.ca.us (Jerry Russell)
Subject: hello again
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:29:39 GMT


Hello again,
     Some e-mail that came in last night prompts me to add a few words to my
previous post, before I get more flames.
     My wife & I were sufficiently uncomfortable with monogamous ideals, even
when we were first married, that we agreed to omit the phrase "foresaking
all others" from our wedding vows.  Since then, she has actually taken
more advantage of the freedom implicit in our contract than I have.  To be
exact, she has been involved in two relatively brief but intense relationships
with other men, complete with romantic walks, fancy lunches, and
heavy petting (but not full sexual intercourse, I believe.)  Both ended sadly
when the men involved started hinting at her to dump me and go monogamous
with them, which she didn't want to do.  These events do not make me think
less of my wife or her love for me, but they do make me suspect that she's
emotionally capable of being in more than one relationship at a time.
     As I said in my post, I don't know what she would actually feel if I were
involved with another woman.  However, I do know what she says she would feel.
She says she wouldn't be angry or feel betrayed or want a divorce.  She would
feel lonely, a little worried about disease, and concerned that I might not
come
back.  I wouldn't want her to feel those concerns, which is one reason I'm
not clear on whether polyamory is right for me, at least not if it means
leaving my wife out of things.
     I don't think this whole thing is about sexual gratification.  Poly*
people
keep referring to Heinlein and Rimmer.  If you read them, you'll find that
the picture is of a supportive, romantic context where everyone shares
their lives and no one is left out, lonely or jealous.  It may well be an
un-realizable fantasy for me in this world, but it is a concept I'm attracted
to.


                                   Jerry Russell
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: pentangl@spdcc.com (Scott Moir)
Subject: Re: scientists & polyamourity
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Distribution: alt
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 09:22:46 GMT

In article <DAVIDR.92Jul22222202@china.mps.ohio-state.edu> davidr@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu (David Rostcheck) writes:
>
>Hmm. This brings to mind a new thread, something I've been noticing
>lately. I'm a physicist and it seems that I see lots of net traffic from
>scientists who are polyamourous. In fact an early polyamourous
>lifestyle reference (brief) I stumbled upon involved scientists. The
>book was named "Emergence" by David Palmer (and it's really good); the
>reference is just in passing. But anyway, how many polyamourous people
>out there are scientists?

Aside from the fact that most of the people who are net-connected are
either in school or in the computer industry, it would stand to reason
that any demographic group measured here would largely consist of
science people.

But anyway...  I'm a Chemist, and my Primary is an Astrophysisist, but
my other love is an Artist. My two previous loves were a Programmer and
a Teacher.

Scott

-- 
Scott Moir / Pentangle / Satyr ______ # "There's really only one requirement 
pentangl@Ursa-Major.spdcc.com  \ \/ / #  for a Prophet, and you've got it."
B4 f t+ w g k+(+) s+ m r p+     \/\/  # "What's that?"
These are my opinions, not SPDCC's    # "A mouth." - 'God' to J.R.'BoB' Dobbs
From: zk@coos.dartmouth.edu (Generator)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Delurking...sort of
Date: 28 Jul 92 14:44:18 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

This is a delurking of a sort... I just read some of the posts on how to
explain polyamory and I found myself identifying quite strongly with
them. I have on many occasions tried to explain to people that I can love
my friends. If I have made them a friend it is because I love them. I
really believe that the reason they are my closest friends is that I do
love them. I didn't even realize that what I was feeling was polyamory
until I started reading this group. I kept having to justify it in my
mind because many others that I knew (and loved) did not identify with
this at all. 
  Unfortunately, at this time I can not explore this new knowledge
because I have a boyfriend who I love very much, but is definitely not
polyamorous. Of course I will try and work things out, but it will take
a lot of communication and work. I have tried to explain this to him
before, but he just doesn't understand what I feel in this area. Some
progress has been made and there is hope (now I just have to explain
this to others) Fortunately my house (I am living in a co-ed
fraternity...wonderful people) is very open sexuality, preference, etc.,
and most will listen and help even if they do not quite understand the
exact feelings I have.
  I have read Heinlein's novels and thoroughly enjoyed them (I think
they are what first introduced me to this side of myself.) Are there any
other books that are good to read in this area? I am not taking classes
this summer so I have lots of time to read...

-Gen ( This is for Genevieve, not the mutant spelling of Gennifer..;-)
     (But I prefer Gen, only my mother calls me Genevieve)
--
            Generator aka zk@coos.dartmouth.edu alias Gen Saur
      email: gen.saur@dartmouth.edu, gensaur@northstar.dartmouth.edu
  "If you are going to be reincarnated as a white mouse, make sure you're
           in the control group."	-Peter K. Suk
From: zane@ddsw1.mcs.com (Sameer Parekh)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: Getting the idea across...
Date: 28 Jul 92 04:06:14 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL
X-Disclaimer:  Material posted in this article is the sole responsibility of
                the poster and does not represent MCSNet or the system owners.

In article <1992Jul27.052547.21367@mach4.wlu.ca> brea9430@mach4.wlu.ca (breadner kenneth cecil joseph u) writes:
>In article <1992Jul27.015529.854274@zeus.calpoly.edu> awozniak@zeus.calpoly.edu (The WOZ) writes:
>>What's the best way to explain the concept of polyamory to someone
>>who has never heard of the idea before?
>
>I'd start by talking about love in general, and asking your subject (never
>TELL them) if it is possible to love more than one person at a time. Of
>course, you're going to get a yes here. Then maybe ask them if it's possible
>to love more than one friend at the same time (the Greeks called this love
>agape, and you might want to explain to them (and get their opinion on the
>matter) that they (the Greeks) thought agape was the highest order of love.
>Eros (physical love) was comparatively low on the scale. 
>Things to mention: society's very odd use of the word "lover"--all those
>sexual connotations, what are they doing there?--; the different loves we
>can feel for different people at the same time; and such.
>
>I've justified polyamory in my mind by thinking:
>
>A. The Greeks thought agape was the highest order of love (and I agree with
>them)
>B. I believe I have "agape" for more than one person
>C. I should then be able to love more than one person in any other way,
>including eros, if we desire it.

	I think you are slightly mistaken about the words. In doing research
about MLK Jr. I came across this definition of Greek love. Three words.
Eros, Philia, and Agape, in that order. (Agape being the highest.)  It seems
like you describe philia.. "I believe I have 'philia' for more than one
person."  Saying that statement with agape doesn't really make sense because
agape means love of ALL. Love of humanity, love of little bronw fuzzy
things, etc.

-- 
  _Sameer_Parekh_zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM_zane@infopls.chi.il.us__________________
 / STOP The War on Rights          | | Restore liberty in the United States \
 | "Specialization is for Insects" | | Vote Libertarian 1992          ______/
 \________- Robert A. Heinlein_____/ \_ap.2363@cupid.sai.com (anon)__/
From: urlichs@smurf.sub.org (Matthias Urlichs)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: Moment of poly self-discovery
Date: 24 Jul 1992 23:32:15 +0200
Organization: University of Karlsruhe, FRG
NNTP-Posting-Host: smurf.sub.org

In alt.polyamory, article <1992Jul21.171403.4868@sco.com>,
  daveu@sco.COM (Dave Uebele) writes:
< 
< I was also heavily influenced by two books from Robert Rimmer,
< "The Harad Experiment" and "Proposition 31", Both dealing with group
< marriage ideals.

Could somebody post publisher / ISDN information? I'm trying to order them
but the local book stores can't seem to find these in their catalogs.

As if getting English-language books in Germany wasn't bad enough already. :-(

-- 
Ink: A villainous compound of tannogallate of iron, gum-arabic, and
water, chiefly used to facilitate the infection of idiocy and promote
intellectual crime.
-- 
Matthias Urlichs  --  urlichs@smurf.sub.org -- urlichs@smurf.ira.uka.de   /(o\
Humboldtstrasse 7 -- 7500 Karlsruhe 1 -- Germany  --  +49-721-9612521     \o)/
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: uk02700@mik.uky.edu (mitchell e french)
Subject: Re: Moment of poly self-discovery
    <1992Jul20.125755.23041@agora.uucp>
Organization: University Of Kentucky, Dept. of Math Sciences
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 09:29:45 GMT
Distribution: na

In <1992Jul20.125755.23041@agora.uucp> richard@agora.uucp (Richard Johnson) writes:

>>weaver@sfc.sony.com (Eric Weaver) writes:
>>
>>>I would like to ask the readers to whom it applies: What was it that
>>>made you aware of your own polyness (or perhaps the mononess of others
>>>and your difference therewith)?

    Actually, it was finding this newsgroup and discovering that 
there was a word for the way I thought.  It just made a lot of
random things that I had thought before click together into a 
more-or-less coherent whole.  
     And so, here I am, in a sorta relationship with 2 happily
SO-ed women...and still looking for another person to love....

*pouf*
Mushroom
From: woodhous@latcs2.lat.oz.au (Joe P Woodhouse)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: Couples with couples
Date: 21 Jul 92 08:59:30 GMT
Organization: Comp Sci, La Trobe Uni, Australia


   A tip of the hat to all who've replied so far - a basket of sound and
sensible advice.

   I must confess to a deep suspicion of polyfidelity (I don't even like
the connotations of the term). I can't escape the feeling that polyfidelity
is merely an attempt to be monogamous with more than one person at once.

   I personally can't really understand this other couple - how it is
somehow "better" or "easier to deal with" sleeping with *only* the Poly
couple and no-one else? If they're truly able to deal with becoming a
4-group, I very strongly believe that they'd be able to deal with being
"fully" Poly.

   For me, the main objection I have to monogamy (apart from it being not
very much fun, that is 8->) is the notion of a mandate or *rule* against
loving/sleeping with other people. How is the polyfidelitous situation
described any different?

   I'm afraid my reaction to a proposal to be polyfidelitous is the same
as my reaction to someone wanting to be mono. It's not an option. If they
can't handle my being with other people (apart from a selected "approved"
few, in the case of polyfidelity), if they can't accept my guarantees that
any new relationship *will not* make any existing relationship less, my
guarantees that the only reason I will leave someone will only be to do
with them and not because of someone else...then they shouldn't be with
me - I won't be with them.

   I don't think the Poly couple should agree to this restriction. If the
other couple truly do love them, they'll manage somehow. It might not be
easy, but they'll make the attempt. And they certainly wouldn't insist
on imposing what basically is monogamy on people who've made the decision
to keep monogamy out of their lives.

   Sorry if that sounds harsh, but I can foresee terrible problems over
this issue if it's not dealt with before it goes any further.

   It's going to be hard to explain this to the mono couple. All I can is
if they're genuinely prepared to accept a polyfidelitous relationship, 
they should be able to make the leap to polyamory.

Joe.

  / Joe Woodhouse        / I'm just a sweet bisexual...   / Hello, there.
 / Latrobe University   /    (think - Rocky Horror)      / Threesomes are fun.
/ Melbourne, Australia / Music. Magic. Mathematics. Me. / I like cats! (miaow!)
From: asuccop@milton.u.washington.edu (Annemarie Succop)
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
Subject: Re: Anonymous Post for "Alan Hardy"
Date: 22 Jul 92 00:08:54 GMT
Organization: University of Washington


	hmmm

	as a female scientist who's been in threesomes w/bisexual men &
	who's been non-monogamous, i'm trying to figure out if i *know*
	alan hardy.

	annemarie
	asuccop@u.washington.edu
Newsgroups: alt.polyamory
From: daveu@sco.COM (Dave Uebele)
Subject: Re: Moment of poly self-discovery
Organization: SCO Engineering, 150 Dubious St.
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 17:14:03 GMT



I don't recall a single point of poly self discovery. I was heavily influenced
by Heinlein, "Stranger in a Strange Land" and others of that author.
I was also heavily influenced by two books from Robert Rimmer,
"The Harad Experiment" and "Proposition 31", Both dealing with group
marriage ideals.  The song "Triad" was also a heavy influence. I've mostly
been in open relationships of one sort or another. Most of them did not
work out, but I learned a lot from them.  I think the thing that keeps
pushing me to explore polyamory is what I call "fuzzy line friendships".
I really don't understand why having lunch is ok, but dinner is not
or shaking hand is ok, but hugs are not or kissing but not light fondling.
Everyone seems to have a different sense of what is the line that should not
be crossed. I refuse to limit physical contact with close friends just
because they are not my primary partner.

dave
-- 
Dave Uebele	uunet!sco!daveu  or daveu@sco.com
Newsgroups: alt.individualism
From: catapnbf@g310b7.Rose-Hulman.Edu. (Nathan)
Subject: What is Libertarianism? 
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 01:28:27 GMT

Hello:
	I was wondering where I could find more information on the beliefs  
and platform of the Libertarian party?  All snail mail addresses and other  
references would be welcome.

				Thank you.
					Nathan
From: wilkes@apple.com (John Wilkes)
Newsgroups: alt.individualism
Subject: Re: Libertarianism vs. government
Date: 25 Jul 92 01:11:54 GMT
Organization: Apple

In article <1992Jul24.234642.18671@leland.Stanford.EDU>, dkeisen@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dave Eisen) writes:
> 
>  And libertarians *do* assume that the poor will
> do what they're told and leave the wealthy alone.

Libertarians assume that unregulated free markets will be more
efficient at distributing wealth.

For an example of a completely unregulated free market, consider the
illegal drug trade.  Ask any crack dealer in Oakland if s/he thinks
it's an efficient method to build personal wealth.  Then ask if s/he
is concerned that the higher-up drug lords make even more money.

The illegal drug trade is not a perfect example of a free market because
it is also totally unprotected, allowing bullies to use force instead of
finesse.  A Libertarian would still have police and courts to address this
sort of problem.

If the people who rioted in LA believed they actually had a chance of
accumulating some wealth of their own, do you think they would have
burned and looted?

John Wilkes  <wilkes@apple.com> 
Newsgroups: alt.individualism,alt.politics.marrou