HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu (Nancy Lebovitz)
Newsgroups: soc.women,sci.skeptic,alt.sexual.abuse.recovery
Subject: Re: "Satanic Ritual Abuse" in the media
Date: 9 Jan 93 23:29:01 GMT
Organization: UDel, School of Life & Health Sciences

In article <26e5wB1w164w@cellar.org> revpk@cellar.org (Brian 'Rev P-K' Siano) writes:
>joe@dogface.austin.tx.us (Joe Zitt) writes:
>
>> In article <C0Iors.Mp8@cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>> >
>> >The lead story on ABC's "Primetime Live" was also on ritual abuse. It
>> >was much more skeptical. It pointed out that some psychotherapists
>> >were getting rich finding ritual abuse almost everywhere they look.
>> >The show also talked to four women who said their psychotherapists had
>> >exploited them by feeding them fantasies (while ignoring their
>> >truthful accounts of "ordinary" abuse.) Primetime Live also said that
>> >an FBI study (dated January 1992?) concluded that there was no
>> >evidence of even one ritual-abuse related murder. (Some of the
>> >psychotherapists claim that tens or even hundreds of thousands of
>> >ritual murders are involved.)
>
>	I watched this segment with Gerry O'Sullivan, one of the co-authors
>of ther CSER "Satanism in America" report-- the first comprehensive analysis
>of Satanic cult crime claims. It's amusing to note the\at Tom Jarrel, the
>ABC correspondent covering the above story, was also the one who promote
>Satanic cult crime claims on "20/20" some years back. It's nice to see the
>guy trying to make amends.
>
>	I was also glad to see they'd gotten in touch with George Ganaway,
>whom I'd spoken to for an article I'd written a few months ago on the same
>subject. (I might still be able to repost the text, if anyone wants it.)
>
>> >
>> The front page of the latest New York Times Book Review also has an
>> article "Beware the Incest Survivor Machine", which casts doubts on the
>> subject and brings up a lot of the "false memory" talk.
>
>	The article is by Carol Tavris, a CSICOP Fellow and author of "The
>Mismeasure of Woman." Glad to see she's on the side of the angels here.
>
I'm interested in this topic--but I do think that discussions of the
validity of evidence belong in asar.d, not asar.

Nancy Lebovitz
nancy@genie.slhs.udel.edu
Xref: sparky soc.women:22538 soc.penpals:5236 soc.net-people:1617 soc.couples:4670 soc.singles:36190
From: huston@access.digex.com (Herb Huston)
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.penpals,soc.net-people,soc.couples,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Lancey
Date: 10 Jan 1993 17:55:47 GMT
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: access.digex.com

In article <1993Jan8.182257.26238@city.cs> lionel@cs.city.ac.uk (Lionel Tun) writes:
}BTW what do you call a girl who is always at an angle to the
}perpendicular?
}Ans: Ilene.
}What do you call a Chinese girl with the same posture?
}Ans: Irene.

If you're going to risk giving offense by telling ethnic jokes, at least
choose the right ethnic group to offend.  Tsai Lun, the inventor of paper,
Lin Pao, Chou En Lai, and the millions of Chinese named Li all had no
trouble pronouncing their names.  It's Japanese whose difficulties with
the letter R bring smiles to the lips of Occidentals.

-- Herb Huston
-- huston@access.digex.com
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie)
Subject: PBS: "Sex, Power, and the Workplace"
Organization: University of Illinois, Dept. of Comp. Sci., Urbana, IL
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 07:03:02 GMT

This TV show will shown on Saturday (at least in Urbana, IL).
Check you local listings for time (9pm in Urbana).

- Carl

-- 
Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
 = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men,alt.dads-rights
From: tjbryce@unix.amherst.edu (THOMAS JAMES BRYCE)
Subject: Re: False allegations (Was Re: What can we expect from President Hillary Clinton?)
Followup-To: soc.women,soc.men,alt.dads-rights
Organization: Amherst College
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL7]
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 08:01:04 GMT

Wow. What an excellent post. Thank you very much for sharing your story
and experiences.

Id like to remind everyone of the surrogate motherhood case a few years back 
with mary beth whitehead, where the man who was supposed to keep the child
had a *tape recording* of the phone call where she let him know if he didnt
give up the fight, she would accuse him of sexually molesting the child.
He could potentially have gone to jail for years and gotten beaten, raped,
etc. and had his life destroyed by such a charge. And it was in the media.
Was much ever said about it? No. And of course she was not prosecuted.
From: falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Breast Implant Info Needed
Date: 6 Jan 93 03:04:17 GMT
Organization: Sun
NNTP-Posting-Host: peregrine

In article <C0E09q.JE7@srgenprp.sr.hp.com> sam@sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen) writes:

>I fail to see why the laws should be different.  If implants are safe, then
>let everyone try them.  If they are not, don't give them to anyone.  

The consensus seems to be that they're not safe.  Therefore, the logical
solution is to deny them to everyone.

The problem, I think, is that there are some women who would refuse to
have needed masectomies if they couldn't get implants.  The danger of
this outweighs the danger of the implants, so they make an exception in
this case.

		-ed falk, sun microsystems
		 sun!falk, falk@sun.com
To be loyal to rags, to shout for rags, to worship rags, to die for rags 
-- that is a loyalty of unreason, it is pure animal (Mark Twain).
From: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com (Laurie Mann)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: "Satanic Ritual Abuse" in the media
Date: 8 Jan 1993 17:46:45 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer Inc, Marlboro MA
Reply-To: lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: ansible.pubs.stratus.com

Mike Wohlgemuth writes
>kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>>                                                  (Some of the
>>psychotherapists claim that tens or even hundreds of thousands of
>>ritual murders are involved.)

??????  Please someone, cite a statistical reference here.  

>I've seen people claim that between 50,000 and 2,000,000 ritual murders
>take place every year in the U.S.  Now let's see:
>
>50,000 murders / 365 days a year / 50 states = 2.74 ritual murders per
>day in each state.

Geesh, this is news to me.  I've never seen a number anywhere near
that high.  Ritual sexual abuse is out there, but it tends to be
a very small percentage of sexual abuse.

The Ms. article, which I have read, does not seem to quote numbers
anywhere.  And the Ms. article discusses ritual sexual abuse, not
"ritual murders." 

After being learning way too much about sexual abuse over the last two years,  
I'd estimate (and this is a guess) that a few people ARE murdered every year,
maybe a dozen or so.  When you remember that hundreds of people are reported
as missing and are never heard from again, this guess is not terribly far off  
the mark.

BTW, discussing this in soc.women and even in sci.skeptic isn't so
bad, but I think it's VERY irresponsible to be X-posting this article
to a group designed to be a haven for sexual abuse survivors, some of
whom were abused by groups of people in a ritualistic manner. Just as 
people should avoid posting male-bashing articles to soc.men, don't post
articles bashing sexual abuse survivors to a survivors' area.

*  In Germany they first came for the Communists, and I didn't speak *
*  because I wasn't a Communist.  Then they came for the Jews, and I *
*  didn't speak because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade *
* unionists, and I didn't speak because I wasn't a trade unionist... *
*Then they came for me--and by that time no one was left to speak up.*
*  Rev. Martin Niemoeller     [Why to March on Washington in April]  *
Newsgroups: soc.women,sci.skeptic
From: sheaffer@netcom.com (Robert Sheaffer)
Subject: Re: Crossposting Cult Discussions To ASAR
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 18:24:35 GMT

In article <1isbjkINNp4i@transfer.stratus.com> lmann@vineland.pubs.stratus.com writes:
>Steve Russell writes
>>	I would like to reinforce the plea that posts about Satanic Abuse
>>	*NOT* be cross posted to alt.sex.abuse.recovery.
>
>I second this.  I've sent E-mail to some of the main offenders.
>At least one person has backed down, but others are STILL
>doing it.

My God, are we *LUCKY* that John_-_Winston didn't cross-post any of the
Email he received from Satan to ASAR! What incalculable harm 
has just so narrowly been avoided! Imagine the sound of ten thousand
teddy bears being hurled through plate glass windows, followed by an
equal number of Primal Howls.....


-- 
  
        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: soc.women,sci.skeptic
From: ramon@convex.com (Ramon Dominguez)
Subject: Re: REVIEW: _In Pursuit of Satan_ (Was Re: "Satanic Ritual Abuse" in the media)
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:39:19 GMT
Organization: The Arts Babblative and Scribblative
Followup-To: soc.women,sci.skeptic
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.

#########################################################################
Note that I have removed alt.sexual.abuse.recovery from the Newsgroups:
and Followup-To: lines above.  Please follow suit when you reply to
T.S. Davies article.  The people in asar have enough problems as it is,
whatever may be the nature of those problems.
#########################################################################

In article <TSDAVIES.93Jan12041437@rodan.syr.EDU> T.S. Davies <tsdavies@mailbox.syr.edu> writes:
=>Notes: 
=>
=>   The figure of 50,000 victims of human sacrifice annually is one
=>   that seems to be generally accepted by the "cult cops"; Hicks
=>   attributes it to Deputy sheriff Larry Dunn, with support from
=>   survivor Jacquie Balodis, who says, "devil worshipers sacrifice
=>   50,000 humans a year, mainly transients, runaways, and babies
=>   conceived solely for the purpose of sacrifice."  (p. 58, from an
=>   article by Melissa Berg, "Satanic Crime Increasing?  Police,
=>   Therapists Alarmed," _Kansas City Times_, March 26, 1988.)

I really just wanted to point out that the homeless population of every
city in the country would have been exhausted long ago if "they" were
relying on transients and runaways for human sacrifice.  I'd also like
to point out how strange that headline looks.  Why in the hell would you
choose to point out the fact that a group like "therapists" were alarmed
by Satanic Ritual Sacrifice?  Who cares?  Wouldn't there be a lot more
alarmed parents?  Shouldn't there be concern within the wino community?
Seeing the juxaposition of "police" and "therapists" just doesn't seem to
make sense.
________________________________________________________________________________
WARNING: This article may be harmful or fatal if swallowed.  Do not insert this
article into the ear canal.  Not responsible for injuries due to reading this
article in shower.  Prolonged inhalation of fumes from this article may result
in nausea, dizzyness, convulsions, and death.  Do not operate any motor vehicle,
heavy equipment, or power tools while reading this article.   Dispose of this
article in a responsible manner when finished reading.   The author of this
article is under pressure, do not puncture or incinerate this article.  May not
be suitable for children under 12.  Discontinue reading this article if skin rash appears, and consult a physician.  No warranties expressed or implied.

You didn't read this, and I didn't write it.

--ramon (not)
-- 
Ramon Dominguez             | "Work is the curse of the drinking class"       
Convex Computer Corporation |                            --Oscar Wilde
ramon@convex.com            | "Ceci n'est pas une .signature file"
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men
From: barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry)
Subject: Re: Duck and Jive (was Re
Organization: QQQCLC
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 16:47:54 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.011809.17271@zooid.guild.org> Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) writes...
>>Don't expect sympathy or support from me for your failure to be a
>>responsible adult. The sexual equality argument is bullshit. What you
>>are really asking for is public financial support for certain men's lack
>                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>of responsibility. Forget it. No way. They owe; they pay.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
>If a woman doesn't want a child, and doesn't think that she can support
>him/her herself, then she is under NO OBLIGATION to bring him/her into
>this world, just as I recognise NO OBLIGATION to pay for a child whom
>I have chosen during pregnancy, not to support, either.

	What you feel is your own business. I'll tell you this: if a
person refuses to help his own child, the flesh of his own flesh, when
that child is too young to care for itself, is there really anything
further he need do, any other line he must cross, to rate as a
completely selfish bastard? Is there some demonstration of amoral
selfishness which is stronger or more definite than this? Some more
extreme rejection of the no-man-is-an-island idea? If there is I must be
overlooking it.

>And don't be telling me about having to spend taxpayer's money

	That _is_ an uncomfortable thought, one would hope. Kinda brings
one to the bottom line - that you can't shirk a responsibility without
thereby dumping it on someone else. Supporters of deadbeat dads find it
easy to talk about the child's mother, since she bears equal
responsibility for the situation, but quite _un_comfortable talking
about the child, or the taxpayers who frequently end up supporting it.
Pretty hard to dump the blame for what happened on them, I guess.

-  Nothing fails like success  -             Kenn Barry
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELECTRIC AVENUE:                             barry@netcom.com
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer)
Subject: PMS (Was: Re: What can we expect from President Hillary Clinton?
Date: 06 Jan 93 03:16:16 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

In article <lkhtnoINN1fl@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> falk@peregrine.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) writes:
>When a woman gets angry, some men will make a "bad time of the month"
>crack.  [...]
>
>For the record, I have never accused a woman of having PMS when she
>was angry at me.  (Although I have had women use PMS as an excuse for
>shouting -- this is almost as bad IMHO.)

"Excuse" or "reason"?  I interpret "excuse" to mean "made-up reason 
which will [hopefully] get me off the hook" and "reason" to mean "cause
of a particular action, or basis for a decision" [roughly].

The reason I'm asking is that I've been known to shout and throw things
as a response to certain stimulus which normally would not have caused
me to shout and throw things...when I had PMS. IE, I would say that the
reason I was shouting and throwing things is because I had PMS.

This was when I was in high school....

Since then I've learned to monitor my actions and responses when I have
PMS [I know when I have it - if I feel like I've got the flu but don't
have an abnormal temp, I'm getting my period].  I ask myself if my "gut
response" is indeed a "normal" response for me, and censor my words &
actions, *particularily* in the workplace. If I'm at home & want to cry
because I feel so damn depressed, I cry - if I'm at the office, I wait
til I'm alone. 

I call this self-control, and it's what I expect from myself and, to
a lesser degree, from other people. If someone's had a bad morning at
home, they're likely to be grouchy when they first get to the office.
For that someone to then take it out on a coworker is unprofessional.
I tend to lump PMS into this same catagory...primarily because it affects
me a two-three days before each period, and each period lasts 3-5 days.
That's 1 week out of every 4 or 5, or 1/5 to 1/4 of the year, and I just
don't want to write off 1/5 to 1/4 of my life right now.

Thoughts? 

-jen
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.penpals,soc.net-people,soc.couples,soc.singles
From: mikep@g2syd.genasys.com.au (Michael Preedy)
Subject: Re: Lancey
Organization: Genasys II, Sydney, Australia
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 04:25:50 GMT

In article <C0GCxH.8vq@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> alyon@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (arthur alexander lyon) writes:
>I am looking for a woman. Her name is Lancey (my spelling may be
>incorrect). That is all I know. This may seem odd, but I am very
>serious.
I once knew a women named Lancey but she spelt her name with an "N".

-Mike

Newsgroups: soc.women,sci.skeptic,alt.sexual.abuse.recovery
From: cburian@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Christopher J Burian)
Subject: Re: "Satanic Ritual Abuse" in the media
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 08:22:48 GMT

kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:

>                                                  (Some of the
>psychotherapists claim that tens or even hundreds of thousands of
      /\ 
       Insert space here... 

>ritual murders are involved.)

Xref: sparky soc.women:22302 soc.men:22343
From: u8854076@aix00.csd.unsw.OZ.AU (Lisa Williams)
Subject: Re: Muffy becomes anti-choice (absolutely false)
Summary: sorry, had a shocker
Organization: University of New South Wales
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 07:32:41 GMT



sorry, had a shocker

Xref: sparky soc.women:22367 alt.child-support:4268 talk.abortion:54662
From: sbishop@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.child-support,talk.abortion
Subject: Re: What can we expect from President Hill
Date: 8 Jan 93 13:17:05 EST
Distribution: na
Organization:  Wright State University 

In article <ARCHER.665.726503785@utkvm1.utk.edu>, ARCHER@utkvm1.utk.edu (T. Archer) writes:
> Has anybody else made the following observation:
> 
> When asked, "What happened?"  following a breakup, women have many answers.
> 
> "He didn't really love me."
> "He was married to his work."
> "He was too insensitive."
> 
> Just to name a couple.
> 
> When asked the same question, men have ONE answer.
> 
> "She went nuts.  I don't understand.  She just went nuts."
> 
> I have been given to understand that this is because women in general are 
> more sensative than men to kinesic communication (body language), and tend 
> to communicate that way.  Men, primitive creatures that we are, expect to 
> communicate verbally, and miss most of what is going on during the endgame.
> 

I also wonder how many couples went in for counciling to try to reconcile
their differences.  I've seen quite a few divorces that would have been
averted by counciling.  Since I know several women who are divorced and 
who have discussed their divorces with me, a few of them have said they
begged their husbands to go to counciling with them but they refused.
Let's hear the male view on this.  I don't have any close male friends
who are divorced so I just don't have that viewpoint.  
How about an honest answer from all the divorced people out there, male
and female.  How many of you asked (or were asked) to go to counciling
with your former mate?  How many went?


> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Vote Dempublican, it's easier than thinking.
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Sue
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: Living in a State of
X-To: DANIEL B. HOLZMAN
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 04:11:00 GMT
To: holzman@d0gslb.fnal.gov

You write:
>In article <1gth7bINNcfi@gap.caltech.edu>, peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah
>Peri) writes:
>> dgross@polyslo.csc.calpoly.edu (Dave Gross) writes:
>>
>>>      "We men" are surrounded by violence from our circumcision in infancy
>>>(no anaesthesia, thank you) to being bullied in elementary school; from tryin
>>>out for the football team in high school to registering for the draft; from
>>>being several times more likely than our sisters to be murdered to watching
>>>boxing on television; from visiting Arlington National Cemetery to running ou
>>>fingers along the Vietnam War Memorial.
>>
>> [additional examples deleted]
>>
>> So this gives you the right to do violence unto others???

>Please quote the passage in which Dave Gross claims he has the right to do
>violence unto others.  When you fail to find it, please apologize to him for
>attempting to use this cheap tactic to discredit him.
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Ugh!  Tell me about it!!!

W.

 * SLMR 2.1a * "I prefer to call it the Prime Suggestion" - Captain Kirk
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: sfjr@wam.umd.edu (Steve Russell)
Subject: Re: PBS: "Sex, Power, and the Workplace"
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 19:03:53 GMT

In article <C0H292.HH@cs.uiuc.edu> kadie@cs.uiuc.edu (Carl M. Kadie) writes:
>This TV show will shown on Saturday (at least in Urbana, IL).
>Check you local listings for time (9pm in Urbana).
>
>- Carl
>
>-- 
>Carl Kadie -- I do not represent any organization; this is just me.
> = kadie@cs.uiuc.edu =

Friday 10pm, Wash DC area, shit!

Steve R

Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism
From: sfjr@wam.umd.edu (Steve Russell)
Subject: FYI
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 18:58:05 GMT

I was watching a news show the other night ( Dateline ) and I heard
an interesting statistic.  I know statistics are the fool's gold of
argumentative points on the net, but hell, I'll mention it anyway.

According to the artical teenage women are coming into their own as
far as being victims as battery.  One in 11 "adult" women are battered
by their mates.  One in 4 teenage girls are beaten by their boyfriends.
  The reporters claimed this stat was universal across economic and
racial classifications.


Keeping with the idea of fun-with-stats the Uttne Reader has some interesting
features this month, one of them the supposed "Battle Of The Sexes".  Articals
by both men and women ov SEVERAL points of view about the supposed antagonism
between the sexes is presented.  Some weighty challenges are made to std
feminist ideas and related statistics.  Im neutral, but the collection of
articals would be interesting for anyone who is willing to pick up the mag,
even if they do have an artical by Pagilia in it.


STeve R