HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 11:26:17 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <1992Aug18.045118.2375@samba.oit.unc.edu> Bathsheba.Grossman@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Bathsheba Grossman) writes:
>
>Your words are before thousands of women Right Now, so...let's talk about
>bananas instead of statistics - we estrogen-brained bubbleheads think
>they're more fun.

Really?  I prefer cherries.  Must be a hormonal thing.
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

"I 'got a life'.  Now what?"
From: oldman@coos.dartmouth.edu (Prakash Das)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Exactly what I mean by "unattached"...
Date: 20 Aug 92 18:09:36 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <lz!n-xl.aahz@netcom.com> aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius) writes:
>
>Yo, Kiran!  How long have you been on the Net?  You should know by now
>that the attribution line is outdented one character from the quote.
>Sheesh!

Plus she needs to be told not to post one line replies with 99.9%
of the original article quoted, and I might add, chain-like posts.
Give us a break.

-PD
(who doesn't flame without reason)
From: stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Date: 19 Aug 92 05:47:16 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

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

>The chance of meeting someone by going to one bad party a week for a
>year is better than 2/3.  The chance of meeting someone by posting to
>USENET about your bad chances multiple times a day for a years is
>still 0%.
[...]
>Since your attractiveness is not defined by you, but by other people,
>you might be able to change both at the same time (e.g. leaving an
>environment where the women want men who are very muscular for one
>full of women who prefer intelligent men).

Since it seems that USENET is an environment where some of the women prefer 
intelligent men, perhaps we can conclude that a man's chances of meeting a 
woman by posting *intelligent* things to USENET are greater than 0%.

Stef
stef@apple.com
--
It may be that your whole purpose in life is simply to serve as a warning 
to others.    /fortune
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: catcher@netcom.com (Paul W. Francisco)
Subject: Re: Various ramblings...
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 92 04:58:44 GMT
Organization: The Vampyre's Lair

In article <1992Aug13.054903.29191@nuchat.sccsi.com> kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>But it does make me wonder: are there so many freeloading guys out there,
>who would use and abuse the resources of the lady like that?  So many that
>"financially stable" is seen in almost every personal ad written by a
>female?  If so, why don't they just say "no freeloaders"?

A couple of reasons come quickly to mind.  First, how many freeloaders
are going to see that and say, "Well, I'm a freeloader, so I better not
answer"?  Some, perhaps, but a lot probably don't acknowledge or admit
that they are.  Also, it is much easier for someone to tell if the person
who is responding is financially stable.  I'd take that to mean that they
are capable of supporting themselves and have a steady income that is
not likely to go away any time in the near future.  Ask a person what 
they do; that should tell you, or at least give you an idea.  It's much
harder to get an accurate objective view of whether or not they are
looking for someone to support them.

>My concern for correctness is so prevalent that you might say it defines
>who I am.  I believe very strongly that one cannot be happy for very long
>living a lie, that knowing exactly how the real world works and where you
>stand with respect to it is mandatory if you're to get anywhere in it.

On the other hand, while you spend time trying to figure out everything
about the situation, others are taking chances.  It usually takes less
time to take a chance than it does to analyze everything.  If you take
that gamble, and it turns out to be the right one, then you didn't use
up as much time, and you can always determine where you stood at the time 
in hindsight, if you so desire.

This isn't living a lie, but it is getting ahead.  Sometimes your gamble
won't pay off.  Sometimes it will.  The more worthwhile something is,
the more risky the gamble, at least in many cases.  If you don't take the
risk, someone else will, at which point you'll be left wondering why you
didn't try something.  And if you determine that the situation had been
right, you'll kick yourself for not going for it.

I don't really have any other bright ideas off the top of my head.  This
is, I'm sure, something you've heard many times before, but maybe said
in a different way.  Whatever, here it is again.

-- 
From the Vampyre's Lair, 	    The thirst from a vampire bite
Paul W. Francisco        	    fills the emptiness inside...
catcher@netcom.com                      - Siouxsie and the Banshees
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Subject: Re: men in their thirties who never dated
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 14:07:32 GMT

In article <9709@kralizec.zeta.org.au> craig@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Craig Dewick) writes:
>
>I'm almost 24 years old, and I keep seeing my friends getting into serious
>relationships with the opposite sex but, possibly because of my upbringing and
>my responses to the way I've seen other people react, I cannot muster up the
>courage to approach women that I find attractive.

That's probably because it's difficult to "approach" anyone you don't
know and strike up a conversation, and even more of a gamble that the
two of you will have anything in common.  It's kind of like chosing the
right kitten from a basket of ten - the one with the prettiest markings
might also be the least friendly.  Pick the one who climbs up your shirt
and starts pawing at your nose.  You'll get along much better and in time
it'll be the most beautiful kitten in the world to you.

When it comes to a human-type lifemate, it's not a really good idea to
let your gonads do the choosing.  Don't choose at all.  Just go live your life
and persue your interests and the people you meet along the way will be
part of your life already, have the same goals, probably be a HELL of a lot
easier to talk to, and will in time become the most beautiful people in the
world.

It's like drawing the runes.  The right one will stick to your fingers.
> 
>All too often I feel as though I'd like to be holding an attractive
>woman in my arms and doing all the 'normal' things a couple does when they are
>in love, but this apparent 'fear' takes control and I lock up into a passive
>state.

A normal couple in love doesn't always consist of a man holding an
attractive woman in his arms.


-Not Dawn
-- 
Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*    o__    *^*^*^*^*  |  Work that body!
att!ihlpk!colucci            _.>/               | Stay fit for life.
                            (_) \(_)                           
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Subject: Re: Exactly what I mean by "unattached"...
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 92 11:36:53 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <kiran.714388296@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu> kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
>aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius) writes:
>
>>Yo, Kiran!  How long have you been on the Net?  You should know by now
>>that the attribution line is outdented one character from the quote.
>>Sheesh!
>
>I'm aware of that, but not everybody reading it might be.

Well, yes, I know you know that, but you might try educating people
instead of simply flaming.  "Give a man a fish, and he has a meal.
Teach the man to fish, and he has dinner for life."
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

"I 'got a life'.  Now what?"
From: state@sargent.cs.unc.edu (Andrei State)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: single men
Date: 13 Aug 92 05:11:14 GMT
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

luzenko@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com (Bill Luzenko) writes:
>
> Two women dance on a dance floor what are they? ( two close friends )!
> Two men dance and what are they ( two queers )! 
> W H Y !!!
> Now you know why I'm pissed off and tired of the bullshit!

It does have its advantages though.  For example, when one's girlfriend
offers to bring a female friend of hers into one's bed, without expecting
one to do the equivalent, masculinity-threatening gesture for her.  Heh.


Andrei

P. S.: BTW, article numbers are different on each site, did you know?
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: How to not look smart (was Re: Various ramblings...
Date: 19 Aug 92 21:18:02 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Aug19.143917.1765@uwm.edu> markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Hunk) writes:
>>
>>And not in a subtle, understated "and it was only a couple of hundred
>>dollars more, no big deal" way, but in a very blatent "I've got a porsche,
>>I've got not one, but two companies, and I've got a million" way.
>
>It ain't bragging if it's the truth.
>
I vehemently disagree.  If it's not the truth it's lying.  

>Furthermore, it's very hard to respect someone who covers up their assets or
>virtues in order to appease the taboos, superstitions that people try to
>perpetuate in this society

If you're talking about a woman that has a nice set of hooters than I agree.
However I have more respect for someone that doesn't flaunt the fact that
they have a lot of money rather than someone that feels they have to have that
Rolex watch to display that fact. I used to work with a guy that
was one of the early big winners of the California lottery.  I've sat next
time in a neighborhood bar and chewed the fat with him for hours on end.  On
one occasion, he got up to make a phone call.  He had a about 2/3's of a 
drink, about seven dollars, and a few pictures.  When he got up he said,
"watch my stuff".  This is a man that has won $23 million dollars in the
lottery and now owns a resort in Thailand and he was concerned about his
"stuff".  At the time he was wearing his casio watch and I doubt that anyone
could pick the millionaire out of the crowd of the bar that night.  He does
tend to carry an air of confidence now.  Can't tell you whether he's getting
laid more, although he did tell me this story about a woman that he brought
back to his resort from town.  
-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Subject: Re: Exactly what I mean by "unattached"...
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 92 23:22:39 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <1992Aug12.022501.13642@nuchat.sccsi.com> kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>In article <1992Aug10.195307.3749@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>>Though I think the decision process you outline happens sometimes, I
>>don't think it's by any means the usual one.  Much more often, though
>>people usually have specifications for what a potential partner should
>>be like, they meet someone who makes their hearts go pitter-patter and,
>>regardless of his or her fit to those specifications, that's who they go
>>after.
>
>:-)  In other words, it's so irrational that one shouldn't bother to try to
>analyze it.
>
>I don't suppose this is what everyone has been trying to tell me all along?
>
>If it can't be analyzed, then I have *no* way to tell what I should do to
>improve my chances except for increasing my exposure.

Well, yes and no.  I had a list, including one specific item that was a
boolean for go/no-go on any relationship.  I met a woman who failed that
test, but matched so many others that I gave it a chance.  I'm *very*
happy now.  <grin>

In other words, you *do* need to have some match against the list held
by the women you find attractive, *on the average*.  ;-)  Nevertheless,
you'll probably get told sometime after you're in the relationship that
there was a really good reason why she shouldn't have gone out with you,
but she did anyway.
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

"I 'got a life'.  Now what?"
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (eleanor.j.evans)
Subject: Re: Trygve Trolling
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sun, 23 Aug 1992 15:16:43 GMT

In article <1992Aug20.135045.2475@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> allisson@turing.toronto.edu (H. Allisson Roome) writes:
>In article <1992Aug19.222351.7041@cbnews.cb.att.com> eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com 
>(eleanor.j.evans) writes:
>
>>Well, he's got one waiting for him right here--just hasn't been out
>>to claim it.  _Yet_.  (Trygve, there is an expiration date on these
>>things, ya' know??)
>>
>>Piglet, blatantly Trolling for Trygve.  Again.  Ho-hum.
>
>And she knows what he looks like --  she's seen pictures taken by a
>relatively unbiased person (me) - so it isn't just the net.personna
>that interests her.
>
>Allisson

Oh, gosh <blush>, Allisson, you're just exposing all my little
secrets here, aren't you??  By the way--call me, more scoop...

Piglet
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: allisson@turing.toronto.edu (H. Allisson Roome)
Subject: Re: NOT Pickup Lines, ferchrissake, but being InTeReSting, maybe
Organization: Some and growing
Date: 22 Aug 92 09:39:26 GMT

In article <3840074@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM> wjb@hplvec.LVLD.HP.COM 
(Bill Buse) writes:
>
>Something that I left out of my previous date idea posting was the part
>about watching the sunrise from a high point in the mountains to the west 
>of town.  Its similar to your beach/park idea.  

Grumble, grumble ... yeah, but you live near one of the most beautiful
pieces of the world in my opinion and I'm stuck for 2+ years in the
humid flatlands with nary a mountain in sight (real mountain (14+K
tall)) for 2,000 miles.

Sorry, I'm sort of homesick for a part of the country that I only
visited for the first time this past July but fell in love with - I
guess part of it was being shown the Rockies and the area around
Boulder by a person who really loves them/that area and part because
it's one of the most beautiful areas I've ever seen (there's this
little mountain lake that looks like it was the prototype for all
other mountain lakes).  Sigh, at least I have pictures.

Allisson (who wishes she were a Coloradan ... it could be worse
	  I could be from Texas ..)

-- 
allisson@turing.toronto.edu (new address)       H. Allisson Roome
"Teach only love, and learn that love is yours and you are love."(A.C.I.M/p.92)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie (Emma Williams)
Subject: Re: How to not look smart (was Re: Various ramblings...
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 11:47:54 GMT

In <1992Aug18.164633.7053@mks.com> fredw@mks.com (Fred Walter) writes:

>nobody writes:
>>fredw@mks.com (Fred Walter) writes:
>>>Be quiet about it. Don't be showy about it. Don't talk about how hard
>>>something was - people who know about it will know how hard it was, and
>>>people who don't know about it will just think you're bragging.
>>
>>Silly advice. Talk to Trygve.

>Ok.

>Trygve, talk to me.

>Anyway, Kevin wanted to know how to not appear as a smart alec, to not appear
>as if he's bragging. Trygve is not the person to talk to, because, at first
>glance, does appear to be bragging.

>And not in a subtle, understated "and it was only a couple of hundred
>dollars more, no big deal" way, but in a very blatent "I've got a porsche,
>I've got not one, but two companies, and I've got a million" way.
	
	Yes,but Trygve does it with such a delicious grin on his face 
and a sense of humour that one couldn't possibly be offended by it.
Besides he has evidently worked hard for what he's got and he deserves
to enjoy it!:>

    ____________________________________________________________________
    |   Emma Williams            | Dad, I guess you're wondering why   |
    |   ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie    | I'm ringing you..--Calvin & Hobbes  |
    |				 | (eller Steen og Stoffer :-> )       |
    |____________________________|_____________________________________|
From: bart@muppet.bt.co.uk (Tim)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Finding Romantic Partners (long)
Date: 18 Aug 92 12:15:51 GMT
Reply-To: bart@muppet.bt.co.uk
Organization: British Telecom

In article 2375@samba.oit.unc.edu, Bathsheba.Grossman@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Bathsheba Grossman) writes:

>-Sheba
>Rubber ducky, you're the one
>You make bathtime so much fun
	
I'm sure there's a better rhyme in there somewhere ;-)

T

---
The harvest of life, the harvest of death	<-- bart@muppet.bt.co.uk -->
Resumes it's course each day			<--     Tim Fulcher      -->
It comes as if by schedule			<--  tel : 0473 648220   -->	
The harvester lives, with arms that are bent	
And toes that cross, and knees that jerk	<-- British Telecom Labs -->
And necks like swans that seem to turn
As if inclined to gasp for breath...	- Quicklime Girl - , BOC
From: taina@cs.Helsinki.FI (Juha Taina)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Oh, no! Statistics! Run!! :-)
Date: 22 Aug 92 15:59:21 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki, Finland

In <1992Aug21.181048.4579@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:

>>Help!!!  I haven't a clue what to talk about with people!!!  The only
>>reason I have friends at all is that there are lots of people (male, of
>>course) who share my interests.  *These* people I can talk to.

>Well, you can ask them what they do for a living and talk about that;
>you can ask them what brings them to the place you're talking to them
>in; you can as what their hobbies are or what they do for fun outside 
>of work and talk about that.  If you run out of things to say, ask a
>question that shows you're interested in them and give them a chance
>to lead the conversation.

Usually when I ask a question from a lady I get a two word answer.
Then if I want to continue the chat I have to ask another question.
Then eventually she starts staring at me like I were rotten meat and
looking at her watch several times a minute. :)

Well, seriously thinking... Usually people are easy to talk to.  I've
used opening lines like "You look familiar, have you been to Blah
Blah?" and "You dance very well.  Have you taken lessons?".  A very
typical opening line for me is "3 spades, are you serious??" (I play
bridge) :)

>Trygve

Juha
-- 
Juha Taina | taina@cs.helsinki.fi | Phone: +358-0-708-4247
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: Larry Margolis <margoli@watson.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: men dancing with men just because they're friends.
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 02:13:01 GMT
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In  <1992Aug19.175235.23140@panix.com>  pw@panix.com (Paul Wallich) writes:
>
> paul   looking for some way to work in magma or zeugma

That *is* an enigma.  But please - don't try to work in smegma.

Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
From: garrison@kodak.com (Laurie Garrison)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Commitment--The C-word?
Date: 21 Aug 92 17:47:16 GMT
Reply-To: garrison@kodak.com (Laurie Garrison)
Organization: Image Processing Algorithms Laboratory, Eastman Kodak Co.

In article <kiran.714384225@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu>, kiran@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (Kiran Wagle) writes:
|> garrison@kodak.com (Laurie Garrison) writes:
|> >well, i *have* to put in my knee-jerk response to this remark--
|> >"the woman is gaining access..."  the WOMAN????  even if the woman
|> >makes less money that the man, he will still enjoy a higher standard
|> >of living that will come from a two income household.
|> 
|> Knee-jerk indeed.  It depends on the type of lifestyle they both like.
|> If she makes less than he does, he might end up contributing to her
|> interests, and not be able to spend all his disposable income on books
|> and CDs and food and fast open-top cars (I want a del Sol...) 

maybe i am being incredibly niave, but even in my failed marriage
experience we did not make this distinction between 'my' money
and 'his' money-- it was all 'our' money.  if he is not spending all
of his disposable income on things he likes, i'm sure she's not
getting all the things she likes... isn't there supposed to
be some comprimise here???  gee whiz, maybe my ex wasn't so
bad after all...

NOT.

|> 
|> Simply because they have mnore money together does not mean they will
|> _both_ enjoy a higher standard of living--that assumes that "higher
|> standard of living" means the same thing to both of them. 

don't you think that they should have discussed what their 'standard
of living' would be and have some sort of agreement before they get
married???  they both should have some idea of what they are getting into...
i know i know, people never agree on this stuff.  but it sure seems
like there should be some discussion going on...
|> 
|> >besides the obvious, she *could* make more than he does :)
|> 
|> Yeah, she could, but does she?

in my case, probably :)
after these discussions however, the Mword looks less likely than ever before!

laurie


------
The more I know, the less I understand		<--this seems especially
All the things I thought I'd figured out, 	    appropriate lately.
I have to learn again...
				- Don Henley
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: greg@netcom.com (Greg Bullough)
Subject: Re: single men
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 92 06:08:08 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa
Keywords: glock kill them till you drop

In article <2220@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com> luzenko@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com (Bill Luzenko) writes:
>
>Why men can't dance with men in america without some stigma attached to it .

Because they're not Morris dancers.
 
There is an official dispensation for Morris dancers.
 
Greg
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: men dancing with men just because they're friends.
Date: 15 Aug 92 00:08:02 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Aug14.212829.33958@watson.ibm.com> margoli@watson.ibm.com writes:
>In  <2219@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com>  luzenko@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com (Bill Luzenko) writes:
>>
>> Why men can't dance with men in america without some stigma attached to it .
>
>Well, gee, if I knew there was a stigma attached, I'm sure I wouldn't have
>done it.

Usually when I've got my stigma attached, I end up dancing with a women
rather than men.  Are you sure you've got it attached correctly.  The pointy
end goes out.

-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
Newsgroups: soc.singles