HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cherokee@b11.b11.ingr.com (Lori Ludick)
Subject: Re: guys with long hair
Reply-To: cherokee@b11.b11.ingr.com (Lori)
Organization: Intergraph Corp. Huntsville, AL
Distribution: soc
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 16:51:36 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.160653.13006@utagraph.uta.edu> goldstn@arrisun3.uta.edu (David Goldstein) writes:
>> Speaking(?) of long hair, I was wondering how women feel about long
>>hair on a man. Just a wonder since, mine is getting there (67 inches
>>below shoulders).
>>                Cs.
>>
>
>        The longer, the better.   :)
>
>Lori,
>
>I'm suprised it's liked in Alabama....as a Texan with very long hair, I get
>hell for my hair all the time!  Of course, the people who like my long
>hair LOVE my long hair                   ;)
>
>David
>
>ps Heavy metal clubs seem the only place to find fellow longhairs...
>just doesn't cut it, normally, as a professor!
>
>pps But there are at least 2 IBM researchers with long hair!


	I didn't say it was liked in Alabama, I have only been here for 
	about six months. I wouldn't be suprised 
	if they didn't have a cop outside of the state line with a ruler
	to make sure you would have the proper hair length to be able to enter
	the state. :)


	People either like guys with long hair or they hate them, there are
	very few people in between. Mostly men hate to see other men with
	long hair, I do not understand this.

	
	I have found that male friends that have long hair are more at
	ease with themselves and with other people, they tend to be more
	individualistic, while men with short hair are less open.
	I have met several great guys with short hair, but they are still less 
	likely to open up.
From: tarra@skat.usc.edu (Frat Boy)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Fraternities (was: Re: E.W.- Average age of subscribers)
Date: 31 Jul 1992 10:00:48 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: skat.usc.edu

In article <1992Jul31.053612.17477@spool.cs.wisc.edu> rawdon@cabrales.cs.wisc.edu writes:
>>> In article <l7bbrjINN8b7@skat.usc.edu> tarra@skat.usc.edu (Frat Boy) writes:

>>> This time.  Should I quote your email again?
>
>>Why - was he able to come up with anything more intelligent than
>>"lick my sack"?  (That's all I've ever gotten from him.  (I declined the
>>offer.))
>
>Probably a good move.  He probably would have accused you of having no
>taste afterwards.
>
>-- 
>Michael Rawdon

Oh come on now, one or two heated comments and I have bad tasting genitalia?
Then again living in Wisconsin what could you possibly know about taste.

Tom

P.S. "I got the shit kicked out of once in Wisconsin"  





-- 
"Chicks dig me because I rarely wear underwear"  
					Bill Murray 
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: blackp@med.umich.edu (Jeremy Thomas James)
Subject: Re: Net.Women
Originator: blackp@hendrix.itn.med.umich.edu
Keywords: good looking cute beautiful etc.
Organization: University of Michigan - Medical Center
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 22:28:34 GMT


In article <ddose.139@oregon.uoregon.edu>, ddose@oregon.uoregon.edu (David C Dose) writes:
|> In article <1992Jul28.193425.13239@med.umich.edu> blackp@med.umich.edu (
|> Jeremy Thomas James) writes:
|> >--------------
|> >I friend of mine and are are having a dispute as to whether there
|> >are actually any good looking net.women that read this news group.
|> >Any suggestions as to how this dispute could be settled?
|> 
|> Of course there are!  At least I know one is, because I've met her! :)
|> Very, very good looking!
|> 
|> My question is, does it really matter?
|> 

Whether it matters or not, it's a question I'm interested in.  I happen to
believe that there are (one of my good freinds got married to a girl met on
the net).  So it doesn't really matter in a since.  BUT...

I believe the reason everyone is here is to figure out how to not be here
(single that is).  So, being interested in attractive females, I would kind
of like info from attractive women.  Is this not a good reason?

The only good suggestion so far is a Boink near by, but I posted a message
asking of interest and there wasn't a whole lot (so far anyway).
-- 
What I say isn't necessarily the opinion of the organization I belong to!
===============================================================================
Jeremy T. James         University of Michigan Medical Center,  ITN 
B1911 CFOB, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-0704 Phone:313-747-2778  blackp@med.umich.edu
"Even if your on the right track, you'll get run over if you're there too long"
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Morality- Alarming results
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 19:12:45 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.035035.16360@zooid.guild.org> Ross Ridge <ross@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>
>gds@cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes:
>>This is another example of how the laws changed and something that was
>>a perfectly fine activity somehow became illegal.  Before the 70's
>>energy crisis and the "55 saves lives" campaign, it was perfectly
>>reasonable to drive 75 on highways that supported driving at that
>>speed.
>
>But it wasn't a perfectly fine activity, people were dying.  It may be
>suprising but 55 *does* save lives.  If you don't believe me come to
>Canada were the speed limit is 100km/h (60 mph), 110km/h in some areas,
>and the police (in Ontario) won't pull you over for speeding unless your
>doing over 120km/h.  As a result we have some of highest accident rates
>in the world.  

Actually, the statistics I've encountered over the years don't support
that; while the accident rates are lower in the US now than they were
prior to the introduction of the 55 mph speed limit, they were declining
prior to that time and the change in speed limit apparently had little
effect on the rate of decline (incidentally, accident rates have 
continued to go down in areas where the speed limit was subsequently
raised to 65).

A recent federal study showed that the group of drivers with the lowest
accident rates were those who drove 5-15 miles per hour above the posted
speed limit; those who drove at the speed limit had higher accident rates
and those who drove below the speed limit actually had higher accident
rates than those who drove more than 15 miles per hour above the posted
limit. 

>>It is the same principle with having sex with 14 year olds;
>>there was a time when not only was it legal it was a commonly accepted
>>practice when they consented.
>
>Once a apon time 14 year old could marry and then support his family
>working in the fields.  Nowadays no 14 year could support his family
>and would be great burden on society.  So, it seems to me to be very
>reasonable for modern society to discourage 14 years old from having
>sex, just like I think it's reasonable for an goverment to impose speed
>limits that save lives.

I don't know if this is still the case, but a psych book I have here mentions
how old one has to be to legally get married--and in some states, this is
as young as eleven (for females with parental consent).

Still, it seems odd to put as much weight on age as most people do--I know
many people who, at age 14, were much more mature than a lot of other
people I know in their twenties and older.

Trygve
From: neilp@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Postlethwaite)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Net.Women
Keywords: good looking cute beautiful etc.
Date: 30 Jul 92 09:52:47 GMT
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Heriot-Watt University, Scotland

In article <1992Jul28.193425.13239@med.umich.edu> blackp@med.umich.edu (Jeremy Thomas James) writes:
>
>--------------
>I friend of mine and are are having a dispute as to whether there
>are actually any good looking net.women that read this news group.
>Any suggestions as to how this dispute could be settled?
>

Post a few GIF images.

Scan a photo or better still, squat on a scanner and flex those muscles.

Neil the perv !!
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: nance@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (nancy.l.colucci)
Subject: Re: seeking higher ground
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 13:45:08 GMT

In article <2152@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com> luzenko@catfish.ocpt.ccur.com (Bill Luzenko) writes:
>In soc.singles I find that men comments are six times the womens.
>And when a women is involved in three times out of five we have a
>battle of the  sexes.  Anyone  can  project  this  confidence  in
>themselves  that polarizes one against the other. I would use the
>bandwith to get down to details to find the infinitesimal  common
>ground  which would yield the faintest echo of cordial thaught as
>hard as it may seem.

What?

-Nance

-- 
Nance Colucci  *^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*^*  | Discussions welcomed. 
att!ihlpk!colucci                               | Trollers discouraged.
From: rcf@pnet01.cts.com (Bob Forsythe)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Those looooong and hard love sessions (was: Re: She called, I came, she smiled, I slept)
Date: 25 Jul 92 14:16:15 GMT
Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA

markh@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Mark William Hopkins) writes:
>
>Now that we got the pleasure dimension all discussed out, here's a related
>question this time on the temporal dimension:
>
>         What's the longest you've ever spent (or ever wanted to spend)
>         making love with someone?


     About 8 hours, with a couple of bathroom and drink breaks.  And, for the
youngsters out there, I was 36 at the time.

Bob c/o The OTH Gang
rcf@pnet01.cts.com
From: teri@sdd.hp.com (Teri Tracey)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: A Dying Breed
Date: 23 Jul 1992 18:04:53 -0700
Organization: HP/San Diego Technical Graphics
NNTP-Posting-Host: hp-sdd.sdd.hp.com

In article <12274@mahon> mahon@Software.Mitel.COM (Ed Mahon) writes:
>
>'Busy' does not mean poor organization or any inabilities in a general
>sense.  I see many people who were very busy for many years of their
>life, and who now are sitting back and relaxing with their SO because
>they had enough forsight to see the long range benefits of 'hard
>work'.  And their SO understood who it was being done for...
>
>Unfortunately, the almighty dollar rules the world and relaxing
>doesn't pay well.  I find that when I do relax, I *always* enjoy the
>time and make the most of it.  You only live once... do it right and
>that's enough...

  I've seen people work all their life to live the good life "later" but
found that it was not to be had, since you get caught in the rat race
until you retire, at which point your spouse has divorced you, your kids
have moved 2000 miles away, and the dog doesn't know who you are.
Are you talking about people who become millionaires at age 35?  What about
the rest of the hoi polloi?

And you missed all the good times of your life working your ass off.  You only 
live once...to me, there's more to life than getting ahead and making 
piles of money.  No one regrets on their deathbed that "they didn't work
hard enough at ABC company."

                             T   e   r   i
                            teri@sdd.hp.com 
    "We're Kxxx, 10x.x on your dial...we play nothing strange or unfamiliar"
                -an actual commercial for a radio station
~       
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Would you Shag a 14 year old ??
Keywords: n
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 17:40:27 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.154515.3091@news.acns.nwu.edu> drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max) writes:

>Ya know the weird thing is that even if they think its wrong, I bet most
>guys would at least be tempted by the allure of a pretty youngster (seems
>to also be true for some male homosexuals and 14 year old boys). I
>suspect that this "allure of youth" isn't something that attracts most
>women. A 14 year old boy, no matter how pretty, would simply be of no 
>sexual interest to me at all. So am I right ladies and gentlemen, is this 
>really a gender difference? 

I think it's a definite, but far from universal, trend (I know a fair number
of women who are into "young boys" and many who at least wouldn't consider
men more than a little bit older than themselves). 

I do wonder, though, how much this tendency is cultural and how much is
genetic--one can't open a magazine, turn on the TV, or go to a movie
without seeing "younger woman/older man" being portrayed as the norm
and the few exceptions that one does see are portrayed as oddities.
(Real life seems to be much more diverse in this respect than the media
would suggest.)

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Used threads
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 92 21:27:36 GMT

In article <711665909snx@walter.UUCP> fred@walter.UUCP (Fred Walter) writes:
>
>Why argue ?

From context, I'm assuming that we're talking about something a little
more emotional and a little less rational than a discussion or friendly
debate.  Within a relationship, I think there's very little point in
communicating with this particular technique--the only time ranting and
raving is necessary with your romantic partner is if other, more 
effective, means of communication are not beng recognized; and in that
case, odds are that you have problems more serious than whatever it is
that you would be arguing about.  

On the other hand, it is possible to disagree with a romantic partner
and, indeed, completely appropriate to express this disagreement in a
rational manner (non-threatening, non-accusatory, etc.); I wouldn't 
want to be in a relationship with someone who wouldn't do this.

>Do you have to raise your voice and get emotional to get the other person
>to take you seriously ?
>
>Does it serve a constructive purpose ? (Can it ?)

Sometimes, yes--fortunately, this rarely occurs with anyone I'm likely
to have to deal with on a regular basis.  Every once in a while, I
run across a clerk, customer service representative, government 
employee, etc., who simply won't respond until I put on a display of
anger.  One rule I follow, though, is "never get angry when you're mad"--
doing so, you tend to lose your advantage and might as well not go to
the effort of getting angry in the first place.

I have known people (usually men) who don't take their partner's feelings
seriously until their partner throws a tantrum; I don't know whether this
is a part of a larger power game or what, but if you happen to be
involved with such a person and wish to continue the involvement 
without getting him or her to modify this behavior, then displaying
anger can serve a constructive purpose here as well.

>Can you keep yourself from verbally attacking the other person's
>intelligence/character/etc. when you are arguing with them ?

Yes, if necessary--though whether or not you should depends on your
intent and the situation.

Trygve
--
Rumor has it that mail is once again functional and that I can be
reached at tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu.  (Do not send mail to tlode@nyx.UUCP or
tlode@isis.cs.du.edu.)  If you've tried to send me anything in the last
few weeks, feel free to resend it--or, since I'm still not convinced
that mail is entirely bug-free, simply show up on my doorstep with a
printout (3270 Cherryridge Road, Englewood, CO  80110).
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: long hair
Date: 29 Jul 92 18:37:52 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <154e7oINNsa3@rodan.UU.NET> evie@rodan.UU.NET (Evie Allen) writes:
|Maybe you can
|tell me exactly what it is that attracts you to long hair so much! 

For me, it's that feeling of having it wrapped around my waist.

-- 
+============================================================================++
| John Fereira            "Is that all you ever think about?"                |
| johnf@auspex.com                                                           |
+============================================================================++
From: casbah.acns.nwu.edu!drmax@overmind.mind.org
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Used threads
Date: 22 Jul 92 20:43:00 GMT
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
X-mailer: Stadel 3.4a-227
X-Spam-content: irrelevant

In article <MARTINC.92Jul22113603@grover.cs.unc.edu> 
martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin) writes:
>Don't you all think these problems would be solved if you just grew
>about 10 inches and gained 75 pounds?
>--
>
No, then we'd just have other problems. BTW ever seen a 6'2" man back off
very quickly from an angry 5'2" woman? I have.
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: ron@turing.toronto.edu (Ron Wessels)
Subject: Re: I Had Crabs With Steve
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
Distribution: usa
Date: 21 Jul 92 05:02:25 GMT

johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>Back by the kitchen is a large aquarium where you can choose your meal.

"Oh look ... Howard's being eaten!"

-- 
Ron Wessels		University of Toronto		ron@turing.toronto.edu
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: dbj@cs.washington.edu (Dave Johnson)
Subject: Re: Would you Shag a 14 year old ??
Organization: Computer Science & Engineering, U. of Washington, Seattle
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 18:05:21 GMT

Why would I want to get involved with someone who's
more mature than me?

-- 
  Dave Johnson

"You're not too smart, are you?  I like that in a man."
    --Kathleen Turner in Body Heat
From: martinc@grover.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Used threads
Date: 22 Jul 92 15:36:03 GMT
	<1992Jul21.131034.12654@news.acns.nwu.edu>
	<ewillims.711803388@unix1.tcd.ie>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: ewillims@unix1.tcd.ie's message of 22 Jul 92 11:09:48 GMT

Don't you all think these problems would be solved if you just grew
about 10 inches and gained 75 pounds?
--

Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu/(ne crm@cs.duke.edu) 
O/Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
H/3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mit der Dummheit kaempfen Goetter selbst vergebens. -- Schiller
Ergo bibamus! -- Goethe
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: aahz@netcom.com (Aahzmandius)
Subject: Re: Why are Women *SO* Vain ??
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 18:23:28 GMT
Organization: Bill 'n' Opus for Prez

In article <1992Jul22.004905.2083@reed.edu> terra@reed.edu (Clippers in '93!!!) writes:
>
>...after that, if he can tolerate the way I look dripping wet after
>a shower, then we're meant for each other.

Gee, I think most women look more attractive dripping wet.....
-- 
                         --- Aahz (the *other* Dan Bernstein)
                             @netcom.com 

Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6

Babbage's Birthday Bargain Bash -- December 26th, 1992
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.women
From: puter@no1home.nashvil.ingr.com (PuterDude)
Subject: Re: HUNTSVILLE, ALABAMA (Here I Go Again)
Keywords: Recreation tips for business trip.
Organization: None, today. Thank you.
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 19:30:42 GMT

 sms@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (steven.m.stein) writes:
>Another business trip, this time, solo.  I will be in Huntsville
>8/5-8/6 maybe 8/7.

Go up on Monte Sano Mountain. It has a lookout that looks over 
the whole city that is BEAUTIFUL at night. 

For entertainment, try "Bowties" in the Holiday Inn, or "September's"
at the Marriott. 

P.S. "Restaurant Alley" is west of Rideout Rd. on Highway 72. Say
hello to my mother-in-law for me.  *grin*

-- 
Puter	puter@no1home.nashvil.ingr.com	.sig by Generic Labels
(Put obnoxious title here)		(Put phone # here.)
(Put irritating quote here. Please make it as long as possible.)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Used threads
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 21:20:17 GMT

In article <711873554snx@walter.UUCP> fred@walter.UUCP (Fred Walter) writes:
>
>Actually I wasn't refering to just romantic partners, but friends as well.
>And, yes, we're talking about something more emotional than a discussion.
>Several of the people (with whom I have 'discussions') seem to think that
>if there's no obvious emotion attached to what I'm saying then it isn't
>important to me.
>
>Like "could you do your dishes more often ? I did them again because the
>smell of the food rotting on them was turning my stomach" in a quiet tone
>of voice gets me an "all you ever do is nag" response, whereas something
>similar said with lot's of emotion actually got my room-mate to regularily do
>her dishes for a week.

Well, that sounds like sufficient reason in itself not to date her; I
sometimes encounter people like that, but I try to keep my future
contacts with them to a minimum.  (However, in cases where you don't
want to take the effort to modify their behavior, a display of temper
can be a perfectly appropriate tactic.)

Trygve 
Xref: sparky soc.singles:21258 soc.women:14198 soc.men:13784
From: drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max)
Newsgroups: soc.singles,soc.women,soc.men
Subject: Re: Sexual Selectivity and Barbary Macaques
Keywords: selectivity, sociobiology, complexity
Date: 28 Jul 92 14:44:22 GMT
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.

In article <1992Jul28.053847.6568@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
>
>A friend of mine proposed her theory to me a while ago that people
>don't look for Mr. or Ms. Right so much as they just wait for the
>right time and then just grab the next available MOTAS.  I don't
>think that's a universal rule by any means, but I suspect that it
>is often a greater factor than any characteristic of the other 
>person in question.
>

And this leads right into a theory of why so many relationships/marriages
end in break up/divorce....
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: walter (Walter Lego)
Subject: Re: seeking higher ground
Followup-To: soc.singles
Reply-To: nobody
Organization: Twisted Pair Inc.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 16:17:37 GMT

In article <BruL60.Izp@news.cso.uiuc.edu> mcregor@s.psych.uiuc.edu (Meloney Cregor) writes:
>In article <1992Jul22.190241.1603@walter.bellcore.com> nobody writes:
>>In article <1992Jul22.154022.20609@u.washington.edu> intrigue@milton.u.washington.edu (Angelwing) writes:
>>>
>>>Angelwing - How do I get my testosterone level checked?
>>>
>>
>>Buy a ruler and don't shave.
>
>It's a function of leg hair length, right?  

Amongst other things, yes.

						Walter

What disclaimer?
From: mayoff@austin.eds.com (Rob Mayoff)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: I Had Crabs With Steve
Date: 27 Jul 92 00:53:15 GMT
Article-I.D.: austin.1992Jul27.005315.27004
Distribution: na
Organization: EDS Research;  University of Texas at Austin;  Talisman

In article <1992Jul24.070757.2809@dg-rtp.dg.com> morton@rtpnet06.rtp.dg.com (John R. Morton) writes:
>I email out of vogue, or do some consider their flirtings of National
>importance.... or maybe something else I overlooked ??

I think you overlook the fact that without all those semi-personal
messages, this newsgroup would be much less busy.  I find it's a great
time-waster, now that I've convinced my boss that network news is an
important and useful source of job-related information (which it is,
sometimes).

rob
Newsgroups: soc.singles