HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Hating Men with Full Force
From: rivero@mdcbbs.com
Date: 1 Sep 92 14:27:43 GMT
 <1992Aug27.120558.12106@ultb.isc.rit.edu> <1992Aug28.104209.1@mdcbbs.com> <1992Aug28.203310.23869@news.nd.edu>
Organization: Electronic Data Systems, Unigraphics Division, Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: riley

In article <1992Aug28.203310.23869@news.nd.edu>, slarsen@beethoven.helios.nd.edu (susan larsen) writes:
> 
> (BTW shame on all us money-grubbing, vain, lazy wenches who wreak havoc 
> on men's wallets! It just serves to makes men look stupid, wanting to spend 
> so much time with us vile, calculating female-types.)
> 

  We DON'T (at least around here). That's why all the single ladies sit 
together at the bar, buying each other Pina Coladas and bemonaing the fact
there are no availble men to be found!

   Actually, we're all over the place.  We're just in hiding!

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero rivero@mdcbbs.com  Middle-Aged Mutant Ninja Animator   |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
|  I spend my time in my animation shop making movies (also money).      |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From: kurts@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Kurt Strain)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Hating Men with Full Force
Date: 25 Aug 92 15:49:26 GMT
Organization: Milky Way Galaxy

In soc.women, charles@zip.eecs.umich.edu (Charles Jacob Cohen) writes:

    In article <4270025@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> kurts@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Kurt Strain) writes:
>   >In soc.women, farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>   >
>   >>   But I bet if you had asked any of these men about male bashing, they
>   >>   would talk about the damn feminists.  The fact that their wives or
>   >>   girlfriends viewed them as big, overgrown, ugly, immoral, stupid
>   >>   children just barely controlled by sex and food never seemed to
>   >>   register.
    >
>   >Oh, so you're saying that male bashing done by working class, white,
>   >hetero, Southern working women is proof that male bashing is justifiable.
>   >I think you are a male basher and here's your proof that it's all worth
>   >while.  Tell me all about us being overgrown, ugly, immoral, stupid
>   >children.  I think you should look in the mirror.
>
>
>   My goodness, will you please *READ* her article!  


Precisely my point.  It gets confusing when you put words in my mouth, and
vice versa.
Xref: sparky soc.women:15679 soc.men:15391
From: stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul)
Newsgroups: soc.women,soc.men
Subject: Re: Censorship, perhaps?
Date: 24 Aug 92 03:33:18 GMT
Followup-To: soc.women
Distribution: na

ljf writes
+ In article <stricher-180892000116@stayman.ocean.fsu.edu>  
stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul) writes:
+ >Loren I. Petrich wrote:
+ >
+ >> 	Melinda Shore posted a satire there recently calling for the
+ >> Claytoon's fellow Optilink employees to ostracize him or be known as
+ >> seeing nothing wrong with crude bigotry, if not actual supporters of
+ >> it.
+ >
+ >Satire? Or censorship? I get my ass toasted for suggesting that
+ >"main stream" feminists might want to put some distance or even
+ >out right comdemnation of some of the more bizarre and hateful
+ >statements made by the "radical" feminists, or be thought of as
+ >"seeing nothing wrong with crude bigotry, if not actual supporters
+ >of it". [nice quote, BTW]
+ 
+ Shore's post was a poke at Cramer's insistence that, unless every
+ lesbigay in existence states that NAMBLA is a group of sickos,
+ lesbigays support child molesters.
+ 
+ I find your insistence that all feminists are responsible for every
+ feminist somewhat similar.  

Unlike the lesbigay's (with/against/whatever) NAMBLA, feminists tend to
defend each other - even the "men haters" - from outside attack. We
never hear about inside fighting, so those of us on the outside can
only go by what we see: mutual defense and support.

Then again, certain sections of feminism can work with fundamentalist
Christian-types when it comes to "pornography" without an ill word,
and then turn around and slash at each other over abortion. I still
haven't figured *that* out. Maybe it's the same within feminism?
except we don't get to see the fighting? I dunno - you tell me.

+ >This is Political Correctness in it's pure state - think the way
+ >we do, or else.
+ 
+ Well, if it bothers you when someone proclaims that all men are
+ potential rapists, why doesn't it bother you when someone proclaims
+ that all feminists are man-haters?

Maybe they're equally true? I'll let the feminists defend themselves.
I can't say that I've seen them coming to my defense, so why should
I bother with theirs? 

K'Char - thanx for the followup line
Xref: sparky soc.women:16150 alt.abortion.inequity:3527 talk.abortion:35049 soc.men:15938
From: regard@sdd.hp.com (Adrienne Regard)
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.abortion.inequity,talk.abortion,soc.men
Subject: Re: Father Notification Reconsidered
Date: 4 Sep 1992 09:28:08 -0700
Organization: Hewlett Packard, San Diego Division
NNTP-Posting-Host: hpsdde.sdd.hp.com

>No I would not resort to violence.  The woman in not property of mine
>that I can do whatever I want with.

But Dan, you missed it. He didn't feel she was his *property*, no (after
all, where the hell was she for that year?  How the hell did she get to
the abortionist all by herself if she was his property?  That's not it.

No, his complaint is this:

>>situation, if the woman had *not* been so respecting as to tell me before,
>>but in fact had not only told me right afterwards, but had waited a year (!)

He just wants her to be 'so respecting'.

Now, SHE might have been respecting of her reasons.  But he doesn't have
to be, heck no.  She just has to be respecting of him.


>out of curiosity would you also kill a daughter they told you she got
>an abortion?  I need your help in deciding how I feel about parental
>notification laws.


Only if she wasn't respectful about it.

Adrienne Regard

Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.sex.wizards
From: A sufferer
Subject: How to relieve menstural cramp
Originator: jclee@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 22:14:44 GMT

There seem to be many techniques, valid or not, used to relieve this monthly
ritual of pain.  I suffer from a paralizing one almost every month.

Please share with me (e-mail please, I do not feel like discussin this in
public) what you know, and what you heard of.  I am sick of taking pain
killers.

Thank you.
From: slarsen@beethoven.helios.nd.edu (susan larsen)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Hating Men with Full Force
Date: 28 Aug 92 20:33:10 GMT
Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame

In article <1992Aug28.104209.1@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
>
[ a lot of typical rivero-isms deleted]

>  So, while it's partly correct to place blame for the male bash on
>extremists such as Andrea Dworkin, a major portion of the cause for
>"mainstream" male bashing lies with the advertisers, and WON'T go away until
>the networks start to see men controlling the discretionary spending. Then
>those same TV programs will turn the "bash" in the opposite direction.

Why did you have to go and make such a perfectly good point, that tele-
vision tends to encourage man-bashing, amidst so much woman-bashing?
Are you losing your touch? Or were you just trying to see if anyone 
was paying attention?

(BTW shame on all us money-grubbing, vain, lazy wenches who wreak havoc 
on men's wallets! It just serves to makes men look stupid, wanting to spend 
so much time with us vile, calculating female-types.)

Sue Larsen
slarsen@berlin.helios.nd.edu
Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.sex.wizards
From: 881045m@dragon.acadiau.ca (Richard Muise)
Subject: Re: How to relieve menstural cramp
Organization: Acadia University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 15:00:57 GMT

A few of my female friends take the pill of only this reason (so they 
say :-)). The pil does reduce the amounts, and bring a regualtity that
they tell me they normally don't have.

something to think about

-- 
 " Apple : Changing the world, one person at a time"
 " Friends : Don't let friends do DOS "
       881045m @ dragon.acadiau.ca
       881045m @ ace.acadiau.ca
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: bev@opusc.csd.scarolina.edu (Beverly Huntsberger)
Subject: Re: Hating Men with Full Force
Organization: Univ. of South Carolina, Columbia
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:44:23 GMT

In <stricher-220892115750@stayman.ocean.fsu.edu> stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul) writes:

>In article <1992Aug21.101322.1714@lloyd.Camex.COM>, ma@lloyd.Camex.COM
>(Mary Ann Purcell) wrote:

>> "look at how the feminists think of men".   Where are the quotes from
>> the mainstream feminists?  How about me?  I think of myself as radical
>> and I don't hate men.  You can quote me.

>Ok. But...how come the radicals get invited to speak to the mainstreamers?

	She just she SHE'S a radical. Did you read that?

>Over and over and over again? with the same message? Where are the movers
>and shakers in mainstream feminism? Who is your counterpart to Dworkin
>and MacKinnon?

>See? They DO things: enact legislation, make statements to the media and
>make themselves known. And known as feminists. Where is the vaunted middle?

	It's like they've been telling us: What's the point
	in overstating the obvious? The issues lie in examination
	of the fringes.

	Bev
-- 
Bev Huntsberger		bev@grover.csd.scarolina.edu
			The University of SOUTH Carolina
Personally, I have nothing against incumbents.
I'm simply exercising my right to vote.
From: slarsen@beethoven.helios.nd.edu (susan larsen)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Hating Men with Full Force
Date: 28 Aug 92 15:43:38 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame

In article <1992Aug27.140725.1@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
>In article <1992Aug26.150821.16499@news.nd.edu>, slarsen@monet.helios.nd.edu (susan larsen) writes:
>> (Char Aznabul) writes:
>>>susan larsen writes
>>>+(Bronis Vidugiris) writes: 
>>>+ >
>>>+ >Also, there is absolutely *nothing* like the organized politcial and  
>>>   directed
>>>+ >male bashing that we see in politics today from the homosexual male front
>>>+ >(or the non-homosexual male front, for that matter). There aren't any male  
>>>+ >McKinnon's or Dworkins (IMO).                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>+  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>+ I wouldn't be too sure about that!  On the purely censorious front, we have 
>>>+ Donald Wildmon, Jerry Falwell, and a host of other religious-types more 
>>>+ than willing to do whatever it takes to not only censor, but punish folks
>>>+ involved in pornography.
>>>
>
>  Not quite the same thing. Neither Donald Wildmon, Jerry Falwell, or
>any other unctious religios (to paraphrase Harry S Truman) advocate the
>random killing of women to merely "keep them in their place". Such
>terror tactics have been openly advocated by Dworkian in several speeches.

No, there isn't a reciprical male "call to violence" mirroring the 
substance of Dworkin's statements.  At least nothing I can conjure up in 
modern America.  If there were, the man/men making such statements would 
never attain the level of public consciousness that Dworkin has, because 
there is no audience for such remarks.  Dworkin is playing off a well-
established stereotype of "man as creature of violence."  She did not 
create the audience for this stereotype, but she sure has learned how 
to play to it.

What Dworkin, and Falwell, and Wildmon, and Bush-Quayle all have in 
common is an ability to take a gender or human stereotype and make poli- 
cal hay out of it.  That in and of itself would not be such a terrible 
thing, except that folks like these can creep into the public mind 
(Dworkin), can affect large industries like television (Wildmon) and 
can even win high public office (Bush) by playing to or even against 
simplistic notions about male/female/human behavior.  Once they have 
a level of power, then they move to control our behavior through 
legislation, market pressures, or whatever tools may be at their 
disposal.

Granted, the substance of their messages may be as different as night 
from day and the individuals themselves may anchor down opposite ends 
of the political spectrum, but they share the same mechanism for 
grabbing and holding public attention:  reducing humans to narrowly 
defined roles and traits.

Sue Larsen
slarsen@berlin.helios.nd.edu
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: klassen@sol.UVic.CA (Melvin Klassen)
Subject: Re: FEMALE GYMNASTS
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, B.C. CANADA
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 20:58:26 GMT

Michael Rivero <rivero@mdcbbs.com> writes:
>>Canadian researchers say young female gymnasts pay too dear a price in
>>their intense training for the Olympics.  University of British Columbia 
>>specialists who recently completed a 40-month study of 100 top female 
>>gymnasts in the province say their injuries and hours of training compare 
>>to hardships suffered by children working in coal mines in the 19th Century.
>
>  Why were young male gymnists [sic] not studied? 
Silly question!

It's like asking the researchers why they didn't consider
the affect of eating blue Smarties(tm) on the gymnasts.

Pick any of the following reasons:
 - they were studied, but the LA Times didn't quote their findings,
 - they weren't studied, because male-gymnasts never get injured,
 - they weren't studied, because the researchers were sexist pigs,
 - they weren't studied, because the researchers deliberately focussed
   their study on their mandate,
 - they weren't studied, because the researchers' funding-grant 
   wasn't large enough to study both groups,
 - because Olympic-level female gymnasts are usually prepubescent,
   and therefore 5 to 10 years younger than Olympic-level male gymnasts;
   any injuries will affect still-growing bones and tissues,
   and are more likely to result in permanent disabilities,
   and other disruptions of normal growth patterns.

>Do the researchers not think they are worthy of consideration? 
That's certainly reading-between-the-lines!

Why not contact the University of British Columbia, and ask?
Dial 1-604-555-1212, and Directory Assistance will give you their number.
If you offer them funding, they'll probably be glad to listen to you!

>Or did the study show (or did the researchers assume) that the males, 
>being on average stronger, just dont's [sic] suffer the same injuries? 

Good researchers would measure the absolute and relative strength of 
M/F gymnasts; they wouldn't make such assumptions.

Have you done a study which indicates that male-gymnasts 
don't suffer the same injuries?
From: stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Impact of the absent father
Date: 2 Sep 92 00:00:06 GMT
Followup-To: soc.women
Organization: Murasami Labs

Vicky Hansen wrote:

> I know there are some great fathers out there who have suffered an injustice
> with their divorce but others have not.  Why is this series in soc.women
> instead of soc.men?  Why are we not hearing from all those single moms who
> are reaping all the benefits from all the money these men claim they are
> putting out?

Perhaps because father's rights aren't going anywere until a sufficient
number of women stand up for them?????

As far as I can tell, these posts aren't to gather your symapthy, but 
rather to WAKE YOU UP TO A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH THE DAMN SYSTEM.

K'Char
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: re: FEMALE GYMNASTS
From: rivero@mdcbbs.com
Date: 26 Aug 92 09:37:56 GMT
Organization: Electronic Data Systems, Unigraphics Division, Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: rivero



>Today's LA Times:

>Canadian researchers say young female gymnasts pay too dear a price in
>their intense training for the Olympics.  University of British
>Columbia specialists who recently completed a 40-month study of 100
>top female gymnasts in the province say their injuries and hours of
>training compare to hardships suffered by children working in coal
>mines in the 19th Century.

  Interesting. Why were young male gymnists not studied? Do the
researchers not think they are worthy of consideration? Or did the
study show (or did the researchers assume) that the males, being on average
stronger, just dont's suffer the same injuries? 



<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero rivero@mdcbbs.com  Middle-Aged Mutant Ninja Animator   |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: mec6@quads.uchicago.edu (Rini Clarkberg)
Subject: Re: FEMALE GYMNASTS
Reply-To: mec6@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 23:22:52 GMT

In article <1992Aug26.093756.1@mdcbbs.com> rivero@mdcbbs.com writes:
>
>  Interesting. Why were young male gymnists not studied? Do the
>researchers not think they are worthy of consideration? Or did the
>study show (or did the researchers assume) that the males, being on average
>stronger, just dont's suffer the same injuries? 
 
It'd be my guess that it's because female gymnasts are a fair bit
younger, on average, than the males....  I didn't notice any male
competitors in the recent Olympics who were thirteen or fourteen... 
but I didn't watch too closely, so I might have missed something.  But
it seems reasonable to me that the authors compared the female gymnasts 
to child-laborers in industrial England because of their "tender age".

(I'm not against child competition, btw.  I was a competitive swimmer
from age 5 to 19.)

rini

Xref: sparky soc.women:16108 soc.men:15880 alt.feminism:525
From: btwomey@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (william.tw0mey)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: FEMALE GYMNASTS
Date: 2 Sep 92 20:23:11 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Aug26.182339.1@bbs.mdcbbs.com> loosli@bbs.mdcbbs.com writes:
...
>>their intense training for the Olympics.  University of British
>>Columbia specialists who recently completed a 40-month study of 100
>>top female gymnasts in the province say their injuries and hours of
>>training compare to hardships suffered by children working in coal
>>mines in the 19th Century.
> 
>I agree that the gymnasts who compete on the international level do put in
>many long days in training.  But, I don't think it compares to the abuse of
>children in the 19th Century.  Most gymnasts work out between 25 and 30 hours
>per week.  The weeks before a BIG meet might see a little more workout time,
>but not that much.
...
>	Her work outs this year are 5 hours a night, 4 nights a week,
>	one 2 hour session on Wednesday and 3 hours Saturday.

Good for you that you have a talented daughter, good luck to her.
But-
Your daughter's workouts amount to 25 hours a week.  Would she be be
permitted to work that many hours a week?  Would you or your state
allow it?  If your daughter was putting that many hours in at Burger
King, I bet at least one state would contend that she was being over
worked.  Thus, the comparison to children in a coal mine seems
unhealthily apt.  When do these girls and young women get to grow
up?

Special Bonus: a grumble to those whose knees jerked because only girls
were studied.  Get real.  Criminy, they are younger than boys are when boys
into gymnastics.  Isn't it more fitting to compare children in coal
mines to children in gymnastics, than it is to compare children in coal
mines to teenagers and young adults in gymnastics?

Bill Twomey
-- 
bt@violin.att.com

Bill's Law on Netnews discussions:
"If a poster's name is in the Subject, its not worth reading."
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Hating Men with Full Force
From: rivero@mdcbbs.com
Date: 27 Aug 92 14:07:25 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Electronic Data Systems, Unigraphics Division, Cypress CA
Nntp-Posting-User: rivero

In article <1992Aug26.150821.16499@news.nd.edu>, slarsen@monet.helios.nd.edu (susan larsen) writes:
> (Char Aznabul) writes:
>>susan larsen writes
>>+(Bronis Vidugiris) writes: 
>>+ >
>>+ >Also, there is absolutely *nothing* like the organized politcial and  
>>   directed
>>+ >male bashing that we see in politics today from the homosexual male front
>>+ >(or the non-homosexual male front, for that matter). There aren't any male  
>>+ >McKinnon's or Dworkins (IMO).                        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>+  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>+ I wouldn't be too sure about that!  On the purely censorious front, we have 
>>+ Donald Wildmon, Jerry Falwell, and a host of other religious-types more 
>>+ than willing to do whatever it takes to not only censor, but punish folks
>>+ involved in pornography.
>>

  Not quite the same thing. Neither Donald Wildmon, Jerry Falwell, or
any other unctious religios (to paraphrase Harry S Truman) advocate the
random killing of women to merely "keep them in their place". Such
terror tactics have been openly advocated by Dworkian in several speeches.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
|  Michael Rivero rivero@mdcbbs.com  Middle-Aged Mutant Ninja Animator   |
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
| Not that I'm worried; I'm a much better shot and a MUCH narrower target|
| than Ms. Dworkin is.  :)                                               |
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: ataylor@nmsu.edu (Nosy)
Subject: Re: Women are inferior
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 20:46:08 GMT

<In article <1992Sep2.041229.14127@news2.cis.umn.edu> karypis@epx.cis.umn.edu () writes:

<   It is true...  Women were not created equal.  They are clearly inferior
<   to men....

	
	Do women leave terminals unattended as often as men?

	Just curious........
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Women are inferior
Date: 2 Sep 92 16:29:06 GMT
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA

In soc.women, karypis@epx.cis.umn.edu () writes:

>>  It is true...  Women were not created equal.  They are clearly inferior
>>  to men....

I will make the rash assumption that you are male.
Then I will stoop to your level and answer:
    Isn't it just like a man to make a blanket statement with absolutely
    no details or supporting evidence.

Women and men are probably more different than our current society strives
for but neither is inferior as a group.  Please specify the traits you are
referring to.

This should produce some fascinating responses though -- so thanks.
Newsgroups: soc.women