HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: eager@eagercon.com (Michael J. Eager)
Subject: Re: Close, but no cigar.. (was: Re: Really: responsibility vs role expectation)
Reply-To: eager@eagercon.com
Organization: Eager Consulting
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 03:12:30 GMT

In article 20991@amd.com, jmw@angelo.amd.com (John Wincn) writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.230838.16912@eagercon.com> eager@eagercon.com writes:
>>Instead of one, there are thousands or millions.  A satisfactory male
>>contraceptive has to kill all of the sperm.  A single one out of the thousands
>
>That's close, but in fact: thousands are required to ensure pregnancy, one 
>usually wins out.  It is not necessary to kill *all* the sperm to prevent 
>pregnancy, it is merely necessary to kill *most* of them.  Don't believe me?
>Consider this: a man is considered 'infertile' when his viable sperm count 
>drops below some magic number.  This *may* but does not *necessarily* imply 
>that he does not produce sperm. 


Yes, you are right.  A male contraceptive has to kill or disable the vast 
majority of the sperm.   To be effective, a contraceptive has to reduce the
count to a level where there are essentially no sperm present.

The question of at what level a man is considered infertile is not relevent--this is 
probably a much higher number than the level which would be considered effective
in a contraceptive.

The rest of the previous comment about male contraceptives still holds.  To kill 
or disable most of the sperm requires much more intensive measures than are 
required in a female contraceptive.


---
Michael J. Eager		Michael.Eager@eagercon.com
Eager Consulting		(415) 325-8077 
1960 Park Boulevard, Palo Alto, CA 94306-1141
From: cd975@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Daniel K. Holmes)
Newsgroups: ba.singles
Subject: Otis Returns!
Date: 15 Dec 92 06:39:07 GMT
Reply-To: cd975@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Daniel K. Holmes)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu



As Otis approaches the lovely town of Bayberry..he notices something.
Nothing but more arguing from a bunch of people that believe their's is
the only true view!

Otis bows his head and continues walking.
-- 
Daniel K. Holmes            | "You can still smell the roses when your
cd975@cleveland.freenet.edu | running with them in your hand. Memories are
Holmes@vaxt.llnl.gov        | the true measure of life. Make all you can."
                            | --Garth Brooks
Xref: sparky ba.singles:2701 soc.singles:34250
From: erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp)
Newsgroups: ba.singles,soc.singles
Subject: Re: Beer . . . hic!
Date: 18 Dec 92 05:08:10 GMT
Followup-To: ba.singles
Distribution: ba
Organization: Bleeding Edge Technologies - 'Sliding Down The Razor Blade Of Life...'

In article <lj24a1INNh89@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> smith@wesson.Eng.Sun.COM writes:

>Andreas Tovornik (dreas) will be in town soon and I wondered 
>if there are any of you out there who want to get together for 
>a beer or two or three . . . hic!  We can tell him how much fun 
>it was!  :) . . . just kidding!

I will be in town this weekend, too - I have an interview with Sun Monday
morning, so I'll be in all weekend with nothing to do... :) :)

For those of you who missed your kiss at the TygerBoink party, this is
your chance! :)

FREE kisses to the first 100 women... :)

>There's this really cool place in downtown Mountain View that
>opened up a little over a month ago called "Fogg's".  They have 
>80 different bottled beer labels from around the world as well 
>as bunch of others on tap.  They've got dart boards, 4 television
>screens, jukebox music and Saturday nights, a really cool blues 
>band performs there.
>
>Hey ladies!  Let's show these guys we're not cheap, sleazy hussies,
>see how many of them will spring for a beer without making us pay 
>for half of it and rip up their pre-sex contracts.  Guys!  We pro-
>mise . . . no cats, no gold-diggers and don't expect a kiss on the 
>cheek.    
>
>Send me email before the end of the day Friday if you plan to be 
>there or just show up Saturday 6:00 p.m. onwards.  I'll be the one 
>holding up the bar or kicking John Fereira's butt at (with?) darts.

I'm tempted to make it down to this one -- who else is coming??
-- 
Ed Carp, N7EKG                    erc@apple.com                   801/538-0177
"This is the final task I will ever give you, and it  goes  on  forever.   Act
happy, feel happy, be happy, without a reason in the world. Then you can love,
and do what you will."           -- Dan Millman, "Way Of The Peaceful Warrior"
From: DeadHead@cup.portal.com (Bruce M Ong)
Newsgroups: ba.singles
Subject: Re: Oh, I forgot... (was: Re:  we can kill...)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 14:50:24 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: ba
  <1992Dec17.193037.20711@fico.uucp> <1992Dec18.022422.2159@netcom.com>
  <15994@auspex-gw.auspex.com>

>In article <1992Dec18.022422.2159@netcom.com> henry@netcom.com (Henry Polard) 
w
>rites:
>|In article <1992Dec17.193037.20711@fico.uucp> ala@fico.UUCP (Adryenn Ashley) 
w
>rites:
>|>In article <1992Dec17.030056.7519@netcom.com> barry@netcom.com (Kenn Barry) 
w
>rites:
>|>>In article <71837@cup.portal.com> DeadHead@cup.portal.com (Bruce M Ong) wri
t
>es:
>|>>>	Gawd. Being a canonist snob just doesnt pay.  :-)
>|>>
>|>>	It does if your canon is big enough.
>|
>|Canonist snobs should be cannonized.
>|Is there a howitzer in the house?
> 
>No, but I think there's an Uzi in the area.
>
	DONT SHOOT! I Promise I will read Danielle Steele! Judith Krantz!
err... The Harlequins, even!

	What? Madanna???

	*SIGH*. alright. you can blind fold me and shoot me now...
>
>-- 
>+==========================================================================+
>| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
>| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
>+==========================================================================+

---
/bruce		"Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
		 Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
		 Rage, rage against the dying of the light." - Dylan Thomas

Wow. It all began to make sense...
Xref: sparky ba.singles:2586 soc.singles:33607 alt.sex:39324 alt.peeves:18244
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: ba.singles,soc.singles,alt.sex,alt.peeves
Subject: Re: Self Refuting Posts
Date: 11 Dec 92 17:46:54 GMT
Followup-To: ba.singles
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Dec10.210117.16527@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
|johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
|] In article <1992Dec8.204001.12150@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
|] |
|] |I hate to tell you this, but RealWomen[tm] do NOT go to bars.
|] |Only Cheap Sleazy Hussys will be found any place that
|] |Demon Alcohol will be found!
|]  
|] Of course they do.  How do you think I met me ex-wife?
|
|John,
|
|Foot, Toe, BANG!
|
|Please STOP reading that Godel,Escher,Bach
|before you send out postings.
 
Too late.  Already did that.

|ps: Now to get Dear John some Nice RealWoman[tm]
|who will resolve all of these problems for him.....
 
As soon as I finish my engineering specifications I'll distribute them
to the business team so they can go about their search.  Someone that
not geographically challenging would be nice.

I seem to be having trouble with my mailtool lately.
-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: ba.singles
From: tyger@netcom.com (Kristen Kohlbecker)
Subject: Re: Beer . . . hic!
Organization:  Something close to nothing, but different than the day before
Distribution: ba
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 04:34:39 GMT

erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp) writes:
>diana@wetware.com (CatWoman ) writes:
>
>>Barring other unforseen problems (I REFUSE to
>>be sick again), the PYM and I are talking about
>>being there also.
>
>What??? You mean, I will *finally* get a chance to met the infamous CatWoman???
>Oh, my! I suppose I'll have to wear my best jeans (the ones without the holes)
>and my very best T-shirt, huh? :)

You might...me, I'll be wearing the t-shirt I just got from a friend of mine,
with a pseudo-Nagel pic on the front, and Tyger across the back...:)

That was a hint...yes, gerg and I will be there...;)

>Ed Carp

Tyger
-- 
      Kristen Kohlbecker    And I would choose to be with you
      tyger@netcom.com      That's if the choice were mine to make   
                            But you can make decisions too
      A Tyger and a Lady    And you can have this heart to break
From: DeadHead@cup.portal.com (Bruce M Ong)
Newsgroups: ba.singles
Subject: Re: Oh, I forgot... (was: Re: we can kill...)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 14:36:36 PST
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Distribution: ba
  <Dec.10.08.49.20.1992.27452@net.bio.net> <75589@apple.apple.COM>  
  <1992Dec15.004401.16970@netcom.com> <71837@cup.portal.com>
  <75690@apple.apple.COM>

>DeadHead@cup.portal.com (Bruce M Ong) writes:
>>	Oh well. Havent read the book, nor seen the movie. Guess that makes me
>>a "disappointing illiterate."
>>	Gawd. Being a canonist snob just doesnt pay.  :-)
>
>Not really. The Princess Bride is an excellent book. Will you take it from
>someone who likes wcw and tse?

	well... since another more open-minded canonist says it's good, then
I will have to say - Yes. ;-)

	[It's funny how much good stuff passes me by when I get so fixated
in the canon. A coworker few days ago slipped an Indigo Girls CD (nomads,
indians, saints) to me -- I have been saying 'no' to non-canonized music for
the past 3 years -- and woah.... now I am hooked... i guess the magic is
to keep an open mind and say 'yes']

>--
>Stef                Just as there are laws of Conservation of Matter and
>stef@apple.com      Energy, so there are in fact Laws of Conservation of 
>                    Pain and Joy. Neither can ever be created or destroyed.
>                         But one can be converted into the other. 
>                                                         --Spider Robinson

---
/bruce			"yes is a world
			 & in this world of
			 yes live
			 (skillfully curled)
			 all worlds."		-- e.e. cummings
Newsgroups: ba.singles
From: gordon@rahul.net (Gordon Vickers)
Subject: Re: *whimper* *sniffle* *sniff* (was: Re: your lousy pre-sex contract)
Organization: a2i network
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 06:42:32 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.170224.22117@amd.com> jmw@angelo.amd.com (John Wincn) writes:
>Awwwww, poor baby!   Life has been very tough on you, hasn't it?
   No, that is not what I was saying.  I was originally following a
 threat supporting someones statement that women have an advantage in
 these matters.

>Perhaps if you had thought about this a little, howevermanyyearsago,
   I did. I always knew that if we had kids it was likely that I would
  get them if we ever divorced.

>the county wouldn't have to force you to live up to your responsibility
>and you could continue to behave as if the world owes you a living.
>
   I have no idea how you could think I was trying to say that.
   No one is forcing me, I wanted the kids. I'm glad to  have them, and in
  fact, I need them.
   My complaint is only that gender makes a differance. Absent fathers are
 expected to be much more responsible than absent mothers, even when both
 enjoy comparable lifestyles.  The absent mother can easily elect to have
 no responsibility, yet the absent father ussually has some degree of it
 mandated to him.  BIG Diferance, and the system is sexist for it.
  That is my only point.

-- 
Gordon Vickers <gordon@rahul.net>
From: gerg@netcom.com (Greg Andrews)
Newsgroups: ba.singles
Subject: Re: The TygerBoink Committee would like to thank you
Date: 17 Dec 92 05:14:26 GMT
Organization: Netcom Online Communications Services (408-241-9760 login: guest)

erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp) writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.135247.2697@wetware.com> diana@wetware.com (CatWoman ) writes:
>>
>>That may be because those of us who were REALLY
>>contagious had high enough fevers that we decided
>>trying to remain vertical for any significant 
>>length of time was not a viable alternative.
>
>I'm only sorry to hear that your reason for not remaining vertical had nothing
>to do with sex.  <grin>
>

Ah, but you're forgetting who Diana is!

Never believe a ProblemOlderWoman when she tells you sex was not
involved....

-- 
:::::::::::::::::::  Greg Andrews  gerg@netcom.com  :::::::::::::::::::
ObGuindon:  Beets!  They're not just for breakfast anymore.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
From: charleen@net.bio.net (Charleen Bunjiovianna)
Newsgroups: ba.singles
Subject: Re: Oh, I forgot... (was: Re:  we can kill...)
Date: 15 Dec 92 18:41:21 GMT
Organization: BIOSCI International Newsgroups for Biology

In article <15895@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>
>I have got an online copy of the complete dialog for "The Princess Bride"
>for anyone that would like a copy of it.  It was my ex-girlfriends favorite 
>movie.  It was so romantic, that I <sniff>, of sorry, I can't continue..
>I think maybe if I put on some "Yanni" I'll cheer up a little...

As someone somewhere said, "Buy the book."  It's much better--funnier, 
more romantic--than the movie.  William Goldman wrote it, Del Rey Books
published it.

Charleen
From: erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp)
Newsgroups: ba.singles
Subject: Re: Beer . . . hic!
Date: 19 Dec 92 05:21:28 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Bleeding Edge Technologies - 'Sliding Down The Razor Blade Of Life...'

In article <1992Dec19.043439.18746@netcom.com> tyger@netcom.com (Kristen Kohlbecker) writes:
>erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp) writes:

>>Oh, my! I suppose I'll have to wear my best jeans (the ones without the holes)
>>and my very best T-shirt, huh? :)

>You might...me, I'll be wearing the t-shirt I just got from a friend of mine,
>with a pseudo-Nagel pic on the front, and Tyger across the back...:)
>
>That was a hint...yes, gerg and I will be there...;)

Gerg?  Who's Gerg?  Hehehe... :)

Well, this is going to be a bang-up weekend!  Gee, I'm going to have netters
around me all weekend! :)  How fun!!  I will be glad to finally meet the
mysterious "Greg"... :)

I have to fly into Oakland - I couldn't get a flight into San Jose.  I will be
meeting another netter for lunch, and will be at Fogg's around 6 or so.
-- 
Ed Carp, N7EKG                    erc@apple.com                   801/538-0177
"This is the final task I will ever give you, and it  goes  on  forever.   Act
happy, feel happy, be happy, without a reason in the world. Then you can love,
and do what you will."           -- Dan Millman, "Way Of The Peaceful Warrior"
Newsgroups: ba.singles
From: eager@eagercon.com (Michael J. Eager)
Subject: Re: Close, but no cigar..(Was Really: responsibility vs role expectation)
Reply-To: eager@eagercon.com
Organization: Eager Consulting
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 17:29:10 GMT

In article 1gt9nhINN6gr@male.EBay.Sun.COM, merblich@imola.EBay.Sun.COM (Mitchell Erblich user) writes:
>There is only 1 little problem with this argument, is that if a male goes into
>a hot tub, he kills off alot of sperm and thus can become infertile for a short
>time. 


I used to know a married couple back in Chicago.  He would always go to the 
gym and, after a workout, spend 15 minutes in the steam bath.  It appeared to be
very effective birth control.

Well he got a cold and didn't go to the gym for a couple weeks.  She got pregnant.

(And I now have another reason I should by a hot tub!)


---
Michael J. Eager		Michael.Eager@eagercon.com
Eager Consulting		(415) 325-8077 
1960 Park Boulevard, Palo Alto, CA 94306-1141

Newsgroups: ba.singles,soc.singles,soc.men,soc.women,alt.flame
From: oleg@netcom.com (Oleg Kiselev)
Subject: Re: Duck and Jive (was Re: Pre-Sex Contract )
Followup-To: alt.flame 
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 09:35:18 GMT

In article <1992Dec19.201811.16183@rotag.mi.org> kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>Then why do you defend the paternity child support statutes? 

A large number of single women can't change the diapers and manage to
keep a job that pays enough to support themselves and their children.
As one of the parties responsible for the conception of a child, the
fathers are responsible for their children's welfair, whether or not
they wanted to have these children born.  

If you consider this unfair and are unwilling to accept responsibility
for your actions, vasectomy and celibacy are two best alternatives open
to you.

-- 
Oleg Kiselev at home			...use the header to find the path
Newsgroups: ba.singles
From: eager@eagercon.com (Michael J. Eager)
Subject: Re: Pre-Sex Contract
Reply-To: eager@eagercon.com
Organization: Eager Consulting
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 17:22:09 GMT

In article 2257@zooid.guild.org, Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> () writes:
>lana@magenta.corp.sgi.com (Lana Mountford) writes...
>LM> Fer crissakes, if you feel that way, why not just get a
>LM> vasectomy??  It seems to me to be a very simple solution:
>LM> if you dont' want the responsibility for babies, don't make
>LM> 'em.  If you're unwilling to take your own precautions, then
>LM> don't have sex.  Simple, and no need for a contract.
>
>
>It's not that simple, Lana.  *David* may not want children (perhaps never),
>but a vasectomy might be a bit TOO extreme, especially if he should decide in
>the future that he wants to have a family.

There are other options, including having sperm frozen in the event that he does
change his mind.

>
>Indeed, as I was explaining to Larry Billings, asking Freedom of Choice For
>Men supporters to go out and have vasectomies makes about as much sense as
>telling women who don't want to get pregnant, to get a tubal ligation.

Unfortunately, this isn't a parallel.  Women have a number of options for 
contraception, only one of which is surgery.  And a tubal ligation is not the
minor surgery that a vasectomy is.  

>
>These operations are more or less *irreversible*, so rather than force people
>who don't to be parents RIGHT NOW, into a situation where they will NEVER
>become parents, why not try to offer men and women a comfortable degree of
>reproductive freedom.  Women currently have this freedom, why shouldn't men?

Vasectomy is reversable, depending on a number of factors, including how long
ago the procedure was done.  

As for male reproductive freedom, what the hell are you talking about?  

>
>---
>Will Steeves, goid@zooid.guild.org                      "Neil Hull is GOiD"
>ZOOiD BBS, Toronto, Ontario - The Zoo Of Ids            "GOiDS Rule"
>(416) 322-7876
>
>"Cthulhu for President in '92 - Why vote for the _lesser_ of two evils?"
>                                                          - Bronis Vidugiris
>---
> * SLMR 2.1a * * I M a tru beleever in the American edukashun sistum.



---
Michael J. Eager		Michael.Eager@eagercon.com
Eager Consulting		(415) 325-8077 
1960 Park Boulevard, Palo Alto, CA 94306-1141

Newsgroups: ba.singles,soc.singles,alt.romance.chat,alt.romance,alt.personals
From: rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster)
Subject: Re: The TygerBoink Committee would like to thank you
Organization: The Tickle Palace - Moonyvale, CA
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 07:23:12 GMT

In article <1992Dec9.000722.20024@netcom.com> tyger@netcom.com (Kristen Kohlbecker) writes:
>msmiller@Rational.COM (Mark Miller) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec6.210538.7028@wetware.com>, diana@wetware.com (CatWoman ) writes:
>>|> For participating in a government sponsored test.
>>|> 
>>|> [...]
>>|> [deleted]
>> [deleted]
>>
>
>Oh fine...be that way! *pout* Remeber that even the host was suffering right
>along with you...*sniff*
>
> [deleted]
>
>I learned a great many things, including the fact that W. David Rohwer can 
>actually be semi-human in person..;) He's also quite ticklish as Libby and I
>found out, much to his chagrin...*grin* Oh, and David? Yer a lyin' dog if you
>are telling people that you aren't a net.personality...I don't hiss like that
>at just *anyone*, you know!
>

     Moi, ticklish?  Nah, not in the least bit I am not ticklish.  I am not
a lying dog because I am not a net.personality.  I think that drieux,
Catwoman, Desiree, Stef, Aahz, trygve (spelling?), Tyger, Moscny, Mark
Israel, Herb Huston, John Ferierra (spelling?), Charles Martin, and Julie
Wright are all worthy of that title because they post more than me.

> [deleted]
>      tyger@netcom.com      That's if the choice were mine to make   


-- 
                                         +---------------------------------+
  +-----------------------------------+ /      Not a net.personality      /
 /   // Mr. Tickle Monster   // Amiga ++---------------------------------+
|  \X/   W. David Rohwer   \X/  3000  /  Internet: rohwerwd@netcom.COM  /
+------------------------------------+---------------------------------+
From: sam@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Vicky Hansen)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 16:36:03 GMT
Subject: Re: We can kill that thread for you, wholesale
Organization: HP Signal Analysis Division - Rohnert Park, CA
Newsgroups: ba.singles

In ba.singles, DeadHead@cup.portal.com (Bruce M Ong) writes:

   >>shouldn't we separate the never marrieds from the
   >>widows from the quadruple divorces, etc. ? 

 >that question sounds a bit accusatorial. It's like you are guilty of
 >something if you are not married or have never been married. It's interesting
 >how the society sees marriage as a "success story" of some sort, and divorce
 >or being single as "failures."

I find it interresting too.  Some people never marry by choice, some stay
married eventhough the marriage is a total failure, etc.  I consider anyone
who is happy with their current state (married, single, living_with) OR
anyone who is not happy with their current state but who has taken
reasonable steps to improve that state (possibly divorcing out of a worse
state, possibly joining clubs to meet others, whatever) is OK too.  The
'failures' are those people who are terribly unhappy with whatever state
they are in (job, relationship, location, whatever) and are doing nothing to
rectify the situation.
I do not understand why success = money, marriage, children when happiness
could just as easily = low paying job (maybe artist?), single, childless for
some person.  
Our society is easing up on these rules but we have a long way to go.  I have
always wanted to be a mother and enjoyed it a lot but I also know it is not
for everyone and am quite pleased with people who choose not to pursue it --
they are much more a success in my book than the people who are not the parent
type but have kids anyway.  The same philosophy goes for confirmed bachelors
(or bachelorettes?) who are content with being single.  However, it is too
bad that infertility or loneliness force others away from the path of their
choice.
Newsgroups: ba.singles
From: diana@wetware.com (CatWoman )
Subject: Re: Beer . . . hic!
Organization: Castle WetWare MouseCatcher
Distribution: ba
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 00:36:09 GMT

johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:

] erc@Apple.COM (Ed Carp) writes:
] >smith@wesson.Eng.Sun.COM writes:
]  
] |>Send me email before the end of the day Friday if you plan to be 
] |>there or just show up Saturday 6:00 p.m. onwards.  I'll be the one 
] |>holding up the bar or kicking John Fereira's butt at (with?) darts.
] |
] |I'm tempted to make it down to this one -- who else is coming??
] 
] Like Nina said, I'll be there.  

Barring other unforseen problems (I REFUSE to
be sick again), the PYM and I are talking about
being there also.

Diana
Newsgroups: ba.singles