HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ceb@dbrus.Unify.Com (Caroline E. Bryan)
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: More Women Than Men Prefer to be Alone
Date: 12 Nov 92 19:44:59 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization

In article <1doj8oINNjkk@news.aero.org> foy@aero.org (Richard Foy) writes:
>A news item this morning said that 20% of married men preferred to be home
>alone. However, 50% of married women preferred to be home alone.
>
>Are there other studies similiar to this? What are the reasons for more
>women then men preferreing to be by themselves?

The quality of the wives out there, and the quality of the husbands.

Come on, ask a hard one.


Carrie		ceb@rechenau.unify.com		x 6244  ----------------+
|  I don't belong to any organized political party:  I'm a Democrat.	|
|						-- Will Rogers		|
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: parker@meibm4.cen.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: soc.women
Subject: Re: Am I "exploiting" this woman?
Date: 8 Nov 92 17:35:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.BxErIq.E6L
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

kaarts@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth John Aarts) writes:

> lib@cbnews.cb.att.com (Lib) writes:

>> kaarts@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth John Aarts) writes:
>>>
>>>What a person reads, wherever they read it, should be their own business.  I
>>>still don't understand why someone should be upset with that woman for
>>>reading an erotic magazine.  Granted, it is easy to come up with specific
>>>incidences, but I don't think it is valid as a general rule.
>>   
>>Not at work. You're on private property with other people and
>>those other people have rights.

>I don't understand what other peoples rights have to do with what she reads.

>> 
>>>You still have not explained why a calender or poster is inherently bad.
>>>You have offered the suggestion of role reversal, but that doesn't help much.
>>>I don't have an inherent fear or hate of beef-cake pictures.  I would really
>>>like it if you could articulate why Chip & Dale calenders are the most
>>>evil things in the world.

>>Calendars or posters are not, of course, inherently bad. Those that depict 
>>people as sex objects may create or contribute to a hostile environment.

>I do not believe they create a hostile enviroment, and everything is
>capable of contributing to a hostile environment.  I am not against
>chastising hostile co-workers, but against labeling posters as immediately
>hostile.

When a member of what is sometimes called the "weaker" sex is surrounded by
calendars depicting scantily-clad women, she can get the impression that her
male coworkers don't take her seriously as a person and coworker, but only
think about her in terms of how she looks.  Whether or not that is true, it
makes (some) women uncomfortable with the work environment.  That can make it
harder for them to work smoothly and is "hostile".

Companies have an interest in ensuring that their workers feel comfortable at
work and can work smoothly, and should have a policy against such displays.
(The other alternative is to kick out women who complain about it or whose
job performance suffers; and *that* is sexual discrimination and/or outright
harrassment.)

>Ken
Newsgroups: soc.women
From: marty@world.std.com (Marty M HaleEvans)
Subject: Re: Am I "exploiting" this woman?
Organization: Cicely Public Access UNIX, Cicely, AK
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:22:19 GMT

kaarts@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Kenneth John Aarts) writes:

>How far should someone have to go to protect your hyper-sensivity?  It is
>enamel off of my teeth, because it is an unnecessary restriction.  I

That depends on how compassionately you style yourself as a human being.

Unnecessary restriction is a dumb-ass argument -- clothes are, too, but I
assume you wear those to work. So is chewing with one's mouth closed and many
other things we think of as common courtesy. The bottom line is that the world
doesn't run well if we all do exactly what we feel like at any time we feel 
like it, and there are just times when we do things to make other people 
comfortable in this world, too.

Furthermore, unless you work in a brothel, I don't understand how pictures of
naked or semi-naked people has anything to do with your job. It's simply an
unprofessional distraction at best, and I'd feel differently about the ability
such a person would have to take his or her job seriously and do a good job.
(Especially if I were that person's boss and were responsible for justifying
his or her paycheck to whomever makes the budget.)

>I maintain that it is a valid political protest.  For whatever reason, the
>issue of calenders and posters is important to me.  I can't convincingly
>articulate why I feel strongly about this issue, but I still do.

Could it be because you feel that your right to  do whatever you damn please
is more important to you than considering the slightest pain you cause to 
anyone around you?

Marty

=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=
"Seems like there ought to be a way we could look each other in the eye
To see we're all in this together, and put all thoughts of victory aside.
Seems like there ought to be a way we could turn this fear into trust;
No matter what you say, there has to be a way --
Every living thing is counting on us."      

Marty Hale-Evans                                 M   @   *   O   %   8   U
89 Mass. Ave., Ste. 199, Boston, MA 02115       \|/ \|/ \|/ \|/ \|/ \|/ \|/


Newsgroups: soc.women
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: Sad Day for Liberty
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 10:11:08 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.172854.817@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> jrmo@volta.att.com (J.R.Moore) writes:
(I've deleted parts to shorten the post.)

>But I'm not proposing to brainwash anyone, quite the opposite.  In addition
>to asking for tolerance, which I would abundantly give to anyone, they also
>want favoritism in terms of AA status, and also want to teach in schools
>that homosexuality is an equally acceptable life choice.

Look, sexual orientation laws protect you too (heterosexuality is a
sexual orientation).  Of course, they protect heteros in the way
anti-lynching laws in the South protected whites, it's just that
nearly all the lynching victims were blacks.  

What this means is that if some prejudiced lesbigay people won't hire
you because you're hetero, you can sue them.

  I think that >teaching kids that hatred and bigotry espoused by
skinheads and KKK is wrong.  >I also think teaching kids that
homosexuality is something they have no control >over is wrong.

Once again, did you choose to be hetero?  When did you decide to be
straight?  You secretly long for men, but force yourself to marry a
woman?  I don't think so...

What I think you'll find is that a certain percentage of kids will be
homosexual and they will have no control of their attraction to the same
sex.  Whether they act on that attraction to form sexual relationships
is another matter.  

So, you can accept those kids and let them grow up to be happy, proud
adults who have great relationships with people of the same sex, or
you can make them hate themselves and wonder why they're "deviant."

>Instead of homosexuals trying to dilineate themselves as special,
deserving of >special attention in terms of AA and hate laws, etc.
Why not try to get a group >neutral benefit?  Why not try to get equal
treatment for families as defined by >the individual members of the
family?  By approaching the problems faced by >being homosexual,
rather than trying to get society to accept homosexuality as >equal to
heterosexuality and blaming any problems on the right wing, try to
>establish a legal mode of establishing a family as individuals who
share >expenses and living quarters and who have mutually agreed to
give rights >granted to family members to each other.  A marriage of
sorts, but not >specifically a marriage.  This should help in revising
insurance and other >problems.  I'm not against your gaining equal
treatment, and I'm not against >your trying to pursue happiness in the
way you choose, I just am not ready >to label your choice as equal to
all others.

Equal to heterosexuality?  What _do_ you mean by that?  

Look at what you're saying.  We should push for families, a marriage
of sorts, but not a real marriage (like the one you as a hetero can
have).  We can have equal treatment, just realize that our "choice" is
not equal to all others.  What if you heteros were in the minority?
Would you be satisfied with a deal like that?

Newsgroups: soc.women,alt.feminism,soc.men
From: wendy@sundown.mil.wi.us
Subject: Re: Self Appreciation (was: Re: Elle MacPherson causes rape?)
Organization: Nowhere
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 17:10:18 GMT


I just thought I would say that I find this whole thread interesting. Being a
Transexual on her way to transition, I can understand both sides. Most men,
being members of the White Male System, have no idea of what women go through.
They cannot remotely see how women are inherently treated as inferior in this
culture. It sure was a learning experience for me, I can tell you that!!!!!

I suggest that before you men spoute off about how women are not treated as
inherently inferior, you become better informed. Try the book "Women's Reality"
by Ann Schaef. It might enlighten you. It did me. Helped me understand why
women sometimes think of themselves as second class citizens. And why I'll
be treated the same way as I go out into society as a women. Hasn't changed
my mind what-so-ever, but has prepared me somewhat to cope with it.


Wendy
From: Human Rights Coordinator <hrcoord@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.rights.human
Date: 09 Nov 92 11:02 PST
Subject: GUATEMALA: HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1476700776:000:2608
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!hrcoord    Nov  9 11:02:00 1992


From: Human Rights Coordinator <hrcoord>
Subject: GUATEMALA: HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION 

/* Written 12:11 am  Nov  9, 1992 by newsdesk@igc.apc.org in
igc:ips.englibrary */ Copyright Inter Press Service 1992, all
rights reserved.  Permission to re- print within 7 days of
original date only with permission from 'newsdesk'.

Title: GUATEMALA: HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION URGES PROGRESS IN TALKS


guatemala city, nov 6 (ips) -- the head of a delegation of the
inter-american commission on human rights, marco tulio bruni, has
stressed the urgent need to break the deadlock in the peace
negotiations between the guatemalan government and the urng
guerrillas.

''we must... accelerate the peace process,'' bruni told reporters
on the fifth and final day of the delegation's visit to guatemala
to assess the human rights situation in the country.

''we understand that the accords, especially the agreements on
human rights, are fairly well advanced,'' he added.

the negotiation process, which began 18 months ago, has been
stalled for the past year because of major differences between
both sides on the crucial issue of human rights.

the present obstacles to a resumption of the talks include
disagreement between the government and the urng over the
establishment of a commission to investigate reports of human
righrts violations during the past 30 years of civil conflict.

another stumbling block has been the failure to reach agreement on
safeguarding the human rights of civilians in the country's combat
zones.

last week, the mediator in the dialogue between the government and
the national guatemalan revolutionary unit (urng), catholic bishop
rodolfo quesada, said the required conditions were not in place to
break the present deadlock in the negotiations.

the head of the government's negotiating team, manuel conde,
claimed thursday that a major factor preventing progress in the
talks was the internal divisions within the urng on the issue of
human rights.

asked whether the commission might mediate in efforts to unblock
the stalled talks, bruni explained that this was not his mission's
task.

''we want a dialogue, and hope it will go forward. however, for
the moment, the inter-american commission's task is simply to
encourage the dialogue but without intervening in the process,''
he explained.

the negotiations are aimerd at putting an end to a 30-year
conflict that has been characterised by repeated human rights
violations against the civilian population and has prompted
international condemantion of guatemala's political and military
authorities. (ends/ips/trd-sp/gr/er/cg/92)
-----
From: Human Rights Coordinator <hrcoord@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.rights.human
Date: 09 Nov 92 15:29 PST
Subject: HAITI boat: summary
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1476700779:000:2454
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!hrcoord    Nov  9 15:29:00 1992


From: Human Rights Coordinator <hrcoord>
Subject: HAITI boat: summary

/* Written  4:24 pm  Nov  8, 1992 by aiusala@igc.apc.org in
igc:ai.general */
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
October 31, 1992

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL USA VOYAGE ENDS -- SPOTLIGHT SHINES ON
PLIGHT OF HAITIAN
ASYLUM SEEKERS AND REFUGEES WORLDWIDE

    Miami Fl -- In a statement issued today, John G. Healey,
Executive Director of Amnesty International USA, commented on the
completion of the voyage of the symbolically named vessel "One
Respe" (Honor and Respect.) This is the boat that Amnesty
International USA had sailed Friday into the Windward Passage off
the north coast of Haiti to demonstrate against the U.S.
government's current policy of interdicting Haitians and returning
them to Haiti without access to asylum determination procedures,
and to draw attention to the plight of refugees around the world.

"We felt the time had come to take our message to the U.S.
government in a dramatic way, and we know that they heard our
protest.  The support that we received from so many individuals
and organizations working on behalf of refugees around the world
and in the Haitian community shows that people in this country are
tired of having to convince the government that all asylum
seekers, regardless of their country of origin, need a fair chance
of having their claims heard.  We do not understand why we should
have to keep pointing out to the U.S. government what its
obligations are under international law, and its own Refugee Act
of 1980.

"The voyage itself went well -- we did not encounter either
Haitian refugees or the Coast Guard, although we heard rumors that
the Coast Guard had intercepted a boat of Haitian asylum seekers.
We were surprised not to have come across the Coast Guard given
their close patrolling of the vicinity and the renewed reports of
forced repatriations in that area in recent weeks.  We sailed with
our 50 foot protest banner unfurled, reading "Refugee Rights -- No
Forcible Return".

"We will continue our campaign to focus attention on the need for
drastic changes in U.S. refugee policy, and after Tuesday's
election will be calling on the next adminis-tration to take all
possible steps to rectify the problem.  Amnesty International is
concerned that people being returned to Haiti are in danger;
renewed reports of arrests of recent returnees convinces us to
keep insisting that the U.S. protect all asylum seekers equally,"
said Healey.
From: Human Rights Coordinator <hrcoord@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.rights.human
Date: 11 Nov 92 20:11 PST
Subject: Re: AI EX098/92 TURKEY Fear of torture
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1476700788:cdp:1476700790:000:717
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!hrcoord    Nov 11 20:11:00 1992


/* Written  9:49 am  Nov 11, 1992 by sharrison in igc:ai.uan */
for USA readers:

Ambassador Nuzhet Kandemir
Embassy of the Republic of Turkey
1714 Massachusetts Ave NW
Washington DC 20036

PLEASE SEND APPEALS IMMEDIATELY. Check with the Colorado
office between 9:00 am and 6:00 pm, Mountain Time, weekdays
only, if sending appeals after November 20, 1992.

If you have any questions about this Urgent Action appeal or
the Urgent Action Network in general please contact:

Scott Harrison
Urgent Action program office
PO Box 1270
Nederland CO 80466
303 440 0913 (voice)
303 258 7881 (fax)
sharrison@igc.org (e-mail address)

If you are not a member of Amnesty International USA, we
would like to send you information.
From: GRS02932@CONRAD.APPSTATE.EDU (*David Winn Ponder)
Newsgroups: soc.rights.human
Subject: Re: Standard Rights for Refugees(?)
Date: 12 Nov 1992 01:26:46 GMT
Organization: APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: conrad.appstate.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

In <1992Nov10.202217.3311@mercury.cair.du.edu> aeckert@diana.cair.du.edu writes:

> In article <1dksbqINN2tq@lester.appstate.edu> GRS02932@CONRAD.APPSTATE.EDU (*David Winn Ponder) writes:
> >
> >	After hearing and reading about the continued violation of rights for
> >refugees I have begun to wonder what action could be taken to ensure and
> >protect the rights of refugees.  Does the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights
> >contain an article on refugees?  How can the international comunity ensure
> >human rights in the new world without violating rights of sovreignty?  Possibly  
> >we should start placing the rights of the individual above the rights of the
> >state.	
> 
> I agree that this would be more advantageous for the refugees, but since
> the international system is state-based, it would be difficult to 
> implement a standard which put the rights of the individuals above those
> of states.
> 
> Amy
********************************************************************
 	The refugee must be put above the state in order to preserve
international stability.  Following WW II the UN established UNCHR to deal with
the refugees in Europe.  I would even arguee that the international order is no
longer state-based; not one country could survive on its own.  The UN must come
up with a Rufugee Bill of Rights in order to deal with the growing number of
displaced citizens of the world.  We must asure asylum hearings, safe passage,
ect.  A refugee is more of a world citizen than he is of his homeland, because
that homeland is forcing him to flee.  If we are to protect these helpless
world citizens then we must establish binding international law.  The UN is in
the best position to regulate the establishment of this law and then enforce.
From: Human Rights Coordinator <hrcoord@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.rights.human
Date: 05 Nov 92 08:02 PST
Subject: Re: AI FI152/92 ALGERIA Death penalty
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1476700761:cdp:1476700764:000:545
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!hrcoord    Nov  5 08:02:00 1992


/* Written  6:24 pm  Nov  3, 1992 by ai-koeln@link-k.comlink.apc.org in igc:ai.uan */
The address of the diplomatic representative in Germany
is as follows:
 
Embassy of the Democratic People's Republic of Algeria
Botschaft der Demokratischen Volksrepublik Algerien
His Excellency Mr Kamel Hacene
Rheinallee 32-34 
W 5300 Bonn 2

------------------------------------------------------
 
If you have any queries about this Urgent Action or about
the UA scheme in general, please contact:
 
APC     ai@link-k.comlink.apc.org
CL      AI@LINK-K.ZER
From: Amnesty International <aiusala@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.rights.human
Date: 08 Nov 92 16:34 PST
Subject: HAITI refugees: action to Clinton
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1476700771:000:2451
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!aiusala    Nov  8 16:34:00 1992


From: Amnesty International <aiusala>
Subject: HAITI refugees: action to Clinton

/* Written  4:23 pm  Nov  8, 1992 by aiusala@igc.apc.org in igc:ai.general */
/* ---------- "HAITI refugees: action to Clinton" ---------- */
If you would like to take action on behalf of the Haitian refugees, please
write courteously worded letters to President-elect Bill Clinton, who has
said:

      May 27, 1992:  We should continue to press for restoration of the
      elected government of Haiti, and until then I think refugees should be
      given temporary asylum...In so far as they're economic refugees, it's in
      large measure because of the embargo that we're supporting...I think we
      should be supporting the embargo, but I think in the interim, while they
      are waiting for the restoration of the government, they should be given
      temporary asylum here.  -New York Times

WRITE TO:
The President-Elect
c/o Clinton/Gore Transition Team
P.O. Box 615
Little Rock AR 72203

You may wish to include the following points in your letter:

## By returning Haitians to Port-au-Prince (where they are fingerprinted by
Haitian authorities) the US breaks its international obligations under the
Covenant Relating to the Status of Refugees.  Article 33 of the Covenant
states;

      "no Contracting State shall expel or return ("refouler") a refugee in
      any manner whatsoever to the frontiers of territories where his life or
      freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion,
      nationality, membership of a particular social group or political
      opinion."

[This is the chief international obligation nations have towards refugees.  As
Arthur Helton of the Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights put it:  "This
(President Bush's Order) is as wrong as it gets in terms of international
refugee law."]

## The practice violates the Refugee Act of 1980, which binds US law to the
Covenant and commits the United States to allow refugees to request asylum in
the US.

## The practice violates Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights: "Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum
from persecution."

## The practice directly contradicts US policy towards Southeast Asian boat
people.  The United States has been militant in its defense of the refugee
rights of Vietnamese and Cambodians, and has condemned the actions of nations
which have pushed back or returned these refugees.
From: Human Rights Coordinator <hrcoord@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.rights.human
Date: 06 Nov 92 10:50 PST
Subject: Amnesty Barred Again
Nf-ID: #N:cdp:1476700767:000:797
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!hrcoord    Nov  6 10:50:00 1992


From: Human Rights Coordinator <hrcoord>
Subject: Amnesty Barred Again

/* Written  6:51 am  Nov  6, 1992 by apakabar@igc.apc.org in igc:reg.indonesia */


    According to a November 6 Reuter story datelined Sydney, Indonesia 
has blocked a planned visit to troubled East Timor by Amnesty International 
on the anniversary of last year's massacre by Indonesian troops.
    The London-based group said it applied to visit the former
Portuguese colony and quoted Indonesian authorities saying such a visit
"would create problems ... for the Timorese people."
    "One year after the Santa Cruz massacre ... there is serious concern,
amidst reports of continuing violations in East Timor, that human rights
abuses will increase around the anniversary of the massacre," Amnesty
said in a statement.
From: Human Rights Coordinator <hrcoord@igc.apc.org>
Newsgroups: soc.rights.human
Date: 05 Nov 92 08:02 PST
Subject: Re: AI FI152/92 ALGERIA Death penalty
Nf-ID: #R:cdp:1476700761:cdp:1476700762:000:501
Nf-From: cdp.UUCP!hrcoord    Nov  5 08:02:00 1992


/* Written  3:25 pm  Oct 30, 1992 by gn:rmitchellai in igc:ai.uan */
The address of the diplomatic representative in the UK
is as follows:
 
His Excellency Mr Ali Lakhdari
Embassy of Algeria
54 Holland Park
London W11 3RS
 
------------------------------------------------------
 
If you have any queries about this Urgent Action or about
the UA scheme in general, please contact:
 
Ray Mitchell
Amnesty International British Section
99 - 119 Rosebery Avenue
London
EC1R 4RE
 
email: gn:rmitchellai
From: GRS02932@CONRAD.APPSTATE.EDU (*David Winn Ponder)
Newsgroups: soc.rights.human
Subject: Standard Rights for Refugees(?)
Date: 9 Nov 92 05:18:50 GMT
Organization: APPALACHIAN STATE UNIVERSITY
NNTP-Posting-Host: conrad.appstate.edu
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24


	After hearing and reading about the continued violation of rights for
refugees I have begun to wonder what action could be taken to ensure and
protect the rights of refugees.  Does the U.N. Declaration on Human Rights
contain an article on refugees?  How can the international comunity ensure
human rights in the new world without violating rights of sovreignty?  Possibly  
we should start placing the rights of the individual above the rights of the
state.