HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Gripe: soc.motss
Organization: Cuddlehogs Anonymous
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 10:55:36 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.000051.10916@midway.uchicago.edu> elle@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
:Several soc.motss regulars are bisexuals who avoid soc.bi, because what
:you find sweet and friendly, we find ... cloying.  I don't mind fluffy
:nuzzle-lick-snuggle stuff _in person_, and I see a number of soc.bi
:posters in person every week.  Online, though, I find it most definitely
:Not To My Taste.

I'd just like to make a personal observation; that soc.bi has had fluffy
times and it has had argumentative times, and I've noticed that when a
fluffy period starts after long flames, we get a large batch of muffins
coming out.  I'm quite happy for soc.bi to stay a social group rather
than a political one, if it means we end up welcoming more friends into
the fold and offering us a chance to lend them support at the time they
need it most.

G
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal)
Subject: Re: Talking about sex (was Re: Party Face, Net Face)
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 12:41:32 +0000

:to someone who hasn't been sexual?  I know that during the
:intervals when I was celibate, and, for that matter, before I
:started becoming an e-slut, I would get rather uncomfortable
:listening to people discuss their sexual experiences, et alii, and

Your discomfort hasn't stopped you doing the same yourself here,
at length, continuously, every day, for the last three months
though, has it?

G
From: zen@death.corp.sun.com (d)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: phrases and sex roles
Date: 21 Jan 93 12:42:37
Organization: savage hackers
	<MUFFY.93Jan19153402@remarque.berkeley.edu> <C17HC3.K5t@world.std.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: death.corp.sun.com
In-reply-to: smoir@world.std.com's message of Thu, 21 Jan 1993 13:26:26 GMT


In article <C17HC3.K5t@world.std.com> smoir@world.std.com (Scott A Moir) writes:
> There are two roles in a realtionship.. a -two person- relationship. There
> are the same number of roles as there are people. There are also a generic
> set of tasks that are required to run a household, and those tasks get
> split up among the respective members.

  The two main stereotypical roles still exist; as you say, they are
just cut into smaller pieces (assuming everyone does contribute.)  Quite
often, though, from what I have seen, you still have the participants
falling into one of the two roles... you might have two people in a more
typically male role (breadwinner, etc.), and one in the stereotypical
female role (housewife, etc.), or whatever, but they often still won't
cross the artificial boundries.

> >defined by our society.  It seems to me that, even in a two-person
> >relationship, these roles are somewhat oppressive, and that in
> >multi-person relationships, the acceptance of these two roles as being
> >"the parts of a relationship" is actively detrimental.
> It would be detrimental only if you attempted to apply a two-person model
> to a three person relationship.

  It seems that you're saying that you think it is fine (or potentially
so) for two people to try to fit into these roles, and it's only a
problem if you try to fit that model to a three party relationship -- if
so, she was saying the same thing -- that it was detrimental in
multi-person relationships... (3 person is multi-person, obviously) so I
don't know why you were saying that, unless you're just disagreeing with
the first point.  In any case, I think trying to shoehorn yourself into
what someone else thinks is a good idea of how a relationship ought to
be is a Bad Thing (tm.)

 -- d
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: bryant@icd.teradyne.com (Wayne Bryant)
Subject: Re: Gender and Bi Groups
Reply-To: bryant@icd.teradyne.com
Organization: Teradyne, Inc. Boston MA
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 14:24:57 GMT

In article 686@harlqn.co.uk, daveb@harlqn.co.uk (Dave Berry) writes:
>bryant@icd.teradyne.com writes:
>>There would be none of
>>this foolishness about alternating male and female facilitators, etc.
>
>It sems a bit strong to call this "foolishness".  I agree that it needs
>modification to include people of other genders, but the basic aim, of
>ensuring that a group doesn't become male-dominated, seems sensible.
>Although if a group is already managing to avoid being male-dominated,
>then it would be redundant.

Dave,

I agree that "foolishness" was an overly strong word to use.  It was a
reaction against rules which place an artificial gender barrier against
people who are not members of one of the two dominant genders.  I think
it is redundant, in any event, to have rules that protect against male-
dominated bisexual networks because virtually every one I am aware of is
female-dominated.  This is not a complaint, by the way.  I am perfectly
happy being in a female-dominated organization and it is a refreshing
change from my job.  Perhaps one of the things that makes bisexual men
more understanding of women than men in general, is that they do not always
expect to be the ones in control.

I was happy to see your responses on the net.  Having to wade through
so much fluff every day, it is nice to see someone interested in talking
about real issues.  I hope to be able to see you and the other Edinburgh
bi people again soon.  Hugs.

					Wayne


Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (Piglet)
Subject: Re: ST:Deep Space Nine, possible bi?
Organization: the house on the corner
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 15:09:40 GMT

In article <1k4i4lINN6sj@umbc8.umbc.edu> ac999273@umbc.edu (ac999273) writes:
>	She said that her species, as in the small being inside the host
>is mostly aesexual, but that she has to deal with the feelings of each host.
>	It is therefore possible (presumably) to put it into a straight
>male host, and have it attracted to women, and all other possible combinations.
>	I have thought that it would be fun for her to be bi.  Also, I assumed
>she would be open-minded, being that she has been in many hosts, probably of 
>both genders (definitely, actually), and probably of many orientations.

The slug is asexual, right?  The hosts are sexual.  Doesn't mean the Trill
would be open-minded, since it's dealing with the sexual feelings of each
host.  Not that I disagree, I mean, certainly the host species must be
prepared to deal with the friends/lovers/etc. of their slugs, and so must
be expecting and/or taught to deal with gender confusions...

>	The doctor is pretty cute, and he wants Dax.  She isn't responding...
>And he got hit on by the Cardassian Clothier.  A lot of interesting 
>gay potential side plots.

That there is.  My (sub-optimal, but I'm working on it) gaydar went
*WRAHWRAHWRAH* when I saw the doctor/tailor bits.  Especially when he
was playing with the plant--just _too_ cute.  Doesn't everyone want 
Dax?  Not to mention Maj. Kira.  *Woof*!!

Oh, and for those people who were missing Denise Crosby--she's playing
the mayor on Key West.  And she looks Great, too.



Piglet, still drooling from thinking about Kira Nerys.  And now how
        and I supposed to get any work done??
From: as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Scorpii)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: question about the triangle
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:22:16 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <memo.899149@cix.compulink.co.uk> iwatters@cix.compulink.co.uk (Ian Watters) writes:

>             __
>Drewcifer on \/riangles:

>>To add something to this whole triangle discussion, I've been told by
>>someone that the triangle specifically relates to AIDS when right-side up,
>>and represents "taking back the language" or some such PC agenda like that
>>when upside down.

> /|                                          |\
>< |  What's this "right side up" business??  | >
> \|                                          |/

><grin>

>Sounds terribly phallocentric to say that only triangles "pointing" up are
>the right way, while triangles that look like a common pattern for female
>pubic hair aren't...

>  //\/\/  iwatters@cix.compulink.co.uk
>          who would like to do a few more angles,
>          but the ASCII character set lets him down.

>>>>MATRIX version  1.21e

Good that you included the "grin".  Otherwise things could've gotten messy.

Ahem.

I will not begin a diatribe against the ridiculous habit of symbolists to
define every shape in terms of sexual organs.  "Phallocentric," indeed.

I will, however, merely inform you that the term "right-side-up" is a
commonly used phrase to describe a triangle resting on its base, and I use
the phrase because (a) it fits my conceptual framework to think of a
triangle which could support itself (i.e., base down rather than point)
structurally as being of an original orientation, and (b) people know that I
mean "pointing up" when I use that phrase.

And BTW, I can see the pubic hair thing, but MY penis isn't shaped like an
equilateral triangle.  Hopefully yours isn't either.

Drewcifer the Hopelessly Pedantic
-- 
***************************************************************************
** Andrew David Simchik, registered Scorpio ************* SCHNOPIA! *******
***************************************************************************
as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: smoir@world.std.com (Scott A Moir)
Subject: Re: Ever wonder...
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 11:35:58 GMT

In article <C1F2DM.4Do@news.cso.uiuc.edu> kkr42091@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (QUEEN ZENOBIA!) writes:
>gtoal@pizzabox.demon.co.uk (Graham Toal) writes:
>
>>In article <1993Jan25.015253.8784@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> dms4s@helga13.acc.Virginia.EDU (Sailor on the Seas of Fate) writes:
>>:
>>:My local video store has quite a few bi sex videos. I haven't rented
>
>>Again I ask my question to which I've never heard an answer.  What exactly
>>*is* 'bi' porn?  Is it a combination of gay + straight, or is it what I'd
>>probably call 'poly porn', or what?  What exactly is specific to bis in
>>bi porn or bi gifs?

The bi porn I have seen is a tape in which you have a cast of mixed gender
characters who, over the course of the movie, get every other character in
the film hot and sweaty. [Good enough definition?]

Unfortunately, the company that makes most of the stuff that I have seen
is dead set on having the word 'bi' worked into EVERY title. They also
stick with the same formula for thier actors. The women are small and
trim, the men are smooth and hairless. *blegh* I have found that I much
prefer amateur porn. You get people who are doing it because they want to,
you get people of all shapes and sizes, and it is just SO much more
pleasant to watch than a cleverly edited sequence which is actually about
1/3 as long as it seems to be. (If you have seen it, you know what I mean.)

>>Maybe this doesn't make sense to you as a question.  It does to me.  I
>>wonder what bi porn could be if it *isn't* poly...  (not that I'm averse
>>to poly situations, eh shelly? ;-) - it's just an intellectual curiosity)
>
>>G
>
>Well for magazines, I would assume bi porn to contain erotica of both male
>and female, *not* necessarily in the same shoot, but not to just contain
>pictures of females (playboy) or males (playgirl). Although the few Playgirls
>that friends have shown me do have some spreads with a man and a woman,
>usually involved in a sex act, if you wish to dream about poly stuff.

For magazines, I usually pick up a mix of het and gay magazines. (This
usually causes just a little discomfort on the part of the cashier 8>  )

I have yet to find any female-female pornography that has passed muster
with my female partners. Most of it was done for males, and isn't very
realistic. Actually, the magazines 'Bad Attitude' and 'On Our Backs' are
supposed to be very good, but they are not in a place where I could buy
them without causing a bit of a fuss. (It is definitely uncool for a male
to walk in to a women's bookstore and buy lesbian porn.)

Scott

(Who is still looking for some good porn with some nice, broad shouldered,
hairy chested MEN. (Not boys, dammit!)


-- 
Scott Moir  /  Satyr on IRC    ______ # "There's really only one requirement 
smoir@world.std.com            \ \/ / #  for a Prophet, and you've got it."
B4 f t+ w g k+(+!) s+ m r p+    \/\/  # "What's that?"
Also: pentangl@ursa-major.spdcc.com   # "A mouth." - 'God' to J.R.'BoB' Dobbsl
From: pash@chopin.udel.edu (Pasua L'Gem Ellison)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: gratuitous mumbling
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:38:57 GMT
Organization: University of Delaware

In article <1993Jan25.014600.5541@ringer.cs.utsa.edu> dwells@lonestar.utsa.edu (Darren . Wells) writes:
>
>This Saturday, as in the 23rd?????   Well, pooh.  I'm just now reading
>this on Sunday night.  I really must protest. You simply _must_ do it
>again next weekend so I have a chance to go.  *pout*
>
>
>Darren
>(who will eventually manage to make it up to the huge nest of
> Soc.bi'ers in Delaware, one way or another)

	Really Darren, why not _both_ ways?
	
                   *wink*  -Pasua ( hiding behind that innocent
					chesire cat grin  ):*)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
pash@brahms.udel.edu _____
                     \   /
		      \ /      
	                     "Someday I'll have a fabu quote,
					Someday."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
	
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: kamal@specialix.co.uk (Kamal Mortoza)
Subject: Re: Blatant birthday information! :-)
Organization: Specialix International, London
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 09:58:12 GMT

TXK025@maccvm.corp.mot.com (Eddie Chandler) writes:

>Sorry everyone, just couldn't resist spilling the beans
>about my birthday tomorrow.
>I will be the ripe old age of 25! :-(
><sob> I want to be 21 again!
Eddie,
Dont worry about it...I'm 37 and really, it does get better and better.
Would you really like to be 21, or even 18 again without the experience
you've accumulated ? 
I really think age has nothing to do with chronological age but a mental
attitude. Most the parents of my kids freinds look and act about 10-15 years
older than Alice and me - so much so, that my teanage son provided the
ultimate accolade - "you know dad ? I really like having a young dad" and my
pre-tean added - "Yeah! you're a bad dude dad!". I think it's because we
(both of us) just refused to act the part of being "oldies" and just like
being ourselves.
Enjoy getting older, it's all experience in life after-all. As you get older,
you also tend not to repeat mistakes and end up a happier person.
Happy birthday and a happy 26th year....

Hugs
Kamal

>Eddie
-- 
kamal@specialix.co.uk          ______ 
h- B(5) f+ g k+ s+ m+ r pv     \   _/____   If it feels good - do it!
				 \ \    /                    - Dr Ruth
                                     \/
From: pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: what is sex (was Re: Daoism, Pooh, and Bisexuals)
Date: 26 Jan 93 11:33:46 GMT
Reply-To: pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Organization: Edinburgh University

Quoting kay@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Kay Dekker) in article <1993Jan25.183116.26693@dcs.warwick.ac.uk>:
>In article <C17ID0.An2@dcs.ed.ac.uk> pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley) writes:
>[on defining 'sex']
>>
>>Kay could probably answer this better than me, I know.
>
>O this is tricky.  I'm probably the worst person in the world to attempt
>to answer this.

This was exactly the answer I was trying to say, that it gets impossible
to know when to call it sex.

>You wonder stuff like this and your brain melts.
>
>		Between the motion and the act
>		Falls the Shadow.

Wonder stuff?

"Oh, say it's not true, the things they said we do,
Oh, how can I explain the pleasure in the pain?"

(Don't Let Me Down, Gently --- Hup --- The Wonder Stuff)
  __                                  _____
\/ o\ Paul Crowley   pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk \\ //
/\__/ Trust me. I know what I'm doing. \X/
From: j_babylo@oz.plymouth.edu (Jessica L. Babylon)
Newsgroups: soc.bi
Subject: Re: gratuitous mumbling
Date: 27 Jan 93 10:03:36 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Plymouth State College - Plymouth, NH.

In article <1993Jan25.171947.19563@cbnews.cb.att.com> eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (Piglet) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.171326.8329@udel.edu> litterst@pecan.cns.udel.edu (Stephen Litterst) writes:
>>In article <MUFFY.93Jan21224543@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>>>Yeah, but you *have* to all stick together...there is nowhere else for
>>>you to go.  I hear you can bicycle across Delaware *twice* in one day!
>>
>>Never tried it myself, I've got better things to do *twice* in one day.  And
>>at least we're not in danger of falling into the ocean. (Just in danger of
>>falling into that wonderful toxic waste dump know as New Jersey. :))
>
>
>Only twice?  Hm.  Think I'll stay in NJ.  (We keep the toxic waste
>confined to small areas like Newark, and show those to people that
>we don't want to have move here...)
>
>
>Piglet, temporary Jersey girl, minus the BigHair
>        who needs muscles when your hair can be your biggest part?
>        'cause you can flex big hair....
Hey, why didnt you tell me you were in Jersey? That is where i have
been for the last, oh, month or so, on break from school...i will be
leaving with any luck on the 30 or 31st so get in touch ASAP if you
can, i am in the New Brunswick area, near Rutgers Busch/Cook/Douglas
campuses...gimme a ring, here or on my other account..quick like a
bunny;) hugs, Goddess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible
worlds, and the pessimist fears that this is true" - James Cabell
**Jesica L Babylon Goddess of Scandalous email: j_babylo@oz.plymouth.edu
"PMS: Just before their periods women behave the way men do all the
time" - Lowell Stone
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: daveb@harlqn.co.uk (Dave Berry)
Subject: Orcish respectability (was Re: What to do at a bar?)
Organization: Harlequin Ltd, Cambridge, UK
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 10:58:26 GMT

orc@sybase.com (Orc) writes:
> daveb@harlqn.co.uk (Dave Berry) lies outrageously:

If something's worth doing, it's worth doing outrageously. :-)

>  Respectable.  Professional.  Software engineer.
>
>  Okay, I can see the software engineer part.  Professional, yes,
>since software engineering usually also involves the icky parts, it
>would make sense.  Respectable.  Umm.  Orcish definition?

Well, to answer that you have to tell me what the Orcish definition is.
oes "Orcish" have a standard meaning that can be applied to any situation,
or does it have a specific meaning in this instance?

And the professional part isn't that icky, so far.  I like to do a job well,
I don't have to wear a suit, and they pay me lots of money (if not quite
on the orc globe-trotting scale :-)).  Of course, one day they'll make me a
manager.  I'll just have to employ lots of staid, respectable programmers
and analysts to brighten the place up.

>  david parsons \bi/ Staid, respectable programmer/analyst.
>                 \/

Yes, that sounds about right :-)

Dave.
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: daz@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (Darren Primm)
Subject: Re: Gripe: soc.motss
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:30:33 GMT

as010b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Scorpii) writes:

>But why is the atmosphere there so hostile and chilly?  Admittedly, this is
>the sweetest, friendliest group I know of, but the general aura is as
>different as--forgive the cliche--night and day.  What's up with that? 
I havent found it to be hostile and chilliy in the most part.

>Please tell me there are people without complexes who post there.
There are people without complexes that post there.

>Drewcifer
Daz.

--
  Darren (Dazza) Primm, Dept EE Eng, Melb Uni, Parkville, 3052, Australia
 "There's no point in being grown up if you can't be childish, sometimes."
   Internet: daz@mullian.ee.mu.oz.au  [dazza@ecr.mu.oz.au]  IRC: Family

Newsgroups: soc.bi
From: litterst@pecan.cns.udel.edu (Stephen Litterst)
Subject: Re: gratuitous mumbling
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 17:13:26 GMT

In article <MUFFY.93Jan21224543@remarque.berkeley.edu> muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu (Muffy Barkocy) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.051044.8341@udel.edu> litterst@pecan.cns.udel.edu (Stephen Litterst) writes:
>   In article <ZEN.93Jan21165600@death.corp.sun.com> zen@death.corp.sun.com (d) writes:
>>>  Sorry... california wins the US race by a mile...
>>Yeah, but we have a higher soc.bi density.  We are all in the same place
>>(scenic Newark, DE) whereas you guys are spread out over California.  Haha
>>We're denser than you are.  :)  (A dense blonde, imagine that  ;))
>
>Yeah, but you *have* to all stick together...there is nowhere else for
>you to go.  I hear you can bicycle across Delaware *twice* in one day!
>
>Muffy

Never tried it myself, I've got better things to do *twice* in one day.  And
at least we're not in danger of falling into the ocean. (Just in danger of
falling into that wonderful toxic waste dump know as New Jersey. :))

					Steve L.
-- 
| Stephen C. Litterst           |*HUG*HUG*HUG*HUG*HUG*HUG*HUG*HUG*HUG*HUG*|  
| kyraan@bach.udel.edu          |       More man than you'll ever be...   |
| litterst@pecan.cns.udel.edu    \   More woman than you'll ever get.     |
|_guido@gnu.ai.mit.edu____________\ ______________________________________|
Newsgroups: soc.bi
From:  orc@sybase.com (Orc)
Subject: Re: Why I read a.s.a.r. (was: For Non-Abused Skeptics)
Reply-To: ss19@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: Department of Ambiguity
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 06:30:57 GMT

In article <vashti.727614720@concave> vashti@concave.cs.wits.ac.za (Vashti Galpin) writes:
>In <1993Jan19.135641.20454@midway.uchicago.edu> orc@sybase.com (Orc) writes:
>> [my usual incoherent babbling, this time involving pdaing]
>
>I find the reason why I get quite uncomfortable in the presence of
>massive pdaing (or even not so massive) is I feel curious and want to
>watch (I guess this is called voyeurism), but there seem to be
>conventions that say this is not done;

   Depends on the people, too.  I would guess, based on experience
with some of the more, ahem, public demonstrations that were given
in Edinburgh last year, that a goodly portion of the uk.bi
party-attending crowd wouldn't even notice the audience (after
having a beergarden's worth of college students become awed
spectators of a spectacularly public display indeed, well, one or
two people just doesn't do it.)


>  I could well imagine myself watching
>for a while, seeing the dynamics, understanding what I am feeling,
>learning how to decline unwanted affection subtly and then deciding to
>get involved (if this is an option; there is always this nagging worry
>that I won't be welcome) or maybe not. But I don't know if the space
>exists for this.

   Watching for a while and then deciding to (or not to) get
involved seems to be pretty normal behavior for a lot of people,
myself included.  (Okay, so I've become a little more blatant
recently, but in any N-way collections (where N is > 3) my
reactions are still somewhat more hesitant...)

   If you can figure out how to subtly decline unwanted affection,
lemme know.  I've been told that I'm good at defusing affectionate
situations in the pastm, but it seems like the way I defuse those
situations involves the moral equivalent of a nuclear weapon,
which, even for me, isn't extraordinarily subtle.

                ____
  david parsons \bi/ Who never had to deal with the T-word.
                 \/