HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.abortion.inequity,alt.dads-rights
Subject: Re: adoption rules
Date: 22 Jan 1993 02:32:21 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:

>peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
>>rlt@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (r l taylor) writes:

>>>Likewise, does the child have a right to a relationship with both parents?
>>>If so, why should the mother be allowed to deny this relationship by keeping
>>>(or attempting to keep) the father uninformed of the child's existence?
>>
>>IMO that is a terriffic ideal.  But there are some cases where this is
>>not appropriate.  Such as where one parent is potentially abusive or
>>otherwise harmful.

>Yes, but what makes you feel that the mother should have the sole
>right to make such a judgement?

>If a child were one week old and the father *knew* the mother was abusive,
>would it be right for him to take the child and disappear and never
>permit the mother to see the child again -- or even to arrange an adoption
>without her permission or knowledge?

>By proposing that mothers can give children up for adoption without
>permitting the father to be notified, you imply that it is alright
>for the *mother* to take such action.

Don, you have a compelling argument here.  What do you propose to 
safeguard the father's right to stop an adoption, yet safeguard the
mother and the child in the cases where the mother feels that the 
father is potentially abusive?
-- 

                                                --  Michal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Impressive amounts of material can be accreted in this manner.
Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.abortion.inequity,alt.dads-rights
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Subject: Re: adoption rules
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 14:09:02 GMT

rat@erg.sri.com (Ray Trent) writes:
>In the referenced article, peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
>>>>the *good* of protecting the father's right to stop an adoption is not
>>>>worth the *bad* of subjecting the mother and child to the risk of 
>>>Fine.  Will you legally permit a father to abduct a child and disappear
>>Are you claiming that abducting a child is equivalent to a mother 
>>declining to go out of her way to notify a former sex partner that 
>>she has borne a child?
>
>He claimed nothing of the sort. However, if your real conclusion was
>that "the *bad* of subjecting the mother and child to abuse" justified
>lack of notification (i.e. nullification of parental rights for the
>father), then the same conclusion should force you to accept the
>analogous abduction of a child from an abusive mother as being valid.

Precisely.


>If you just think the woman should be able to say "go to hell" to the
>man simply because she feels like it, why not say so? (hint: ...no,
>on second thought, if you need a hint, no hint will suffice...)

I won't conjecture about whether Michal is motivated by such opinions, 
but every position she takes effectively supports women having this power.  

I find such positions debatable with regard to abortion, but in 
outright contradiction of basic human decency and our fundamental 
societal principles (good or bad), with regard to born children.


>"When you're down, it's a long way up
> When you're up, it's a long way down
> It's all the same thing
> And it's no new tale to tell"                      ../ray\..

Protect the women and children from the monstrous men.

Simple as a flower, and that's a complicated thing.

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
Xref: sparky soc.men:23343 misc.legal:23403
From: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Newsgroups: soc.men,misc.legal
Subject: Re: Sexual Discrimination
Date: 26 Jan 93 18:19:29 GMT
Followup-To: soc.men
Organization: UniSQL, Inc., Austin, Texas, USA

In article <1993Jan26.145634.21622@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
> Furthermore, family law I have seen, whenever there is disparate treatment, 
>benefits men at the expense of women. 

	BWAHAHAHAHA!!!  Like, _he_ gets to ignore court orders for outrageous
support settlements while _she_ gets jailed for refusing to allow visitation.
Like, _he_ calls the cops and claims she's abusing her and _she_ gets thrown 
out of her house without any more evidence than "he said so".  Like, _he_
accuses her of child abuse so that he can get custody and have her forcibly
removed from his life.  And when he makes that accusation, _she's_ 
immediately presumed guilty and forced to spend megabucks proving that he
probably never did it.	And when they get divorced, _she_ gets forced to 
provide luxuries like horses and benefits like insurance and education that 
she can't be forced to provide if the marriage remains intact.  And....

	What planet are you posting from, anyway?  Is it even in the Milky
Way?
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: fnsjb@alf.uib.no (Jarle Bareksten)
Subject: american sociology on men ...
Organization: University of Bergen, Norway
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 15:59:06 GMT


Hi!

What's going on in american sosiology on men? I'm trying to get an overview -
do you know of books, papers etc.?

What email-lists are there (I know mail-men)?




### jarle      email: fnsjb@alf.uib.no

Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.abortion.inequity
From: beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver)
Subject: Re: Back to responsibility
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 16:01:07 GMT

garrod@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (David Garrod) writes:
>In article <1993Jan27.233020.10389@rotag.mi.org>, kevin@rotag.mi.org (Kevin Darcy) writes:
>......
>> 
>> A right to be supported? Yes. A right to get that support from a particular 
>> source or sources? Why? What's the justification? Does it really matter to 
>> the child whether his or next meal is paid for by Mommy's greenbacks, Daddy's
>> greenbacks, taxpayer's greenbacks, or a combination of the above? Seems to
>> me that the legislature only has a vital interest in whether the child is
>> adequately supported. The question of WHERE that support comes from should
>> be settled using common law notions of legal obligation, as I have proposed.
>> 
>      I would suggest that the first obligated to support the child
>      are BOTH of the parents.  (not necessarily equally, but according
>      to their ability.)
>      Only AFTER it has been shown that the parents do not have the
>      capability should society, in general, support the child.
>
>The KEY word, which you seem not to understand is RESPONSIBILITY.
>
>See title!

The KEY word that you seem unable to understand is RESPONSIBILITY.

Is it undeniably RESPONSIBLE for a woman to bring a child into
the world, knowing that the parents *cannot* support it?

Is it a RESPONSIBLE decision if a woman aborts a child because she 
has thought deeply on the matter and believes she and the father
cannot support the child?

Your opinion seems to be that she can make a RESPONSIBLE decision
unilaterally, but that she is not RESPONSIBLE for her decision.  He is.

Don
-- 
beaver@cs.psu.edu                       Opinions from the PC-challenged
From: wrat@unisql.UUCP (wharfie)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: the king is dead
Date: 27 Jan 93 16:00:44 GMT
Organization: UniSQL, Inc., Austin, Texas, USA

In article <25477@galaxy.ucr.edu> starbuck@galaxy.ucr.edu (starbuck) writes:
>Today another entertainer exists that has the same emotional effect on women 
>as the "King". His name is Michael Jackson.

	*I* thought his name was Phil Lesh.  Or do I mean the other one?

						"Spanish lady, comes to me..."

Newsgroups: soc.men
From: roarf@stud.cs.uit.no (Just this guy)
Subject: Re: The Nice Guy Syndrome (was: Re: Male Men Bashers)
Organization: University of Tromsoe, Norway
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:15:03 GMT

In article <1993Jan26.040900.20453@microsoft.com>, jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer) writes:
|> peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
|> >tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode) writes:
|> >
|> >>That's both a good point and a particularly good way of putting it--I'd
|> >>suggest that it goes even a little further than that, since most "jerks"
|> >>never actually go out of circulation [...] 
|> >
|> >Such a good point I thought I'd paraphrase it.  The "nice guys" 
|> >get happily married and go out of circulation.  The "jerks" are still
|> >out there dating.
|> 
|> Or as one of the [few] women I work with put it....
|> 
|>   my women friends think that working at microsoft would be great...
|>   men, men, men...and the men/woman ratio [we're in MS-DOS/Windows]
|>   is good.  But...the intersection of the set of men who are desirable
|>   [in terms of personality, interests, etc] with the set of men who
|>   are available is usually null.
|> 
|>   Or, if a man is available...it's usually for cause.
|> 

Meaning that if you meat a nice guy who you like and who is free
you automatically decide "there must be something wrong with
this guy"...

|> -jen
|>  [of course, if I didn't label all men in my immediate workgroup 
|>   'undesirable, it wouldn't be null in my case. but dating someone
|>   in my immediate group might induce insanity. oh well....]

-- 
Roar Foshaug                                      (roarf@stud.cs.uit.no)
Department of Computer Science
University of Tromsoe, IMR                        'oe' is '\o{}' in Tex
N-9037 TROMSOE, NORWAY                            'OE' is '\O{}' in Tex
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: snodgras@lclark.edu (Bil Snodgrass)
Subject: Re: Are false accusations harmless? (WAS Re: Drunk Sex = Rape?
Organization: Lewis & Clark College, Portland OR
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 18:03:10 GMT

In article <2524@newsserver.cs.uwindsor.ca> bouche2@server.uwindsor.ca (BOUCHER DAVID            ) writes:
>In article <C1H48v.BDx@hplntx.hpl.hp.com> albert@hpl.hp.com (Joseph Albert) writes:
>
>> [....]     i happen to believe that william kennedy
>>smith was guilty of rape.
>
>WHY do you believe that?  It seems to me just as plausible that the alleged
>victim was hoping to "land" a rich man, and when she realized that all he
>wanted was a one-night stand she decided to go the rape accusation/blackmail
>route.

CORRECTION!!!  It is plausible tht the alleged victim was hoping 
to 'land' a KENNEDY!

>
>- db
>
>


Bil Snodgrass III
From: peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Drunk Sex = Rape ? (was Re: Mysogynist Bullshit)
Date: 24 Jan 1993 02:50:42 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: sandman.caltech.edu

evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans) writes:

>However if the woman in question is likely to behave in such a way is
>it not also quite possible that she will make a false accusition of
>rape, if the man in question dares refuse to have sex with her.

Not bloody likely.  The first thing they do in a rape trial is 
ascertain on the basis of physical evidence whether intercourse 
took place between the two people.  So if he didn't have sex with 
her he's off the hook.
-- 

                                                --  Michal
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Impressive amounts of material can be accreted in this manner.
From: pepke@dirac.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Newsgroups: soc.men
Subject: Re: Drunk Sex = Rape ? (was Re: Mysogynist Bullshit)
Date: 20 Jan 93 23:56:59 GMT
Reply-To: pepke@dirac.scri.fsu.edu (Eric Pepke)
Organization: Florida State University, but I don't speak for them

In article <1993Jan19.003819.20956@news.cs.indiana.edu> alyoung@kiwi.ucs.indiana.edu (amy lynn young-leith) writes:
>I didn't make it, so I can't answer that.  The law, however, *was*
>made by a group almost exclusively of men.  Makes the intent a little
>harder to fish out.  

I have a stock answer to this, but I really want to know the answer to 
this question:

Why does this fact make the intent harder to fish out?

This is a serious question.  I want to know your reasoning.

-EMP
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: rfs@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (richard.f.j.soyack)
Subject: Re: Drunk Sex = Rape ? (was Re: Mysogynist Bullshit)
Organization: AT&T
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 12:11:16 GMT

In article <1jt0fjINNm3f@gap.caltech.edu> peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah Peri) writes:
>Guess again.  This is CA law.  If you have a party, one of your guests
>gets drunk, drives off and injures someone, then you're liable.  It is 
>a host's responsibility to ensure that his guests do not drive off if
>they're drunk.  (The host can either call them a cab or have them stay 
>over and sleep it off.)
>-- 
>
>                                                --  Michal

This, of course, is a very dumb law.  Follows in this
countries current trend to remove any fault from the person
performing the action (the person doing the drinking).  In NJ
I believe this became law as a result of a court case.  My
favorite example of how dumb this law is is a NY case in which
some guy got drunk at a bar and got into an accident.  The
drunk, or his family (I don't remember if he died in the
accident) sued and criminal procedures were brought against
the bartender who served the drinks, and the owner of the bar,
who wasn't even in the bar when the drinks were served.  One
jury let the bartender go, while the owner's jury found the
owner guilty.  Isn't it wonderful when our government
legislates morality.

Have fun,
Rich Soyack
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
Subject: Re: Male Men Bashers
Organization: Aston University
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL241235]
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 15:49:13 GMT

Eric Pepke (pepke@dirac.scri.fsu.edu) wrote:
: Check followups.
: 
: In article <1993Jan17.014306.7372@adobe.com> kendall@adobe.com (Janice Kendall) writes:
: >OK.  Let's define what "nice, sensitive guy" means...
: >
: >I am a woman and I wanted a "nice, sensitive guy".  I've dated self-centered
: >jerks and as I matured and came to care more about my own "quality of life"
: >(yep - it's, arghhh, SELF-ESTEEM!), I quit seeing the self-centered jerks
: >as better-than-me-and-therefore-desirable, and saw them as self-centered
: >jerks not worth wasting my time on.
: 
: Thanks for saying this.  It is consistent with my experience.
: 
: The reason I set the followups the way I did is that I want to talk about
: the message that men get.  The message is this:
: 
: 1) If you're a self-centered jerk, you'll get plenty of dates.
: 2) It you're a nice, sensitive guy, you may at some time acquire a long-term
:    partner who may or may not stop dating self-centered jerks.  In the mean
:    time, you might as well watch Popeye cartoons to see what your forearms
:    are going to look like.
An assumption here that everone wants a long term partner..
: 
: This is generally called the "nice guy syndrome."
: 
: -EMP

--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Evans                                   |evansmp@uhura.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 429 9199  (Home)                    |evansmp@cs.aston.ac.uk
+(44) 21 359 6531 x4039 (Office)             |
Xref: sparky soc.men:23236 soc.women:23040
From: kendall@adobe.com (Janice Kendall)
Newsgroups: soc.men,soc.women
Subject: Re: Gender Discrimination
Date: 25 Jan 93 17:49:39 GMT
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated

In article <C1Ex0o.3Lt@apollo.hp.com> nelson_p@apollo.hp.com (Peter Nelson) writes:
>
>
>
>
>
>   Both the New York Times and LA Times News services reported
>   over the weekend that when Bill Clinton was choosing an 
>   Attorney General he limited his search to only women!   
>
>   If my employer, Hewlett Packard, had an explicit policy of
>   only opening a certain position to one sex, or systematically
>   only considering candidates of one gender for a certain job,
>   wouldn't we be hauled into court faster than you could say,
>   "Zoe Baird"?   (I hope so!)
>
>   Assuming these news reports are correct, I think it's outrageous
>   that the Clinton Administration is starting off with such a 
>   sexist prologue.  Not to mention the fact that the nation can
>   hardly be well-served by potentially denying half (or probably
>   more because most lawyers are men) of the otherwise qualified
>   candidates merely due to their gender. 
>
>   And what effect would this have on compliance with anti-dis-
>   crimination laws, knowing that the Justice Department itself
>   was run by someone chosen by a process that violates the very 
>   statutes they are attempting to enforce?
>
>
>---peter
>
>
>   
>


 I agree.  It is one thing to *expand* the search beyond white men to 
 -include- minorities, women, and handicapped people, and then to choose
 the best person for the job.

 But, to restrict the search to fill a quota tarnishes the perceived
 qualifications of the person chosen.

 I also heard something about Clinton's press secretary being a woman
 and having her title, salary and responsibilities diminished, which
 has never happened before to all her male predecessors.  Anyone know
 any real details?  I just caught this out of the corner of my ear on
 the radio.
   
 Janice Kendall    kendall@adobe.com    ...!{decwrl|sun}!adobe!kendall

		"Creativity overcomes violence."
				John Bradshaw on "Homecoming"
Newsgroups: soc.men
From: lionel@cs.city.ac.uk (Lionel Tun)
Subject: Re: Men bonding with their Children.
Organization: City University, London
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 16:49:02 GMT

In article <25376@galaxy.ucr.edu> starbuck@galaxy.ucr.edu (starbuck) writes:
>14.  I spent time on our relationship.  I can see that she is now in
>     transition from childhood to adulthood and can see the result of
>     my actions as a parent.  I am working on letting go of control
>     of her life slowly but with a lot of thought.  To me this is
>     difficult knowing how much freedom to give her.  Once given
>     it cannot be taken back.
>
>I could go on and on and on about events in our lives where nurturing
>and bonding have taken place in our lives but I am only one man.  What
>I have done will not be the same or approprate for others.  I would like
>to hear from other men how they have bonded with their children with
>particular interest those men with teen's.  
>
>Bond on and love you children!

Thank you very much for a wonderful post! I have two daughters
aged 2 and 4. I often wonder how they will be as teenagers,
and I can see that the way is to help them _as_ they grow up,
not _after_ they have grown up. I believe your approach is very
sound and I can see great love at work.

>starbuch


--
  ________  Lionel Tun, lionel@cs.city.ac.uk  ________
 / /_  __/\       Computer Vision Group      /\ \__  _\
/___/_/_/\/ City University, London EC1V 0HB \ \___\_\_\
\___\_\_\/        071-477 8000 ext 3889       \/___/_/_/
Newsgroups: soc.men,alt.abortion.inequity
From: wolit@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (Jan Wolitzky)
Newsgroups: soc.libraries.talk
Subject: Machine-readable Dewey tables?
Date: 26 Jan 93 14:53:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnewsm.1993Jan26.145341.18451
Organization: AT&T

Does anyone know of the availability anywhere of the Dewey Decimal
classification schedules in machine-readable form?

-- 
Jan Wolitzky, AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill, NJ; 908 582-2998
          att!library!wolit or jan.wolitzky@att.com
   (Affiliation given for identification purposes only)
           Si fractum non sit, noli id reficere.
From: davidg@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au
Newsgroups: soc.libraries.talk
Subject: Photocopying policy of NRLF  of the Univ. California
Date: 27 Jan 93 11:40:10 +1100
Organization: Computer Centre, Monash University, Australia



Does anyone know the ILL photocopying guidelines for the Northern Regional
Library Facility of the University of California system?

The item in question is an article in from the 1898 volume of
the Hohenzollern Jarhbuch.

Given its age I think that it is likely that they will not be willing to
have it photocopied.

Before I go to the trouble of organizing an international ILL I thought that
I would check out the possiblity that  they would refuse the request.

Thank you in advance for you assistance,
					David Godley


Newsgroups: soc.libraries.talk
From: fc12@vaxb.acs.unt.edu
Subject: Re: Photocopying policy of NRLF  of the Univ. California
Organization: University of North Texas
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 17:41:03 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.114011.91112@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au>, davidg@vaxc.cc.monash.edu.au writes:
> 
> 
> Does anyone know the ILL photocopying guidelines for the Northern Regional
> Library Facility of the University of California system?
> 
> The item in question is an article in from the 1898 volume of
> the Hohenzollern Jarhbuch.
> 
> Given its age I think that it is likely that they will not be willing to
> have it photocopied.
> 
> Before I go to the trouble of organizing an international ILL I thought that
> I would check out the possiblity that  they would refuse the request.
> 
> Thank you in advance for you assistance,
> 					David Godley
> 
> 

This shows in OCLC as being at U. Cal. Berkley and they will probably copy it
for you, 50-50 chance, cost will be $25.00 US plus, there is a chance for
additional charges.  Searching the OCLC Data Base from the University of North
Texas we find holdings six other locations in the US and one in Canada, though
we didn't check for a particular volume. The cheapest locations would seem to
be Univ. of Minnesota, Univ of Missouri, Univ. of Virginia; A mid range of cost 
would be from Univ of Conneecticut, Florida State Univ., Washington & Lee; high
cost would be Univ. of Michigan and SUNY (State University of New York)-
Stoneybrook. In Canada it would seem that the Univ of Alberta has some volumes.
I did not check to see who had partaicular volumes but this may give you a
start on which schools to contact. You might also check to see which of these
schools have their Interlibrry Loan Offices connected to the INTERNET.

Hope that this helps.


        

Bill Floyd
Universtiy of North Texas
From: cfwrefdv@solomon.technet.sg (Chan Fook Weng)
Newsgroups: soc.libraries.talk
Subject: oclc charges
Date: 27 Jan 93 09:49:01 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Am trying to find out how much OCLC charges for accessing LC MARC records.
Are there also any additional charges that I might have to pay if I access
it. Does anyone know if you can get to OCLC from Internet?

Thanks
Marjorie Raj