HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dswt@bnr.co.uk (Stewart Tansley)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Being Alone?
Date: 18 Nov 1992 14:02:24 GMT
Organization: BNR Europe Ltd, London Road, Harlow, England.
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.199.202.41

In article <7067@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:
>In article <oneil.721965040@cwis> oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil) writes:
>>
>> [Sharon talks about Datecity]
>
> [Diamond talks about Datefest]

This is like being told that heaven exists but you wouldn't like it much!!!

===========================================================================
Stewart Tansley     | BNR Europe Limited              |  'Be cool, or be
                    | London Rd, Harlow, CM17 9NA, UK |    cast out...'
dswt@bnr.co.uk      | +44 279 429531 x2763 (ESN 742)  | Subdivisions, Rush
===========================================================================
  'You know how that rabbit feels -- going under your speeding wheels...'
===========================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Being Alone?
Summary: Confused
Organization: Intergraph
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 19:09:35 GMT

In article <97839@netnews.upenn.edu>, crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
>  It was one of the wackier chains I've ever been part
> of.  
> 
> Woman A liked man #1 (my current SO).
> Man #1 liked me.
> I liked Man #2.
> Man #2 liked woman B.
> Woman B liked man #3 (and later married him.
> 
> Yeah, I think timing is important.
> 

UH, could you go through that one more time?  :)

> Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu

Larry Billings
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: feirtag@i5120b.nrl.navy.mil (Fred Feirtag)
Subject: Re: Benefit from parents divorce
Organization: Naval Research Lab, Washington, DC
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 00:24:03 GMT

In article <1992Nov20.125137.8885@iscsvax.uni.edu>, cuvelier2724@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:
|>                   . . . Well, I finally found him and we're getting married
|> next June.  I KNOW that I won't be going through a divorce from the other side
|> because I saw the pain my parents suffered.  This may be a cocky statement
|> saying that I know I won't be getting a divorce.  But if you do things the
|> right way, the thought should never cross your mind.
|> 
|>                                              Sonia

Ummmm. Excuse me,
   but I'm afraid divorce did just cross your mind.  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-O  :-(

Well, best of luck anyway!!!  And if your husband to be is HALF as dedicated
to building a good relationship as you, I expect you CAN have a great
marriage!!!
                 \
   :-)   :-)    :-) <---(supposed to be an extra big smile, for good luck)
                 /

--fred
From: spp@zabriskie.berkeley.edu (Steve Pope)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: First date on Friday the 13th
Date: 16 Nov 1992 00:44:21 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley -- ERL
NNTP-Posting-Host: zion.berkeley.edu

In article <16NOV92.00004605@vax.clarku.edu> mcohen@vax.clarku.edu writes:
>Ok, I had a first date on Friday the 13th.  Is this a good thing?

How are we supposed to know?  You tell *us* whether
it was a good thing!

/sp
Xref: sparky alt.romance:14337 soc.singles:31313
From: martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles
Subject: Re: net.hugs?
Date: 20 Nov 92 01:23:34 GMT
	<lgl06rINNqsi@news.bbn.com> <j#mqpg#@lynx.unm.edu> <h4y1#k=@rpi.edu>
Followup-To: alt.romance
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: petitc@nuge111.its.rpi.edu's message of 19 Nov 92 14:03:21 GMT

In article <h4y1#k=@rpi.edu> petitc@nuge111.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit) writes:

   In article <j#mqpg#@lynx.unm.edu>, blowfish@carina.unm.edu (rON.) writes:
   |> In article <lgl06rINNqsi@news.bbn.com> dhardin@spcink.bbn.com (Dawn Hardin) writes:
   |> >In that case, cross-posting to soc.singles is probably a *BIG* mistake.
   |> >We're not very safe.
   |> 
   |> Actually we in soc.singles are quite safe.
   |> We just simply expect people to stand up for themselves instead of being
   |> propped up by everybody else in the group.


       Ok, mister, you asked for it...


      Can YOU do EVERYTHING YOU NEED TO by yourself?  Hmmmm?
      Can YOU make your very own cars FROM SCRATCH?
	....


Violates rule 1.
--
		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
     Dept. of Computer Science/CB #3175 UNC-CH/Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3175
	    3611 University Dr #13M/Durham, NC 27707/(919) 419 1754
     "Oh God, please help me be civil in tongue, pure in thought, and able
      to resist the temptation to laugh uncontrollably.  Amen." -- Rob T
From: bushmanangel@bvc.edu
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Benefit from parents divorce
Date: 23 Nov 92 14:07:37 CDT
Organization: Buena Vista College, Storm Lake, IA


My parents' divorce was good for me, too, much better than constant 
fighting in the home.  But I would go even farther to argue that the 
divorce rate on the whole could be a good sign.  Why?  It seems that 
society is re-evaluating marriage.  People are ending unhappy and 
unfulfilling relationships.  They aren't staying together for all the wrong 
reasons.  People who are getting married are hopefully looking more closely 
at their reasons for marriage--society no longer expects marriage when a 
female is pregnant.  Now I'm not saying that teenage pregnancies are 
desireable, or that I believe children should be raised in one-parent 
homes, but I think society is in a transitional stage.  Maybe we're all 
learning something from it.

Angela
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: winter@sol.surv.utas.edu.au (Derek Winter)
Subject: Re: Is it me? - a Christian view of sex
Organization: CenSIS at University of Tasmania
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 05:05:09 GMT

In article <Bxrx7E.F9D@csugrad.cs.vt.edu>, jaker@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (Jake Rose) writes:
> 
> weird@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (john.t.erhardt) writes:
> 
> 
> >To my last post I just wanted to add something.  Christian teach that
> >sex should only be used between maried couples and for making babies only.
> >Well if sex was for making babies, it wouldn't feel so good!
> 
> Those Christians probably tag it as "satanic influence" or something.  There's
> certainly a very good scientific, evolutionary reason for reproductive
> activities to feel good, though, isn't there?
> 
Hello All,

						I have missed the previous posts to this one quoted above, so I may have
missed the point; however I would like to clarify a couple of points about what
the bible teaches about sex i.e. a christian view of sex.
							I certainly agree that God designed sex for married couples only, and
IMHO alot of the problems that get aired on this group would be avioded if this
was upheld by society in general. I disagree, however, that sex was only 
designed for the creation of babies - I feel that the bible clearly indicates
that sex was, and is, meant to be pleasureable, and a very natural and 
enjoyable part of married life.
							There is definitely no indication of a "satanic influence" in the Bible
with respect to sex, except for the misuse of sex that satan encourages.

							Anyway, I hope I have not inappropriately responded to this thread, but
from what I read, I just wanted to make a few things clear.

																			Best Reagards,
																								Derek.
From: weaver@jetsun.weitek.COM (Michael Gordon Weaver)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: "Made" or "Just Happens"?
Date: 18 Nov 92 18:15:46 GMT
Organization: WEITEK Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <BxvBr5.GD0@acsu.buffalo.edu> v119qkv2@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (POE) writes:
>
>	There has been an on-going arguement as to whether or not relationships
>have to be planned or just happen.  Do you need a plan and a strategy to find
>that special SO or do you play the waiting game and let nature take its course?
>Does it just happen or do you have to make it happen?  etc.
>
My experience and bias is that finding someone special is mostly a
matter of luck (though you can always improve your odds a little), but
relationships are made. Every time I talk separately to the two people
in a couple, if one seemed to think that their relationship 'just
happened', the other thought the relationship had come about through
hard work.  I feel a little sorry for couples like that.  

I think a good relationship requires that both partners see the
relationship as a commitment that requires work. Just because you have
been in a relationship a while doesn't mean you don't have to work. A
relationship grows or dies.

The confusing thing for me is trying to start a relationship. I said that
finding someone special is mostly a matter of luck, and sustaining a 
relationship requires that both partners work at it. But when you have
found someone you think is special, but they haven't made up their mind
about you, it is hard to say whether you should be goal-driven or fatalistic.
And the flip side when someone else is interested in getting involved, but
you are unsure is even more confusing. These days I try to be goal-driven
but patient. So I always know what the 'next step' is, but I never know
when and if it is going to happen. This seems to work for me.



Michael.
From: fretlord@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Ryan Stryker)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: See this note for further instructions
Date: 23 Nov 92 04:21:15 GMT
Reply-To: fretlord@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Ryan Stryker)
Distribution: usa
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX
Originator: fretlord@tigger.cc.utexas.edu

First, check to see that you are female.
Then, reply to this note.
Then, simply sit back and wait - a few hours maximum - for your new friend to
   arrive, all polished and shiney, on your virtual doorstep.

-Ry

-- 

==============================================================================
"Interjections show excitement or emotion.  They're generally set apart from a
 sentence by an exclamation point, or by a comma if the feeling's not as strong.
 So when you're happy....     HURRAY!"
======================================= - Schoolhouse Rock - =================
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: carrie@wam.umd.edu (Carrie Lynn Leonard)
Subject: Re: letters, opinions, women, romance
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:09:53 GMT

Hello out there -

I just have a few comments to make.  I am involved in a long distance
relationship.  I love talking to my b/f on the phone, but his letters
light up my whole day.  They are something tangible, that I can read 
again and again, that I know he touched at one point in time.  It helps
keep that physical link, in a weird sort of way.  Email is great also,
but there's still nothing like a good postal letter to make you feel
close to someone who's far away!


-------------------------------------------|--------------------------------
|   Carrie Leonard                         |                               |   
|   Marine-Estuarine-Environmental-Science |   Respect the Beach           |
|   University of Maryland                 |                               |
|   carrie@wam.umd.edu                     |                               |
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles
From: mmzn@rice.edu (Mark Mazina)
Subject: Re: Being Alone?
Originator: mmzn@tarka.cs.rice.edu
Reply-To: mmzn@rice.edu (Mark Mazina)
Organization: Rice University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:17:53 GMT


In article <1992Nov15.151337.13175@bnlux1.bnl.gov>, schroede@bnlux1.bnl.gov (gary l. schroeder) writes:
|> In article <amymw.721677596@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu> amymw@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Amy Wisotsky) writes:
|> 
|> >A new boy/girlfriend can be found when the person is ready to find
|> >one.  It depends entirely on the person in question.  
|>
|> Well, I'm glad to hear that relationships are so easy to stumble upon at
|> Brandeis, Amy.  There's a lot of people out there that are "ready to
|> find one", but are still alone.  Consider the possibility that you don't
|> live in a college atmosphere anymore where you're surrounded by nothing
|> but people of your own age group that you're constantly interacting
|> with.  That's the great thing about college, isn't it?  It's just a big
|> pool of people that you can go out with on the weekend.  Well, after
|> that artificial world ends, your friends might find it difficult to
|> meet someone new within the week.

This presumes Amy is a 20-something student, but what if she's a 36 year old (exactly) staff member at a University... 

Part of communicating is learning to restrain our own pre-conceptions.

Mark
From: dswt@bnr.co.uk (Stewart Tansley)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
Subject: Re: Plea
Date: 18 Nov 1992 13:47:04 GMT
Organization: BNR Europe Ltd, London Road, Harlow, England.
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.199.202.41

In article <1992Nov18.010332.12466@cs.uwp.edu> itzenhui@cs.uwp.edu (Steve Itzenhuiser) writes:
>
>I am only 24 years old, but believe in previous lives (though I do not

[Weird previous lives stuff deleted]

>there like me and my friends--you're not alone.  However, out of all the
>knowledge that I have gained over the X-amount of life times that I have
>been on this earth, I can not, for the life of me understand LOVE!!!

Shall I tell him folks, or what!? ;-)

>I am now interested in one particular woman (who I really hope doesn't
>read this).  She is intelligent and wise (a combination hard to find), and
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
ie. you're in love... 

>also quite stunning.  She has expressed interest in me, though I don't
            ^^^^^^^^
...See? :-)

>know to what extent, though that in itself can keep me in check for some time.
>My biggest problem, however, is that I become very absorbed into a woman
                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Have you seen "Lawnmower Man"?

>and thus become anxious.  I don't know what to think when she does this or
                 ^^^^^^^
Ah, you have! ;-)

>that, I don't quite know how to act and react.  I know that I should be
>myself, but I do so much want to be with her but I do not want to push her
>away.  I become quite stressed.  Do I relax, do I tell her of my anxiety,
>or what?  I would really appreciate a bit 'o advice.


Yup, relax & tell her how you feel -- but it sounds like you need to
develop a closer relationship with her before you tell her the whole
story of you're true feelings. In fact, it sounds like you're doing things
pretty slowly and steadily and I think this is the right way to go. Just
give it time -- in fact, given all your previous lives & those to come,
surely you have *plenty* of time! In fact, maybe you'll even have a second
chance in a future life! ;-)

I'm afraid I don't think much of your "I'm 24 and due to past lives I'm
an expert in most things in life apart from love" line -- I trust you will
be suitably embarrassed in 5 years time if you re-read your post!

Still, you sound nice enough, and are reacting just like everyone else
(ie. you're scared shitless of the woman of your dreams -- well, it's
normal in *my* book! :-)) and if she is, go for it!

===========================================================================
Stewart Tansley     | BNR Europe Limited              |  'Be cool, or be
                    | London Rd, Harlow, CM17 9NA, UK |    cast out...'
dswt@bnr.co.uk      | +44 279 429531 x2763 (ESN 742)  | Subdivisions, Rush
===========================================================================
  'You know how that rabbit feels -- going under your speeding wheels...'
===========================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles
From: jlamb@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu (Jeffrey Richard Lamb)
Subject: Re: Attention Advice Givers (ie HELP)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 02:38:09 GMT

>- Time out!  Can you please explain this to me?  How can a "date" not be a 
>"date"?  In my book, when someone asks you out to the movies, and you go, it's
>a "date".  So how can you "turn it into a date"?  How could it not be a "date"?
>Then, you started "dating".  Does this mean "we went to the movies a few more
>times" or "we agreed not to see other people"?  And are you "interested in 
>dating him" because "you love him" or because "he's a fun guy to be with"?  Is
>it just me or does the English language really suck when it comes to relation-
>ships?

I agree. Unfotunately the English language is the only thing we got. It would
help howvere if people who say what REALLY happened inside of using phrases
that different people read different ways. When you say "going out" that could
mean anything from getting together witha grouip of friends. . .(of the same sex
even (Homosexuals are free to flame me if they find this offensive (to them
I say get a life and quit splitting hairs))). . . with a group of friends
and going to the movies or shopping or the bars or whatever to  haveing a
love affair with someone and not being able to see other people. It would
be better if people would quit saying :Oh yes, we're going out: and start
saying "Oh yes, we are going to enjoy a movie together this Friday" or
"oh yes, we are going on several romantic dats now, and we've agreed not
to see other people so we can devote ourselves to each other for a while."
English isn't the greatest (if there is a greatest), but people are the ones
that make it really pathetic.


-- 
H. Ross Perot | "How do you always manage to    | Jeff R. Lamb
for President | decide?" 			| Midnight Arrow
of the United | "How do you let others decide   | Champion of Reality
States in '96 | for you?"	   -Ayn Rand 	| (jlamb@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu)
Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: linnan@bulldozer.cs.hut.fi (Matti Linnanvuori)
Subject: Re: Is it me?
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, CS lab
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 16:32:06 GMT

In <1992Nov13.211341.19205@cbfsb.cb.att.com> weird@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (john.t.erhardt) writes:
>To my last post I just wanted to add something.  Christian teach that
>sex should only be used between maried couples and for making babies only.

  Previously, Christian people used to think that marriage starts
with sexual intercourse. Therefore, pre-marital sex between previously
unmarried man and woman could not exist, since by the time they made
love they would already be husband and wife. In other words, that way
of thinking did not distinguish common-law and official marriage. 


--


Newsgroups: alt.romance
From: mcohen@vax.clarku.edu
Subject: RE: wish me luck results
Organization: Clark University
Date: 23 NOV 92 01:10:54 GMT

In a previous article, chorwit1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Cathy Horwitz) wrote: >Hi
All, >					Today is Sunday, and I just got a call
from "the guy."  he said that >he couldn't come to dinner, but he was very
nice about it and he had a good >excuse.  He broke up with a two year
girlfriend yesterday.  Don't I have >bad timing.  He said maybe we could do
dinner some other time which is >good.  I think I will introduce myself
sometime next week because he still >doesnt know who I am.
>					He has the most beautiful voice.  Too
bad that the only time I've >heard it it was rejecting me.  He said that he
was very flattered and sorry >that he couldn't come.
>					Now the only problen is how do I get
over lusting over him?  I want to >date him badly, and I'm spending about 50%
of my time thinking about him. >At the moment there is really no chance, so I
wish I could just get over >it.

Cathy-
  I think you did pretty well.  Although you didn't get everything you were 
after, you found someone who was nice enough to call and be honest.  
Relatively good scenario compared to being totally blown off.  Sounds like a 
good time to meet him and offer friendship.  Good for you.
..Mitch, pathetic optimist

/--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
| > <    Mitch Cohen * Multimedia consultant * MCohen@vax.clarku.edu       |
|  ^          Any opinions expressed are clearly not my own.               |
|  v     I'll come up with something intelligent to put here later.        |
\__________________________________________________________________________/
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles
From: dks@sr.com (Dave K. Sprow)
Subject: Re: net.hugs?
Reply-To: dks@srhqla.UUCP (Dave K. Sprow)
Organization: Silent Radio, Los Angeles
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 18:33:11 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.130850.24192@dgbt.doc.ca> michele@dgbt.doc.ca (Michele Guillet) writes:
>In article <8cx16zg@rpi.edu> petitc@rpi.edu writes:
>>
>>  I think people don't *HUG* each other nearly enough.  We all NEED to be
>>touched.  That's what's wrong with the U.S.  We're too selfish to touch other
>>people and acknowledge that we DO need other people's attention and affection.
>>So, we use the only 'acceptable' way to need someone---when you're in love.
>>
>I agree with you. I think we forget easily that touch is needed, 
>infants that aren't held don't develop normally. It is sad when the
>house pet gets more attention and touch than the people living there.
>I have notice that friends who comes to my house will almost always
>pet my dog but often will not hug me or kiss me. Of course, my dog
>is hard to ignore, she makes it clear that she wants and expects
>a pet. I learned from her to ask for hugs and kisses, know what,
>I am getting a lot more since I started asking.
>
>
Maybe I should try wagging my toungue and drool a bit...

>-- 
>Michele Guillet 			The Communications Research Centre 
>3701 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA, K2H 8S2	tel:613-998-2384
>Internet: michele@dgbt.doc.ca	

David S.


Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: Being Alone?
Organization: Intergraph
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 19:13:44 GMT

In article <1992Nov15.170900.9931@netcom.com>, aahz@netcom.com (Mean Green Dancing Machine) writes:
> 
> The ProblemOlderWoman and I were both posters to soc.singles for a long
> time, but never really aid much attention to each other.  She finally
> started paying attention to me when I stuck in my "hugs-and-backrubs"
> .sig, and sent me e-mail several months later.  We exchanged e-mail for 

Maybe I need a new sig, how does "Will give or receive full body massages"
sound?  :-{)

> 
> Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6
> 

Larry Billings
*******************************************************************************
  
  Will give or receive full body massages.  I break all rules.

*******************************************************************************

WELL, I'm waiting!  :)
Newsgroups: alt.romance,soc.singles
From: baptiste@bnr.ca (Michael Baptiste P275)
Subject: Re: net.hugs?
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, BNR-RTP 
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 16:22:15 GMT

In article <64z158_@rpi.edu>, petitc@nuge111.its.rpi.edu (Christopher Jon Petit) writes:
[Much Stuff Deleted]
|> -- 
|>  *HUGS*, a @>---'--,----, and a :&) to whoever needs them.
|> "Whoever said that life was fair never read the rules, and found out that
|> there were none."
|> 
Actually, its 
"Whoever said that life was fair, never went to Rensselaer"

Mike
Class of '92