HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tcheung@ramius.ocf.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: White male/Asian female and Asian male/white female
Date: 2 Sep 92 18:51:49 GMT
Organization: University of California, Davis / LLNL

In article <1992Sep1.203657.12612@bnr.ca> xyang@bnr.ca writes:
->In article <17vv05INN338@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, cc015@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Vito T. Kwan) writes:
->|> 
->|> Someone brought up this topic before, and his/her opinion in why there are
->|> more cases of white male/Asian female marriage is Asian males are of nationalism
->|> Hey, wake up! Don't be so Ah Q. In my opinion (being an Asian male), I think
->|> the Asian females are more of materialism.  (especially those from HK) The 
->
->Are you sure the Asian males are not as much materialism as their
->counter partners?

Probably true.  However, Asian males would more likely get insulted
for dating girls better-off than them, while Asian females would get
admiration.

->
->|> following are the reasons for this kind of sick phenomenon:
->|> 
->|>     1. They can get the green card.
->
->What if an Asian girl who already has a greed card? Or earn more
->or equal money than her white boyfriend?

How common is the latter?

->
->|>     2. Male (traditionally) thinks his career is much more important than any ing else (and dating a white female takes awful long time and much money)
->
->I thought dating an Asian girl is even more sophisticated than
->dating a white girl. Have you ever had such an experience? I do
->see many around me, though.

I would say this is definitely true.  I think it's harder to get a
date with a white female.  But if they like you, then it shouldn't
take much time.  On the other hand, even if Asian girls like you,
they will still make you do many things for them in order to prove
your love for them.

--
Terry Cheung
tcheung@ramius.ocf.llnl.gov
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: jlam@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (Lord Automato)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: What is love in Chinese sense.
Date: 1 Sep 92 00:11:16 GMT
Organization: University of Melbourne


In article <liqiang.715296442@kramden>, liqiang@kramden.nyu.edu (Li) writes:
|> xlli@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (xiao-lin li) writes:
|> 
|> 
|> 
|> >(7). When a Chinese loves a non-Chinese (including Hongkonger and
|> >     Taiwanese), what is behind the love.
|> 
|> Hongkongese and Taiwanese are Chinese.
|> 
|> 
|> Li, Qiang

Right, I wonder what the mentality was behind the original author.

Lin Can
=========================================================================
.-- .... --- . ...- . .-. -.. . -.-. --- -.. . ... - .... .. ...
--. . - ... -. --- - .... .. -. --.        
.-.. .. ..-. . .. ... ... .... --- .-. - .-- --- .-. -.- .... .- .-. -..
                                                   .-.. .. -. -.-. .- -.
=========================================================================
                                          

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: kchen@math15.math.umbc.edu (Kan Chen (GS))
Subject: looking for Han Weining of 79 EE of Zhejiang University
Originator: kchen@math15.math.umbc.edu
Organization: Department of Mathematics, University of Maryland Baltimore County
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1992 16:54:13 GMT


Dear SCC reader,

	I am  looking for  Han, Wei-Ning from 79 Radio Electonics
of Zhejiang University. He  may went to Australia 1988 or 1989. If any 
one knows any infomation please send mail to:
	kchen@math15.math.umbc.edu
or
	kan@statepi02.sph.jhu.edu

	If Wei-Ning Han sees this message, you may call me home
410-525-1562 USA. 

	Thanks in advance.
Kan Chen.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:24053 soc.culture.hongkong:10197 soc.culture.japan:7373 soc.culture.taiwan:12463
From: william@natimuk.acci.com.au (William Lo)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.hongkong,soc.culture.japan,soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: An open letter to the Emperor Akihito of Japan
Date: 27 Aug 92 06:38:37 GMT
Organization: IBM Australia/ACCI

Sorry mate:

	** I'm not kidding but this one really gets me!

In article <1992Aug24.132912.4746@cs.brown.edu> xxx@xxxx.xxxx.xxx writes:
>please ignore, this is just a test.
 			^^^^^^^^^^^
			So, how come the title isn't so?	



	** Guys, a trick or a trap, there's always a chance you get caught,
	   besides this isn't a bad one...

	** The title of the guy's "test" is unchanged. See above, or refer
	   to the subject title.

	** To read or not to read, there's a question: don't kid me mate!

---You don't cry - I cry,
	Bill
From: chen@mel.dbce.csiro.au (Qian Chen)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Passport policy
Keywords: New CG's policy
Date: 31 Aug 92 07:59:31 GMT
Organization: CSIRO, Div. Building Constr. and Eng'ing, Melb., Australia

While issueing a passport is considered a favour to do, it's not the time to
talk about new policy.
-- 
| Qian Chen          CSIRO Division of Building, Construction and Engineering |
|                    Post Office Box 56, Highett, Victoria, Australia   3190  |
| Internet: chen@mel.dbce.csiro.au  Tel: +61 3 252 6000  Fax: +61 3  252 6244 |
|_____________________________________________________________________________|
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: cw@orion.uucp (C.W. Chung)
Subject: Re: Chinese reform (1980 - 1991)
Organization: Objectivity Inc.
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 92 17:41:02 GMT

    In article <27AUG199218082022@phobos.ucc.umass.edu> s9874194@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194) writes:
    >In article <714923644.23762@minster.york.ac.uk>, yong@minster.york.ac.uk writes...
    >>Chinese reform (1980 - 1991)
    >> 
    >>	China GNP		GNP per capita
    >>1980 	US$81.27 billions	US$82.90
    >>1991	$356 billions		$307.45
    >Can anybody give me a figure about the GNP's of US? Let's assume the
    >GNP per capita is US$6,000. If we expect that Chinese getting this rich,
    >the national GNP would be US$356 billions * 20 * 6 = US$42,720 Billions,
    >not to count the consumption and pollution as well as the natural 
    >resources needed. Oh my God. For that reason, I only want to be half
    >as rich as American.
    >c.q. from Massachusetts

My 1991 CD-ROM has GNP figures and per capita income for 1988, and estimate 
population figure for 1990.  So the GNP/capita is underestimated by perhaps
a few percent for all countries:

	(from the World Almanac and Book of Facts 1991)(my calculation)
	GNP	per-capita income	population	GNP/capita
USA	$4800B		$16444  	 250M		$19200
Japan	$1800B		no data		 1230M		$14634 (from almanac)
China	$ 350B		$  258		1100M		$  318
S.Korea $ 171B		$ 2180		  439M		$ 3895
Taiwan	$ 119B		no data		  20M		$ 6200 (from almanac)
Singap. $  23.7B	$ 6200		   2.7M		$ 8777

Note that these figures are subjected to currency rate fluctuation. The Taiwan
dollars has been strong for the last few years, so GNP growth in US dollars
will be quite spectacular.  The GNP growth measured in the local currency
will be less.  Conversely, the Yuan of mainland has been weak for the past
few years. So the GNP growth measured by local currency would be much greater
than measured by US dollars.

-cw-
_____________________________________________________________________________
C.W.Chung       Objectivity Inc.      Object-Oriented DBMS  Tel: 415/688-8023
                800 El Camino Real,   Menlo Park CA 94025   Fax: 415/325-0939
                                      email: cw@objy.com    or  uunet!objy!cw
From: zyou@aludra.usc.edu (Zhongbai You)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: What About Tibet? (Re: What about China done to Korea)
Date: 27 Aug 1992 10:34:40 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aludra.usc.edu

In article <1992Aug26.192924.2705@news.acns.nwu.edu> usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns) writes:
>>   Before those states got independence, there is no doubt about USSR's
>> sovereignty over those states. Those states later decided indepedence
>> after USSR collapsed. They became sovereignty countries.
>>   Your comparsion to Tibet does not make much sense. Tibet is still part
>> of China. China does hold sovereignty over Tibet. Why do you doubt it?
>> 
>
>Why can't I? Your explaination is not clear. Actually, I am not a promoter of  
>Tibet Independence because I am not sure whether Tibet is a province of China  
>or not. You simply should not treat a person with different opinion in a brutal  
>way. 
>

   Should Tibet gain independence in the future, Tibet will be similar to
those USSR states. But Tibet IS part  of China up to now, you should not
compare Tibet with those indepdent countries.

   I am glad to hear that you are not promoting TI.


>> 
>>    I will never give up my land if the land  belongs to me by LAW.
>>                                                            =======
>
>
>Wait a minute! What kind of LAW are you talking about?! You always take things  
>for granted. Don't forget, Janpanese occupied Taiwan by their LAW too.

     International law regarding territory integrity. China's sovereignty
over Tibet is recognized by most nations in the world, including US.

     Once again, you made a terrible mistake by comparing China to Japan.
Japan's invason of Taiwan is illegal, never recognized by other peace loving
countries.


>
>>     The weakest person is the one who give up his property easily.
>> 
>
>The weakest and evilest persons are those who want to oppress other people  
>while they themselve are under oppression.

   Wait a second, I said that you are weak because you have  the 
tendency to give up your rights which are evidenced by many of
your postings.

   What is your reason for you to say me (us) 'oppress other people'
 and 'under oppression'?   Is it because we are asking protection?
 asking apology? Don't you realize that it is fighting for our own
 goods.

>
>Carl



Z. You

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: mlibucha@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Libucha)
Subject: "By Some Quirk"
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 22:47:39 GMT


At the time when the NBC-bashing was at its height somebody posted a list
of some of the world's major news organizations ordered with respect to 
the fairness/disinterest of their reporting, in that author's opinion. Do 
you remember which topped the list........? The BBC. At least one other
netter seconded this opinion. Well, check this out...

Today is the 150th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Nanking. The
BBC did a backgrounder on the history leading up to this event. They 
discussed the imbalance of trade between China and the West: China had
tons of things that everybody wanted (silk, tea, rhubarb, porcelain, etc.)
and the West had nothing China wanted. So China demanded payment in silver.
And a healthy portion of the West's silver flowed into China.

Then the BBC goes on to say, "and then, *BY SOME QUIRK*, opium replaced
silver as the currency with which the West paid for Chinese goods." No
further explanation.
(Emphasis is mine, and the quote may not be exactly right, but it's close.)

Just can't figure out how that happened. *Awfully* strange. You would think 
it was a much better deal for the Chinese to take silver, but, who knows 
how these things work, they wanted opium. Go figure!
 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:24781 soc.culture.korean:4177
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Hello from news reader in China
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 92 20:49:19 GMT

In article <92Aug31.144101edt.56@orasis.vis.toronto.edu> liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu) writes:

>not quite.  There are invasions, and they do settle down, for example,
>look at Sichuan & Qinghai provinces, they all have a lot of mix races
>living together, Tibetan, Han, Hui, MOngols, and quite a few smaller
>nationalities.  

How big is the Tibetian population in Sichuan?  I will not concede, in the
Quinhai case, that it's a migration into "China," since China had never
actually had the control of Quinhai until the Chin Dynasty (yes, *that*
dynasty again :-)) took it from (yes, you guessed it) the Dzungarian
Khanate.  Before Dzungaria had it, it was a collection of loosely independent
Mongolian and Tibetian tribes.
From: tylee@austin.ibm.com (Ter-Yuan Lee)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: A New Fa-Guo-Nan-Cai Theory :-)  Re: A real story
Date: 27 Aug 92 19:01:22 GMT
Organization: IBM Austin Advanced Workstation Division
Originator: tylee@leety.austin.ibm.com


In article <1992Aug26.130709.28764@acd4.acd.com>, jjs@iedv7.acd.com ( James J. Song       ) writes:
> In article <BtJtzz.9os@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> xiong@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Bo Xiong) writes:
> 
> And you probably forget mentioning another fact: the better relationship 
> you have with officials of a dictatorial government, the easier you can do
> business in that country and the more profit you can make. So why not love
> KMT/CCP?
> ___

You probably don't understand what you were saying above. It is true that the 
government in office is dominated by the CNP (or KMT). However, the whole
congress is elected by the people. It is incredible you are still describing
the government (as you are equating the ROC government to Chinese Nationalist
party) as a dictatorial one. All the policies have to be passed by the 
congress before can be practiced. It is impossible for the CNP to be
dictatorial. CCP, on the other hand, is the dictatorial one.

Get real and get a life, be up-to-date, not out-of-date.

-- 
/* The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of IBM's.         *\
 * Take care and have a nice day.                                            *
\* Ter-Yuan Lee                                                              */
From: gt9414b@ferrari.uucp (Wing-Cheong William Man)
Subject: Re: Hello from news reader in China
Organization: Computer Engineering Group, Georgia Tech, Atlanta, GA 30332-0250
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 16:29:16 GMT

In article <1992Sep1.043419.18741@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> abs0@coos.dartmouth.edu (Kelvin Leung) writes:
>dht@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Joyous Dave baby) writes:
>
[... stuff deleted ...]

>I think China is doing great in education.  Most of the students from
>Mainland China that I know of are very well educated, and have a very
>analytical mind.  So, I would say improving the educational system doesn't need
>to be China's top priority right now.

I think you miss the point. It is true that every Chinese students we know
in the graduate schools (or even college, I don't know) is very smart. But
they are the lucky ones that can receive proper education. They are the
cream of 1.2 billion people. Chinese economist always critize that the
government invest too little on education. And many children in remote rural
area cannot receive education at all (remember project Hope?). I think 
the improvement of education is still the first priority job of China.

>
>Improving the economy, however, is very important.  By "improving the economy,"
>I dont mean making money for one or two people's benefit.  Rather, to increase
>the size of bourgeoisie (sp?).  Countries like Switerland has a huge middle
>class... only when most of the people settle down, and not having to worry about
>losing their jobs, houses and meals, can this country become strong...
[... stuff deleted ...]

Very true.

>
>Yours Sincerely,
>Kelvin
>
>                                            ____________________________
> __________________________________________/ Undergraduate, Class of 94 \___ 
>/____________________________________________________________\_____/________\
>|  Kelvin    /   Internet: Kelvin.Leung@Dartmouth.edu       ({o   o})       |
>|   Leung   /       or     abs0@Coos.Dartmouth.edu        <  #  ^  #  >     | 
>|__________/_______________________________________________(vvvvvvvvv)______|
>| "Unless someone like you cares a whole |  Do you see a doll? a beast?     |
>|  awful lot, nothing is going to get    |                                  |
>|  better.  It's not."                   |  There are always more than one  |
>|               -- Dr. Seuss (The Lorax) |  side to any story...            |
> \______________________________________/ \________________________________/ 

William Man
-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
		   Georgia Institute of Technology
      School of Electrical Engineering, Atlanta, GA  30332-0250
		    E-MAIL: gt9414b@eecom.gatech.edu
From: who@guess.guess.forever.etc
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Anonymous post!
Summary: this catches you anyway ;-)
Keywords: who am I?
Date: 28 Aug 92 03:04:29 GMT
Followup-To: (no precedent yet)
Distribution: usa
Organization: just keep guessing
Originator: yuta@okeeffe.cc.rochester.edu

Who says anonymous posting is not possible. Can you figure out the
originator of this post? Send me a request and I will tell you how!
					            A.P.
From: zdlin@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (ZhongDong Lin)
Subject: Re: Top 10 most fashionable words in SCC
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 15:46:02 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.143244.14110@bnlux1.bnl.gov> ping@bnlux1.bnl.gov (Shiping Zhang) writes:
>In article <1992Aug26.164213.28643@news.acns.nwu.edu> zdlin@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (ZhongDong Lin) writes:
>>
>>  Top ten most fashionable words:
>       ^^^
>  How should one count?
>
>>  10.  you jerk
>>   9.  you idiot
>>   8.  you hypercrotic
>>   7.  dogshit
>>   6.  bullshit
>>   5.  what-so-ever shit
>>   4.  ass
>>   3.  asshole
>>   2.  f**k
>>   
>>
>>   And now the NO.1 fashionable word in the group of SCC:
>>  
>>   you communist running dog!  
>
>   Which of these FOUR words is the NO.1 fashionable word?
>
>   You? Communist? Running? Dog?  :-)
>
>-ping
>


   Thanks for pointing my mistake out.  I did realize it right after I posted
the list.  What happened is this *phrase* "communist running dog" was not in
my original list of top 10 word ( it was 'ignorance' instead).  However,  after
it popped up again in the news group, I felt it is so amusing that I am
obliged to include it in my list.  Apology for the misuse of *word*, and hope 
people in this group would understand my point.

  Brian

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: xlli@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (xiao-lin li)
Subject: Re: [News] PRC Announces Further Loosened Policies on Overseas Students
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 15:48:29 GMT

In article <BtoMK1.4KK@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> xiong@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Bo Xiong) writes:
>My feeling after reading the People's Daily news is exactly the same as 
>that of mine when I read it before on same topics:  The further away 
>(physically and geographically) a Chinese from the Communist party, the 
>BETTER the party will treat the Chinese.  If the party has NO control of 
>you, you'll be treated as "superior Chinese", if the party has full control 
>of you, you are just a piece of Chinese sh*t in the eyes of the CCP!  
>No wonder there are some Fa-Guo-Nan-Cai guys who stay overseas and 
>ass kiss CCP :-)
>

We certainly welcome any friendly gesture of the Chinese government.
In fact, it is nothing new in the world for a government to protect
its oversea citizens. It is not too nice for them to do so, but it
is not too late for them to do so either. Let us consider this a progress
of the Chinese government.

Yet, we have something to remember. We still remember the government
unreasonably killed peaceful civillians who demonstrated only for
their basic right. Before a formal apology is issued from the government
to the Chinese people, this government is still guilty.

I would appreciate if the Chinese government choose to apologize.
It will show their grace and sense of justice. Poeple tend to forgive.
But people cannot take the arbitrary killing for granted.

Xiao Li
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: zyoung@engr
Subject: <None>
Followup-To: poster
Organization: Memorial University of Newfoundland
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 21:55:36 GMT

I am also going to test my system. 



Is it working ?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: ldong@hila.hut.fi (Liyun Dong)
Subject: Re: The Future of China
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 08:38:53 GMT

In article <1992Aug27.071118.2918@sinix.UUCP> shu@sinix.UUCP (Leif Schumacher) writes:
>
>THe CCP regime will not last forever. It will be followed (sooner or later) 
>	by some form of government which is open and democratic.
>	This will hapen either peacefully or through a revolution.
>
>China does not have a democratic tradition.
>
>
>The result of these points lead to the questions:
>
>	1) How could this transition happen ?
>	2) What type of government will follow ?
>	3) How long and when will this transition occur ? 
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------

1. This transition would probably be triggered by the deaths of current
senior leaders. Some faction (mostly probable the reformers) within the party,
 backed by
young professional army officials (they are trained in military institutions
since 1978), would take the power, changing the CCname into some sort of social
democrats. It is highly probable that the transition would be largely peaceful,
because the present economical situation is largely healthy.

2. Since there is no any political force inside or outside of China can rival
the present CCP. The future social democrats government would still be a
semi democratic similar to the present eastern bloc countries or more like J
apan, South Korea or Taiwan. The real, western style democracy would 
be impossible. However a full market economy would be developing very fast.

3. Probably before the end of this century.

Huachen Pan
Finland
---------------
i am using other's account for news reading.
From: john@jho.com (John Ho)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Keywords: F16
Date: 4 Sep 92 19:01:12 GMT
Organization: Software Programming, Inc., Dallas, Texas USA

zliu@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Zhong Liu) writes:

>So far, no countries have been successful to sell high-tech
>weapons to Taiwan. I wonder what the serious consequences claimed
>by CG will be. I think this time CG must feel to be betrayed by
>President Bush. For Bush, the winning of the election is more
>important than any other things.

What does it have for Bush if he cannot keep his throne?  Bush is
a dictator with a different face.  He will hold on to power as much
as he can.  It is the power that gets to his head and he will do 
anything to keep that position.  Stay tune for more arm sale to Taiwan
from now on.  France and Britian and Iran and Turkey and USSR are 
more than happy to show Taiwan, the rich man in Asia, their goodies 
in their arsenal and US will not say a word.  Politics. Polictics. Politics.
-- 
John Ho from Dallas, Texas USA. (john@jho.com)           - No news is bad news.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: mlibucha@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Mark A Libucha)
Subject: When does a Chinese become an American?
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 19:28:09 GMT

	Suppose the U.S. Green Card Bill becomes law. Every Chinese who
applies for a green card does so (at least officially) with the intent of
becoming a U.S. citizen. If a Chinese becomes a U.S. citizen does he or
she then share the blame and glory of America?

	For instance, will he or she share the blame for the Vietnam War,
for the atomic bombs dropped on Japan, the bullying of China, the 
extermination of Native Americans, etc.?

	Can he or she take credit for the first moon walk, the first actor
president :-), etc.?

	I personally am a second generation American. Yet because I have
white skin and speak fluent English I feel that American history is somehow
partly my responsibility. Will the new Chinese U.S. citizens (or their 
children) feel the same way? Should they? Should I?