HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gadfly@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (Gadfly)
Subject: Re: Abortion
Organization: AT&T
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 21:43:32 GMT
Summary: Time to worry.

In article <235@cnmhnet.UUCP>, keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard) writes:
> > > > > Is abortion wrong?
> > > > Discussing it in this newsgroup is!
> > > No Gadfly, it isn't.  

Well, that was the recap.  To which I wrote:

> >            ...Because of the dogmatic nature of opinions on this
> > subject, coupled with an inability of most undergraduate technogeeks
> > to form and communicate a coherent philosophical argument, we--
> > your net.elders--created net.abortion, which would become talk.abortion
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > in the fullness of time... 
 
> Oh Gadfly, if you were as chronologically mature as one would
> have us believe, you would have stated in your brief rhetoric,
> that there is a more appropriate newsgroup for the discussion
> of a topic such as abortion, and you would have mentioned it.
> Instead, you instilled upon us the subtle flame which said,
> "Discussing it in this newsgroup is...", without gladly furnishing
> the addendum "...try the newsgroup talk.abortion".  

Gee, I'm really sorry, Keith.  Here I took the time to craft a
succinct, and I hope entertaining, reply to your hideously lame (but
wonderfully terse!) plaint.  And I had the collosal arrogance to
presume that you could read.  Perhaps you're a member of that "post-
literate" generation that soi-disant "educators" are babbling about.
Anyway, please accept my apologies.  I know I was pretty mean to
you, but do feel warmly reassured that I nevertheless truly value
your basic worth as a person.  OK?  Ciao.

               *** ***
Ken Perlow   ***** *****
15 Dec 92   ****** ******   25 Frimaire An CCI
            *****   *****   gadfly@ihspc.att.com
             ** ** ** **
...L'AUDACE!   *** ***   TOUJOURS DE L'AUDACE!  ENCORE DE L'AUDACE!
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (eleanor.j.evans)
Subject: Re: Women: would you go out with a man dumber than you?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 17:25:04 GMT


I have to.


Piglet      <this is a trap door.  do not o
                                           p
                                           e
                                            nn
                                              >
From: martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Stoke Dat Pizza Oven
Date: 12 Dec 92 21:18:56 GMT
	<1992Dec12.090324.9958@netcom.com>
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: rohwerwd@netcom.com's message of 12 Dec 92 09:03:24 GMT

In article <1992Dec12.090324.9958@netcom.com> rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster) writes:

   In article <1992Dec11.032838.25983@sol.UVic.CA> atovorni@engr.UVic.CA writes:
   >>>[deleted]
   >>>		Charles R. Martin/(Charlie)/martinc@cs.unc.edu
   >>[deleted] 
   >>               Sesquipedalian
   >[deleted]

	(:

My, that was certainly enlightening.


--
		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
Newsgroups: soc.singles,ba.singles
From: aldridge@netcom.com (Jacquelyn Aldridge)
Subject: Re: Okay, what *is* that view? (was: Re: Pre-Sex Contract)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 21:15:06 GMT


>In article <BzE0vv.77o@CAM.ORG> souchay@CAM.ORG (Francois Souchay) writes:

>Good point, though I was thinking more of day-to-day interaction.
>I blanked out on male strippers, though, because I find the concept
>distasteful.  I look at a Chippendale's calendar, and those guys don't
>turn me on, they look *weird*, like something from the Planet Steroid.
	
	Well, I don't think the live shows are all that bad. The guys seem
to enjoy it. Like being a rock star but all based on how gorgeous he looks
and acts on stage. If it's not a career but just a year or two it's
probably fun. How many guys get to do it? Even your basic skinny and not
built guy looks good on stage if he struts and uses a tanning lotion. Like
seeing a stallion rear rather than just plodding around in a pasture.
---Jackie--
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Victims of Denial!!!!
Date: 14 Dec 92 20:17:12 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Dec12.091241.10375@netcom.com> rohwerwd@netcom.com (Mr. Tickle Monster) writes:
>In article <15855@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
||In article <1992Dec10.214852.16800@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
|>>HF.HLA@forsythe.stanford.edu (Lisa A. Haupt) writes:
|>|] 
|>|]  *deleted*
|>|] 
|>|] Lisa Haupt
|>|] "the seahag"
|>|
|>|  *deleted*
|> 
|>Hey, where's all that help that you talked about in that last article
|>about finding a RealWoman(tm) for John?  Why didn't you ask her if
|>she was willing to meet John?   Are you saying that Lisa is not a
|>RealWoman(tm)?
|>
|
|     Well, maybe Lisa just happens to be a RealAirPrincess. (:

Is this another inside joke?

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Date: 17 Dec 92 21:16:23 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <1992Dec16.212243.26513@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> krw@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (keith.r.smith) writes:
>In article <15932@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
|>
|>The man picks her up and takes her to a restaurant for dinner.  She has
|>not selected the restaurant.  
|
|Was she not even _consulted_ as to where she might like to go?
 
Maybe she was, maybe she wasn't.  Assume he is suprising her.  Go with me
on this, OK?

|>She orders as she would normally do, and lets
|>say the total bill comes to $60 without the tip.
|>
|>The man then asked the woman for $30 but said "I'll get the tip."
|>
|>It was the womans opinion that this man has no class and I agree with her.  
|
|Let's see here, a man is _expected_ to take a woman out to a fancy
|restaurant on a first (or-nearly-so), and pick up the entire tab there,
|presumably to impress her with how much money he can blow on a "night out".
|I wonder what kind of impression this makes on the woman.... if she
|goes out with you again, on the same basis, is it because you have
|deep eyes or deep pockets?  Is it not possible that a woman can enjoy
|the company of a man that she might want to get to know better, without
|automatically expecting (in some cases, even _demanding_) that he foot
|the bill?
 
Whole lot of word twisting going on there.  

|>I would much prefer a "Thank you very much for dinner tonight.  I had
|>a wonderful time", and maybe a kiss on the cheek than 25% of the tab and
|>a handshake.
|
|Are these options mutually exclusive?  Can a woman not enjoy the company
|of a man _and_ be considerate enough to share the expenses of dating?
|If a man picks up the tab, does that mean that the woman will give him
|a kiss, rather than a handshake?  Should a man foot the bill if he
|hopes for a kiss, rather than a handshake?  Suppose the woman hopes
|for a kiss, rather than a handshake?  Is that when she should pay?
|(after all, what is the differrence between going out on a "date",
|and "going out with the homeboys/homegirls")
|Why the double-standard?
 
More word twisting and conjecture.  Rather and address each question, 
(I will if you insist but there's just been too many responses to the
thread to respond to already), I'll answer with a question.

If you get a Christmas present from someone this year will you offer to
contribute to the cost of the present?  No, of course you won't.  That's
because it's a gift.  Think about it.

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: kytan@mantra.fia.dmg.ml.com (Kok-Yong Tan)
Subject: Re: Wannabees (was Re: Attraction -> Acquiantance or vice versa?)
Organization: Organised?  Here?  Hahahahahahahaha.....
	<JULIE.92Dec11173857@cucbs.chem.columbia.edu>
	<1992Dec14.194204.12562@b8.b8.ingr.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 15:41:26 GMT

In article <1992Dec14.194204.12562@b8.b8.ingr.com> larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings) writes:

>I had one friend who used to call and talk for hours every time she and her
>husband split up (quite frequently), long distance.  It gave her a chance to
>hear a friendly supportive voice and run up her husbands phone bill.  One
>time my roommates sister and a friend were visiting and one of the girls
>answered the phone, later she came in to tell me she was leaving on a date.
>When she got back from her date I was still on the phone.  My one good
>ear was sore, and both arms were hurting from holding the phone, but she felt
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Ah!  That's why I now have a cordless headset phone!!! :-)  Believe me, it
helps immensely when one is in "father confessor" (aka "priestly") mode. 

>better and that was what I found to be important.  But then I'm a NICE GUY.
>I'd have hated to see that months phone bill NYC to Fla. for 6/7 hours.

--
===============================================================================
Kok-Yong Tan, 			  	| My words are my own: 
Fixed Income Analytics Group, 	  	| My bosses know naught.
Merrill Lynch,			  	| Wherever they're sown,
World Financial Center, North Tower, 	| Just I should be sought.
New York, NY 10281-1315.	  	|		- K. Y. Tan, 5 Feb 1992
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
InterNet: kytan@fia.dmg.ml.com (Merrill Lynch)
	  75046.256@compuserve.com (CompuServe)
===============================================================================

Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA (dreas)
Subject: Re: Giving and Receiving
Reply-To: atovorni@engr.UVic.CA
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, Canada
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 20:04:35 GMT

In article 17472@rs6000.bham.ac.uk, pickerig@eee.bham.ac.uk (Guy Pickering) writes:

>If you give someone little presents, what do you give and what do
>you like to receive?

I was talking to the guy[</.)] in the red suit last night on a street corner.
A very attractive young woman passed us by. I asked him if she'd fit into my sock
on the mantle. "Yes," he said, "But she'd get stuck and full of soot in the 
chimney."

Now, this would pose a problem. The living room would get full of smoke and
the poor girl would get slightly crispy. Besides, Christmas is a time for 
giving, isn't it?

I gave a video cassette to my landlady, chocolates to my sister, an 8X10
glossy of me wearing a Sanity Clause hat and a devilish grin to my parents
back home. Giving makes me feel good. I don't care what I receive. It's the 
thought that counts.

But now that you mention it, a bottle of WISER'S OLDEST 18-year-old rye would
just about hit the spot...

dreas 


Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: margoli@watson.ibm.com (Larry Margolis)
Subject: Re: Woman: will you go out with shorter man?
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 07:20:04 GMT
News-Software: IBM OS/2 PM RN (NR/2) v0.16 by O. Vishnepolsky and R. Rogers
Reply-To: margoli@watson.IBM.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: The Village Waterbed

In <15837@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
>As I said before, when this topic last came up, I think that dating someone
>that exactly the same height is the ideal.  For one thing, you can both
>stand flatfooted and you'll find that your lips fit.  Access to other
>strategic parts is also much easier.

I've found that in bed, height differences don't generally matter...
--
Larry Margolis, MARGOLI@YKTVMV (Bitnet), margoli@watson.IBM.com (Internet)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: martinc@hatteras.cs.unc.edu (Charles R. Martin)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Size 8? (Re: What is NOT attractive to "SINGLE" men)
Date: 12 Dec 92 21:12:40 GMT
	<MARTINC.92Dec11221443@hatteras.cs.unc.edu> <7895@news.duke.edu>
Distribution: usa
Organization: UNC Department of Computer Science
In-reply-to: diamond@acpub.duke.edu's message of 12 Dec 92 16:54:34 GMT

In article <7895@news.duke.edu> diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams) writes:


   >In article <227@cnmhnet.UUCP> keithg@cnmhnet.UUCP (keith garrard) writes:

   >>   Oh Elizabeth, please cancel my previous posting whereby I said I 
   >>   was in RDU last weekend and I wished I could have met you. 
   >
   >Hey, Beth, if you can get him to stop off here, I'll hold him down while
   >you kick him.

   Thanks, Charlie, you're a sweetheart.   However, I think I'd rather sit on 
   his ribcage for a few hours.

Yeah, that's what you say -- but do you ever offer to sit on *my*
ribcage for a few hours?
--
		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
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: What is gold-digging?
Date: 11 Dec 92 20:08:14 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

In article <724066442.19833@minster.york.ac.uk> aaron@minster.york.ac.uk writes:

>: >When I was into the dating game and during one year where I, at various  
>: >times, dated 6 different women, I first found that none of them were much  
>: >excited about sharing the expense of a meal out.
>: 
>: I'm genuinely surprised at the number of female "gold-diggers" that seem
>: to be out there, from what you guys say.
>
>  So am I. It is not my experience at all. 

Would someone define gold-digging?

If a man asks me out, and I don't know him very well, I assume he's
paying.  If he doesn't, he's got no class whatsoever, IMO.  Frankly, it
hasn't happened to me (though it did happen to a friend of mine).  

If it's not a first date, I'll usually offer to pay my way, depending on 
the guy -- some guys would rather _always_ pay; others like to split the 
bill.  Usually, though, I end up with guys who, if they ask me out, plan
on paying.  In those cases, I'll usually offer to leave the tip or buy
dessert.

I imagine it would be different if I asked a man out, but that isn't my
style.  

Now that I've been seeing someone for over a year, we rarely do the
traditional "date" thing; I'll pay for lunch this time, he'll pay next
time, I'll cook, he'll cook, whatever.  Occasionally we still do the
formal "date," we go somewhere special and he pays.  Otherwise, whoever
happens to have money at the time pays, or we split it.  

So, would any guys out there in net.land consider any of this 
"gold-digging"?  I'm honestly not very familiar with the term.




-- 
The trick of reason is to get the imagination to seize the actual world --
if only from time to time.     -- Annie Dillard, "An American Childhood"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
From: johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Thanks for 7 inches
Date: 18 Dec 92 17:44:24 GMT
Organization: Auspex Systems, Inc.

In article <BzEnMu.EFw@CAM.ORG> souchay@CAM.ORG (Francois Souchay) writes:
>
|In article <15928@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
|>In article <BzC13o.DIv@CAM.ORG> souchay@CAM.ORG (Francois Souchay) writes:
|>>In article <15906@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:
|>|>The best sign I've seen at a ski resort is one at the top of one of the
|>|>advanced runs at Mammoth.  It reads, "When your friends say go, you have
|>|>the right to say no. The life you save may be your own."  
|>|
|>|Too bloody right. I let myself be guided off the lift by these guys.
|>|I left the idiots as soon as I got to the bottom. 
|>|
|>|The mountain doesn't care if you do the run, or avoid it entirely.
|>
|>Yes it does. 
|> ... John with ski patrol working for safety... [deleted for brevity]
|
|Ok, you're right, the workers at the site care. What I meant was the
|mountain as a granite entity doesn't care if you live or die on its
|slopes. It will still be there long after we're all gone, so what's
|the point of "proving" anything?
 
And you're right about "the mountain".  Sorry I misinterpreted your
article.  You are also right that there is no point in proving anything
to your buddies.  There is, however, some satisfaction in proving something
to yourself.  Successfully skiing a challenging run (not just getting
down it) is one of the joys of skiing however.  The thing about skiing
is that no matter how good you get there's always going to be someone better.

-- 
+==========================================================================+
| John Fereira        | Auspex Systems | "Ask me about my vow of silence." |
| johnf@auspex.com    | Santa Clara CA |                                   |
+==========================================================================+
From: diamond@acpub.duke.edu (Elizabeth Abrams)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Date: 16 Dec 92 20:27:43 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

In article <15926@auspex-gw.auspex.com> johnf@Auspex.COM (John Fereira) writes:

>When I go out to dinner at a restaurant, whether it`s
>dutch or I'm paying, I will choose a place that I can afford to order anything
>that I want off the menu on that particular night.  

This sounds like a good idea to me too.  However, given my current financial
state, I could *maybe* affort McDonald's for two.  I guess that means I
just can't ask anyone out until I inherit money, or something.  

					--Diamond

diamond@acpub.duke.edu| We cross our bridges when we come to them and burn
Elizabeth S. Abrams   | them behind us, with nothing to show for our progress 
		      | but the memory of the smell of smoke, and the  
                      | presumption that once our eyes watered. -Tom Stoppard
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: larry@b8.b8.ingr.com (Larry Billings)
Subject: Re: What is gold-digging?
Organization: Intergraph
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 15:42:48 GMT

In article <kDYKrAbEBh106h@wildrose.infoserv.com>, rkf@wildrose.infoserv.com (Ray Fink) writes:
> 
> Oh yeah, I probably do have no class whatsoever, I don't even open
> car doors for women.  Another useful sorting criterion, I've found ;-)
> 
> -- 
> -- Ray


Please explain how this is a "sorting" criteria...  What you open the door
for her and if she seems to like it you slam the door and drive off leaving
her on the sidewalk?  :)
If she DEMANDED it I'd be a little cautious, otherwise I see nothing wrong 
with it at all.

Larry Billings
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: cocoa@netcom.com
Subject: Re: Picking up the Tab (was: Re: What is gold-digging?)
Organization: Bourbon Street
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 07:38:53 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.004855.27002@news.acns.nwu.edu> drmax@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marianna Max) writes:
>In article <1992Dec16.212122.17026@cbnews.cb.att.com> eleanor@cbnews.cb.att.com (Piglet) writes:
>
>>
>>Even on a formal date, I will offer to split the check, but I won't be 
>>offended either way...  There are exceptions.  If I had a lousy time, 
>>and I NEVER want to see the other person again, I'll stick 'em with
>>the check (but only if they did the asking).  I've also grabbed for the 
>>check, when I had a really great time...  
>
>Heh! Funny, I do just the opposite. If I want to see them again, I feel
>comfortable letting them pay for the first date because I know that when I
>ask them for that second date I'll pick up the cost. Guys I don't
>necessarily want to see again are the ones I don't want to feel any
>obligation towards so the books are balanced immediately. 

!!!I have unwittly posted sentiments that agree with Max's ???!!!!!!

Quick, somebody pinch me 'cause I must be dreaming.  Or have I just been
away *WAY* too long?

Just me,

little 'e'

"for life's not a paragraph"
"And death i think is no parenthesis" - e.e. cummings

-- 
*  *  *    Chocolatier at Arms, and Castle Wetware Liason            *  *  *
*  *  *    e-mail: cocoa@netcom.com   -    voicemail: 415-337-4940   *  *  *
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 16:30:23 EST
From: Graydon <SAUNDRSG@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: New Relationships...
Distribution: usa
 <1992Dec9.022705.4868@sol.UVic.CA> <1992Dec9.182323.23707@cbfsb.cb.att.com>
 <12DEC199223015971@stars.gsfc.nasa.gov> <oneil.724227891@cwis>

In article <oneil.724227891@cwis>, oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu (Sharon O'Neil) says:
>
>How important /is/ sex to a relationship?
>
>sharon
>oneil@cwis.unomaha.edu
>

It depends on what the relationship is for.

If one has entered into the relationship with some hopes/intentions
toward continuing the relationship for so long as you both shall live,
it is hard to see how there can be any particular urgency about getting
to the sex part. (urgency inherent in the relationship, rather than glands. :)

If the *point* is access to sex, then, well, the frequency, quality,
or particular nature of the sex involved is obviously the over-riding
concern for the person with that objective.

Miss-matched objectives are a problem; so are unclear objectives,
particularly ones where the person is so confused that they can't
even tell what they're confused about (if that parsed!).

There - three whole paragraphs to say 'it depends'. :]

Graydon
Newsgroups: soc.singles
From: lfd@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (Lee Derbenwick)
Subject: Re: Size 8? (Re: What is NOT attractive to "SINGLE" men)
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 00:43:14 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.203753.9339@netcom.com>, cocoa@netcom.com writes:
> Or perhaps by standing on a man's ribcage while wearing spike heels that have
> the plastic heel peice gone, so that the nails are sticking right into the 
> man's flesh.  And then walking up and down his chest a few times.

Ouch.  What do you think this is, alt.sex.bandage?  :-)

 -- Speaking strictly for myself,
 --   Lee Derbenwick, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ
 --   lfd@cbnewsm.ATT.COM  or  <wherever>!att!cbnewsm!lfd
From: stef@Apple.COM (Stef Jones)
Newsgroups: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Surrogate companion
Date: 20 Dec 92 18:30:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

Matt Valentine writes:

>IMO you should try even harder to maintain friendships when  
>starting off and getting further into a relationship with an SO.  I think  
>you can lead a much more balanced life emotionally when your socialization  
>is spread around to many people.  If the SO leaves you, your dependence  
>hasn't grown so large that you can't function without that person.  

Furthermore, if the partners have outside interests, they keep on bringing
new energy into the relationship. Maintaining outside interests is not just
a safety net, it is a positive thing for the relationship. 
-- 
Stef                Just as there are laws of Conservation of Matter and
stef@apple.com      Energy, so there are in fact Laws of Conservation of 
                    Pain and Joy. Neither can ever be created or destroyed.
                         But one can be converted into the other. 
                                                         --Spider Robinson