HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: Arizona State University
Date: Monday, 23 Nov 1992 12:56:41 MST
From: <AUASV@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: I'm back, Ashish Vaidya

While most of you were talking behind my back, I was at a funeral for my friend
He died of gun shot wounds.

I'll take any comments that you have to me and also If someone can provide me
with the latest on what's being discussed about this subject, write to me.

The death of my friend was, as the police described it, a racial incident.  I
think we have had enough of this, What do you people think?

I know some people have been slaming me hard for my comments, sayin they are
made up,  Tell that to Maasi and Uncle.  They lost their son.  They lost their
reason for living since he was their world.  You tell them that you don't
believe it.  Be considerate people!

My initial contact to this group was so I can learn the mentality of you people
and while I received much response, I was not able to stir up any support,
except for someone in Canada, and I failed miserably to get the views of the
unfortunate accross. Yall shouldn't be kickin a man when he's down, but somehow
I now expect that from many Indians.  I laugh at the people who called me a
Millicient Rebal, or something close to that.  I don't think he can read.  NO,
I AIN"T STARTING A INDIAN STREET GANG, YOU DUMB rich ass MoFo (Aahhhemm), guy.
I am trying to start an activist group who will be there when an Indian is in
trouble, Or when an Indian is in need, or when an Indian needs help with legal
problems, etc.   If there was a brother in need in a court, the only street
gang I'm looking for is made up of 4 or 5 lawyers who walks to court to provide
aid to this man.  If a family had a loss, get a support team out there so while
they are greevingthey can run errands or provide some other asked for service.
families.  If a family is going thru a financial breakdown, there is a fund
which they can access in their time of need, etc.
These are type of "Street Gangs" I'm hoping to inspire.

To anyone that wants to reply, please do so on my other account which is ICASV
instead of AUASV, thaks for reading my "Worthless Indian Points".  Unlike most
of you who have jobs, I don't so I have to get back to class so that I can pay
for my education from the Govt.
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian,soc.culture.indian
From: alok@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (alok.vijayvargia)
Subject: Re: Excluding men
Organization: AT&T
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 00:20:19 GMT
Followup-To: alt.culture.us.asian-indian

In article <17NOV199211084807@rosie.uh.edu>, fina2f@rosie.uh.edu (Venkatesh, P. C.) writes:
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Posted for Susan Chacko, whose usual posting address is 
> temporarily out of commission.
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> The mailing list is in no way secret, and has been discussed fairly
> extensively on soc.culture.indian where the proposal was first
> floated. 

Unfortunately the proposals were n't posted on acuai, hence the post
from Amirthi who heard about it from a friend.

> At that time, there was no plan to exclude men, but a number
> of the women who responded felt very strongly that they would prefer
> an all-female group. For this reason, the question of male membership
> was postponed until the group was formed and *all* the members had
> a chance to express their views.

Could we see some sort of a vote count or referendum among the subscribers
of this mailing list on this issue ?

Just post the results on sci, acuai etc.

> If someone were to start an open group to discuss women's issues,
> I'd join and contribute. But I don't see any reason to change the
> nature of this mailing list at present, especially since most of the 
> members prefer it as it is.

How would others know about these so called womens issues if there is
limited access to this group ?  I mean how are men going to know about
these womens issues ? Are the moderators or somebody going to post 
summaries of these issues on the open groups like sci or acuai etc ?
Would there be an open discussion on these issues after such summary
postings ? Will the result of these open discussions then be discussed
on the private maillist and so on ? I mean - what is the mechanism you
or the organizers of this private mailing list propose to have men
involved at some point ? Do you see the need at all of having men
involved at some point in future ?

> Susan.

Alok
From: c150-bt@po.berkeley.edu (Manish Vij)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: SEX
Date: 23 Nov 92 21:19:47 GMT
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley

In article <samaddar.722451292@dumbo> samaddar@siemens.com writes:

>Why do people expect monogamy once a relationship begins when they
>condone past sexual encounters/relationships? If your spouse/SO can have sex
>with someone X months/years ago and you accept his/her claim that that is not
>going to affect your relationship, why is difficult to accept the same claim
>if he/she had sex with someone yesterday/(an hour ago)/(having right now) ?
>
>Sumitro

Because it ain't true.

My views on sexuality have transformed from my days of living in a conservative
Indian home, but on this one issue, I'm unable to reconcile my ideology
with my experience.  Logically, (putting aside the increased risk of STD's),
emotional fidelity matters more to me than physical fidelity.  In
practice, I am jealous of other people that my SO may see.  I have difficulty
believing that it doesn't affect the relationship; we're not machines that
we can switch on and off and compartmentalize our emotions.

Another element of this, of course, is how secure the partners feel in the
relationship.  If each believe the other is firmly, seccurely committed,
then physical infidelity would matter less.  If any insecurity comes into
play, and it usually does, then jealousy would arise.

Jealousy is a destructive emotion to me.  Without passing moral judgment
on its rightness, it inherently crimps my chest, depresses my spirits, and
clouds my mind.  I would love to be free of it, but it seems that I'm
unable to entirely devalue fidelity.

Nanish

Do not know love when the spring flowers bloom
An inch of love is an inch of ashes.
                                          - T'ang dynasty poem
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: soam@cs.cornell.edu (Soam Acharya)
Subject: Re: RACISM
Keywords:  !!@@, #$%#$, s$%$#^$%&$&!@!
Organization: Cornell University, CS Dept., Ithaca, NY
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 17:23:19 GMT

In <1992Nov18.223314.22221@midway.uchicago.edu> moh2@quads.uchicago.edu (Kateri/Mary Anne) writes:

>A list of common Anglo-Saxon expletives for those too innocent to
>understand the Ron's post:  shit, damn, fuck, hell, bitch, cunt, dick,
>spic, honky, nigger, fag, dyke .....

Or any combination thereof.

You know, anything can be made to sound derogatory.  Ever been called
a "gandhi"?  

The worst name I've ever been called was a "hindiya" and that was in
Kuwait.  You can guess what it means but it was the context in which
it was said that I found to be most perturbing.

> Mail me if you need definitions.

A little uncalled for.  I am sure Ron's cursing vocabulary is good as 
the next man's!
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
   Soam Acharya					soam@ee.cornell.edu
   Eng. & Theory Center, #369			soam@cs.cornell.edu
   Cornell University				607-254-8811
   Ithaca, NY 14853
   
   "I see the light at the end of the tunnel now
    Will someone please tell me it's not a train "
					- Cracker
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: raghavan@wk28.nas.nasa.gov (Venkatraman Raghavan)
Subject: Re: MISUNDERSTANDING
Organization: -
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 92 23:27:50 GMT
Distribution: usa

Attribution:

 >   = Ron Hira
 >|> = Me flaming Ashish Vaidya:
       [ As we all know, I am allergic to the initials A.V. :-) 
         Just kidding, Alok. ]

[Ron, I have deleted the stuff on which both of us agree. Also  I didn't
expect to be scrutinized on my flaming of Ashish. His postings contained
a lot of hatred and I was just trying to let him know how he sounds.
Somehow, Ashish's stories sounded more like sour grapes to me. 
(Families driven out of their homes due to racism, etc.). Also
he never responds to the any questions asked. ]

 >|> [Some of your hatred of America seems to come from the economic hardship
 >|> you might have gone through. Get a decent education and a good job, you 
 >|> will be happier. If you are trying to form Indian street gangs, no thanks,
 >|> we don't need them.]

 >What you're advocating is that we should feel good about ourselves
 >because the white man has sort of accepted us into their clique. 

I am not advocating that at all. Also, I am not saying that there
is no racism. All I was saying was that the best way out of a ghetto
is by moving up the economic ladder.

 >One thing that I've been wondering about is if anyone knows a good 
 >derogatory name for white people? Frankly, "whitey" doesn't cut it. 

I have used 'pale face' at some people, showing my support for the
other 'indians'.

 >|> Please spell the name M.K.Gandhi correctly, it is not Gandy or Ghandi.
 >|> (I am pretty sure it not a typo, your 'h' is three spots out of place).

 >This is intended more as a question than a flame, but isn't `Gandhi' just
 >a phonetic english spelling of his name? As an example, there are many 
 >english representations of Gaddaffy, Kadafy, etc etc (for those of you
 >who used to watch SNL).  
 >
 >Is there a right or wrong way to spell it, or just one that is commonly
 >used?

I was correcting Ashish because his spelling comes quite close to an
obscene word in Hindi. I thought Ashish being from Gujarat should 
know the correct spelling. As another poster pointed out, we should
use Gandhi because that is what he used.

Regards,
Raghavan

P.S.: The almost silent 'h' in my name is a killer too. People who are
not familiar with the 'deva nagari' system of alphabets have a tough 
time spelling it and pronouncing it. Whenever they forget, most 
americans spell it as 'Rahgavan'.
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: moh2@quads.uchicago.edu (Kateri/Mary Anne)
Subject: Re: SEX
Reply-To: moh2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 22:27:48 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.221749.4700@watson.ibm.com> saeed@watson.ibm.com (Saeed Jaffer) writes:

>Well, how about this.  What about engaging in pre-marital sex with someone who's not
>South Asian?  

Why should it matter?

Never mind, I know it does for a lot of people.

>With someone who IS South Asian?  Is there a difference?  

Unfortunately, I think there would be.  With a South Asian, I would
have to fight my conditioning against speaking freely and openly among
Indian men.  (y'all should see me in person, in an Indian
gathering....not quite a mouse, but close)

>What age do you
>think pre-marital sex is too young?  12?  16?  19?  

That's a hard one.  In Illinois, age of consent is 18, and I've known
people younger than that who are mature enough to make such a
decision, and I've known people older who aren't mature enough.

General guideline....if whoever you're with is at all unsure,
especially if they're young, back off!  It'll wait.  And if your love
is strong enough, it'll last.

>What about extramarital sex?

Another hard one.  Deceiving someone you care about is generally a bad
idea.  But people do it all the time, for the best of reasons (often
so as not to hurt their loved one over a thoughtless moment).  Try to
be honest; try to be careful.

Of course, if both partners are polyamorous, the problem becomes more
one of logistics than ethics.

>How about widows and divorcees?

Anything who's been through that much pain deserves whatever joy they
can find.

 - Amirthi

P.S. -Congratulations to Saeed for being the first to respond (shaming
me into doing so)...and to Puneet for having the courage to bring up
these questions in the first place.
-- 
More than any other time in history, mankind faces a crossroads.  One
path leads to despair and utter hopelessness.  The other to total
extinction. Let us pray we have the wisdom to choose correctly.
						 - Woody Allen
From: mba2@Rosie.UH.EDU (Puneet_S)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: SEX
Date: 23 Nov 1992 15:47:01 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
Reply-To: mba2@Rosie.UH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: rosie.uh.edu

In article <samaddar.722451292@dumbo>, samaddar@siemens.com (Sumitro Samaddar) writes:
>misdeva@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu (Devjani Mishra) writes:
>
>What about married (or having some SO), consenting adults having sex with
>someone who is NOT their spouse/SO? 

PS	So what...they are consenting....It's their business...On the other
	hand if I am married to one of the individuals it then becomes my
	business also... I don't want my wife to "cheat" on me, as I would
	not "cheat" on her....What you do as a single, is your business..
	what you do as a married individual becomes the business of the SO.

Will it bother you if your spouse/SO had
>sex with someone else but remained just as caring,loving,affectionate towards
>you? 

PS	Yes an No,  Difficult to answer... Never had a SO/spouse in such a
	situation... SO I might not care as much... Spouse I might care a
	lot more though....

Why do people expect monogamy once a relationship begins when they
>condone past sexual encounters/relationships?

PS	Good question, can't answer.....

 If your spouse/SO can have sex
>with someone X months/years ago and you accept his/her claim that that is not
>going to affect your relationship, why is difficult to accept the same claim
>if he/she had sex with someone yesterday/(an hour ago)/(having right now) ?
>
PS	Jealousy.....It's evil, It's there, and I know I am/can be very
	Jealous....May not like it, but it's a part of me....and I accept it.
	I may try to change myself to be less of it....but I don't want to..
	By being this way, it makes me understand how the SO might feel
	if I was in a similar situation... hence, I won't allow myself in
	said situation.....

________________________________________________________________________________
It's not my goddamn planet, monkey boy
Puneet

                                                         MBA2@JETSON.UH.EDU   or
                                                         BBRC215@BAL0053.B-R.COM
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: sram@seas.gwu.edu (Siddharth R. Ram)
Subject: Re: NYT bashing [was Re: Linear times in Amrika]
Organization: George Washington University
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 03:52:52 GMT

In article <SMEHTA.92Nov16152758@kwela.nynexst.com> smehta@nynexst.com writes:
>
>> am299cp@sdcc15.ucsd.edu (ashok machcha) writes:
>
>> A random study sampple conducted by Northern Illinois Univ., examining
>> about 180 issues, found that ONLY crisis events of India 
>> were covered in the NYT.
>> 
>> I am now subscribing to NYT.  Havta see what barbara crosette is up to next !
>FYI, Barbara Crossette is no longer the NYT correspondent, bureau
>chief, whatever in India. In fact, last time I saw her she was back
>in DC on some PBS talk(ing heads) show. If you think the NYT is
>"negative" try The Economist for its smugness -- which doesn't mean
>that their analysis isn't correct, just that Indians have a hard time
>dealing w/ it.

I do not think that the fact that only crisis events are covered implies in any
way that the paper is biased. The fact is that only bad news makes for good reporting, irrespective of the country being covered, and this is largely because ofour desire to read stuff which is either horrifying or at the least, upsetting
. All the news about germany
in the past few weeks has either been about the money markets going crazy,
or the extreme right wing violence. Peru was in the news only because of a Coup
attempt. When was the last time any of you saw the headlines say "Boy scout helps granny cross road, gets a pat on the back as reward" ?.
The popular push in America would be to pedal India as a poor nation, wiht
poverty and misery (not that it is completly off), just as japan likes to see
America as a country with everyone with a gun in thier hands, in a drug induced
stupor.
In general, though, I think that The Washington Post is better with John Anderson covering india rather than Steve Cohen.
From: mba2@Rosie.UH.EDU (Puneet_S)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: SEX
Date: 19 Nov 1992 19:01:25 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
Reply-To: mba2@Rosie.UH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: rosie.uh.edu

Attention! Not for the mild-mannered or the comically inclined.

Interesting events in my life and my friends lives have brought 
up some questions.  I feel that I should share these with you all in 
hope of getting opinions.  Of course, you all may have posted concerning
this particular matter in the past.  I appologize for redundancy.

I am taking this matter seriously, definetly not in fun or pun.

1.	Is sex before marraige right/wrong?
	If it is wrong, Why?
2.	If sex is wrong, is it wrong for guys and gals?
	If only wrong for one, why not the other? Hypocricy?
3.	Why would you have /not have sex before marraige?
4.	What is Sex?  Is sex the phyical act of fucking or the
	act of making love?  Is one right before marraige and
	the other not?
5.	Is there dishonor in sex before marraige?  Why?
6.	Do you care if the person you marry is /is not a virgin?
7.	Would you marry a "slut"?  Why? Why Not?  What is a slut?
	Someone who has slept with someone else before maraige or
	someone who sleeps with many people or someone who fucks
	many people?

I have many other questions, but I figure if you all are interested,
you will bring them up.

I have a stance, but am questioning it.  Of course, there are a lot
of gray areas.  Please realize, having grown up with conservative
parents, I was of course raised with the ideal that SEX (Love Making
as well as fucking) were meant for after marraige.  As I grew older,
I developed my own opinions as to what was right and wrong.

Oh, Mary Anee, per your request I have not used the *** but gone
ahead and spelled out the words.  Please note there is a difference
in my eyes between fucking and making love.  One is an animalitic act
and one is a emotional act.    Hope you all
have the time or inclination to respond.
________________________________________________________________________________
It's not my goddamn planet, monkey boy
Puneet

                                                         MBA2@JETSON.UH.EDU   or
                                                         BBRC215@BAL0053.B-R.COM
From: samaddar@siemens.com (Sumitro Samaddar)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: SEX
Date: 22 Nov 92 16:54:52 GMT
Reply-To: samaddar@siemens.com

misdeva@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu (Devjani Mishra) writes:

>non-consenting individuals, like murder and rape.  On the whole, if  two 
>(or more) mature individuals EACH decide that they would like to have sex
>together, then it is "right".  If even one of the individuals in question

(Many other posts emphasized this "consent makes it right" argument. I am
 just using this post to stick in my questions. I'm not really arguing
 against anything that Devjani wrote)

What about married (or having some SO), consenting adults having sex with
someone who is NOT their spouse/SO? Will it bother you if your spouse/SO had
sex with someone else but remained just as caring,loving,affectionate towards
you? Why do people expect monogamy once a relationship begins when they
condone past sexual encounters/relationships? If your spouse/SO can have sex
with someone X months/years ago and you accept his/her claim that that is not
going to affect your relationship, why is difficult to accept the same claim
if he/she had sex with someone yesterday/(an hour ago)/(having right now) ?

>namely, homosexuals.  I have seen life partners (or even just steady
>"boyfriends" and "girlfriends") with mutual respect and commitment to one
>another that is truly awe-inspiring;  if all marriages could as respectful
>and dedicated as these partnerships, this society would be a far more
>humanistic place.  

I would consider these couples married. IMHO, they are just trying to prove
some silly point. IMHO, marriage means a degree of commitment. Married
couples promise this commitment by taking/making some kind of vow/promise.
If these "boyfriends/girlfriends" make this degree of commitment (or more),
they should be considered married. In modern society, marriage allows the
society to enforce some kind of spousal rights in the event of separation,
death, etc. That's all. It's not some kind of iron curtain from which you
cannot come out. It also implies monogamy, but these "unmarried-but-committed"
couples also usually practice monogamy. So what's the difference. Tax, health
coverage, alimony, child support :-)

Sumitro
From: fina2f@rosie.uh.edu (Venkatesh, P. C.)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: MISUNDERSTANDING
Date: 19 Nov 92 15:50:00 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
NNTP-Posting-Host: rosie.uh.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

-------------------------------------------
Posted for Susan Chacko
Please address mail to susanc@helix.nih.gov
-------------------------------------------

In article <6996@dove.nist.gov>, hira@cme.nist.gov writes...
> 
>This is intended more as a question than a flame, but isn't `Gandhi' just
>a phonetic english spelling of his name? As an example, there are many 
>english representations of Gaddaffy, Kadafy, etc etc (for those of you
>who used to watch SNL).  
> 
>Is there a right or wrong way to spell it, or just one that is commonly
>used?
> 

The way *he* spells it is the right way, surely?
Seems like it's only common courtesy to spell and pronounce people's
names the way they want it, not the way we think they should be
spelt or pronounced. 
(I had a friend in grad school called Ng, and I tied my vocal cords
up in knots trying to say it correctly, but she would have been
offended, and rightly so, if I told her 'Sorry, I can't handle 
your name so I'm going to call you Ing or Ung or Eng'...)

Susan.
From: mba2@Rosie.UH.EDU (Puneet_S)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Re: SEX
Date: 23 Nov 1992 15:39:04 GMT
Organization: University of Houston
Distribution: na
Reply-To: mba2@Rosie.UH.EDU
NNTP-Posting-Host: rosie.uh.edu

>Congratulations to you too for being courageous in answering questions
>on 'Sex' issues. I found your answers quite reasonable.
>It is good to have a women's perspective on these issues and Honor goes
>to you for being that first woman.
>
>Alok

PS	Well, Alok, how about you.. I'm interested in the Conservative
	view point also.....

________________________________________________________________________________
It's not my goddamn planet, monkey boy
Puneet

                                                         MBA2@JETSON.UH.EDU   or
                                                         BBRC215@BAL0053.B-R.COM
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian