HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: martyg@ocf.berkeley.edu (Martin Guerrero)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: More PC stuff
Date: 9 Sep 1992 18:15:35 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: earthquake.berkeley.edu



I hereby declare the contents of this post official alt.politics.XXXXXXX
language.

Anyone who doesn't use this standard or sympathize with this will be
called insensitive, hateful, bigotted, racist, misogynistic, etc.

:)



Here's a little interesting thing I found.  
Reprinted without Permission.

One of the lines was contributed by a friend of mine.

If you have any  interesting additions, please email me!



NEW POLITICALLY CORRECT LABELS FOR 1992:
(from the Heuristic Squelch, compiled by Julie Comparini)

OLD LABEL				NEW LABEL

Conservative				Reactionary
The Establishment			White Power Elite
Blind					Visually Challenged
Mute					Vocally Challenged
Dead					Metabolically challenged
Alive					Temporarily Mechanically Abled
Ugly					Aesthetically Challenged
Short					Vertically Challenged 
					   (Contributed by Gary Gin)
Rude					Politically Correct
Psychopathic				Socially Misaligned
Bald					Follicularly Challenged
Retarded				Mentally challenged
Non-white, non-male			Oppressed
Fat					Gravitationally Challenged
Pregnancy				Parasitic Oppression
Lazy					Motivationally Challenged
Drug Addict				Narcotically challenged
Janitor					Sanitation Engineer
Woman					Gyno-American
Dish Washer				Utensil Sanitizer
Dairy					Where cows are raped
Ranch					Where cattle are murdered
Fishing					Raping the Oceans
Farming					Exploiting Mother Earth
Paper Bag				Processed tree carcass
Biology Department			Where animals are tortured and then
					murdered to fulfill the sadistic 
					fantasies of white male scientific 
					lackeys of imperialist drug
					companies.
From: dsteinbe@nmsu.edu (David Steinberg)
Subject: helping desparate mothers
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
Distribution: alt.politics.correct
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 18:20:49 GMT

Kathy:
I'd love to be able to help you, but 20+% of my stipend goes to taxes.
The rest barely covers food, clothing, rent, etc.  Of course if we
didn't have to pay taxes, not only would I be able to help you out,
but:
1) You wouldn't be nearly as broke as you are because your salary
wouldn't have anything taken out for taxes.  (As for government
services  (e.g. garbage collecting) that you would want anyway, it's
always is cheaper to pay the garbage people directly rather than pay
a middle-person who pockets some for her salary and gives the rest to
the garbagepeople.)

2) The money you have would go further because there would be no sales
tax.  Take the price of food for example.  Not only would food not be
taxed (e.g. you could by 5-8% more), but with no tax on gasoline, the
price of trucking it to where you live would be cheaper, hence the
price would go down again.

Good luck with your family...

-David "ZZYZX" Steinberg
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 09:09:23 GMT

In article <Sep.12.11.59.04.1992.485@remus.rutgers.edu> kretz@remus.rutgers.edu (Kevin Kretz) writes:
>In article <1992Sep12.021908.7403@leland.Stanford.EDU>, farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>
>] My sister was a captain in the army for nearly four years.  The only
>] time she lived and showered with other women was in basic training.
>] The rest of the time she lived in a condo by herself in a yuppie
>] apartment complex.
>
>This is certainly not typical, and, more importantly, it is irrelevant. 

It's more typical than you think.  It's not true, of course, during a
war (or a police action, etc.) or at sea, but it's quite typical of
the Army.  

>]  How is the military any different from high school and college
>] students living and showering with each other?  You really think all
>] the men in your dorm or your frat are hetero?  If you join a sports
>] club, are you going to make sure all the men are hetero before you use
>] the locker room?  How do you plan to do that?
>
>     It's _not_ any different.  If there's a "differently aligned"
>person in a frat or at school and nobody knows, then nobody cares.
>It's when people _know_ that person next to them in the shower
>might have things in mind that trouble them that they don't want them
>there. And they have every right not to have to shower with
>homosexuals.

I don't understand what difference it makes to you whether another man
is looking at you because he's never seen an uncircumsized penis
before (as an example) or because he's sexually attracted to you.  It
only bothers you if a gay/bi man is out and you know he's gay or bi?

>I'm sure there are many "alternative-sexual-outlet-seekers" in the
>armed forces.  As long as they do not outwardly display that at work,
>they'll stay.  Nobody seeks to actively purge them from the army, a la
>Salem witch trials.  

Bullshit.  This is not true.  The military has purged 15,000 lesbigay
people in the last 10 years, costing the US millions of dollars to
train them, toss them out, and then train people to replace them.  The
lesbigay press is full of stories of how these people are treated, of
how the military threatens them with prison if they don't name names.

You probably missed the story of how several lesbigay soldiers came
out before Operation Desert Storm, were sent to the gulf because they
were needed, and then kicked out once the war was over.  

Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 22:23:06 GMT

In article <92252.42346.J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM> J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
>In <5181@news.duke.edu>, Emil Chuck writes:
>
>(Who would be nominated by Bill Clinton for:)
>>Secretary of Defense
>   Pat Schroeder

An excellent choice.  Schroeder has repeatedly shown herself to be a
firebrand in pushing for women's rights in the military.  She also has
proposed legislation that will stop the military from kicking lesbigay
people out on the basis of sexual orientation.  Something like 1500
lesbigay people are kicked out of the military on an annual basis,
costing American taxpayers millions of dollars to train them, try
them, and then replace them.  (Of course, who ever said that bigotry
was cost free?)

Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 92 09:16:14 GMT

In article <1992Sep12.170504.29973@anasazi.com> john@anasazi.com writes:
>In article <1992Sep12.021908.7403@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>]My sister was a captain in the army for nearly four years.  The only
>]time she lived and showered with other women was in basic training.
>]The rest of the time she lived in a condo by herself in a yuppie
>]apartment complex.

>Proof by anecdote.... obviously you must be right! Surely since your
>sister was able to stay in an apartment complex, there will never
>be a problem.

The point is that for much of the time, military personnel live a life
very similar to anyone with a 9-to-5 job.

>Obviously you know NOTHING about military life. Try living in a condo
>when you are at sea for 8 months! Try it when you are stations in
>someplace where the only living quarters are barracks. Try it when
>everyone lives in a tent (you DO remember Desert Storm, don't you)?
>
>Sheesh!

So?  What does any of that have to do with lesbigay military
personnel?  They are at sea for 8 months.  Some went to Desert Storm
and then came back and were forced out of the military for being
lesbigay.

What is the big deal about having someone of the same sex finding you
sexually attractive?  As long as it isn't sexual harassment, why does
it bother you?  After all, out of the 40 rapes reported during
Operation Desert Storm, all of them were men raping women.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Organization: Lockheed Missiles & Space Company, Inc.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 15:31:29 GMT

In <1992Sep12.021908.7403@leland.Stanford.EDU>, ljf writes:

>My sister was a captain in the army for nearly four years.  The only
>time she lived and showered with other women was in basic training.
>The rest of the time she lived in a condo by herself in a yuppie
>apartment complex.

>How is the military any different from high school and college
>students living and showering with each other?  You really think all
>the men in your dorm or your frat are hetero?  If you join a sports
>club, are you going to make sure all the men are hetero before you use
>the locker room?  How do you plan to do that?

How is the military different than high school and college?  Well, most high
schools I've heard of which have students living there are private preppie
schools in which the parents have chosen to have their children attend there.
And in college, don't people generally get to choose whether they have male or
female roommates (and by the way, why is it that most men will accept a roomie
of either sex when 99% of women want "female only")?  If women can refuse to
accept a man as a roommate, why can't we decide whether we want a straight or
gay roommate?  In the military, you have no such choice.  If you live in the
barracks on the base, you room with whom you're assigned.  But of course, women
can still choose to live apart from those evil men...  :-)

If I were in the military, I'd just as soon not know if the person I was
showering with is gay.  It's really none of my business--especially if he
conducts himself in a way that makes his sexuality a non-issue to me.  I think
as I roommate I have a right to that, but little else.

Personally, I wouldn't care if I had to share a shower with a gay man, but I
can understand why someone might.  How many women would like to be ogled by
hetero men?  I'd like to think that people of either sex and either orientation
could associate without their sexuality being the most important aspect of the
relationship.  It doesn't have to affect anything--only if you make it happen.

Tim Irvin   j056600@lmsc5.is.lmsc.lockheed.com
**************************************************************************
"In a free government the security for civil rights must be the same as that
 for religious rights." -- James Madison, Federalist #51
From: fay@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Date: 11 Sep 92 18:11:30 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <1992Sep9.225427.3320@galileo.physics.arizona.edu>, krueger@galileo.physics.arizona.edu (Ted Krueger) writes:
> In article <1992Sep8.222306.28962@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
>>In article <92252.42346.J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM> J056600@LMSC5.IS.LMSC.LOCKHEED.COM writes:
>>>In <5181@news.duke.edu>, Emil Chuck writes:
>>>
> 
> Please let me explain to you my reasons for rejecting gays in the 
> military.  Bathrooms, showers and dormitories.  Men and women live 
> in different quarters for one excellent reason, members of one sex 
> are justified in desiring to live without having to worry about 
> others, who are sexually interested in those of their sex, looking 
> at their bodies.  Gays and lesbians should not be allowed in the 
> military because they should not be allowed to live in dormitories 
> with others of the same sex, should not be allowed to share bathroom 
> facilities with others of the same sex and should not be allowed to 
> shower with others of the same sex; just as high school boys should 
> not be allowed to share locker rooms with high school girls in gym 
> class.
> 
> Have you ever considered the reason why men and women do not share 
> shower facilities under group living conditions?  Your first 
> reaction might be to say, "because men and women are different". I 
> would say that the reason is slightly deeper; Men are sexually 
> interested in women, and women are sexually interested in men.  People 
> should not be required to share facilities with others who may be 
> sexually interested in them.  
> 
> A final analogy:  A gay man in the military, showering with dozens of 
> other men is the same as a heterosexual man showering with dozens of 
> women.  Would the women be in favor of the heterosexual man showering 
> with them?
> 
> Ted

Yes, and of course the military (say Navy pilots as an example) avoids these
problems by only allowing heterosexuals in the services.

By the way, the gay men and women that I know that served in the armed forces
never had a problem with being interested in their colleagues.  Gee, Ted, maybe 
some people shower/go to the bathroom/sleep/etc without only thinking about
sex.

Besides, as one friend put it "people who were about gays coming on to them
usually don't have anything to worry about."

PS--yes, the Spartan army, that bunch of fags, what a crappy fighting unit they
were, huh?

> 
> 
>  
> 
> -- 
> State money should "be provided only to invalids and the elderly"; "teachers 
> should be tested for competency.  All curriculums shall focus on the basics in 
> high-school requirements...advanced sciences and additional math, English and writing."  --- from _Bloods/Crips Proposal for LA's Facelift_
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 03:44:08 GMT

In article <1992Sep14.002706.19048@news.acns.nwu.edu> dmeier@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Douglas Meier) writes:
>I knew guys in high school who would not shower in gym because they were afraid
>a gay might be in the class.  A number of those went into the military.  If
>they thought any one of the people in their unit was gay.....
>Armageddon, baby.  Those guys would have killed or at least maimed anyone who
>was the least bit suspicious.  They fear what is unknown.

There were white men who felt the same way about blacks.  The military
was integrated despite the insistence that whites wouldn't allow it,
that blacks' lives would be at stake, etc.  As far as I can see, the
military has done a better job at integrating than most colleges.  If
those homophobes got the message loud and clear that they, not
lesbigays, would be punished and/or kicked out, most of them would act
accordingly.

>In the above scenario it is relatively easy to point out a man in a shower
>full of women.  Not so with a gay in a shower full of straights.  This makes
>the threat of my paranoid classmates bludgeoning someone who they believe is
>gay even more likely if they know that gays are allowed in the military.  At
>the current time under current policy, rednecks like my classmates don't feel 
>the need to be belligerent because they have peace of mind knowing that they
>don't need to worry about it.  

Maybe under an enlightened policy of not worrying about sexual
orientation, those rednecks like your classmates wouldn't go into the
military, now a safe haven for homophobes.

>I think the policy is remaining the way it is because someone high up in the
>military probably thinks like my high school acquaintances.  Should it be
>changed?  Hard for me to say.  Sounds like an attitude change that needs to be
>made nationally at the grade school level before we thrust it on those that
>are lagging behind.

I believe the military was racially integrated just after WWII, many
years before the civil rights movement of the 60s.  I don't know why
we are supposed to wait until Dan Quayle realizes that lesbigays
aren't evil to expect our military not to discriminate on the basis of
sexual orientation.

Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct,alt.sex.bondage,alt.sex,talk.bizarre
From: clavazzi@nyx.cs.du.edu (The_Doge)
Subject: Re: Beating (was Re: RICHH: SHORT NON-PC P.J. O'ROURKE QUOTE)
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 92 13:59:47 GMT

In article <9209111507.AA00258@hrt213.brooks.af.mil.brooks.af.mil> tjm@hrt213.brooks.af.mil (Tim Miller) writes:
>On 10 Sep 1992 21:14:13 GMT, asya@ux5.lbl.gov (Asya Kamsky) said:
>
> A> In article <1992Sep10.154911.1413@javelin.sim.es.com>
> A> biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel) writes:
>  >Oh Lothie, so I'm not the only one who has this thing for Alan Alda
>  >and a tire iron?
>
> A> No, that's Alan Alda and a fish hook.
>
>	I thought it was Ted Kaldis and a tire iron.  (I wonder if
>anyone remembers this from 2 years back other than me.)
>
	No, it's Colonel Mustard, in the study, with a gun.

>-- Cerebus <tjm@floyd.brooks.af.mil>
>"Or should I say K*ld*s?"
>
	Or you could just say "clueless", in his case.
The_Doge
ObQuote:	"Men love in haste, but detest at their leisure."
				-- Lord Byron
From: moofie@apple.com (Steve Klingsporn)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: My two cents...
Date: 8 Sep 92 23:25:09 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.correct
Organization: Apple Computer Inc.




Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this post do not represent my employer.


I'm sure very few people care, but my two cents is this:

I think that as long as people respect one another and try and get along,
realizing that their race or sexual preference, or gender, or style is
bound to be different, and most definitely not superior or inferior to
anyone of any other of these, they will be fine.  Constant worries
about Political Correctness is absurd and I refuse to conform.  I work
in a company that likes to see itself as being "on the cutting edge
of conformity," which is a slight departure from many of my own
ideals, mainly thinking for yourself and doing what feels right in
your own heart.  Essentially, I believe that you should do whatever
the hell you want as long as it doesn't get in the way of whatever
anyone else wants to do.

It makes no sense that people rally for human rights and in turn
prune their own with the notion of being "politically correct."  Quite
honestly, I think PC is complete bullshit, and I refuse to conform.
I'll be polite, I'll be honest, and I will be the best human being
I can be, but I absolutely refuse to conform to some form of
society's idealism -- there is enough oppression out there towards
whoever you may be -- we don't need to create yet *MORE*.


Wishing the world would chill out,


Steve

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Klingsporn                     "There are moments you can reach with
Apple Computer, Inc.                  people that are pure bliss, but then
20525 Mariani Avenue, MS 35A          you have to get it again, and it can
Cupertino, CA  95014                  turn into a futile exercise that can
(408) 862-6508                        undermine your entire existence.
moofie@apple.com                      The quest for the perfect moment."

                                                    - Robert Smith

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this post do not represent my employer.
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
From: john@anasazi.com (John R. Moore)
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Reply-To: john@anasazi.com
Organization: Anasazi Inc, Phoenix AZ USA
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 17:05:04 GMT

Keywords: 

In article <1992Sep12.021908.7403@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
]My sister was a captain in the army for nearly four years.  The only
]time she lived and showered with other women was in basic training.
]The rest of the time she lived in a condo by herself in a yuppie
]apartment complex.
]
]How is the military any different from high school and college
]students living and showering with each other?  You really think all
]the men in your dorm or your frat are hetero?  If you join a sports
]club, are you going to make sure all the men are hetero before you use
]the locker room?  How do you plan to do that?

Proof by anecdote.... obviously you must be right! Surely since your
sister was able to stay in an apartment complex, there will never
be a problem.

Obviously you know NOTHING about military life. Try living in a condo
when you are at sea for 8 months! Try it when you are stations in
someplace where the only living quarters are barracks. Try it when
everyone lives in a tent (you DO remember Desert Storm, don't you)?

Sheesh!
-- 
John Moore NJ7E, 7525 Clearwater Pkwy, Scottsdale, AZ 85253  (602-951-9326)
john@anasazi.com ncar!noao!asuvax!anasaz!john anasaz!john@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
 - - Support ALL of the bill of rights, INCLUDING the 2nd amendment! - -
 - - It is not enough to be right. One must also be effective! - -
From: Charles.R.Hohenstein.1@nd.edu (Charles R. Hohenstein)
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct
Subject: Re: Clinton's Cabinet (humorous suggestions)
Date: 15 Sep 92 02:08:01 GMT
Followup-To: alt.politics.correct
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Notre Dame

In article <1992Sep13.165932.13405@anasazi.com>, john@anasazi.com (John R.
Moore) wrote:
> 
> Keywords: 
> 
> In article <1992Sep13.091614.9827@leland.Stanford.EDU> farthing@leland.Stanford.EDU (ljf) writes:
> ]The point is that for much of the time, military personnel live a life
> ]very similar to anyone with a 9-to-5 job.
> ]
> ]>Obviously you know NOTHING about military life. Try living in a condo
> ]>when you are at sea for 8 months! Try it when you are stations in
> ]>someplace where the only living quarters are barracks. Try it when
> ]>everyone lives in a tent (you DO remember Desert Storm, don't you)?
> ]>
> ]>Sheesh!
> ]
> ]So?  What does any of that have to do with lesbigay military
> ]personnel?  They are at sea for 8 months.  Some went to Desert Storm
> ]and then came back and were forced out of the military for being
> ]lesbigay.
> 
> Well, you were arguing that military life is like living in an apartment
> or dormitory, when it is simply not true in general, and in those cases where it
> is true, it is irrelevant.
> ]
> ]What is the big deal about having someone of the same sex finding you
> ]sexually attractive?  As long as it isn't sexual harassment, why does
> ]it bother you?  After all, out of the 40 rapes reported during
> ]Operation Desert Storm, all of them were men raping women.
> 
> It doesn't bother me, but when I was in the military, most of the people
> I knew would respond VIOLENTLY if they suspected such a thing. There was
> even a person here on the net who said he would respond to a homosexual
> proposition with his fist. I don't condone such behavior, but unless
> things have changed a lot, that attitude is common among you men
> in the military. I don't think the military should be used as a place
> for social experimentation - there are too many lives at stake. I don't
> want the guys in charge of nuclear weapons in a bad state of mind because
> there is homophobia in action.
> 
> 
By this logic, the armed services would never have been integrated. I'm
sure that all the same comments were made concerning Blacks, and frankly, I
don't care what forms of bigotry are "common among men in the military."  
Newsgroups: alt.politics.correct