wa371@sdcc12.UUCP (wa371) (05/17/85)
Do women waste more toilet paper than men? I live in a shared house, and I have been sharing a bathroom with various females for many years. The problem is that my female housemates seem to waste a lot of toilet paper. I wake up in the morning to the roll going rrrttt-rrrttt-rrrttt-rrrttt-rrrtttt, five times! And we are using up paper like it is going out of style. A lot of it is turned into little balls that rapidly fill the waste basket. But most paper is used to "gift wrap" sanitary mapkins and tampons. What a waste! I imagine that there is fertile ground for a psychologist. I also imagine that I will get flamed for this. Bernd (Not affiliated with, nor speaking for U.C. San Diego) UUCP: ...!ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdcc12!wa371, ARPA: sdcsvax!sdcc12!wa371@nosc *** hooray for USENET ***
edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) (05/17/85)
> I imagine that there is fertile ground for a psychologist. Indeed, though I suspect a psychologist would be more interested in your apparent fascination for this subject. The last time I heard this discussed it ended up with a counter- accusation: how can men avoid wetting themselves, considering how poorly they aim? If you've ever cleaned a bathroom you'll know what I mean. Yeeeccchhh... > Bernd -Ed Hall decvax!randvax!edhall
desjardins@h-sc1.UUCP (marie desjardins) (05/22/85)
> Do women waste more toilet paper than men? > I live in a shared house, and I have been sharing a bathroom with various > females for many years. The problem is that my female housemates > seem to waste a lot of toilet paper. I wake up in the morning to the > roll going rrrttt-rrrttt-rrrttt-rrrttt-rrrtttt, five times! And we are using > up paper like it is going out of style. A lot of it is turned into little > balls that rapidly fill the waste basket. But most paper is used to "gift > wrap" sanitary mapkins and tampons. What a waste! > I imagine that there is fertile ground for a psychologist. > I also imagine that I will get flamed for this. > > Bernd Would you rather look at the bloody napkins and tampons? You obviously have no sense of the female anatomy. Ever noticed that women have to sit down to go to the bathroom? Ever wonder why? Ever wonder what a drag it is to have to even bother changing tampons every few hours? nope, didn't think so. Tell you what: why don't you complain to your female housemates? Maybe you'll get lucky and they'll kick you out. marie desjardins P.S. Sorry for the flame, I've never thought the female anatomy was exactly fair (if I ever run into God, I'll ask her what on earth she was thinking of...). I think maybe you should think more about the situation your female housemates are in and less about something STUPID like toilet paper.
sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (05/22/85)
> Do women waste more toilet paper than men? > I live in a shared house, and I have been sharing a bathroom with various > females for many years. The problem is that my female housemates > seem to waste a lot of toilet paper. I wake up in the morning to the > roll going rrrttt-rrrttt-rrrttt-rrrttt-rrrtttt, five times! And we are using > up paper like it is going out of style. A lot of it is turned into little > balls that rapidly fill the waste basket. But most paper is used to "gift > wrap" sanitary mapkins and tampons. What a waste! Geesh!!! you are so right!! How dare they squander your hard-earned money with such abandon! besides, anybody who bleeds like that deserves the most severe of punishments. I say: "cut their uteruses out!!!!" Ah, women are so spoiled these days! we should really go back to the good old days when they'd get buried in the sand to their neck during "those days"! It saved a lot of money on toilet paper AND sanitary napkins too. Kept them out of trouble too! But, hey, you have a real problem on your hands, so here are some constructive solutions that should solve your problem: a/ set up a separate budget for toilet paper b/ suggest that they go back to using cloth sanitary napkins that you will wash for them. If the problem is not about money, but about waste, then I suggest you either a/ recycle your newspapers or b/ eat their sanitary napkins. > I imagine that there is fertile ground for a psychologist. Yes, a psychologist would have fun analysing you. > I also imagine that I will get flamed for this. Flamed? nah.... the topic's not even worth it. Besides, you were too obviously asking for it. It does take the fun out of it, you know.... > Bernd -- Sophie Quigley {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie
clewis@mnetor.UUCP (Chris Lewis) (05/22/85)
In article <854@mnetor.UUCP> sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) writes: >Flamed? nah.... the topic's not even worth it. Besides, you were too >obviously asking for it. It does take the fun out of it, you know.... How about this flame on a similar topic?: I'm *$^@%((&%%^ mad at the wax paper that certain places in the UK call toilet paper! Eg: National Monument sites and some Bed and Breakfasts. It really burns my a*s! -- Chris Lewis, UUCP: {allegra, linus, ihnp4}!utzoo!mnetor!clewis BELL: (416)-475-8980 ext. 321
phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) (05/22/85)
<Why am I discussing this during my lunch hour?> In article <2484@randvax.UUCP> edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) writes: > >The last time I heard this discussed it ended up with a counter- >accusation: how can men avoid wetting themselves, considering how >poorly they aim? If you've ever cleaned a bathroom you'll know >what I mean. Yeeeccchhh... I don't think it's always bad aim, as I am usually careful about my aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference in level. -- What do you do the day after a peak experience? Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA
ed@mtxinu.UUCP (Ed Gould) (05/23/85)
In article <372@h-sc1.UUCP> desjardins@h-sc1.UUCP (marie desjardins) writes: > > ... I've never thought the female anatomy was > exactly fair (if I ever run into God, I'll ask her what on earth > she was thinking of...). Why do you assume she was on earth? Probably some other drug... -- Ed Gould mt Xinu, 2910 Seventh St., Berkeley, CA 94710 USA {ucbvax,decvax}!mtxinu!ed +1 415 644 0146
jeff@rtech.UUCP (Jeff Lichtman) (05/23/85)
> > Do women waste more toilet paper than men? > > > > Bernd > > Would you rather look at the bloody napkins and tampons? > > marie desjardins Who cares? There are a lot of things more interesting than how much toilet paper someone uses. I think it's really perverse to even bring up such a subject. After all, who gives a shit about toilet paper? :-) -- Jeff Lichtman at rtech (Relational Technology, Inc.) aka Swazoo Koolak {amdahl, sun}!rtech!jeff {ucbvax, decvax}!mtxinu!rtech!jeff
sunny@sun.uucp (Ms. Sunny Kirsten) (05/23/85)
> In article <2484@randvax.UUCP> edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) writes: > > > >The last time I heard this discussed it ended up with a counter- > >accusation: how can men avoid wetting themselves, considering how > >poorly they aim? If you've ever cleaned a bathroom you'll know > >what I mean. Yeeeccchhh... > > I don't think it's always bad aim, as I am usually careful about my > aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it > may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference > in level. you could always sit > > -- > What do you do the day after a peak experience? Have another, even higher > > Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 > UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil > ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA -- {ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Ms. Sunny Kirsten)
sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (05/23/85)
> In article <2484@randvax.UUCP> edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) writes: > > > >The last time I heard this discussed it ended up with a counter- > >accusation: how can men avoid wetting themselves, considering how > >poorly they aim? If you've ever cleaned a bathroom you'll know > >what I mean. Yeeeccchhh... > > I don't think it's always bad aim, as I am usually careful about my > aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it > may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference > in level. > > Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. -- Sophie Quigley {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie
dss00@amdahl.UUCP (dss00) (05/23/85)
So when is someone going to start an aromatic discussion other aspects of using a bathroom. God! I'm beginning to feel sick already. I suggest that net.flame should also use ROT13 if flames are likely to be offensive due to their contents or language used. I donot question right of anybody to post whatever they want in net.flame but feel that ROT13 be used if the language or the contents justify it. -- Deepak S. Sabnis ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!dss00 (408) 746-6058 (Usual Disclaimer Here)
plw@mgwess.UUCP (Pete Wilson) (05/24/85)
Being the father of 2 teen-age girls, I gladly sacrifice the cost of the TP for the peace of mind that seeing the little bundles in the wastebasket brings........It means their brains have kept ahead of their hormones for another month.....
roy@phri.UUCP (Roy Smith) (05/24/85)
> > Do women waste more toilet paper than men?
Recent conversation I had regarding all this:
Me: Remember that toilet paper discussion?
Her: You mean they're seriously discussing it?
Me: Well, they're discussing it.
Her: In net.women?
Me: No, net.flame.
Her: Well, at least it's in the right place.
--
allegra!phri!roy (Roy Smith)
System Administrator, Public Health Research Institute
hollombe@ttidcc.UUCP (The Polymath) (05/24/85)
>In article <372@h-sc1.UUCP> desjardins@h-sc1.UUCP (marie desjardins) writes: > > ... I've never thought the female anatomy was > exactly fair (if I ever run into God, I'll ask her what on earth > she was thinking of...). This appears to be evidence of God's masculinity. (-:{ -- -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_- The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe) Citicorp TTI 3100 Ocean Park Blvd. Santa Monica, CA 90405 (213) 450-9111, ext. 2483 {philabs,randvax,trwrb,vortex}!ttidca!ttidcc!hollombe
zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (05/24/85)
> > aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it > > may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference > > in level. > > > > Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 > > I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason > you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business > is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. > -- > Sophie Quigley Frankly I think it stems from fear of deflating ther male ego because they would find out the silly *thing* really wont dip into the water. Jeanette L. Zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie ================================================================================ my opionions belong only to me ================================================================================
sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) (05/25/85)
In article <858@mnetor.UUCP> sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) writes: >I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason >you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business >is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. >-- >Sophie Quigley >{allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie Frankly, Ms. Quigley, I think your attitude sucks. Just because someone did something you didn't like, you make the sweeping statement that all men who urinate standing up are "disgusting" and that it is an issue of manlihood that they do so. The not-so-ugly truth is, it is more convenient to urinate standing up. If you don't believe me, just ask your nearest disgusting stud to demonstrate. Believe it or not, there are quite a few men who really don't give a shit whether they are manly or not. They do things because they like to do so, or because it makes sense to do so, not because they are trying to prove themselves or make a social issue. -- - Sean Casey UUCP: {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean - Department of Mathematics ARPA: ukma!sean@ANL-MCS.ARPA - University of Kentucky
sunny@sun.uucp (Ms. Sunny Kirsten) (05/25/85)
But Sophie! You're attributing to ego a conscious thought, when the truth is closer to a total lack of thoughtfullness, and simple laziness. Or could it be the fire-hydrant phenomenon? Excuse me, but I thought this was net.women... or I remember, it's a woman's job to clean the john. > > In article <2484@randvax.UUCP> edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) writes: > > > > > >The last time I heard this discussed it ended up with a counter- > > >accusation: how can men avoid wetting themselves, considering how > > >poorly they aim? If you've ever cleaned a bathroom you'll know > > >what I mean. Yeeeccchhh... > > > > I don't think it's always bad aim, as I am usually careful about my > > aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it > > may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference > > in level. > > > > Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 > > I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason > you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business > is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. > -- > Sophie Quigley > {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie _ ___ / (:-))> Sunny ~~~ \_ -- {ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Ms. Sunny Kirsten)
root@trwatf.UUCP (Lord Frith) (05/25/85)
>> I don't think it's always bad aim, as I am usually careful about my >> aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it >> may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference >> in level. > I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason > you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business > is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. Standing up? Real men do it standing on their heads (from 10 feet away)... -- UUCP: ...{decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!seismo!trwatf!root - Lord Frith ARPA: trwatf!root@SEISMO "Oh yeh? Well I speak LOUD and I carry a BIGGER stick... and I use it too... *BONK*"
john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) (05/26/85)
>From: zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) >Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories >Message-ID: <258@ihlpa.UUCP> > >> > aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it >> > may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference >> > in level. >> > >> > Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 >> >> I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason >> you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business >> is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. >> -- >> Sophie Quigley > >Frankly I think it stems from fear of deflating ther male ego because >they would find out the silly *thing* really wont dip into the water. > >Jeanette L. Zobjeck >ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie Actually, it's more of an engineering problem- something like trying to fold a cardboard mailing tube to fit it into a mail slot. :-) Also, some of us were raised by mothers who warned us of the evils of sitting on "strange" toilet seats. -- Name: John Ruschmeyer US Mail: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ 07764 Phone: (201) 222-6600 x366 UUCP: ...!vax135!petsd!moncol!john ...!princeton!moncol!john ...!pesnta!moncol!john Silly Quote: I never wanted to be a barber. I wanted to be... a LUMBERJACK!
fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) (05/26/85)
Ed Hall: >> >The last time I heard this discussed it ended up with a counter- >> >accusation: how can men avoid wetting themselves, considering how >> >poorly they aim? If you've ever cleaned a bathroom you'll know >> >what I mean. Yeeeccchhh... Phil Ngai: >> I don't think it's always bad aim, as I am usually careful about my >> aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it >> may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference >> in level. In article <mnetor.858> sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) writes: >I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason >you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business >is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. Nonsense. To sit down, we'd have to take our pants all the way down. And then pull them up again. That's too much work. Furthermore, it's more sanitary (for US) standing up.
fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) (05/26/85)
>> >> ... I've never thought the female anatomy was >> exactly fair (if I ever run into God, I'll ask her what on earth >> she was thinking of...). >> marie desjardins >This appears to be evidence of God's masculinity. (-:{ >The Polymath (aka: Jerry Hollombe) I always assumed gender is an attribute relevent only for beings which must reproduce. God does not reproduce (at least according to MY religious denomination). :-) The only reason for visualizing God as male is that God is the boss (Dominance is a masculine attribute). Frank Silbermann
beslove@osu-eddie.UUCP (Adam Beslove) (05/27/85)
> > > aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it > > > may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference > > > in level. > > > > > > Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 > > > > I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason > > you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business > > is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. > > -- > > Sophie Quigley Gosh Sophie, you're getting a bit aggressive there! You should cut down on those steroids! > > Frankly I think it stems from fear of deflating ther male ego because > they would find out the silly *thing* really wont dip into the water. > > Jeanette L. Zobjeck Jeanette, you're totally right. I've always dreamed about draging my 'silly *thing*' thru toilet bowl water. My ego has never fully inflated as a result. >>>>Adam Beslove (c)1985 (aka Odious Verity) ============================================================================== (UUCP: ...!cbosgd!osu-eddie!beslove) (CSNet: beslove@ohio-state) Believe half of what you hear, (ARPA: beslove%ohio-state.csnet@CSNET-RELAY) And none of what you say.
bing@galbp.UUCP (Bing Bang) (05/27/85)
In article <> sunny@sun.uucp (Ms. Sunny Kirsten) writes: >> In article <2484@randvax.UUCP> edhall@randvax.UUCP (Ed Hall) writes: >> >> I don't think it's always bad aim, as I am usually careful about my >> aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it >> may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference >> in level. > >you could always sit gee, i thought i had the market cornered on a good idea! well, sometimes i sit... > >> >> -- >> What do you do the day after a peak experience? > >Have another, even higher why, thank you, i think i will... > >> >> Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 >> UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil >> ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA >-- >{ucbvax,decvax,ihnp4}!sun!sunny (Ms. Sunny Kirsten) -- ---------- "Is anything really real?" ...akgua!galbp!bing
sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (05/28/85)
> In article <858@mnetor.UUCP> sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) writes: > > >I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason > >you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business > >is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. > >-- > >Sophie Quigley > > Frankly, Ms. Quigley, I think your attitude sucks. Just because > someone did something you didn't like, you make the sweeping statement > that all men who urinate standing up are "disgusting" and that it is an > issue of manlihood that they do so. The not-so-ugly truth is, it is > more convenient to urinate standing up. If you don't believe me, just > ask your nearest disgusting stud to demonstrate. I did not say that "all men" who urinate standing up are disgusting, just that men who insist on urinating standing up even though they are making a mess are disgusting, and they are unless they clean up after themselves. Some people are fortunate enough to be able to aim and not make a mess. Those who aren't should sit down or clean up after themselves, that's all. After all, we women all gift-wrap our sanitary napkins, with an inordinate amount of toilet paper, don't we (don't forget the topic of this discussion was stereotypes), so why don't you guys get even with us and waste just as much toilet paper wiping after yourselves instead of looking in amazement at the drops of ... jumping from the toilet onto the seat. (Hey!!!! I didn't start this conversation, some men did!) -- Sophie Quigley {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie
tw8023@pyuxii.UUCP (T Wheeler) (05/28/85)
You will have to excuse Sophie. She has had a rampant case of Penis envy for years.
bing@galbp.UUCP (Bing Bang) (05/29/85)
>>> >>> ... I've never thought the female anatomy was >>> exactly fair (if I ever run into God, I'll ask her what on earth >>> she was thinking of...). >>> marie desjardins from where i am i think the female anatomy is a work of art... much more pleasing than male anatomy. but i suppose bing male i do have my biases... and as for god being female, i think it has possibilities... just read the bible. she (god) can be a very vindictive bitch... lest some one takes me seriously, my tongue is deep in my cheek -- ---------- "Is anything really real?" ...akgua!galbp!bing
vip@philabs.UUCP (V. I. P.) (05/29/85)
Yes, it is easier for men to do it standing up. And, incidentally, that's why they put flies in our pants (no pun intended). Why should we go through the trouble of opening our trousers, dropping them and our shorts to urinate. What should also be customary, however, is the installation of urinals in all bathroom, commercial and residential. That way nobody would have anything to complain about. As far as women using paper to *gift wrap* their sanitary napkins, why don't the makers of these things include convenient little bags to dispose of them in? Like the above, doesn't this must make sense? There are also things far worse than the consumption of toilet paper by women, required by the unfortunate state of affairs that women endure. My pet peeve is probably plastic disposable tampon applicators. These little nasties inevitably get flushed down toilets and end up on South Shore beaches. Disgusting! These things should be outlawed. I have nothing against women or their biological functioning, but what's wrong with paper applicators that disintegrate? Brian Day UUCP: philabs!vip
pauls@tekecs.UUCP (Paul Sweazey) (05/30/85)
> > Frankly I think it stems from fear of deflating ther male ego because > they would find out the silly *thing* really wont dip into the water. > > Jeanette L. Zobjeck My complaint is the mess **ON** the toilet seat, the kind you may sit on. I have taught my son (with limited success) to sit down whenever there is no stand-up-urinal available. My three daughters and a certain unnamed adult female (,unnamed for marraige preservation,) exhibit the strong propensity for leaving a few drops on the seat. Like almost every time. It just sort of happens when you stand up. Fanatics like me check every time and wipe up any accidents. Why can I not teach my girls to be fanatics? Its not always a male problem. tektronix!tekecs!pauls
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Arthur Pewtey) (05/30/85)
> You will have to excuse Sophie. She has had a rampant case > of Penis envy for years. [WHEELER] Judging from this article, it's apparent that the author has NEVER suffered from brain envy, not seeing much of a use for such an organ... (Who was he calling fuzzy headed?) -- "If you offend everybody, you're doing a good job." --David Steinberg on the subject of satire Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr
features@ihuxf.UUCP (M.A. Zeszutko) (05/30/85)
> In article <858@mnetor.UUCP> sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) writes: > > >I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason > >you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business > >is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. > >-- > >Sophie Quigley > >{allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie > > > Frankly, Ms. Quigley, I think your attitude sucks. Just because > someone did something you didn't like, you make the sweeping statement > that all men who urinate standing up are "disgusting" and that it is an > issue of manlihood that they do so. The not-so-ugly truth is, it is > more convenient to urinate standing up. If you don't believe me, just > ask your nearest disgusting stud to demonstrate. > > Believe it or not, there are quite a few men who really don't give a shit > whether they are manly or not. They do things because they like to do so, > or because it makes sense to do so, not because they are trying to prove > themselves or make a social issue. > > -- > > - Sean Casey UUCP: {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean > - Department of Mathematics ARPA: ukma!sean@ANL-MCS.ARPA > - University of Kentucky Geez, can't he take a joke? Must have no sense of humor. -- aMAZon @ AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL; ihnp4!ihuxf!features
timm@zaphod.UUCP (Tim Melanchuk) (05/30/85)
In article <336@osu-eddie.UUCP> beslove@osu-eddie.UUCP (Adam Beslove) writes: >> > > aim and my bathroom still needs a fair amount of cleaning. I think it >> > > may be due to a higher splash factor arising from a greater difference >> > > in level. >> > > >> > > Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 >> > >> > I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason >> > you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business >> > is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. >> > -- >> > Sophie Quigley > >Gosh Sophie, you're getting a bit aggressive there! You should cut down >on those steroids! > >> >> Frankly I think it stems from fear of deflating ther male ego because >> they would find out the silly *thing* really wont dip into the water. >> >> Jeanette L. Zobjeck > >Jeanette, you're totally right. I've always dreamed about draging my >'silly *thing*' thru toilet bowl water. My ego has never fully inflated >as a result. > >>>>>Adam Beslove (c)1985 (aka Odious Verity) I love it! One of most the enjoyable discussions I've read in a long time. Personally, I think its a fear of having the damned thing ripped off and sucked down the toilet when you flush. -- "A Canadian is somebody who knows how to mke love in a canoe." -- Pierre Berton Tim Melanchuk {ihnp4|alberta}!sask!zaphod!timm
ed@mtxinu.UUCP (Ed Gould) (05/31/85)
>>I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. > >Frankly, Ms. Quigley, I think your attitude sucks. I like her attitude much better than your sense of humor. >Believe it or not, there are quite a few men who really don't give a shit >whether they are manly or not. They do things because they like to do so, >or because it makes sense to do so, not because they are trying to prove >themselves or make a social issue. Well, to tie this in to another major discussion on the group - that of sexist language - most men stand up because that's how their fathers did it. In other words, they're just carrying on the male tradition without thinking about what it means. That's exactly the problem the folks who want to get rid of "he" as the generic third person pronoun want to deal with. It was corny at the time, and still is, but there's a line in the play "Butterflies are Free" that says "There are none so blind as those who will not see." Corny or not, it makes a good point. -- Ed Gould mt Xinu, 2910 Seventh St., Berkeley, CA 94710 USA {ucbvax,decvax}!mtxinu!ed +1 415 644 0146
zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (05/31/85)
> > Believe it or not, there are quite a few men who really don't give a shit > > whether they are manly or not. They do things because they like to do so, > > or because it makes sense to do so, not because they are trying to prove > > themselves or make a social issue. > > - Sean Casey UUCP: {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean > > Geez, can't he take a joke? Must have no sense of humor. > -- > > aMAZon @ AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL; ihnp4!ihuxf!features *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** Not suprisingly men have a great difficulty dealing with humor which stikes close to their anatomy when women are also in the discussion. I have no idea why but I have seen it happen time and again. Women are much more aware of their bodies, nature forces us to be, then men and while we general do not choose the topic for dinner table conversation comparative humor does not generally strike any blow at our femininity yet I get the impression this is just what Mr. Casey and co. are offended about. I could, naturally be mistaken but.......... Jeanette Zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie =========================================================================== all opinions are stricly my own I doubt anyone else would want them. ========================================================================== *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (06/01/85)
Perhaps as an bit of enlightenment. the personality types responding to the discussion dont always have an open mind. I just wish people would sign there messages. this one is perhaps one of the better answers received here - I would like to enroll in a good sex eduation course ie a course designed to enlighten me on the operation of the mind of the opposite sex i think it would be interesting to find out how to open one up (figurativeley that is (;-)><={| to the notion that sarcasm is a tool for communicating - - in this case the thought that males generally (i said generally durn it) have an over-inflated concept of the value of the male sex organ (penis for those who prefer plain talk) (John Dillenger lives again) >"... their *silly things* won't REALLY dip into water" ??? Suggest >you enroll in a local sex-ed course, and soon! > > -Regards! jeanette l. zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie ================================================================================ the opinions expresses herein belong soley to those claiming them ================================================================================
sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) (06/02/85)
In article <277@ihlpa.UUCP> zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) writes: >Not suprisingly men have a great difficulty dealing with humor which stikes >close to their anatomy when women are also in the discussion. I have no idea >why but I have seen it happen time and again. > >Women are much more aware of their bodies, nature forces us to be, then men >and while we general do not choose the topic for dinner table conversation >comparative humor does not generally strike any blow at our femininity yet >I get the impression this is just what Mr. Casey and co. are offended >about. > >I could, naturally be mistaken but.......... You are. I have a great sense of humor about myself and my body. What Sohpie Quigley said wasn't meant to be humor, and needs to be considered seriously because it was meant seriously. Read her followup. -- - Sean Casey UUCP: {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean - Department of Mathematics ARPA: ukma!sean@ANL-MCS.ARPA - University of Kentucky
sml@luke.UUCP (Steven List @ Uncle Bene's Farm) (06/03/85)
> >>I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. > > > >Frankly, Ms. Quigley, I think your attitude sucks. > > I like her attitude much better than your sense of humor. > > >Believe it or not, there are quite a few men who really don't give a shit > >whether they are manly or not. They do things because they like to do so, > >or because it makes sense to do so, not because they are trying to prove > >themselves or make a social issue. > > Well, to tie this in to another major discussion on the group - that of > sexist language - most men stand up because that's how their fathers > did it. In other words, they're just carrying on the male tradition > without thinking about what it means. That's exactly the problem the > folks who want to get rid of "he" as the generic third person pronoun > want to deal with. > > It was corny at the time, and still is, but there's a line in the play > "Butterflies are Free" that says "There are none so blind as those > who will not see." Corny or not, it makes a good point. I don't know about you, but I think it's an awful lot easier to stand up, open my fly, and take a leak than removing and restoring my pants (et al) for something so simple. I think God's mistake was in not providing women the same facility! /-\ :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: : Steven List @ Benetics Corporation : : (415) 940-6300 : : {cdp,idi,oliveb,tolerant}!bene!luke!steven : :-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-: \-/
gordon@uw-june (Gordon Davisson) (06/03/85)
> I suggest that net.flame should also use ROT13 if flames are likely > to be offensive due to their contents or language used. > > I donot question right of anybody to post whatever they want in net.flame > but feel that ROT13 be used if the language or the contents justify it. > > -- > Deepak S. Sabnis ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!dss00 (408) 746-6058 ROT13? In net.flame?!?! Look here, kid, offensive is what new.flame is all about. *Everything* posted to net.flame is offensive, either because of the contents or because it's misposted. If some idiot mama's boy (you) wanders in and gets his psyche scarred, that's his problem. Read what net.announce.newusers has to say about net.flame, and if you can't stand the heat... -- Human: Gordon Davisson ARPA: gordon@uw-june.ARPA UUCP: {ihnp4,decvax,tektronix}!uw-beaver!uw-june!gordon ATT: (206) 527-0832 USnail: 5008 12th NE, Seattle, WA, 98105 Earth: 47 39' 55" N, 122 18' 46" W Reality?: An unimportant member of an unimportant species residing in an unimportant area of an unimportant planet circling an unimportant star partway out one arm of an unimportant galaxy in an Einsteinian, but otherwise unimportant universe. p.s. mod.flame is an oxymoron.
sed408@ihlpg.UUCP (s. dugan) (06/03/85)
> > > Believe it or not, there are quite a few men who really don't give a shit > > > whether they are manly or not. They do things because they like to do so, > > > or because it makes sense to do so, not because they are trying to prove > > > themselves or make a social issue. > > > - Sean Casey UUCP: {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean > > > > Geez, can't he take a joke? Must have no sense of humor. > > -- > > > > aMAZon @ AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL; ihnp4!ihuxf!features > > *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** > > Not suprisingly men have a great difficulty dealing with humor which stikes > close to their anatomy when women are also in the discussion. I have no idea > why but I have seen it happen time and again. > > Women are much more aware of their bodies, nature forces us to be, then men > and while we general do not choose the topic for dinner table conversation > comparative humor does not generally strike any blow at our femininity yet > I get the impression this is just what Mr. Casey and co. are offended > about. > > I could, naturally be mistaken but.......... > > > Jeanette Zobjeck > ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie I beg to differ. I think a lot of women would be offended if men made jokes about their (women's) anatomy. I think the situation is rather like ethnic jokes. People of one particular group may make jokes about themselves, but resent it when others who are not part of that group make the same joke. This also applies to making jokes about oneself. Many people poke fun at themselves but take offense when others poke fun at them. Sarah E. Dugan (no clever lines) -- Sarah E. Dugan (no clever lines)
sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (06/03/85)
> In article <277@ihlpa.UUCP> zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) writes: > >Not suprisingly men have a great difficulty dealing with humor which stikes > >close to their anatomy when women are also in the discussion. I have no idea > >why but I have seen it happen time and again. > > > >Women are much more aware of their bodies, nature forces us to be, then men > >and while we general do not choose the topic for dinner table conversation > >comparative humor does not generally strike any blow at our femininity yet > >I get the impression this is just what Mr. Casey and co. are offended > >about. > > You are. I have a great sense of humor about myself and my body. What > Sohpie Quigley said wasn't meant to be humor, and needs to be considered > seriously because it was meant seriously. Read her followup. > - Sean Casey UUCP: {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean Maybe I should speak for myself here. What actually happened was that I originally meant to be kidding in my original posting. I also wanted to be slightly insulting, and thought that this was acceptable given that 1/ the discussion was conducted in net.flame, where logic and civility are outlawed anyway, 2/ the original discussion was insulting to women, and what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. However, given the amount of hate mail and explanations I received on the matter (more than I have ever received on any of my other usually brilliant postings! :->), I was forced to conclude that I was either 1/ right or 2/ close enough to be right, in which case I should probably make sure that I leave a way out of the insult for some of my best friends (some of my best friends are MEN!). That is why I posted the followup .... I think... actually I don't even remember posting a followup, but if I did, I probably said something wishy-washy like "not ALL men are poisonned......". Well, I retract that now! Now Sean, have fun tearing this one to shreds!!! I will never tell you whether or not I am kidding now.... but things are more exciting that way, aren't they? -- Sophie Quigley {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie
jamcmullan@wateng.UUCP (Judy McMullan) (06/03/85)
--- >What Sophie Quigley said wasn't meant to be humor, and needs to be >considered seriously because it was meant seriously. Read her followup. It wasn't?? And I laughed and laughed.... --Judy McMullan
sed408@ihlpg.UUCP (s. dugan) (06/03/85)
> Yes, it is easier for men to do it standing up. And, incidentally, > that's why they put flies in our pants (no pun intended). Why should > we go through the trouble of opening our trousers, dropping them and our > shorts to urinate. What should also be customary, however, is the > installation of urinals in all bathroom, commercial and residential. > That way nobody would have anything to complain about. > > As far as women using paper to *gift wrap* their sanitary napkins, > why don't the makers of these things include convenient little bags > to dispose of them in? Like the above, doesn't this must make sense? One brand does include little plastic bags with pretty little purple and white designs on them. > > There are also things far worse than the consumption of toilet paper > by women, required by the unfortunate state of affairs that women > endure. My pet peeve is probably plastic disposable tampon applicators. > These little nasties inevitably get flushed down toilets and end up > on South Shore beaches. Disgusting! These things should be outlawed. > I have nothing against women or their biological functioning, but > what's wrong with paper applicators that disintegrate? > > Brian Day > > UUCP: philabs!vip Those things shouldn't be flushed down the toilet in the first place. (The plastic ones OR the paper (cardboard) ones. -- Sarah E. Dugan (no clever lines)
srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (06/04/85)
In article <258@ihlpa.UUCP> zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) writes: >> I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason >> you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business >> is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. >> -- >> Sophie Quigley > >Frankly I think it stems from fear of deflating ther male ego because >they would find out the silly *thing* really wont dip into the water. > >Jeanette L. Zobjeck It's a dick, Jeanette, a cock, penis, etc., not a *thing*. I can understand that you've probably never seen one, you frigid bitch, but I'm certain you must have read about it. You and Sophie ought to get together some night for a good squat and talk all about the male anatomy. And, hey, how about this: Six guys can all use the same toilet at the same time. I'd like to see six girls do that: the girl on the bottom sure would have sticky thighs, eh? And a real man can stir his drink with his dick, and caulk windows and bathroom tiles with it. What the hell can you do with your cooze, slut? Pick up quarters? The hard way? Scott R. Turner ARPA: (now) srt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA (soon) srt@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!srt SPUDNET: ...eye%srt@russet.spud
zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (06/04/85)
> > Nonsense. To sit down, we'd have to take our pants all the way down. > And then pull them up again. That's too much work. Furthermore, > it's more sanitary (for US) standing up. *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** I was RIGHT there is some fear that sitting down will in some way cause a lessening of the masculine image in the minds of males. (;-) alternate suggestion to sitting down: since you are worried about being sanitary AND taking your pants down the obvious solution is to simply pull down the zipper and when ready lay down across the toilet seat facing the floor and voila - no mess and very sanitary , almost, and you dont have to take your pants all the way down either. jeanette l. zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie ================================================================================ opinions are my own - anybody claiming to have the same ones ought to have their heads examined. ================================================================================
jlh@loral.UUCP (Barnabus Collins) (06/04/85)
> I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason > you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business > is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. > -- *I* do it standing up because when I hit the little spinner at the bottom of the pisser I like to see it go round an round an round an round. Whats a few splashes compared to this kind of fun? These nifty toys can be bought at some joke stores, I don't recommend buying a used one at the local swap meet. If you think I'm putting my signature here your outta your gourd.
beth@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Beth Christy) (06/04/85)
[keep :-)ing] From: vip@philabs.UUCP (V. I. P.), Message-ID: <338@philabs.UUCP>: > My pet peeve is probably plastic disposable tampon applicators. >These little nasties inevitably get flushed down toilets and end up >on South Shore beaches. Disgusting! These things should be outlawed. >I have nothing against women or their biological functioning, but >what's wrong with paper applicators that disintegrate? > > Brian Day I assume, since your name is Brian, that you've never tried using either type of tampon applicator. So I'll tell you what's wrong with the paper ones: they're g*dd*mn uncomfortable to use. Often they just plain *hurt*. Oh, and the plastic ones don't *inevitably* get flushed down toilets. They *occasionally* get flushed down toilets. If they *inevitably* got flushed down toilets, you wouldn't find much else on your South Shore beaches (wherever they may be). Hang in and keep :-)ing. -- --JB Life is just a bowl.
srt@ucla-cs.UUCP (06/04/85)
In article <277@ihlpa.UUCP> zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) writes: > >Not suprisingly men have a great difficulty dealing with humor which stikes >close to their anatomy when women are also in the discussion. I have no idea >why but I have seen it happen time and again. > >Women are much more aware of their bodies, nature forces us to be, then men >and while we general do not choose the topic for dinner table conversation >comparative humor does not generally strike any blow at our femininity yet >I get the impression this is just what Mr. Casey and co. are offended >about. > >I could, naturally be mistaken but.......... > > >Jeanette Zobjeck It amazes me that anyone, even a pitiful bag lady like Jeanette, could hold such ignorant, claustrophobic opinions. "Women are much more aware of their bodies..." "does not generally strike any blow at our femininity" etc. What nauseating, ridiculous pulp. Look Jeanette, if you want to sit around patting yourself on the back over how much superior you are, fine, but don't bother to post such masturbatory comments to the net. Any comments to the effect that "women are more sensitive than men", "whites are more intelligent than blacks", "aryans are superior to all other races" is self-serving, prejudiced HORSESHIT, and easily recognizable as such by anyone with an iota of intelligence (borrow one and you'll see for yourself). Go ahead and believe this kind of crap if you want - I'm sure it helps you rationalize the failings in your personal life - but don't post your embarassment for the whole world to read. Scott R. Turner ARPA: (now) srt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA (soon) srt@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!srt SPUDNET: ...eye%srt@russet.spud
shor@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Melinda Shore) (06/05/85)
Perhaps the real question is this: Why do men use so little toilet paper?? -- Melinda Shore University of Chicago Computation Center ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!shor
gmack@denelvx.UUCP (Gregg MacKenzie) (06/05/85)
> I don't know about you, but I think it's an awful lot easier to stand > up, open my fly, and take a leak than removing and restoring my pants > (et al) for something so simple. I think God's mistake was in not > providing women the same facility! > Steven List @ Benetics Corporation Then we'd all be butt-rammers. But, then, women wouldn't need tampons and we'd sure save on toilet paper, huh Steve? Nothing personal, but I'm glad God didn't use your schematics. Gregg Mackenzie denelcor!gmack
sed408@ihlpg.UUCP (s. dugan) (06/05/85)
> Perhaps the real question is this: > > Why do men use so little toilet paper?? > > -- > Melinda Shore > University of Chicago Computation Center > ..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!shor Haven't you heard of the "last shake?" Sarah E. Dugan (no clever lines) -- Sarah E. Dugan (no clever lines)
jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) (06/05/85)
>What do you do the day after a peak experience?
You walk around in a daze, not doing all the work you were getting done
the day before. Later, you sulk.
--
Full-Name: J. Eric Roskos
UUCP: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer
US Mail: MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC;
2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642
"Zl FB vf n xvyyre junyr."
jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) (06/05/85)
Opx, uijt jt hfuujoh rvjuf pvu pg iboe. Gjstu xf ibwf "Nt." Ljstufo ufmmjoh vt xf tipvme tju epxo, opx xf ibwf uxp xpnfo pggfs iptujmf tvhhftujpot xiz xf epo'u. Xfmm, c'hpssz, ju't opu bmm uibu bobupnjdbmmz gfbtjcmf up "ep ju," bt zpv qvu ju, tjuujoh epxo, J nfbo, uifo zpv "ep ju" bmm pwfs uif voefstjef pg uif sjn pg uif dpnnpef, zpv lopx? Hff, xija, bmsfbez. J nfbo, ju't ibse fopvhi up "ep ju" jo b tusbjhiu mjof. -- Full-Name: J. Eric Roskos UUCP: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer US Mail: MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC; 2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642 "Zl FB vf n xvyyre junyr."
jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) (06/05/85)
Look here, if you are going to start another discussion on sexist language, I am just going to subject you to an extended metrical analysis of all the POETRY throughout the centuries that has been CORRUPTED by you people who insist of changing every "man" in every poem written to a "person" and then fixing the meter (or not) by chopping off the last word on every verse and sticking it somewhere in the middle of the next one. I wish the poets were alive to day so they could sue you for tampering with their poetry without their consent! -- Full-Name: J. Eric Roskos UUCP: ..!{decvax,ucbvax,ihnp4}!vax135!petsd!peora!jer US Mail: MS 795; Perkin-Elmer SDC; 2486 Sand Lake Road, Orlando, FL 32809-7642 "Zl FB vf n xvyyre junyr."
gmack@denelvx.UUCP (Gregg Mackenzie) (06/06/85)
> alternate suggestion to sitting down: > since you are worried about being sanitary AND taking your pants down > the obvious solution is to simply pull down the zipper and when ready > lay down across the toilet seat facing the floor and voila - no mess > and very sanitary , almost, and you dont have to take your pants all > the way down either. > > jeanette l. zobjeck > ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie Hey! That's exactly how I do it! (No fair peeking, Jeanette.) Either that, or I just do it in a can or something and very carefully pour it in. Or, I'll just take the lid off of the tank and do it in there. And then there's always the sink...or maybe the shower...(:-) :-)). Gregg Mackenzie denelcor!gmack
barb@pyuxa.UUCP (B E Nemeth) (06/06/85)
Okay, I can't take it anymore. I don't remember who started the original posting so I'm sending this the the general public. I've been sitting back reading all the responses to the original poster's problem of his female roomates using up all the toilet paper. And it seems it really has gotten out of hand. Is it really such a problem? My experiences are that at times I will use a minute amount of toilet paper; then when I'm in one of my crazy moods, for no apparent reason I'll use a lot!! :) Seriously, I don't feel this is such a major problem (say as the rape issue), but I think I came up with a solution. How about if all us net.readers donate a roll of toilet paper to the original poster (I'm sure he'll step forward again). This will keep him happy for a while. And could we end the debate of pissing while: sitting, standing, laying down, standing backwards, standing on your head, etc. Barbara
maybee@gpp1.UUCP (Joe Maybee) (06/06/85)
In article <620@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> shor@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Melinda Shore) writes: >Perhaps the real question is this: > > Why do men use so little toilet paper?? > >-- >Melinda Shore >University of Chicago Computation Center >..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!shor REAL men use their listings! ---J. Maybee
hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (06/06/85)
In article <42@gpp1.UUCP> maybee@gpp1.UUCP (Joe Maybee) writes: ><620@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> shor@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Melinda Shore): >>Perhaps the real question is this: >> >> Why do men use so little toilet paper?? >> >>-- >>Melinda Shore >>University of Chicago Computation Center >>..!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!shor > > > REAL men use their listings! > > ---J. Maybee Ummmmm.... Isn't that a redundant action? Bleah, Hutch
quint@topaz.ARPA (Amqueue) (06/07/85)
>> Why do men use so little toilet paper?? > >Haven't you heard of the "last shake?" The way I heard it..... "No matter how much you shake and dance the last drop always falls in your pants." this is theoretically taught to young boys everywhere. All the guys that I know know it. So why the lack of toilet paper? miaow! /amqueue
quint@topaz.ARPA (Amqueue) (06/07/85)
Holy shit! I don't believe it! Here, right here, on net.flame, we have found the reason for male supremacy in the technical fields: >................... Six guys can all use the same toilet at the same time. >I'd like to see six girls do that.... > > Scott R. Turner This is obviously the most efficient way to do it. And since men are, by nature's own design, inherently more efficient, they are obviously the most efficient people around. And Efficiency is one of the ghods of the technical fields, correct? Since women are thereby less efficient, it is small wonder there are so few of them around in these types of jobs. We should all be proud of them for overcoming their inherent handicap. There... have I gotten everything yet? toilets, dicrimination, handicaps, being proud, poor little women, uh... yeah, I guess so. oh, and scott? the word is cunt. slit. crack. Not cooze. cu! have fun Hugs! /amqueue
spaf@gatech.CSNET (Gene Spafford) (06/07/85)
In article <620@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> shor@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Melinda Shore) writes: >Perhaps the real question is this: > > Why do men use so little toilet paper?? Well, at least in my experience, following micturation I simply whack it against the porcelain a few times to shake out the last few drops. That's why I don't sit when I'm just urinating -- I don't have the room to get a good swing. (Hi, Sophie! How's the job? Is this a good example of testosterone poisoning?) Oops! Back to the home, -- Gene "3 months and holding" Spafford The Clouds Project, School of ICS, Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332 CSNet: Spaf @ GATech ARPA: Spaf%GATech.CSNet @ CSNet-Relay.ARPA uucp: ...!{akgua,allegra,hplabs,ihnp4,linus,seismo,ulysses}!gatech!spaf
sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) (06/07/85)
In article <921@mnetor.UUCP> sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) writes: >Maybe I should speak for myself here. What actually happened was that I >originally meant to be kidding in my original posting. I also wanted to >be slightly insulting, and thought that this was acceptable given that >1/ the discussion was conducted in net.flame, where logic and civility >are outlawed anyway, 2/ the original discussion was insulting to women, >and what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Now you have a change of face. Now you claim that you are kidding. Why? Perhaps you know when you are beaten and can't logically argue your way out of it, so you claim you were kidding. As for the original discussion being insulting to women, "two wrongs don't make it right". If you felt that you were insulted, your best defense you have been to argue your way out of it, instead of using the same techniques. This only displays hypocracy, where you feel that something is bad, and yet do it in turn. >However, given the amount of hate mail and explanations I received on the >matter (more than I have ever received on any of my other usually brilliant >postings! :->), I was forced to conclude that I was either 1/ right or 2/ close >enough to be right, in which case I should probably make sure that I leave a >way out of the insult for some of my best friends (some of my best friends are >MEN!). That is why I posted the followup .... I think... actually I don't >even remember posting a followup, but if I did, I probably said something >wishy-washy like "not ALL men are poisonned......". Well, I retract that now! I can see how hate mail would tend to reinforce your attitude that you were right. I do not see how explanations could have done the same. Explanations, presented rationally, would prove you wrong. I'm glad you're not being wishy-washy anymore, but you are still wrong. >Now Sean, have fun tearing this one to shreds!!! I will never tell you >whether or not I am kidding now.... but things are more exciting that way, >aren't they? >-- >Sophie Quigley >{allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie Whether you tell me you were kidding or not, I will take you seriously. If you choose to waver, you must bear the burden of the doubt. Yes, it has been fun tearing your *statement* and your *argument* to shreds. Yes, it is exciting. I look forward to reading the netnews. I want you to realise something though. As I stated to someone before, I do not want you to believe that I am attacking you personally. I do not know you, and to judge you without so would be hypocracy on my part. I am attacking a statement and an attitude that you displayed - a statement and an attitude that I believe to be in grave error. Though I don't mind making someone mad (especially if it makes them think), I do mind hurting people's feelings very much. If I have done so, I sincerely apologise. Sean -- - Sean Casey UUCP: {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean - Department of Mathematics ARPA: ukma!sean@ANL-MCS.ARPA - University of Kentucky
smb@ulysses.UUCP (Steven Bellovin) (06/07/85)
> It's a dick, Jeanette, a cock, penis, etc., not a *thing*. I can understand > that you've probably never seen one, you frigid bitch, but I'm certain you > must have read about it. You and Sophie ought to get together some night > for a good squat and talk all about the male anatomy. > > And, hey, how about this: Six guys can all use the same toilet at the same > time. I'd like to see six girls do that: the girl on the bottom sure would > have sticky thighs, eh? And a real man can stir his drink with his dick, and > caulk windows and bathroom tiles with it. What the hell can you do with your > cooze, slut? Pick up quarters? The hard way? > > Scott R. Turner > ARPA: (now) srt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA (soon) srt@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU > UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!srt > SPUDNET: ...eye%srt@russet.spud Nothing like nice, civilized discussion, even of issues that don't seem of overwhelming importance. Tell me, Scott, just why do you think that Jeanette is (a) a "slut"; (b) a "frigid bitch"; and (c) both at once? On second thought, don't bother telling me; I'd be just as happy not to see any more of your postings. (Oh, you were joking -- sorry; it doesn't read that way from here, and wouldn't even if you threw in a few smiley faces. If there's any doubt -- no, I'm not joking, merely disgusted.) --Steve Bellovin
sed408@ihlpg.UUCP (s. dugan) (06/07/85)
> In article <258@ihlpa.UUCP> zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) writes: > >> I think it is due to testosterone poisonning myself. The only reason > >> you disgusting people don't sit down when you're doing your business > >> is that you somehow think it is more manly to do it standing up. > >> -- > >> Sophie Quigley > > > >Frankly I think it stems from fear of deflating ther male ego because > >they would find out the silly *thing* really wont dip into the water. > > > >Jeanette L. Zobjeck > > It's a dick, Jeanette, a cock, penis, etc., not a *thing*. I can understand > that you've probably never seen one, you frigid bitch, but I'm certain you > must have read about it. You and Sophie ought to get together some night > for a good squat and talk all about the male anatomy. > > And, hey, how about this: Six guys can all use the same toilet at the same > time. I'd like to see six girls do that: the girl on the bottom sure would > have sticky thighs, eh? And a real man can stir his drink with his dick, and > caulk windows and bathroom tiles with it. What the hell can you do with your > cooze, slut? Pick up quarters? The hard way? > > Scott R. Turner > ARPA: (now) srt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA (soon) srt@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU > UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!srt > SPUDNET: ...eye%srt@russet.spud Now come on! Wasn't that a bit strong and uncalled for? I even take offense at some of those comments, and I don't offend very easily. Let's clean this up a little bit, OK? Sarah E. Dugan (a friend of Dr. Bob and Bill W.) "One Day At A Time" -- Sarah E. Dugan (a friend of Dr. Bob and Bill W.) "One Day At A Time"
ajf@pyuxa.UUCP (A Figura) (06/08/85)
In <1266@pyuxa.UUCP>, Barb Nemeth writes: > Okay, I can't take it anymore. .... > And could we end the debate of pissing while: sitting, standing, > laying down, standing backwards, standing on your head, etc. Barb - what have you done!?!?!? Do you realize how many followups this will create? We'll now have endless discussions of: Whether its chauvinistic and a macho display to piss while standing on one's head Whether a woman standing on her head is "asking for it" Whether a man should cross the street and walk on the other side if he sees a woman standing on her head taking a piss Whether there is a neuter-gender pronoun for someone who urinates in this manner Whether such an activity will increase or decrease the consumption of toilet paper Whether hot water will freeze faster than cold (oh sorry - wrong newsgroup) :-) Why did I ever get into this discussion?
bing@galbp.UUCP (Bing Bang) (06/08/85)
In article <> spaf@gatech.UUCP (Gene Spafford) writes: > >(Hi, Sophie! How's the job? Is this a good example of > testosterone poisoning?) > you mean those booster shots i've been getting from my doctor so that i can drag my thing in the water maybe poisonous??????????? what the heck i'll sign it! bing -- ---------- "Is anything really real?" ...akgua!galbp!bing
bandy@lll-crg.ARPA (Andrew Scott Beals) (06/08/85)
Golly gee, Melinda Shore, haven't you ever heard the old joke? I'll just give the lead-in and punch-line... "At Havahd they teach us to wash our hands afterwards." "At MIT they teach us to not to piss on our hands." ---------- On the other hand, Muffy is saying that it makes more sense to wrap them in toilet paper than to get blood all over the trash can (and have to wash it every month "It's really disgusting, dried blood."). -- andy beals bandy@{lll-crg,mit-mc}.arpa {sun!lll-crg,ihnp4!mit-eddie}!bandy
edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) (06/08/85)
In article <983@ulysses.UUCP>, smb@ulysses.UUCP (Steven Bellovin) writes: > > > > < Scott details some of the advantages of having a dick while > > also pointing out that Jeanette can't pick up quarters with > > her genitals > > > > > Scott R. Turner > > ARPA: (now) srt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA (soon) srt@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU > > UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!srt > > SPUDNET: ...eye%srt@russet.spud > > < Steve get offended > > > --Steve Bellovin Aww, did big bad Scott offend little Stevie? Well, TOO FUCKING BAD! This is (altogether now...) NET FLAME!!!! If Scott wants to refer to Jeanette's anatomy in a non-flattering way, FINE. He has every right to do so! If Scott wants to proudly extoll the virtues of the male sex organ, FINE, he can use whatever words he wants to do so! If you don't like the way things are said in (altogether now..) NET.FLAME, DON'T READ THE GROUP THEN!!! This reminds me of the Right-wingers who complain about all the crap on television while not realizing that if they just turn it off, they won't be confronted by it. gees, some people are soooo touchy... -- edward {ucbvax,unmvax,boulder,research}!anlams! -| () {mcvax!qtlon,vax135,mddc}!qusavx! -|--> ukma!edward | | |-- {decvax,ihnp4,mhuxt,seismo}! -+-> cbosgd! -| /|--- {clyde,osu-eddie,ulysses}! ---| | \ _ \___/ \= "Well, what's on the television then?" "Looks like a penguin." Support barrier free design
jla@usl.UUCP (Joe Arceneaux) (06/08/85)
In article <1266@pyuxa.UUCP> barb@pyuxa.UUCP (B E Nemeth) writes: > ... > And could we end the debate of pissing while: sitting, standing, > laying down, standing backwards, standing on your head, etc. > > Barbara But this discussion has been so much more fun that net.jokes... -- Joe Arceneaux Lafayette, LA {akgua, ut-sally}!usl!jla
jla@usl.UUCP (Joe Arceneaux) (06/09/85)
In article <2226@topaz.ARPA> quint@topaz.UUCP (Amqueue) writes: > > Holy shit! I don't believe it! Here, right here, on net.flame, we > have found the reason for male supremacy in the technical fields: > > >................... Six guys can all use the same toilet at the same time. > >I'd like to see six girls do that.... > > > > Scott R. Turner ... One woman, infinitely tired of her male friend's sexist remarks to the effect that there was nothing that women could do better than men, suggested a little contest. Said she: "Ok, let's see who can piss and leave the highest mark on yonder wall." He: "HA! No problem, you go first." So the woman drops her pants, goes up to the wall, and when she returns there's a wet spot starting about genital height. Her friend looks at it and says "No problem," as he walks over to the wall, drops his pants, and grabs his penis. To which the woman replies, "Ah-ah! No hands!" (:-) -- Joe Arceneaux Lafayette, LA {akgua, ut-sally}!usl!jla
sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) (06/09/85)
In article <572@ihlpg.UUCP> sed408@ihlpg.UUCP (s. dugan) writes: >> It's a dick, Jeanette, a cock, penis, etc., not a *thing*. I can understand >> that you've probably never seen one, you frigid bitch, but I'm certain you >> must have read about it. You and Sophie ought to get together some night >> for a good squat and talk all about the male anatomy. >> >> And, hey, how about this: Six guys can all use the same toilet at the same >> time. I'd like to see six girls do that: the girl on the bottom sure would >> have sticky thighs, eh? And a real man can stir his drink with his dick, and >> caulk windows and bathroom tiles with it. What the hell can you do with your >> cooze, slut? Pick up quarters? The hard way? >> > >Now come on! Wasn't that a bit strong and uncalled for? I even take offense >at some of those comments, and I don't offend very easily. Let's clean this >up a little bit, OK? > >Sarah E. Dugan Oh my, this does look familiar. Watch out Sarah, he might say he was KIDDING. -- - Sean Casey UUCP: {cbosgd,anlams,hasmed}!ukma!sean - Department of Mathematics ARPA: ukma!sean@ANL-MCS.ARPA - University of Kentucky
john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) (06/09/85)
>From: srt@ucla-cs.UUCP >Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department >Message-ID: <5804@ucla-cs.ARPA> > >And, hey, how about this: Six guys can all use the same toilet at the same >time. I'd like to see six girls do that... Actually, they almost do. Have you ever been somewhere with a large group of women and heard one announce that she was going to the rest room? Watch closely, nearly every other one will come along! (I apologize to the net for following up to this rather disgusting point. I did, however, feel that this particular point was germain to the discussion as a whole.) -- Name: John Ruschmeyer US Mail: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ 07764 Phone: (201) 222-6600 x366 UUCP: ...!vax135!petsd!moncol!john ...!princeton!moncol!john ...!pesnta!moncol!john Silly Quote: "I wanted to call it 'Nautical Lady' and Fred wanted to call it 'Queen of the Sea'. So we took the first three letters of my name and the last three letters of his."
grwalter@watnot.UUCP (Fred) (06/09/85)
In article <983@ulysses.UUCP> smb@ulysses.UUCP (Steven Bellovin) writes:
a lot of stuff
While I agree about Scott's personality (disgusting), it is technically
possible for a woman to be both a) slut (sexually promiscuous) and
b) frigid (unable to orgasm). I know several.
Also, it is his type of article (ie. ridiculous) that makes this
newsgroup so funny to read.
Then again, I just may be weird.
Fred
"Don't argue over anything that can be settled with a FLAMEthrower."
srm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian) (06/09/85)
I was going to resist participating in this one, but last night I attended a performance of "Die Goetterdaemmerung" at the SF Opera House. The performance began at 6:30, and the first intermission wasn't until 8:30. At that time I went thru the coffee-then-rest-room routine. The main men's room has 16 urinals and 6 toilets, and the line was out the door. I was done in less than 5 minutes. I don't know the details of the women's facilities, but the intermission was extended to 35 minutes--10 minutes longer than usual. Even for a normal opera--about an hour between intermissions--getting to the women's room and back in 25 minutes is generally a challenge for my wife. ********** About a month or so ago, we attended a performance of the Bay Area Women's Philharmonic, which was held at a Masonic Temple in San Francisco. At that performance, the men's and women's rooms were interchanged, and the men got to use a facility with no urinals and four toilets. I'm not sure what sort of facility the women got, or what they did with the urinals. ********** I don't know the point of this. -- Richard Mateosian {cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!srm nsc!srm@decwrl.ARPA
srm@nsc.UUCP (Richard Mateosian) (06/09/85)
> > "No matter how much you shake and dance > the last drop always falls in your pants." > >this is theoretically taught to young boys everywhere. All the guys >that I know know it. So why the lack of toilet paper? Have you ever looked for toilet paper near a urinal? Besides, it's not true. -- Richard Mateosian {cbosgd,fortune,hplabs,ihnp4,seismo}!nsc!srm nsc!srm@decwrl.ARPA
john@moncol.UUCP (John Ruschmeyer) (06/09/85)
>From: quint@topaz.ARPA (Amqueue) >Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. >Message-ID: <2225@topaz.ARPA> > >>> Why do men use so little toilet paper?? >> >>Haven't you heard of the "last shake?" > >The way I heard it..... > > "No matter how much you shake and dance > the last drop always falls in your pants." > >this is theoretically taught to young boys everywhere. All the guys >that I know know it. So why the lack of toilet paper? Conditioning, maybe? After all, the desingers of urinals never saw fit to provide toilet paper. Could be we all learned to live with the condition. -- Name: John Ruschmeyer US Mail: Monmouth College, W. Long Branch, NJ 07764 Phone: (201) 222-6600 x366 UUCP: ...!vax135!petsd!moncol!john ...!princeton!moncol!john ...!pesnta!moncol!john Silly Quote: "I wanted to call it 'Nautical Lady' and Fred wanted to call it 'Queen of the Sea'. So we took the first three letters of my name and the last three letters of his."
bing@galbp.UUCP (Bing Bang) (06/10/85)
>>> It's a dick, Jeanette, a cock, penis, etc., not a *thing*. I can understand >>> that you've probably never seen one, you frigid bitch, but I'm certain you >>> must have read about it. You and Sophie ought to get together some night >>> for a good squat and talk all about the male anatomy. >>> >>> And, hey, how about this: Six guys can all use the same toilet at the same >>> time. I'd like to see six girls do that: the girl on the bottom sure would >>> have sticky thighs, eh? And a real man can stir his drink with his dick, and >>> caulk windows and bathroom tiles with it. What the hell can you do with your >>> cooze, slut? Pick up quarters? The hard way? >>> i'm sorry i just have to get this in: Scot, you're an asshole. -- ---------- "Is anything really real?" ...akgua!galbp!bing
bing@galbp.UUCP (Bing Bang) (06/10/85)
In article <> quint@topaz.UUCP (Amqueue) writes: > There... have I gotten everything yet? toilets, dicrimination, handicaps, >being proud, poor little women, uh... yeah, I guess so. > i'm a handicap, and i want to thank you for not leaving me out..... >Hugs! can i really? >/amqueue -- ---------- "Is anything really real?" ...akgua!galbp!bing
zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (06/11/85)
> > > > It's a ****, Jeanette, a @@@@, !!!!s, etc., not a *thing*. I can understand > > that you've probably never seen one, you frigid bitch, but I'm certain you > > must have read about it. You and Sophie ought to get together some night > > for a good squat and talk all about the male anatomy. > > > > And, hey, how about this: Six guys can all use the same toilet at the same > > time. I'd like to see six girls do that: the girl on the bottom sure would > > have sticky thighs, eh? And a real man can stir his drink with his ****, and > > caulk windows and bathroom tiles with it. What the hell can you do with your > > #####, slut? Pick up quarters? The hard way? > > > > Scott R. Turner I did not see the original posting of this but I have received much mail essentially saying that Mr. Turner is out of line. I would like to reply to Mr. Turner here. Please excuse me. Dear Scott, It would seem that you have some deep dislike for yourself which is now and has been for some time frustrating your efforts towards copoing with the real world. For this you have my sympathy. Originally I had a rather flamable reply all composed for you but before I sent it I re-read your posting and discovered that what I was reading was a classic example of someone crying for help. I believe that even the "Son of Sam" appealed for help in his own way. I can speak for Sophie of course but for me I would like the people on the net who read our original message, perhaps even some who have read it wuoted also, to do all they can to help you out of your troubles. I would myself but at this point in time your frustration and anger are directed at me and I would not be able to communicate with you well enough to be of help to you. When you have your problems better in hand I would welcome hearing anything you had to say but for now I cant see how you can contribute anything of any real value because something inside you has made the path from your brain to your keyboard take a detour through some hidden cranny of your mind. Live Long and Prosper Jeanette L. Zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie
zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (06/11/85)
> > Barb - what have you done!?!?!? Do you realize how many followups > this will create? We'll now have endless discussions of: > Whether its chauvinistic and a macho display to piss while > standing on one's head > Whether a woman standing on her head is "asking for it" > Whether a man should cross the street and walk on the other side > if he sees a woman standing on her head taking a piss > Whether there is a neuter-gender pronoun for someone who > urinates in this manner > Whether such an activity will increase or decrease the consumption > of toilet paper > > Why did I ever get into this discussion? *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE *** "Thank God and Greyhound ......" - Roy Clark jeanette l. zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie
sed408@ihlpg.UUCP (s. dugan) (06/11/85)
> In article <983@ulysses.UUCP>, smb@ulysses.UUCP (Steven Bellovin) writes: > > > > > > < Scott details some of the advantages of having a dick while > > > also pointing out that Jeanette can't pick up quarters with > > > her genitals > > > > > > > Scott R. Turner > > > ARPA: (now) srt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA (soon) srt@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU > > > UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!srt > > > SPUDNET: ...eye%srt@russet.spud > > > > < Steve get offended > > > > > --Steve Bellovin > > Aww, did big bad Scott offend little Stevie? Well, TOO FUCKING BAD! > This is (altogether now...) NET FLAME!!!! If Scott wants to refer to > Jeanette's anatomy in a non-flattering way, FINE. He has every right to > do so! If Scott wants to proudly extoll the virtues of the male sex organ, > FINE, he can use whatever words he wants to do so! > > If you don't like the way things are said in (altogether now..) > NET.FLAME, > DON'T READ THE GROUP THEN!!! > > > This reminds me of the Right-wingers who complain about all the > crap on television while not realizing that if they just turn it off, > they won't be confronted by it. > > gees, some people are soooo touchy... > > > -- > edward Sorry, but I beg to differ. Those comments didn't just go out over net.flame, they went out over net.women and they offended a lot of people, myself included! -- Sarah E. Dugan (a friend of Dr. Bob and Bill W.) "One Day At A Time"
steven@luke.UUCP (Steven List) (06/11/85)
In article <1023@peora.UUCP> jer@peora.UUCP (J. Eric Roskos) writes: >Opx, uijt jt hfuujoh rvjuf pvu pg iboe. Gjstu xf ibwf "Nt." Ljstufo ufmmjoh Who the fuck is this clown? Not only does he rotate in net.flame, but ^x doesn't unrotate it! I tried caesar 25 just for the hell of it and voila! Even a novice like me understands you don' gotta rotate shit in net.flame - anyone who might get their feelin's hurt don' belong here! -- *** * Steven List @ Benetics Corporation * (415) 940-6300 * {cdp,greipa,idi,oliveb,sun,tolerant}!bene!luke!steven ***
steven@luke.UUCP (Steven List) (06/11/85)
In article <233@gatech.CSNET> spaf@gatech.UUCP (Gene Spafford) writes: >In article <620@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP> shor@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Melinda Shore) writes: >>Perhaps the real question is this: >> >> Why do men use so little toilet paper?? > >Well, at least in my experience, following micturation I simply whack >it against the porcelain a few times to shake out the last few drops. I'll bet you get invited to a lot of softball games, huh, Gene? I can just here them now: "Let's invite Gene - he's got his own bat!" But seriously, do you always whack it on the same side? Does your body lean over that way? I've heard of getting a little on the side, but you're carrying it to extremes! Keep on whackin' -- *** * Steven List @ Benetics Corporation * (415) 940-6300 * {cdp,greipa,idi,oliveb,sun,tolerant}!bene!luke!steven ***
phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) (06/11/85)
In article <627@lll-crg.ARPA> bandy@lll-crg.UUCP (Andrew Scott Beals) writes: >On the other hand, Muffy is saying that it makes more sense to wrap >them in toilet paper than to get blood all over the trash can (and >have to wash it every month "It's really disgusting, dried blood."). A friend of mine says she just sends them to the sewage treatment plant. Biodegradable, right? My sisters gift-wrap them as they were taught by their mother. "It wouldn't do for boys to see them. They might ask what they were." -- A man could get elected President by promising to put the phone company back together. Phil Ngai (408) 749-5720 UUCP: {ucbvax,decwrl,ihnp4,allegra}!amdcad!phil ARPA: amdcad!phil@decwrl.ARPA
gmack@denelvx.UUCP (Gregg Mackenzie) (06/11/85)
> Aww, did big bad Scott offend little Stevie? Well, TOO FUCKING BAD! > This is (altogether now...) NET FLAME!!!! If Scott wants to refer to > Jeanette's anatomy in a non-flattering way, FINE. He has every right to > do so! If Scott wants to proudly extoll the virtues of the male sex organ, > FINE, he can use whatever words he wants to do so! > > If you don't like the way things are said in (altogether now..) > NET.FLAME, > DON'T READ THE GROUP THEN!!! > -- > edward Fellow netters, Please don't flame edward for his recent posting. It won't do any good. It would be futile to point out that any idiot can read the "Newsgroups" line and see that this stuff is going to net.women, as well as net.flame, because edward wouldn't understand it. You see, edward is actually an ape that the Learning Studies Dept. at U of K has attempted to train to use a keyboard. You can see they've had moderate success. Unfortunately, edward got out the other night and wandered over to the math department and mistook one of their terminals for his little keyboard and, well, you saw what happened. So, if it seems that edward doesn't have the slightest idea what he's talking about, that's simply because...he doesn't. Later & Greater, Gregg Mackenzie denelcor!gmack
gkloker@utai.UUCP (Geoff Loker) (06/11/85)
In article <1854@ukma.UUCP> edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) writes: >In article <983@ulysses.UUCP>, smb@ulysses.UUCP (Steven Bellovin) writes: >> > >> > < Scott details some of the advantages of having a dick while >> > also pointing out that Jeanette can't pick up quarters with >> > her genitals > >> > >> > Scott R. Turner >> > ARPA: (now) srt@UCLA-LOCUS.ARPA (soon) srt@LOCUS.UCLA.EDU >> > UUCP: ...!{cepu,ihnp4,trwspp,ucbvax}!ucla-cs!srt >> > SPUDNET: ...eye%srt@russet.spud >> >> < Steve get offended > >> >> --Steve Bellovin > > Aww, did big bad Scott offend little Stevie? Well, TOO FUCKING BAD! >This is (altogether now...) NET FLAME!!!! > . > . > . > > If you don't like the way things are said in (altogether now..) >NET.FLAME, > DON'T READ THE GROUP THEN!!! > Please note that this is NOT JUST net.flame; this is also posted to net.women (or didn't you notice the double posting?) If someone is going to get as abusive as Scott did in his reply, let the double posting be changed to go JUST to net.flame -- that way, people who read the other group(s) won't have to worry about coming up against such trash unless they want to read net.flame. -- Geoff Loker Department of Computer Science University of Toronto Toronto, ON M5S 1A4 USENET: {ihnp4 decwrl utzoo uw-beaver}!utcsri!utai!gkloker CSNET: gkloker@toronto ARPANET: gkloker.toronto@csnet-relay
rohn@randvax.UUCP (Laurinda Rohn) (06/11/85)
In article <1854@ukma.UUCP> edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) writes: >In article <983@ulysses.UUCP>, smb@ulysses.UUCP (Steven Bellovin) writes: >> > >> > < Scott details some of the advantages of having a dick while >> > also pointing out that Jeanette can't pick up quarters with >> > her genitals > >> >> < Steve get offended > >> --Steve Bellovin > > Aww, did big bad Scott offend little Stevie? Well, TOO FUCKING BAD! >This is (altogether now...) NET FLAME!!!! If Scott wants to refer to >Jeanette's anatomy in a non-flattering way, FINE. He has every right to >do so! If Scott wants to proudly extoll the virtues of the male sex organ, >FINE, he can use whatever words he wants to do so! > > If you don't like the way things are said in (altogether now..) >NET.FLAME, > DON'T READ THE GROUP THEN!!! >edward Unfortunately, this is not ONLY net.flame. As I don't read net.flame, I don't know what is or is not appropriate there. However, as you might notice from the newsgroups line, these postings also went to net.women. Such articles are definitely neither appropriate nor appreciated there (in my opinion, of course). Lauri rohn@rand-unix.ARPA ..decvax!randvax!rohn "I told you when I met you I was crazy..."
joeh@dartvax.UUCP (Joe Hill ) (06/11/85)
Thanks, After reading the last 100 or so articles about bathroom activities I have the incentive to clean my cat box. -pogo p.s. I tried sitting down, it does dip in the water. -- Joe Hill USNET: {linus|decvax|cornell|astrovax}!dartvax!joeh ARPA: joeh%dartmouth@csnet-relay CSNET: joeh@dartmouth
wa371@sdcc12.UUCP (Senior Dwarf) (06/12/85)
> >It makes more sense to wrap > >them in toilet paper than to get blood all over the trash can (and > >have to wash it every month "It's really disgusting, dried blood."). Blood is the color of life. And life is not disgusting--or is it? > My sisters gift-wrap them as they were taught by their > mother. "It wouldn't do for boys to see them. They might ask what they were." Right on! Boys should be kept ignorant about and alienated from girls. But do napkins have to be wrapped in miles of toilet paper when two layers will do as well? Women, of the world, mend your ways, or one of these days we will have a toilet paper crisis. :-) Cheers, Bernd <bear-nd> *** hooray for USENET *** UUCP: ...!ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdcc12!wa371, ARPA: sdcsvax!sdcc12!wa371@nosc
sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (06/12/85)
> Now you have a change of face. Now you claim that you are kidding. Why? > Perhaps you know when you are beaten and can't logically argue your way > out of it, so you claim you were kidding. As for the original discussion > being insulting to women, "two wrongs don't make it right". If you felt > that you were insulted, your best defense you have been to argue your way > out of it, instead of using the same techniques. This only displays Nahhh, that's no fun! > hypocracy, where you feel that something is bad, and yet do it in turn. > > Whether you tell me you were kidding or not, I will take you > seriously. If you choose to waver, you must bear the burden of the > doubt. Yes, it has been fun tearing your *statement* and your > *argument* to shreds. Yes, it is exciting. I look forward to reading > the netnews. > > I want you to realise something though. As I stated to someone before, > I do not want you to believe that I am attacking you personally. I do Why not? this is net.flame and you are SUPPOSED to attack me personally. If you want to have fun readin the net, you'd better learn how to do it properly, or your fate will be worse than a little roast in net.flame: you will end up IGNORED because your postings will have been so rational and boring!!!! > not know you, and to judge you without so would be hypocracy on my > part. I am attacking a statement and an attitude that you displayed - a > statement and an attitude that I believe to be in grave error. > Though I don't mind making someone mad (especially if it makes them > think), I do mind hurting people's feelings very much. If I have done > so, I sincerely apologise. > Well, you have hurt my feelings by not attacking me personnally, but you are hurting them even more so by apologising. What makes you think YOU can apologise to ME, buddy? Ah, well, who cares? as long as we are still hypocratising together..... -- Sophie Quigley {allegra|decvax|ihnp4|linus|watmath}!utzoo!mnetor!sophie
zubbie@ihlpa.UUCP (Jeanette Zobjeck) (06/12/85)
> It amazes me that anyone, even a pitiful bag lady like Jeanette, could hold > such ignorant, claustrophobic opinions. I dont ever recall anything about small closed-in places bothering me much > > "Women are much more aware of their bodies..." "does not generally strike > any blow at our femininity" etc. > > What nauseating, ridiculous pulp. Look Jeanette, if you want to sit around > patting yourself on the back over how much superior you are, fine, but don't > bother to post such masturbatory comments to the net. Any comments to the > effect that "women are more sensitive than men", "whites are more intelligent > than blacks", "aryans are superior to all other races" is self-serving, > prejudiced HORSESHIT, and easily recognizable as such by anyone with an iota > of intelligence (borrow one and you'll see for yourself). Go ahead and > believe this kind of crap if you want - I'm sure it helps you rationalize > the failings in your personal life - but don't post your embarassment for > the whole world to read. > > Scott R. Turner I would use far less intelligence to recognize the source of your problems but I have already answered you here in net.women and again (I like to see things put in the proper place) in a somewhat diminished manner (because of the style used) in net.flame. I still hold with my earlier statement. Once you have the batteries put into your helmet liner properly please feel free to consult with me when you feel the urge to be less than intelligent. Sort of like AA or Alanon or Food Freaks or .... jeanette l. zobjeck ihnp4!ihlpa!zubbie
gail@calmasd.UUCP (Gail B. Hanrahan) (06/12/85)
In article <1854@ukma.UUCP> edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) writes: > Aww, did big bad Scott offend little Stevie? Well, TOO FUCKING BAD! >This is (altogether now...) NET FLAME!!!! If you'd taken the trouble to read the Newsgroups line, you might have noticed that your article was also posted to net.women. This discussion has gone way past the bounds of what is appropriate for net.women. DON'T post any more followups on this subject to net.women. Please, people: keep the degrading personal insults in net.flame, where they belong. Learn to use an editor. :-) Edit the Newsgroups line. -- Gail Bayley Hanrahan Calma Company, San Diego {ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax}!sdcsvax!calmasd!gail
sed408@ihlpg.UUCP (s. dugan) (06/12/85)
> p.s. I tried sitting down, it does dip in the water. > > -- > Joe Hill > Are you sure your name isn't John Holmes? :-) -- Sarah E. Dugan "You have to kiss a lot of frogs before you find a prince!"
jeff@rtech.UUCP (Jeff Lichtman) (06/13/85)
> In article <921@mnetor.UUCP> sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) writes: > >Maybe I should speak for myself here. What actually happened was that I > >originally meant to be kidding in my original posting. I also wanted to > >be slightly insulting, and thought that this was acceptable given that > >1/ the discussion was conducted in net.flame, where logic and civility > >are outlawed anyway, 2/ the original discussion was insulting to women, > >and what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. > > Now you have a change of face. Now you claim that you are kidding. Why? > Perhaps you know when you are beaten and can't logically argue your way > out of it, so you claim you were kidding. As for the original discussion > being insulting to women, "two wrongs don't make it right". If you felt > that you were insulted, your best defense you have been to argue your way > out of it, instead of using the same techniques. This only displays > hypocracy, where you feel that something is bad, and yet do it in turn. OH FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!! *I* knew it was a joke! Too bad some people have no sense of humor. Q: How many over-sensitive jerks does it take to change a light bulb? A: I can't believe you said that. And don't try to claim it was a joke, because I know you meant it seriously, and it will only go against you. And besides, two wrongs don't make a right and blah, blah, blah, ... -- Jeff Lichtman at rtech (Relational Technology, Inc.) aka Swazoo Koolak {amdahl, sun}!rtech!jeff {ucbvax, decvax}!mtxinu!rtech!jeff
bing@galbp.UUCP (Bing Bang) (06/13/85)
In article <> sed408@ihlpg.UUCP (s. dugan) writes: >Sarah E. Dugan >"You have to kiss a lot of frogs >before you find a prince!" you haven't tried me yet... -- ---------- "Is anything really real?" ...akgua!galbp!bing
todd@SCINEWS.UUCP (Todd Jones) (06/15/85)
> > >It makes more sense to wrap > > >them in toilet paper than to get blood all over the trash can (and > > >have to wash it every month "It's really disgusting, dried blood."). > > Blood is the color of life. And life is not disgusting--or is it? Not only can life be disgusting, it can smell awful! > > > My sisters gift-wrap them as they were taught by their > > mother. "It wouldn't do for boys to see them. They might ask what they were." > > Right on! Boys should be kept ignorant about and alienated from girls. > > But do napkins have to be wrapped in miles of toilet paper when two layers > will do as well? > Women, of the world, mend your ways, or one of these days > we will have a toilet paper crisis. :-) > > Cheers, > Bernd <bear-nd> *** hooray for USENET *** > UUCP: ...!ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdcc12!wa371, ARPA: sdcsvax!sdcc12!wa371@nosc *** REPLACE THIS LINE WITH YOUR MESSAGE ***
jeffw@tekecs.UUCP (Jeff Winslow) (06/16/85)
> > In article <921@mnetor.UUCP> sophie@mnetor.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) writes: > > >Maybe I should speak for myself here. What actually happened was that I > > >originally meant to be kidding in my original posting. I also wanted to > > >be slightly insulting, and thought that this was acceptable given that > > >1/ the discussion was conducted in net.flame, where logic and civility > > >are outlawed anyway, 2/ the original discussion was insulting to women, > > >and what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. > > > > Now you have a change of face. Now you claim that you are kidding. Why? > > Perhaps you know when you are beaten and can't logically argue your way > > out of it, so you claim you were kidding. As for the original discussion > > being insulting to women, "two wrongs don't make it right". If you felt > > that you were insulted, your best defense you have been to argue your way > > out of it, instead of using the same techniques. This only displays > > hypocracy, where you feel that something is bad, and yet do it in turn. > > OH FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!!! *I* knew it was a joke! Too bad some people have > no sense of humor. I'LL SECOND THAT!!! Must be something in my name, I know... > Jeff Lichtman at rtech (Relational Technology, Inc.) Jeff Winslow
edward@ukma.UUCP (Primate #7463) (06/16/85)
In article <57@denelvx.UUCP>, gmack@denelvx.UUCP (Gregg Mackenzie) writes: > > Fellow netters, > > Please don't flame edward for his recent posting. It won't do any > good. It would be futile to point out that any idiot can read the "Newsgroups" > line and see that this stuff is going to net.women, as well as net.flame, > because edward wouldn't understand it. You're right. I'm an engineer, I don't have to know how to read. > You see, edward is actually an ape that the Learning Studies Dept. at > U of K has attempted to train to use a keyboard. You can see they've had > moderate success. Awwww, you found me out!!!! <Ape noises> > Unfortunately, edward got out the other night and wandered over to the > math department and mistook one of their terminals for his little keyboard and, > well, you saw what happened. Yeah, that was fun. Me an ol' McGilla [ plus a few of our basketball players :-) ] get every other weekend off from the L.S.D.. We just love to play on the net. There are so many people on here at the same intellectual level that we operate at. (We are confused with the discussion on your females menstrual periods though. Why not just let them bleed like our mates do? Are sure you people are smarter than us apes?) > So, if it seems that edward doesn't have the slightest idea what he's > talking about, that's simply because...he doesn't. I dunno. I get my ideas from you people. > > Later & Greater, Greater than what? A 'lower' primate? Why not come on over to the L.S.D. Gregg? We can teach you how to operate a keyboard just as well as me. > Gregg Mackenzie -- edward Primate #7463 "I get my opinions from USENET"
ed@mtxinu.UUCP (Ed Gould) (06/20/85)
In article <1854@ukma.UUCP> edward@ukma.UUCP (Edward C. Bennett) writes: > > Aww, did big bad Scott offend little Stevie? Well, TOO FUCKING BAD! >This is (altogether now...) NET FLAME!!!! ... > > If you don't like the way things are said in (altogether now..) >NET.FLAME, > DON'T READ THE GROUP THEN!!! I don't, but I still see this kind of drivel. Note the "Newsgroups:" line in the header: Newsgroups: net.flame,net.women This stuff is also in net.women. Now, *FLAME ON* before you berate someone for inappropriate postings engage your own brain and look at what *you're* doing. I couldn't care less what shows up in net.flame, or how it's phrased. In other groups, a modicum of decorum is expected. Scott showed none. *FLAME OFF* -- Ed Gould mt Xinu, 2910 Seventh St., Berkeley, CA 94710 USA {ucbvax,decvax}!mtxinu!ed +1 415 644 0146