Dorm Brothel!

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

― RS £aRue (rockist_scientist), Monday, 31 January 2005 21:09 (twenty-one years ago)

Also in this issue: "My Path to Lesbianism:
It was hatred of women that drove me there, and Christ in community that led me out."

― RS £aRue (rockist_scientist), Monday, 31 January 2005 21:12 (twenty-one years ago)

this article is rockist

― The Obligatory Sourpuss (Begs2Differ), Monday, 31 January 2005 21:15 (twenty-one years ago)

And cockist.

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 31 January 2005 21:23 (twenty-one years ago)

And not really funny enough to even mock your way through, really.

Can I just note that all these wonderful male-female interaction standards of the past were kinda built around barring the possibility that a person would ever be just informally friends with someone of the opposite sex? More and more I feel like this is a big weird generational divide. People must have been so deprived, having half the population cut off from any non-formalized interaction!

― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 31 January 2005 21:26 (twenty-one years ago)

What does this guy think venereal disease is for? I suppose suggesting that nature can take care of itself is too darwinian for such a publication, blame the left-leaning university administrators instead.

― TOMBOT, Monday, 31 January 2005 21:41 (twenty-one years ago)

The lure and availability of sexual adventure that our colleges afford is teaching young women also to pursue sexual pleasures aggressively

Oh horrors!

― tokyo rosemary (rosemary), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:20 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, I still can't figure out why a man would ever complain about that. He would probably respond that I'd change my tune if I had a daughter, but really, no, I'd rather my offspring get laid comfortably and electively than just eventually put out for a couple nice dinners and then spend her forties in a cult or sucking off guys in porn theaters because no one ever spanked her in college.

― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:24 (twenty-one years ago)

"the flesh of our daughters is being served up daily like snack jerky"

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:25 (twenty-one years ago)

Woah.

― Neo (Dan Perry), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:25 (twenty-one years ago)

oh no, tell me my fate is not to spend my forties in a cult or sucking off guys in porn theaters because no one spanks me in college!

I'm kind of just blown out of the water by this sentence being so casually thrown in...I'm not sure what the tone is meant to be. Like, "some of us" meaning "some assholes," or "some of us" meaning "we were so innocent, who knows?"We had never heard of date rape either, though some of us may have committed it.

― Maria (Maria), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:34 (twenty-one years ago)

(Yeah, sorry, Maria, something bad in the construction of that sentence assumed that any offspring of mine would necessarily have a burning desire to get spanked while in college. Let's pretend I never posted here. Let's pretend I don't speak English. All will be well.)

― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:47 (twenty-one years ago)

If you don't talk about it, it doesn't exist!

― tokyo rosemary (rosemary), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:47 (twenty-one years ago)

I cannot WAIT for nabisco to have children so that I can stalk him around his daughter's birthday with a print-out of this thread and an a wallet waiting to be filled with $50s.

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:49 (twenty-one years ago)

sorry, just my insecurity coming out there. i am laughing out loud though (now more, with the dan xpost).

― Maria (Maria), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:50 (twenty-one years ago)

Date-rape in retrospect: suddenly the author realizes that those obvious "easy" girls were not actually easy! "Some guy told me she put out," he says, "and then later she was yelling something at me, but I really wasn't paying attention."

― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:51 (twenty-one years ago)

xpost - the last thing you need is insecurity about not getting spanked!

― nabisco (nabisco), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:51 (twenty-one years ago)

"He kissed me and called me when he said he would, but he didn't SPANK MY LIKE I WAS A NAUGHTY, NAUGHTY GIRL! Do you think he likes me?"

― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:52 (twenty-one years ago)

In my dormitory there were young ladies who would indulge in "The French Vice" before certain gentlemen. I have heard it said that their antics could melt the wax off one's moustache. I, however, would not have dared to partake in such licentious activity.

― Jay Vee (Manon_70), Monday, 31 January 2005 22:54 (twenty-one years ago)

Back then, and from time immemorial, so far as I knew, there were the "easy" girls. We had a provocative name or two for them, and they were quickly sorted out from the "other" girls. Word got around fast. These were not young women one seriously considered marrying, and most of us expected and hoped to find a mate in college. If, however, a guy got especially "hungry" or "horny," there was no special stigma attached to taking advantage of what the easy girls had to offer.

The gentlemen of the University of Virginia lived by a double standard, but there were standards. There was little doubt about that.

― Hurting (Hurting), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 04:01 (twenty-one years ago)

A bit tautological.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 04:02 (twenty-one years ago)

Also a bit like saying "Back then, we had people to do our work for us, but they were all black and lived in separate quarters, and generally stayed out of sight. Yes, there was slavery, but at there was a sense of dignity that came along with it."

― Hurting (Hurting), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 04:07 (twenty-one years ago)

Refreshing in its honesty - 'yes, we are hypocrites, yes we drank heavily and took advantage of young women - but by god we acted like gentleman around authority figures!' The problem is not in the debauchery, apparently, it's that the debauchery is no longer a public secret. Rather revealing about the conservative Christian mindset from my experience.

Since my student years, colleges have abandoned all the arrangements that society had once put in place to protect the "weaker sex" so they could say "no" and have a place to retreat if young men pressed them too far.
Er, what was that about date-rape, dude?

― milozauckerman (miloaukerman), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 04:16 (twenty-one years ago)

This article is written with so much blantant denial that I can't read it properly without hurting my brane. :(

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:00 (twenty-one years ago)

i had trouble reading more than a few paragraphs, it was fucking bad. i couldn't figure out what the guy was trying to say except sex is bad, mmmk.

― caitlin oh no (caitxa1), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:02 (twenty-one years ago)

Andrew OTM, the article is head-twistingly ugly :(

― Trayce (trayce), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:10 (twenty-one years ago)

Oh dear. An actual poll from this site:

I believe demonic possession is: (Check all that apply)

not real. It's a biblical literary device.:
5%

a belief of primitive cultures.:
4%

possible, but only for non-Christians.:
23%

possible for Christians.:
13%

not taken seriously enough by Christians.:
35%

not taken seriously enough by doctors.:
20%

― Hurting (Hurting), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:17 (twenty-one years ago)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHH.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:18 (twenty-one years ago)

not taken seriously enough by doctors? what do these people go to the doctor and ask, "a cold? are you sure i'm not possessed by the devil?"

― caitlin oh no (caitxa1), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:23 (twenty-one years ago)

Polycystic Ovaries, you suspect? Hmm, I think you ought to consider the possibility that your reproductive system is posessed by satan, you damn harlot!

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:25 (twenty-one years ago)

to whom would the doctor refer a patient with a diagnosis of demonic possession??

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:27 (twenty-one years ago)

psychiatrist

― caitlin oh no (caitxa1), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:31 (twenty-one years ago)

priest

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:32 (twenty-one years ago)

pokemon

― roxymuzak (roxymuzak), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:32 (twenty-one years ago)

paedophile

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:37 (twenty-one years ago)

Perhaps it isn't worth pointing out, but some of these answers are not mutually exclusive -- you could, for example, believe that possession needs to be taken more seriously by both Christians AND doctors, AND think it can happen to Christians -- so it's not even a well designed poll.

But what do you expect from Christians ...

― Hurting (Hurting), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 05:38 (twenty-one years ago)

actually i thought that was kind of an interesting article. i mean there's some really dumb sexist stuff (which he pretty much admits), but it's not like one of those pat robertson 'god hates fags so smited the world trade center with a fiery spongebob' statements. it almost laments a lack of romance and sense of identity more than a lack of morals.
oh dear. i'm such a party pooper.

― lolita corpus (lolitacorpus), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 06:37 (twenty-one years ago)

I have two things to say about this article:

1. Dude misinterprets the bit from Walker Percy here so badly it hurts.

2. I'll bet anybody big money that the "RA" mentioned in the article is his research assistant, and that he's slept with her or tried to.

― Colin Meeder (Mert), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 09:23 (twenty-one years ago)

A glaring weakness in this article is that the guy doesn't even connect the behavior - sexual experimentation in college - with the bizarre presumed assumption that it will somehow destroy marriage and traditional relationships throughout society. He seems to just think that he can make a laundry list of a bunch of immoral behaviors and that'll somehow show a causal link. Makes you wonder how he got to be a college professor.

― anon lurker, Tuesday, 1 February 2005 10:22 (twenty-one years ago)

good to see Ignatius J Reilly is thriving.

― debden, Tuesday, 1 February 2005 10:43 (twenty-one years ago)

Makes you wonder how he got to be a college professor.

Why? There are plenty of colleges, and plenty of religiously-affiliated colleges will dubious academic agendas too. This guy's practically a goldmine for such institutions, such is his convoluted, confusing reasoning.

― Andrew (enneff), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 10:59 (twenty-one years ago)

i read flabbergastingly stupid statements made by college professors (some at prestigious universities!) in the newspaper seemingly every day.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 14:01 (twenty-one years ago)

cf. recent conference at hamilton college which i believe was called something like "intersections of race, class, gender, and nationality" (way to be specific) and whose keynote speaker is famous for insulting the victims of september 11.

― Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 14:15 (twenty-one years ago)

I knew that fucking Tom Wolfe book would be in there. Fuck that guy, with his stilted inaccurate slang and shit.

― Dan I. (Dan I.), Tuesday, 1 February 2005 20:09 (twenty-one years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.