Simpson: less freedom than Communist Russia

by Kate Paulman

I met a guy this summer who’s slept with 105 women. 105. Of course, he didn’t tell me this until after I went home with him.

Just kidding.

He told me before.

But I digress. The point of the story is this: when he tells people that he’s slept with 105 women, he’s called a stud – actually, what I’d call him is a man badly in need of a punch in the face. But now, let me put my thing down flip it and reverse it – let’s say that I had slept with 105 men.

Don’t worry mom and dad, that’s far from true. But think about it. If I had done that, I’d be a slut. This, my small-town Iowa friends, is completely unfair. American society has set up a repressive sexual double standard.

Wait, wait … let’s not let this turn into another one of those whiny “what’s good for the goose should be good for the gander” columns.

I mean, if a Christina Aguilera and Lil’ Kim collaboration can’t fix this double standard, why should I bother?

Why? Because women were encouraged to be more sexually liberated in Bolshevik Russia than we are today.

It’s true. “The Russian Revolution of 1917 immediately proclaimed complete equality of rights for women. In the 1920s, divorce and abortion were made easily available, and women were encouraged to work outside the home and liberate themselves sexually. The most prominent Bolshevik feminist, Alexandra Kollontai, went so far as to declare that the sex act had no more significance than ‘drinking a glass of water.'” That’s on page 963 of A History of Western Society, Seventh Edition, Volume II, published in 2003 by Houghton Mifflin and written by John McKay, Bennett Hill and John Buckler, if you doubt me. Now, this may not have been true for the entire Russian populace, but it’s hard for me to argue with a history book. Needless to say, this freedom was toned down under Stalin. But that’s another story.

What? The communists encouraged women to be sexually liberal and we still verbally castrate girls who have the literal balls to talk about sex?

In a society where one in four college-aged Americans has a sexually transmitted disease, the topic clearly deserves open, frank and nonjudgmental channels of discussion. This double standard must be eliminated before there can be competent, safe management and discussion of college students’ sexuality.

The “playing” field, so to speak, needs to be leveled.

Naysayers can say nay, say that women enjoy the same freedom from sexual stigma as men do. Well then, riddle me this: Why do college coeds enjoy unlimited shack-up potential at the fraternity houses, but women living in sorority houses are not allowed to have any overnight male visitors? Because men are encouraged to be sexually active, but women are tainted if they do the same.

Of course this problem didn’t stem from the Greek system, it just happens that the double standard manifests itself quite clearly in the different rules for the different sexes in Greek houses.

Puritans can say young people shouldn’t be having sex before they’re married. To them I say, “Dip in the river he who loves water.” In non-Blakean, “If it you like something, do it.”

The simple truth is this: College students have sex on the brain – well, actually, on the bed. Squelching those who speak out about it will do no good. If you’re doin’ it or not, if you want to or chose not to, sex is a campus issue that we need to wake up to.

Clearly, sexuality – in whatever form – is a serious, extensive issue. Whether the choice is abstinence, moderation or extreme behavior, college students deserve a forum where it can be discussed. Currently, this forum is not possible.

Why? When my 105er friend goes to buy condoms, he doesn’t feel any kind of shame. In fact, he sometimes gets high-fives.

When writers try to address it, childish personal attacks are made. What this system leads to is men such as my Century Club friend engaging in reckless sexual behavior, while the women that put him there are shunned – and no one can talk about it.

When women in Communist Russia have more freedom than contemporary American college students, you know something’s wrong.

So, The Simp has talked about it. I’ve talked about it. Maybe I’m beating a dead horse. but I’d rather do that than let the issue slide. Maybe this time, my reputation – or lack thereof – at Simpson will make the outcome different. Maybe we can have actual, intelligent conversations instead of miscellaneous Web postings. No, actually, I’ll probably get labeled a skank, as have my predecessors. But if you’re going to do that, at least sign your name to a Letter to the Editor.

But watch out: Lil’ Kim and Christina Aguilera got my back on this one.