Harvard Professor: Being slutty is bad!
A Harvard male Professor seems to think that the sexual revolution doesn't serve the interests of young women. Whose side is he on? In a talk titled "Feminism and the Autonomy of Women," he suggested that men who grow used to "free samples" in the bedroom are going to leave women high-and-dry when it comes to committed relationships. And then he revealed his insights into the erotic: "[Today's] women play the men's game, which they are bound to lose. Without modesty, there is no romance—it isn't so attractive or so erotic," said the professor. The solution to the problem, clearly, was for women to start saying no a little more often. It's funny that this dude from Harvard is the one bringing this up, since Harvard is pretty much known around the Boston college scene as the "One night stand school" and for good reason: The guys there suck. They are either rich prepy assholes or dorky nerdy dweebs. That's pretty much the Criteria necessary to get into Harvard, with few notable exceptions. The same doesn't apply to Harvard girls, who most of them are attractive and come from fairly middle-class families. With their dating pool confined to those 2 categories of men, and with the fact that they have to battle each other and those damn Try-sexual* sluts from Wellsley college over the few male exceptions, Harvard chicks end up always going to clubs and bars trying to pick up men out of sexual frustration. So, I don't know. It seems that the sexual revolution is at least helping them get laid every once in a while, which is better than nothing. You know? *They will try anything in bed. Them girls are freaky.
6 Comments:
If you think the college students from Harvard are bad, you should see the Harvard Law grads. They think they are entitled to run this country because they really are the best in the country! And they will tell this to any smiling female that shows polite interest. This current withdrawal of a supreme court candidate (of Harriet Miers) is more about her law degree being from SMU in Texas, plus her legal career being located in Texas, than anything else.
Valerie
Was that whole try-sexual comment anything to do with me? I'm not sure if I am supposed to be offended or flattered. I think I choose to be flattered.
Hey! What's that about Wellesley? I went to Wellesley. (Admittedly, a long time ago).
Wellesley women in my time (I don't know about now) were frustrated because there were few men on campus. The few guys staying there through the New England 12-college exchange felt as if they were living in a fishbowl. I remember watching some of them through their dorm-room windows.
But we weren't tri-sexuals or try-sexuals or anything like that, perish the thought. Though we did have a fair number of lesbians, especially in one dorm.
We thought the Harvard men were just conceited. The problem was MIT, which was our "brother" school where we could take classes. They were truly nerds. Talk about slim pickings!
The saying went that, if a Wellesley girl rejected an MIT man, he would say "what's the matter with me?" A Harvard man would say "what's the matter with her?"
The bus that goes from Wellesley to Harvard/MIT on weekend nites is affectionately known as the F*ck Truck
My Harvard Law Grad (my husband) is quite the catch, thank you very much.
Miers withdrew because everyone figured out she was (A) not the most qualified, (B) not really a conservative, and (C) was just some Bush-sycophant. (full disclosure: I am a libertarian-leaning conservative)
At the same time, I love hearing these stereotypes--they are always so interesting and often funny...though the kernel of truth in them is usually rather small.
I agree that the sexual revolution has left women frustrated and this is not a new idea. Unable to fully "become men" and left without the moorings of tradition, they engage in casual sex and then can't stop regretting it by the proverbial "morning after."
http://www.jaydixit.com/writing/wellesley.htm
There's a link to the article about Wellesley College that appeared in Rolling Stone magazine a few years ago when I was there. (I told you I'd get you a copy SAM - I actually have the original magazine pics -which are the best part- and all- if you want to see it later) It's funny because a lot of the girls were outraged(Wellesley girls are always outraged), but if you read it it's not all that bad, although there is the implication that we are all crazy sluts who hump anything. For the record, I never slept w/ a professor, police officer, or dining hall worker, however I did know people who did all of the above - so the article is not completely false. Anyway - back to the point of liberation for women - I really think, as the closing quote of this article so aptly sums up: "Don't let anyone tell you that you have to do a certain thing because you're a woman...it's about defining your own self instead of being defined by others." I think that's about right. Maybe being modest works for most girls - but for this "Try-sexual Wellesley Chick" it just doesn't work - because it's no fun, and I'm all about fun, and damn it whoever marries me will not be bored!
Post a Comment
<< Home