Part-Time Pundit

Sex on Campus: Not as Fulfilling as you Think

A recent study in the Journal of Sex Research links depression in women to casual sex. This flies in direct contrast to a campus culture that tries to celebrate “uncommitted sex.” The problem is it flies in the face of our internal nature, and is the case in most emotional matters, comes down hardest on women.

Like most campuses, the University of Illinois hosts an annual celebration of uncommitted sex called “Sex Out Loud.” It presents a generally one-sided account of sex which doesn’t represent reality. Sex has consequences and those consequences are felt mostly by women.

One interesting feature of the study shows that it is more typical for uncommitted sexual encounters to take place between friends instead of strangers. What this indicates to me is that women and men have a hard time in this society relating to each other in non-sexual ways. “Friends with benefits” used to be a joke a decade ago when I was an undergrad, now it’s a sad reality.

The study shows what many on the right (particularly religious) have always known, that sex has meaning beyond the physical. People long to be in an intimate relationship and meaningless sex does nothing but break down those relationships. Women begin to feel like little more than objects instead of people to who deserve to be cherished.

Likely this story will be ignored on campus and the general media but it’s another statement that the sexual revolution got it wrong. Those who surfer most from that error is women.

November 9th, 2006 Posted by John Bambenek | DailyIllini, Pro-Life, Religion, University of Illinois | 6 comments

Preemptive Strike: Bush Firing Rumsfeld is Heading Off Congressional Harassment

Around 1pm Eastern the day after the election, while Democrats were still celebrating their victories, Bush made a sudden announcement of the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld as Secretary of Defense. To many, this was icing on the cake of a good election. Many missed the larger picture.

Democrats largely did not campaign on any issues. Even their “New Direction” was nothing that voters really cared about. One of the things they did promise and do intend to make good on is to investigate the Bush Administration, from Katrina (likely “finding” racism instead of fault where it belongs), to Iraq, to… Big Tobacco???

The key issue to be investigated is obviously Iraq and everyone knows it. The Democrats will likely waste no time in beginning the investigation so Bush launched a preemptive strike before the Democrats finished their celebrations. The strategy of the Bush Administration will likely to move forward and find new avenues for success in Iraq. Rumsfeld leaving is the obvious side-effect of this policy shift.

Two months from now when the Democrats start asking for investigation after investigation, Bush can say “I’m trying to move forward in Iraq and shift policy so we can achieve success and all the Democrats want to do is dredge up the past and yet still provide no alternatives of their own.”

Bush is establishing a defense by making the investigations moot. If heads have already rolled, the Democrats will likely be seen as beating a dead horse. This will put them in a difficult position, one where their most vocal camps will insist that Bush be made to suffer and the nation be dragged through the mud for 6 years and the less vocal camps who will be turned off by such antics. It’s telling that the races where the war was the central issue, the militant left fringe lost.

Bush made a good play and is keeping his eye on the ball (2008). Will the Democrats be as wise?

November 9th, 2006 Posted by John Bambenek | Congress, Elections, Impeachment, Law / Legal Issues, Military / War, National, Politics | one comment