Feb 21 2017 (Vol. XXX, Is. X) - Binghamton Review

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

P.O. BOX 6000 BINGHAMTON, NY 13902-6000 EDITOR@BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Founded 1987 • Volume XXX, Issue X

Editor-in-Chief

Patrick McAuliffe Jr.

CONTENTS

Managing Editor Kayla Jimenez Copy Desk Chief Elizabeth Elliot

Business Manager Jason Caci

Social Media Shitposter Thomas Sheremetta

SWIPING RIGHT-WING

Editor Emeritus

PAGE 8

by Our Staff 6 Lobster? I Barely Know ‘Er!

by Patrick McAuliffe

Associate Editors

7 Standard Fuck Parties, Bug Chasing, and Homosexuality

by Pino Che

Jordan Raitses

Adrienne Vertucci, Colin Gilmartin

Staff Writers

Luke Kusick, Jordan Jardine, Tommy Gagliano, Matthew Rosen

Contributors

Alex Carros, Pino Che

Special Thanks To:

Intercollegiate Studies Institute Collegiate Network Binghamton Review was printed by Gary Marsden We Provide the Truth.

He Provides the Staples

11 Women’s March... Into Failure

by Jordan Jardine 12 The Review Reveals All

by Our Staff

15 Sexual Consent Contract by Our Staff

Departments

3 Editorial 4 Campus Presswatch

Throwbacks

10 The Sexiest Way to Have the Hottest Sex...

by Alex Carros

TELL US WHAT YOU THINK! Direct feedback to editor@binghamtonreview.com 2

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

Vol. XXX, Issue X

EDITORIAL Dear Readers,

G

From the Editor

reetings and salutations! Now that a woman’s exposed back has drawn you into picking up our issue, let me tell you what’s in store! It’s that time of year again where pheromones are flying and when November/December babies...ahem...start off. Something about springtime gets us rambunctious youth in that kind of mood, so we figure we’d play along with the degeneracy of our time and offer a glimmer of sanity into the crazy orgy of college life. In reality, our time here is a lot less glamorous and promiscuous than people make it out to be, but a strong sexual ethics will serve a person well later in life.

Let’s set you straight and delve right in. Or, if you’re already at that point where you don’t feel the need to make out with every random person in a dark corner of The Rat, congrats! You’ll have a sense of pride perusing these pages. Alex flashes back to a previous article of his, arguing that the sexiest, hottest sex waits on the other end of a wedding aisle. He uses statistics and religious arguments to explain why those that wait to consummate end up happier and stay together more than those that jump the gun prematurely (which is totally fine and something to talk to your doctor about).

Jordan comments on last month’s nationwide Women’s March and fires back at what he sees as “lazy activism” in an age where clear policy paths forward are even more necessary. Pino Che, under duress from yours truly (as he claims), examines the dangerous attitudes prevalent in some sects of the homosexual community as traditional monogamy and prevention of STDs are abandoned in favor of “standard fuck parties.” Finally, I analyze an up-and-coming cultural figure in Dr. Jordan Peterson and his lobster-based arguments for natural hierarchies; while I like what he has to say, his conclusions are not always logically deducible. You, dear reader, will have to take a look for yourself.

We also partook in some sexy hijinks ourselves, just for this issue (no more after this, and don’t ask!). We had members of our staff respond to the questions on Pipe Dream’s Sex Survey and see how the REVIEW decides to “do it”. We also went undercover in the Tinder scene and saw how well a right-winger could do on a leftist campus that would usually take a hard swipe left on us. The results might surprise you!

Our printing will be a bit less frequent this semester, but not to worry, dear reader. We can still go the whole time ;). Included on the last page is a contract you may find useful for future copulation efforts. Make sure you and your partner fill it out in its entirety. Heck, if you need to, consult the original draftee of the contract, Greensteinbergshitzlerman, Attorney at Law. We’ll forward you on if you send your questions or comments to editor@binghamtonreview.com.

Sincerely,

Our Mission Binghamton Review is a non-partisan, studentrun news magazine of conservative thought at Binghamton University founded in 1987. A true liberal arts education expands a student’s horizons and opens one’s mind to a vast array of divergent perspectives.

The mark of true maturity is being able to engage with those divergent perspectives rationally while maintaining one’s own convictions. In that spirit, we seek to promote the free and open exchange of ideas and offer alternative viewpoints not normally found or accepted on our predominately liberal campus. We stand against tyranny in all of its forms, both on campus and beyond. We believe in the principles set forth in this country’s Declaration of Independence and seek to preserve the fundamental tenets of Western civilization. It is our duty to expose the warped ideology of political correctness and cultural authoritarianism that dominates this university.

Finally, we understand that a moral order is a necessary component of any civilized society.

We strive to inform, engage with, and perhaps even amuse our readers in carrying out this mission.

Patrick McAuliffe Jr.

Views expressed by writers do not necessarily represent the views of the publication as a whole. editor@binghamtonreview.com

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

3

CPampus resswatch We know you don’t read the other campus publications, so we read them for you! Original quotes are in regular text, our responses are in bold.

“Why do we shame sex workers?”

Pipe Dream, Sex Issue 2018 Sarah Molano “Some even put links up to legitimate sites where they are cam models, meaning they perform on live video streams.

It looks like people are becoming less ashamed, and I find that refreshing. But at the same time, I fear for my friends who are open about selling nude photos or being cam models. Not because I feel like they’re doing something wrong, but because I know how so many people must be talking about them for doing it.”

We’ll get to it later on, but the main line of argument goes like this: if sex work like camming or selling nudes doesn’t hurt anyone, and if there is a demand for it anyway, might as well let people go ahead with it. As more and more of us get more and more libertarian, we might actually be more willing to grant Sarah this one.

However, a lot of her focus is around the social stigma of sex work, and letting people have the CHOICE to do it without more sexually prude people shaming them. The most important thing that must happen when people are granted more and more negative

4

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

liberty (freedom to be uninhibited from performing actions they want to do) is that they must then be governed by their own INTERNAL moral law, instead of the threat of external coercion by the government.

“It’s no secret that selling nudes, camming and sex work in general are taboo in our culture. I don’t expect to be able to change that. But just consider for one moment: Why do we consider people who “sell their bodies” by selling nude photos or livestreaming video content less legitimate than all the other workers who effectively sell their bodies and labor?...Capitalism 101 says that if there’s a demand for a product or service, there is a market for it. There is a demand for this kind of content.”

Yes, the free market suddenly has all the answers one could ask for when it comes to moral sanctions on being a slut. We need to return to that key distinction many people forget about in conversations about permissibility (and that thing Jeff Goldblum said in Jurassic Park): anything CAN be done in a society with perfect liberty, but there must also be the question of whether that action (or the demand for it) is the RIGHT path to take. Sex for humans is more important and meaningful than mere reproduction or physical pleasure, and denial of that is a stain on one’s soul.

“It’s 2018; I know we’ve become a lot more lax when talking about sex and sexuality. However, we still have a moralistic view on sexuality — we still decide how it should and should not be used.”

I was hoping we’d see the “current year” argument pop up. I don’t know why anyone would celebrate a laxing of morals, especially for such an important topic and alongside such a call for the freedom to do

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Written by our Staff

so. Sarah almost made the libertarian test, but like the current Libertarians, advocating for freedom doesn’t mean one should become a degenerate.

“Considering male birth control” Pipe Dream, Sex Issue 2018 Savanna Vidal “Although time and technology have drastically changed birth control, it seems that one aspect of it hasn’t — birth control has always been expected to be used by women, not men.”

What happened to the cries of female empowerment about making your man wear a condom or else you won’t have sex with him? Isn’t that supposed to be the new way women are evening the score against terrible men who don’t want to be inconvenienced with birth control? If he loves you enough to care about your wants/needs/sex drive, he’ll put it on when you ask.

Maybe it isn’t even about love! Maybe it’s just consent with more hoops to jump through (or rings and rubber to...slide through).

“According to Planned Parenthood, the only ways a male can aid in pregnancy prevention is through use of the withdrawal method, wearing a condom or undergoing a vasectomy. With the pull-

Vol. XXX, Issue X

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM out method only being 78 percent effective, one report concluding that only 30 percent of males aged 25 to 34 used a condom with their last sexual partner and the irreversibility of vasectomies, it’s no wonder that women feel obligated to take on the role of using birth control.”

Not quite sure about the truth to the pull-out statement, so we’ll give it to you. See the above critique to dismantle the rare condom usage argument (also, “one study”). With modern surgical technology, vasectomies are very reversible and patients can even have a healthy sperm flow within a year.

Both genders have non-permanent options, and if you’re both united in the cause to prevent a pregnancy, you can work out ways to share the “role” of using contraceptives. Or, and this is a bit out there (see Page _), just wait until marriage/when you can afford to care for a child. Stop whining. It’s the current year.

“The expectation of females to be the sole protector against pregnancy during sex further removes a woman’s control over her own body. At a time in which this control is in such grave danger, there is no room for a woman to surrender further authority. “ The context for this is the discussion of male birth control shots and pills, which turned out to be 96 percent effective in a study, but were cancelled for production after the subjects complained of adverse side effects such as acne or mood swings. Firstly, some women take birth control because of beneficial side effects in helping regulate their menstrual cycles. They tend to be willing to put up with the negative side effects because of the net positive it gives them in their cycle. This male birth control that was tested was viewed as both a future market flop and for no other purpose than temporary pregnancy prevention. Other methods have been proven to work rather effectively, and even vasectomies have been rendered reversible. Men and women should be united in preventing a pregnancy, if that’s what they’re going for. They can share the burden with the least possible discomfort or hassle for both parties. Instead, some women would rather complain that their partners

editor@binghamtonreview.com

PRESS WATCH aren’t doing enough. Who’s the insensitive one now?

“Dear Jessica 2/8: Hookup hardships; meal plan management” Pipe Dream, 2/7/18 Jessica Gutowitz “I’ve always thought of myself as a “relationship person.” I had a boyfriend for three years back in high school, but we mutually ended things my freshman year. Since coming to Binghamton University, all of the guys I’ve come across seem to just be looking for hookups. It’s exhausting! When I tell them that’s not what I’m looking for, they run in the opposite direction. Where can I find a nice guy who doesn’t want just a hookup?”

Well, anon, the Last Refuge of Scholars and men of good moral character can be found in office UUWB05, if you were looking for more than meaningless hookups. But hey, if things ever did reach the next level with your new Review man, multiple studies from the UK and US show that conservatives are happier with their sex lives. You can’t lose!

“Do you have any advice for budgeting meal plan money? I always start out doing well at the beginning of the semester, but then the stress kicks in and I’m constantly eating at the Marketplace and drinking at least two coffees a day. My parents are annoyed that they always have to add money to my meal plan toward the end of the semester.

How do I make the money last?”

Your friends at the Review have a couple solutions for you, anon. Number one, a part time job or two might help you add money to your OWN meal plan, instead of having to ask your parents. If stress is causing you to spend frivolously, try finding another outlet for it other than spending money; something that provides you with a similar release but isn’t so burdensome on your wallet. You could start working out, or find a hobby to channel that existential distress into. I hear Campus Survival Games has that sweet, sweet release that only wildly firing a Nerf blaster can bring.

Sam Backner “The myth surrounding the “discovery” of our continent is a tactic by the government to keep citizens from thinking too deeply or critically about the real story of Columbus, and the true history of the “foundation” of our country, which involves enslavement and widespread genocidal violence.”

And there are chemicals in the water turning the frogs gay. Jet fuel can’t melt genocidal Europeans. Next.

“The true founders of the United States were the indigenous people native to this land — not Native Americans, since “American” is a term imposed upon them by the white settlers and colonizers.”

I can’t even go one damn sentence.

We don’t have a system of government founded on tribal councils and peace pipes. We have a system of checks and balances with intellectual influences from Locke, Rousseau, and the Greeks, all of whom didn’t originate in the Western Hemisphere.

“Columbus Day was made a national holiday in 1937 by the U.S. government, mainly due to intense pressure from a Catholic group that saw it as an opportunity to celebrate Italian-American heritage….I believe that this is a shame since Italian Americans have so many other figures that can be used to represent their achievements and accomplishments as a community, and Columbus is certainly the wrong choice.”

If that year and reasoning seemed out of the blue for many people at the time, so did this article. Glad Sam decided to jump on the bandwagon of the same tired old argument four months after this holiday takes place.

And hey, if having any sort of connection to past actions of your ancestors (modern-day reparations?) is worth anything to people, discovering a continent and having the new country that was founded on its shores grow to a world superpower in 300 years is pretty damn impressive.

“Columbus Day should be called ‘Indigenous Peoples Day’” Pipe Dream, 2/12/18

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

5

LOBSTER? I BARELY KNOW ‘ER!

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Lobster? I Barely Know ‘Er!

By Patrick McAuliffe Jr.

I

was first introduced to Dr. Jordan Peterson in the middle of January when he was interviewed on Channel 4 News by Cathy Newman. As she constantly tried to strawman his arguments about the gender pay gap, modern masculinity, and transgender activists, Peterson calmly explained how he arrived at his conclusions and refused to take her intellectual bait. He is not specifically a Ben Shapiro or Milo Yiannopoulis by trade; instead, this University of Toronto professor of psychology merely happens to have ideas that many on the political right find appealing. Beyond his book 12 Rules for Life that gives tips to today’s men and his analysis of the gender pay gap through multiple factors, Peterson has one intriguing idea that pertains to an expensive crustacean dinner. He seeks to use the lobster as evidence of the existence of human hierarchies beyond a socio-cultural basis. (By the way, if you think a discussion of lobsters and gender is not exactly fit for a Sex Issue, gender = sex.

And there are only two.)

Dr. Peterson examined the nervous systems of lobsters, a species which he claims we share a common ancestor with, and has used the apparent similarities to the human nervous system as a way to tie the two animals together. For example, the same serotonin exists in the brains of both lobsters and humans, and allegedly, human antidepressants work on lobsters. With this basic connection established, Peterson jumps to looking at lobster “society” in which there are gendered hierarchies between male and female lobsters, with male lobsters usually on top. Because animals without speech or capacity for reason, like lobsters, have natural hierarchies, Peterson deduces that humans must also have these natural hierarchies that are independent of any social convention.

Before he went on Channel 4 News and defended himself from what he calls Cathy Newman’s “animus possession” (a Jungian term that means using arbitrary opinions to provoke a challenge), Dr. Peterson first made headlines when he refused to obey Bill C-16 in 2016. This Canadian bill added not using somebody’s proper gender pronouns as grounds for discrimination. Peterson saw this as another instance of what he calls “neo-Marxist postmodernists” taking over Western civilization and refused to comply. Protests at the University of Toronto and beyond broke out in response to his stance, and he has been labelled (falsely) as a member of the alt-right. According to The Guardian, Peterson also defended James Damore when he was fired from Google. He asserted the gender differences that Damore put into his memo, saying that it was no more than the current scientific consensus.

Peterson touches on these differences in his interview with Cathy Newman, specifically in the workplace. There are many factors, he says, that go into why women seem to be paid less than men, and they go beyond the basic “life choices”/”more time off for child care” arguments you may see most often.

Speaking statistically, he says, men are more often than women to be competitive in the workplace. Agreeableness as a personality trait is found more in women than in men, and he claims

6

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

Photograph: Phil Fisk for the Observer (from The Guardian)

that this difference (while not found in every woman) is more likely than not to predict lower wages and an overall less competitive nature at work. When Newman attacks him for making generalizations about all women, Peterson turns away from the statistics and directly confronts Newman herself, saying that she worked very hard for the situation she is now in, leaving gender out of the equation entirely. Something that may frustrate Peterson, and many who know that the gender pay gap isn’t as straightforward as it seems, is that when proponents of the pay gap succeed in their career, they attribute it to their hard work, and when they fail, they complain that it is due to patriarchy or gender discrimination.

I like Jordan Peterson, I really do. He brings a realm of science and facts to political and social argumentation that has primarily become normative debates over each party’s heads.

However, he is far from perfect, and the direction he likes to take on certain topics is far from scientific. For example, the original topic of this article, his lobster hierarchy argument, does not follow the logical progression that he wants it to. Lobsters may have a similar nervous system, but primates are much closer biological ancestors to us than crustaceans. In addition, lobsters or any other animal cannot speak or reason, and our ability to at least conceive of rudimentary egalitarianism may have something to do with it. I’ve always thought that humanity is interesting in the fact that we are the only animals that can actively choose to kill themselves, which isn’t exactly pertinent to ordering human hierarchies, but it can point to human reason’s ability to overcome natural boundaries. If natural hierarchies exist, as Peterson and other thinkers all the way back to Aristotle have argued, humanity has the ability to at least mitigate the extremities through their rationality. Humans aren’t completely equal, but through reason (which both men and women share, no matter their gender or “agreeableness”), they can find social and therefore political common ground.

References: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54 https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-guest-room/201802/jordan-peterson-knows-what-you-re-thinking https://www.theguardian.com/global/2018/jan/21/jordan-peterson-self-helpauthor-12-steps-interview https://torontolife.com/city/u-t-professor-sparked-vicious-battle-gender-neutral-pronouns/ https://www.oliversherouse.com/2018/01/29/peterson.html

Vol. XXX, Issue X

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

STANDARD FUCK PARTIES, BUG CHASING, AND HOMOSEXUALITY

Standard Fuck Parties, Bug Chasing, and Homosexuality

By Pino Che

A

gainst my better judgment (and held at pen-point by the editor of the Binghamton Review), I had to take a break from throwing commies out of helicopters to pick up a pen and write about sex for the sex issue. As society around me continues to decline and as riding the tiger seems more like esoteric escapism than a long-term plan for the salvation of our society, I stumbled upon a documentary discussing a subculture within the homosexual community known as bug chasing. The documentary was known as The Gift, which followed the lives of multiple homosexual men trying to purposely infect themselves with the HIV virus. The documentary, which is not a Christian/ anti-homosexual propaganda film, is a serious exploration into homosexual men trying to infect themselves with the HIV virus and the results of said infection. Though the documentary concludes before the death of the men portrayed in the show, all of the HIV infected men passed since the end of filming.

What interested me the most when discussing subculture within the homosexual community was the obscene sexual behaviors of these men. One of the events they discussed in the film was Standard Fuck Parties, where 100-120 men would show up and fist each other, bang each other and do all sorts of sexual acts with one another. Condoms are discouraged at the events, and usually after an event only one or two condoms are found. The lack of concern about contracting HIV in the community where it is the most prevalent, according to the United States Government’s studies, is shocking. The disregard for not only their own lives but the lives of others is distressing for someone who values all lives equally. One of the men in the show stated that “The diseases I have, like, they [doctors] said they don’t know what they are.” Yet the man went on to say that he continued to perform in these sex parties bareback, meaning without the use of a condom. This total apathy for individual life is a fundamental revolt against human nature. Watching this video, I recalled that Kropotkin, a famous Russian anarcho-communist, said that humans, similar to other animals, have evolved in order to cooperate with each other. Like ants working together to create a society, humans have evolved to look out for one another. Yet these standard fuck parties exist.

Had Kropotkin’s understanding of human nature been correct, these men would not knowingly take such a risk to hurt their fellow men in a way that could ultimately lead to their untimely death. If an anarcho-communist utopia was the inherent way that man acted, then we wouldn’t see such fundamental greed, pleasure seeking, and degeneracy. Instead we would see these men building each other up to form a community that would better themselves and their community as a whole. Instead we see selfishness and individuals who seek only the self-gratification of an orgasm.

I know what most of you are thinking. These standard fuck parties certainly are degenerate and the people purposely trying to give themselves HIV are outliers and that on the whole, homosexuals are usually just interested in monogamous relationships. Sadly, dear reader, that is the farthest thing from

editor@binghamtonreview.com

the truth. Granted, standard fuck parties might not be the norm; however, monogamy is about as much as an outlier in the homosexual community as bug chasing. In fact, a Slate article written by Hanna Rosin had this insight into the lack of monogamy in the homosexual community and how it is a net benefit. She stated, “The dirty little secret about gay marriage: Most gay couples are not monogamous… because we desperately need something to make the drooping institution of heterosexual marriage seem vibrant again, that gay marriage has something to teach us, that gay couples provide a model for marriages that are more egalitarian and less burdened by the old gender roles that are weighing marriage down these days.”

The push of the homosexual relationship onto heterosexual relationships is something the conservatives warned about for years; however, they were deemed to be using the “slippery slope fallacy.”

This hyper-extensive, egotistical, nihilistic, self-destruction found within the homosexual community is disturbing for most Americans. According to a report by GLAAD, a homosexual advocacy group that pushes for acceptance of homosexuality everywhere, in 2017 the tolerance and comfortability of Americans around homosexuals have dropped. Despite years of indoctrination and lies focused in on homosexuality, the smoke is beginning to fade. The real mask of the homosexual community is starting to be unveiled in America, and sadly it is not the ideal that people believe.

The mainstream movement of putting homosexuals into every aspect of television denies the reality of how prevalent homosexuality is in America. Only 3.5% of Americans identify as homosexual according to PBS, only .3% of the population being transgender. This micro community has been forced into every aspect of life. One of our major political parties has officially taken up the cause of the .3% to force companies, schools both public and private, to allow this community to use whatever bathroom they want. Homosexual marriage has officially become legalized in America, which will inevitably lead to a push towards the religious to marry these couples. We already see a push to force the religious to bake cakes and provide services for their weddings, which many in the religious community would not even consider legitimate. This push of the 3.5% to become the moral compass and force 96.5% of Americans to consider the desires of the LGBTQ c om mu n it y over their own is sad indeed.

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

7

SWIPING RIGHT-WING

Swiping Right-Wing: Written by Our Staff

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Would You Match With us on Tinder?

S

ince literally everybody hates us on campus, we turned to Tinder to find some love this Valentine’s Day. A very brave soul donated his profile for our use. We transformed his bio to meet the image many people associate with us.

Once our bio and pictures were set, our quest to find love began. We swiped right on as many people as possible, all across the gender “spectrum”, to find our prince(ss) charming.

Despite our interesting bio, the matches came pouring in! Apparently no one reads bios these days, as became evident rather quickly.

Some people chose to look past our bio and get to know us a little better. A few conversations got pretty deep, lasting for more than an hour and covering a wide range of topics. One person was actually kind of into us.

We love our fans!

How did we do?

Matches: 40 Unmatches: 3 Decent conversations: 4 Good conversations: 2 Ghosts: 6 Dates/ Hookups: 0 8

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

Vol. XXX, Issue X

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Not all our matches were all sunshine and happiness. Some romances were short lived.

One match was not afraid to get deep. After we nicely asked him about his summer internship, this biddie started roasting all the campus publications... something we have in common! He shared his deepest thoughts regarding just how sh*tty college papers are! @ us next time, bro.

SWIPING RIGHT-WING

And tons of other people either immediately unmatched us, or just didn’t bother to respond.

We’ve all been victims of ghosting, even us at the Review. Who knew a few words was enough to push a potential soulmate away?

Kudos to this match: instead of reading our bio and shying away, she asked the real questions right away. She quickly asked about the last sentence in our bio, prompting an extended open conversation about transgenderism and gender dysphoria. This is what Tinder is about! Living for this!

We even caught up with some old friends!

They say people with political differences have a hard time finding love… and it’s true. While some people were willing to look past our savage bio and ~sexy~ pics to understand more about who we are, most people either didn’t give a sh*t or didn’t want to bother. Oddly enough, many people seemed to not even read our bio… shallow!

Politics is an important factor in finding romantic love and making connections. But are people really looking for romance and connection on Tinder? Maybe not. Overall, some people didn’t want to talk to us, maybe because our bio was a little too right-leaning, but a few people stuck it out and engaged in conversation with us. Even if you’re not looking for love, even if we just talk about photography or philosophy or anything in between, differing political opinions don’t necessarily bar people from productive conversation. We wish more people in college and beyond would start to consider that. editor@binghamtonreview.com

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

9

THE SEXIEST WAY TO HAVE THE HOTTEST SEX...

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

The Sexiest Way to Have the Hottest Sex...

By Alex Carros

… is to wait until you’re married. Yup! You read that right. Statistically (and morally) speaking, the most meaningful and lasting sexual relationships don’t begin until after marriage. That isn’t to say you, or anyone for that matter, is a bad person for having sex before tying the knot. I’m merely looking to encourage what I believe to be a more restrained and thoughtful view of sexuality: sex is a gift to be shared with someone you truly love and are committed to, and it shouldn’t be used solely as means for one’s own personal pleasure. ...That last point in particular, that sex is solely a means to have fun and cut loose, is my main point of contention. Too much of hookup/onenight-stand culture today seems focused on the self. In other words, it involves thinking, “How can this person sexually please me the most?” Within these one-and-done “relationships,” everything meaningful and important about the other person such as personality, emotional intimacy, etc. goes to the wayside. Instead, the partner is, in many ways, treated like a glorified sex toy; they are a source of fleeting pleasure and very little beyond that. By the morning, the person is already gone, never to be contacted or seen again.

Now, this isn’t to say that this other person is being abused or hurt.

To the contrary, many who indulge in one-night-stands would probably say they enjoy the practice. But if you look at the long-term, many who partake report feelings of regret and emotional pain. According to a study by the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, this number is more than a third (35%) of women and an entire fifth of men. The reason for this seems rather obvious, at least to me: sex is an inherently emotional act, in some cases as emotional as it is physical. This is particularly true for women, who, according to researcher Dr. David Buss “differ fundamentally in their sexual psychology.” As he explains, women have a biological urge

10

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

This article was originally published in the March 2017 issue of Binghamton Review.

to seek out long-term relationships, as a more committed mate would better provide for any potential offspring. As a result, women have a higher sense of regret with casual sex, as the study above demonstrates. Therefore, the entire practice of empty, casual sex seems exactly that: empty. The true capacity of the act, which I will delve into later, is ignored for immediate physical gratification. That seems like an obvious path to a shallow, meaningless sex life.

But what about your boyfriend/ girlfriend, someone whom you truly like and care about? You don’t see yourself leaving him/her anytime soon, so why not have sex? The emotional connection will be there as much as the physical, so what do you have to lose? Well, consider (as uncomfortable as that may seem) the possibility of you leaving this person.

How painful will the break up be if the incredibly intimate act of sex has already been established? What good will the act have done after said break up? Since any physical and emotional connection you had has been severed, all it has done retroactively is give you a sense of temporary personal satisfaction. As is with casual sex, this limits the incredibly wonderful effects of unity and love that the act can bring. But if you truly love this person, and want to spend the rest of your life with them, why wait until the formal ceremony of marriage? Well, not only do mistakes happen (the wedding can be called off), but it demonstrates a supreme act of self-control and selflessness.

If you both wait until the honeymoon, you show each other how deep your affection and love are: you have denied yourself personal pleasure solely to be with only this person for the rest of your days, and that

from the sex you have, you will grow closer and closer as a couple You’ll also welcome into your life the miracle of children.

All of that probably seems overly sappy or sentimental to many of you.

You probably think that I’m hopelessly deluding myself into ideals that no one can really live up to. Not only is that untrue, but the effects of patience and self-restraint are clear: many studies have shown that women and men with more sexual partners divorce at a higher rate than couples who abstain.

According to the Journal of Family Psychology, couples who abstained have higher rates of marital stability, marital happiness, and communication. Oh, and they also report having better sex. So, going forward, I urge you discern what would be best for you and your love life. As several studies have shown, this sex-infused hookup culture will cause you higher levels or regret, dissatisfaction, and eventually, divorce. There’s no need to rush when it comes to taking part in the most intimate act humanly possible with another person. So even though it may be an ideal, it’s an ideal worth striving towards (even if we slip up.)

Vol. XXX, Issue X

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

WOMEN’S MARCH...INTO FAILURE

Women’s March...Into Failure

By Jordan Jardine

T

he second installment of the Women’s March happened on January 20, 2018, exactly one year after both President Trump’s inauguration and the first Women’s March.

This is an event where thousands, if not millions, of self-important, petulant people march onto the streets of various cities throughout the United States. Despite predictions from the “news” media that the world would end the minute Trump stepped into the Oval Office, I suppose he made a lot more women happy during his first year than even he thought. Why would I make such an assumption?

Well, according to an article written about the event and published in The Cut, though no official attendance figures have been released, it is estimated that only a little over a million people participated in the march, as opposed to the more than 4 million people who took part in last year’s march. The article specifically mentions the decline in participant turnout in this year’s march in New York City. This particular event attracted a little over 200,000 marchers. The 2017 march was attended by double that amount. It warms my heart that about 3 million women put away their suggestive pink hats, stopped screaming at the sky and did a little bit of growing up in the past year.

Anyone who knows me well knows I am no fan of Donald Trump as a president. I have been very crit-

editor@binghamtonreview.com

ical of him and I understand why many people, both in this country and around the world, are angry with him, but wearing strange hats and throwing temper tantrums in public doesn’t inspire or enact real change. The Women’s March is an example of what I call “lazy activism.” The pictures I saw of the signs some people held up at

“Many things we Americans have today wouldn’t have been possible without entrepreneurs, both male and female, risking everything they had in order to achieve the American dream.” the event were extremely depressing.

Many of them lacked any policy substance whatsoever, which is infuriating to policy wonks like me. The Women’s Marches of 2017 and 2018 were utterly embarrassing and are profoundly disrespectful to the policy-themed marches of the past, such as the March on Washington of 1963 that eventually paved the way for the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the numerous marches by anti-war activists and hippies that led to the ending of the Vietnam War in 1975. The people in these marches had actual goals they were trying to achieve.

The only clear goal of the Women’s Marches that I can figure out is a way to blow off unnecessary steam, and make one feel special without having to contribute anything meaningful to society through hard work and thorough research. The reality is that these perfunctory marches actually make society worse. The marches result in roads being shut down or blocked, forcing many Americans to re-

configure their commute plans and take alternative (and perhaps longer) routes to work. If these people wanted to make society better, they would simply stay home and move on with their lives. Of course, I am a fierce proponent of the First Amendment and I fully support everyone’s right to assemble, protest and express themselves in any way they see fit, but that does not mean I have to agree with the message the participants are trying to send. The message is “Look how virtuous we are and look at our terrible our president!” While Trump is low in the virtue department, wearing hats that represent body parts and demanding more and more access to abortion does not make one virtuous. In fact, most of the participants in this march probably couldn’t be less virtuous if they tried. Of course, I have no idea what many of these people have gone through; some of them may have experienced discrimination in the workplace, and that’s unfortunate, but you have to deal with that in productive ways. Marching creates a great spectacle, but it doesn’t get a lot done in the grand scheme of things, unless it has action and a clear message behind it, as the above mentioned marches of the past have. For women that have been fired or discriminated against because of their gender, why not look into starting your own business or being an entrepreneur? Many things we Americans have today wouldn’t have been possible without entrepreneurs, both male and female, risking everything they had in order to achieve the American dream. My message to people of all genders who participated in this march: instead of marching and screaming because someone is in the Oval Office that you don’t like, go down to the basement, get dirty and make something great that can be a source of joy for all Americans; male, female, liberal, conservative, libertarian, black or white. Use those negative feelings to fuel your creativity. Stop whining and start inventing!

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

11

THE REVIEW REVEALS ALL

The Review Reveals All

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Written by Our Staff

T

he Review: a unique bunch of young men and women just trying to find their place in this world (and get jobs). As conservatives (for the most part), many people assume we’re religious. Though we have our fair share of Catholic and Jewish members, some of our members don’t really care for religion at all. This conglomerate of individuals all have varied views of sex, sexuality, and relationships. For this reason, we decided to survey our members using the questions from the Pipe Dream survey to see how we compared to the rest of campus. Here are the results! Some are shocking!

How do you identify?

This one has me SCREAMING. 18.7% of Review members have either had an abortion or their partner has. Only 2.9% of Pipe Dream respondents have had an abortion… my God. This is beyond ironic in so many ways. Guess conservatives do have abortions? Did someone say Planned Parenthood? Awkward!

Are you in a monogamous relationship?

Some savage responded “Yes, but I don’t want one.” Good luck with that! 62.6% are either in committed relationships, or want to be. Monogamy… HELL YEAH! How would you describe your sexuality?

Pipe Dream’s results revealed that 57.5% of the respondents were female, whereas within our group, 68.8% were male.

Shocker: most of our members are male! But hey, 31.3% female ain’t bad.

What age were you when you lost your virginity?

Wow! We have a balanced proportion of hetero and non-hetero members! Who would have thought! Pipe Dream’s results reflect a 74.6% heterosexual population, while ours reflects a 75% hetetosexual populaion. Oh the wonders of anonymity!

How many sexual partners have you had?

Pipe Dream’s results showed that 14.5% of respondents were virgins… yikes! Looks like either no one wants to sleep with conservatives, or maybe all our religious members are saving themselves for marriage?

Have you ever had an abortion?

The virgins coming in hot again, holding out the majority in this vote. Shocking that people selected 26+. To each their own!

We’re all over the place with this one. It jumps from 13-17 to 26+. The overall distribution is similar to Pipe Dream’s respondents, though their results reflect a smaller virgin population.

12

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

Vol. XXX, Issue X

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

THE REVIEW REVEALS ALL

Have you ever had sex with someone you just met Downtown or at a party?

On average, how often do you view porn?

Our numbers are basically identical to Pipe Dream’s. Most of our members have not had sex with someone after meeting Dowtown. Probably because that’s really awkward and unsatisfying, I dunno. Is hookup culture even real?!?

On average, how often do you have penetrative sex?

Wow, what a diverse group. Our porn viewing habits vary so greatly! Those who watch porn everyday... praying for you.

How would you describe your sex drive?

Nearly half the club never had penetrative sex... interesting. My favroite are the everyday champs. How do people find the time to participate in “penetrative sex” once a day? Good for them, man.

On average, how often do you masturbate?

Look at all those raging sex drives. Ah, youth. Our results are in line with Pipe Dream’s, either because our age and being in college just makes us horny as f*ck, or because we’re socially conditioned to think we have high sex drives because everything is hypersexualized, or maybe it’s just nature. I really couldn’t tell you. But either way, a majority of this campus, Review members or not, report a high sex drive. Love is in the air!

How many of sexual encounters have been while under the influence of alcohol or drugs?

Once a week seems to be the norm here. Overall, it looks like people in the Review are masturbating more than their peers...

I’ll leave that up for interpretation. A fair amount of our members said never... okay sure, if you say so. Once again, my favorite are the brave and determined souls who said everyday. Those wankers! Go getters, if you will. Keep on, getting it on.

On average, how often do you have oral sex? (see chart on top right) We still have the everyday crowd persisting! Oral sex everyday, 4/5 dentists recommend!

editor@binghamtonreview.com

All in all, us Review folk have sex in similar ways and quantities to the general campus population. We may be assh*les, but at least we’re still getting some ass ;)

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

13

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

Binghamton Review Live!

Tune into Binghamton Review Live!, the return of conservative thought to the FM airwaves. We’re on Tuesdays at 6:30pm. If you are in the local area, you can listen on 90.5 FM, or stream from whrwfm.org and click on “Listen Live” in the top right corner. Every week we aim to tackle two hot topics in the culture or political sphere by giving the straight up facts, different takes on what it means, and where to go from here. If you have a take of your own, you can join the conversation by calling in to WHRW (607-777-2137), and we will take your questions and comments. Join Patrick, Matt, Jordan, and many of your favorite authors from Binghamton Review on a quest to make sense of the good, the bad, and the covfefe of American culture and politics.

Our goal is to give the objective facts, and to start an intellectual conversation. You will also get to hear the opinions from hosts and guests who disagree, so both sides can be heard. Although Binghamton Review Live! is conservative/libertarian leaning, we proud to host a left leaning Trump critic, as well as a conservative Trump supporter. So far, we covered the Super Bowl and the State of the Union Address in week one, and then the Russia collusion, the Trump counter-culture, and North Korea during week two. What will we discuss in the weeks to come? You will have to join us to find out. Trust me, you don’t want to miss the Taxation is Theft jokes, the numerous puns, and the good time we aim to have every week on the official Binghamton Review Live! radio show.

To Recap: Find us at binghamtonreview.com Send us feedback at editor@binghamtonreview.com Tune in to WHRW 90.5FM at 6:30pm on Tuesdays for “Binghamton Review Live!”

Carrier pigeon? If you really can manage it. Send checks, “white powder,” middle fingers printed on paper...

14

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

Vol. XXX, Issue X

BINGHAMTONREVIEW.COM

SEXUAL CONSENT CONTRACT

editor@binghamtonreview.com

BINGHAMTON REVIEW

15