ISI Home    ISI Forum    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  First Principles  Hop To Forums  The Academy    Where is Charlotte Simmons?
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
  Login/Join 
ISI Staff
Posted
This week the New York Times Magazine published a profile of the pro-Chastity and Abstience group at Harvard University, True Love Revolution:
quote:
There was a time when not having sex consumed a very small part of Janie Fredell’s life, but that, of course, was back in Colorado Springs. It seemed to Fredell that almost no one had sex in Colorado Springs. Her hometown was extremely conservative, and as a good Catholic girl, she was annoyed by all the fundamentalist Christians who would get in her face and demand, as she put it to me recently, “You have to think all of these things that we think.” They seemed not to know that she thought many of those things already. At her public high school, everyone, “literally everyone,” wore chastity rings, Fredell recalled, but she thought the practice ridiculous. Why was it necessary, she wondered, to signify you’re not doing something that nobody is doing?

And then Fredell arrived at Harvard. Sitting in a Cambridge restaurant not long ago, she told me that people back home called it “godless, liberal Harvard.” Some discouraged her from going, but Fredell went anyway, arriving in the fall of 2005...

From the start, she told me, she was awed by the diversity of the place, by the intensity, by the constant buzz of ideas. There were so many different kinds of people at Harvard, most of them trying to change the world, and everyone trying to figure out what they thought of everyone else. “Harvard really puts pressure on you to define who you are,” Fredell said, and she loved everything about Harvard, except the sex.


For the whole article, click here.

ISI's William E. Simon Fellowship awarded Ms. Cassandra De Benedetto our prize last year for her Love and Fidelity Network. True Love Revolution is a part of the Love and Fidelity Network.
 
Posts: 13 | Registered:: December 07, 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
ISI Staff
Posted Hide Post
Yesterday the NYTime Magazine posted Letters to the Editor concerned with Mr. Patterson's article, which all manage to subvert the issue at hand:
quote:
(First Letter) Sexual preferences and desires are personal and should not be subject to the moral compasses of our compatriots.
...
(Second Letter) the rhetoric of the new chastity recapitulates that of the Victorian reformers with astonishing fidelity.
...
(Third Letter) The issue of adult virginity seems like such a dated topic, and people who preach it usually do so out of fear — the same fear that causes religious denunciation of, say, homosexuality, the fear that others might end up happier than you even though they live differently.
...
(Fourth Letter) A person who insists that her partner conform to her predetermined rules of interaction or she will leave is engaging in relational blackmail, not creating the foundation for the committed relationship she seeks.
...
(Fifth Letter) The grim expression on Janie Fredell’s face says a lot about her puritanical mind-set.
 
Posts: 13 | Registered:: December 07, 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
ISI Staff
Posted Hide Post
For a really fantastic treatment of promiscuity on US College Campusese, check out ISI Books author Vigen Guroian's essay "Dorm Brothel" which is found in his book Rallying the Really Human Things:

quote:
Nineteen sixty-six,...the year I entered as a first-yearman at the University of Virginia. We did not stoop to the State U level of referring to ourselves as freshmen, sophomores, and such--not at "The University." We were all men at U.Va.--"gentlemen," we were told. Young women visited on weekends from Sweet Briar and Randolph-Macon, Mary Washington, and Hollins College. But they did not stay in the dormitory or the fraternity house. They stayed in college-approved housing, more often than not the home of a widow who had a few rooms to let and happily accepted a delegation from the colleges to assume the responsibilities of in loco parentis.

Parietal rules were enforced even in the fraternity houses--self-enforced by those of us who lived in them. Young women were not permitted in the bedrooms and had to be out of the house by a certain hour. We dated, blind-dated often. We did not know what "hooking up" was. We had never heard of date rape either, though some of us may have committed it. It could happen in the back seat of a car, a cheap motel, a cow pasture, or a Civil War battlefield, but not in a college dormitory or fraternity house bedroom, not yet at least; it was not until the end of the decade that all the rules and prohibitions came tumbling down and the brave new world of the contemporary coeducational college commenced.

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...
 
Posts: 13 | Registered:: December 07, 2005Reply With QuoteEdit or Delete MessageReport This Post
 Previous Topic | Next Topic powered by eve community  
 

ISI Home    ISI Forum    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  First Principles  Hop To Forums  The Academy    Where is Charlotte Simmons?