Portland State University's student paper is currently running a guest column entitled "Sexual Oppression Disguised as Student Life." Written by a woman student majoring in Native American studies and something called "independent studies in social justice," it opens thus:

PSU's student population is 70 percent women, and women make up approximately 52 percent of the U.S. population. So that means women are in the majority, right? Well, statistically yes, but remember, it's not just quantity that counts, its quality. And overall, the PSU environment seems to lack greatly in quality for women. It isn't an empowering or safe space for women in general.

What am I talking about, you ask? Well, let's start with the surface. As I walk about the PSU campus, I am mortified to find around every hallway some form of sexual harassment being displayed. From last month's inappropriate "Mardi Gras" display in the SMSU, shrouded in beads, (gee, I wonder what the beads represent), to the subscribing porn magazine pamphlets littering corkboards, to fliers created or co-sponsored by student groups that depict objectified, practically naked women. Perfect example: the recent Cinco De Mayo flier. This flier gives dates and times in the shadow of a sexually objectified woman. Could she be any more scantily clad? And come on, if her breasts were any bigger she'd fall over. Pahhhlease.

Even her sisters in oppression can't seem to generate any outrage. Maybe she needs to build a tunnel.

Good thing the author didn't get into Harvard. That ice phallus would have given her the vapors.

Most noteworthy are the comments posted in response. So far the respondents have all been women. Three responded negatively to the column and one suuported it. One in particular stands out, This is an exceprt:

but there's something awfully disingenous about telling people they should think for themselves and then telling them how to do it. I think it's just as dangerous to try and blanket-ban pornography in the name of "empowering" women as it is "protecting" women--it's still making sex a closed topic, a controlled topic, and making assumptions about women's weakness and need to be protected.

A pretty effective response to a typically condescending "if only you knew what I knew" article.

Yes Laura, I see a Tunnel of Repression in Portland State's future.

I haven't the stomach to read her entire article or the responses, but I hope she pointed out that the very name of her university constitutes a daily humiliation for her: "Port" land? "Any port in a storm" is a notorious expression of masculine erotic nonchalance about women; and for otherly-sized women, the word "port" is also fraught with negative implications, given its proximity to the word "portly."

Funny thing Purcell - but I was under the impression that the phrase "any port in a storm" originated at sea and was commonly used to refer to sailors seeking relief during those long, long voyages in the - ahem - port holes of their fellow sailors.

Your point stands no matter which version applies!

No, no, you're both wrong. Since the port side is on the left, Portland is the Land of the Lefties, and of course that's where she'd be located in her trade of instilling correct consciousness at all costs.

I only learned "port" in college when I rowed, so port was always on my right. But thinking that "port" was "right" only moved me backwards.

What does one do with a degree in "social justice"? Preach?

Yes, you preach - to people with degrees in Peace Studies. It's all become very ritualized, like the Japanese tea ceremony.

Peace Studies along with gender studies, black studies, Hispanic studies and all the other fill-in-the-nonsense studies are the most fiendish of plots of the white straight male universal conspiracy to oppress women, minorities, gays you get the drift. While men , particulalty white men and Asians who are sort of white-lite, study engineering, computer science, and accounting or degrees that will get them jobs to continue to dominate the power structure, women et al will have these useless degrees and continue to be oppressed. Are we not clever? We will continue to dominate society and oppress women et al. Our only mistake was to let them wear pants. It was so much easy to dominate womwn in skirts not to mention more fun to look at. I will have to bring that up at the next meeting of The-Vast-Right-Wing-Conspiracy.

My wife is from Portland, and I've been there many times. I know that area.

Here's a curve ball. Area is crawling with bi-sexual women and lesbians. Could be the objectification of women is as much for their sakes as it is for men. Women have tried to pick up my wife, an Asian cutey, while I'm standing there with her.

Why does the writer supposed that the T&A is only for the edification of the men?

As if to prove my point, this is the front page article of The Vanguard:

"Fat girls speak out
dissenting voices

May 08, 2003

In an effort to combat fat oppression and fatphobia, people of varying shapes and sizes gathered at the Hollywood Theater last Saturday, May 3, to attend the size-positive event FatGirl Speaks.

Organized by Stacy Bias, owner of technodyke.com, the event showcased original music, spoken word, burlesque and the cheerleading squad Fat Action Team Allstar Spirit Squad, better known as F.A.T.A.S.S. PDX, in a celebration of size and sexuality."

Notice the "technodyke.com" address.

I really worry about people like Ms. De Spain. What will happen when they get out into the real world and discover that there are many more pressing issues that what magazines a convenience store sells? Having spent a few years on the assembly line of an aircraft manufacturer, I can tell you, there is so much more to sexual harassment than magazines and flyers.

I agree....there will be a Tunnel in the very near future for the lucky students at Portland State.

Watching movies, I've learned that some primitive cultures feel a camera imprisons your soul. Seeing what she interprets as pornography, De Spain asks, "How do you like being up for sale?"
De Spain feels a picture (of someone else even) is a person, has the moral equivalence of a person, and selling a picture is as selling a person, ie slavery. What exactly are they teaching her in that Native American studies class?

Sorry to belabor this subject, but here goesÖ

My wife is a petite Filipino, cute and sexy. We abandoned our apartment in the Chelsea district of NYC, a predominantly gay neighborhood, because (among other things) we were tired of the constant attention of the bi women.

It isnít that we found the sexual attention disgusting or annoying. NoÖ we discovered a curious phenomenon that explains plenty about whatís been going on for the past 35 years. Hereís the opening line (admittedly concentrated and generalized) from the bi women to my wife: ìMen are just so, evil, arenít they?î

Indirection is womenís way of seduction. Bi women have been using this ìwe hate menî language for as long as I can remember as a means of advertising that they are bisexual. Since the role of women in sex is to pretend to absolutely no interest in sex while attempting to lure men into admitting their sexual interest, the ìwe hate menî gambit is just a new wrinkle on an old game. Itís a way of subtly tipping off their bisexuality, while saying nothing directly about it. This has led me to wonder how lesbians ever manage to actually engage in sex. With both girls waiting for the other to make the first move, how does anything ever happen?

Doesnít this explain a lot? Rather than openly admit their bisexuality, these women are using feminism in the same way that gay men display a red hankie in the left back pocket (or is it the right back pocket?) to indicate their interest in a certain kind of sex. Men are just more honest in the way that they do it.

So, you see, recruiting is part of the homosexual culture. My wife and I constantly confronted bi women who saw it as a challenge to recruit her. They were also pretty angry with me for having her. So, when they said: ìHow can you be with a man? Theyíre so oppressive,î I began to hear them telling my wife this: ìWhy donít you come along with me, baby? I can do a much better job of oppressing you than he can.î

Stolypin, I'm anxiously awaiting your input.

No comments regarding "absolutely gratuitous casual sex?"

Your wisdom is sorely needed.

Stephen, I do not doubt there are gays and lesbians who will try to "recruit" straights into sex with them. I too have admittedly taken some risks and flirted with a few straight men over the years. So have many of my friends. There is definitely some element of truth to your observation, but you'd be surpised that there are so much more gay men and women with a lot of goodwill for hetersoxuals than those who either hate men, women, or are simply heterophobic.

I try not to base my overall attitude about heterosexuals on a few bad experience from bitter homophobes. And I take a lot of pride in my solid and deep friendships with straight men and women. There are good and bad people who are either homosexuals or heterosexuals. I hope you won't let your bad experience with some bad gays and lesbians define the rest of them. You'd be really surprised to know that some of them make great and loyal allies. They're probably closer to you ideologically than some of your straight friends are.

POK

My closest friend of the past 20 years is a gay man. He's a great friend. He's been struggling for as long as I can remember with the assumption that his sexual identity reveals his political agenda. In fact, by the standards of NYC he's a conservative.

In fact, my friend pulled me into men's issues for a while. Had to depart when it became apparent that the men's issues people are just as wedded to ideology as the feminists.

Stephen, as to "absolutely gratuitous casual sex" after careful consideration, I can say I stand firmly in favor of it. Oh that I could say that I stand in favor of it firmly but in this case the splitting of the infinitive may be compelled by physiological if not grammatical reasons.

POK, your points are well taken. The idea of a monolithic 'gay/lesbian/transgendered' community is as much of a sterotype as any other - as people like Andrew Sullivan are quick to point out. As to flirting with 'apparently' straight men - how will you know if you don't ask? It has happened very rarely to me. I think it has been since my time with the Ramsey Clark for NY Senate campaign in 1976. (I attribute this lack of recruitment by the way to my obvious shortcomings in terms of looks, personal hygiene, style, and personlity.) My response to an approach now would no doubt be the same as it was then, to wit: "I guess I'm straight, but perhaps I just haven't met the right man yet. Sorry." Seems to answer the question without offending the asker - as long as they don't mind not being considered the right man.

(By the way - I hope you do not mind my saying that I thought your comments on the Tunnel of Oppression comments were both insightful and perceptive.)

Beckyj - you also posted some compelling points. As to what Ms. De Spain may do when she gets to the real world - she might not ever get there. There are many niche occupations in academia or government or even in many communitities in which one can coccon themselves from much of what they feel oppresses them. Selling 'oppression-free lattes in Berkely is a case in point. Your reference to the assembly line in on the mark.

Don't have a problem with "flirting." Don't have an argument with gay people.

Here's the issue. I'm suggesting that feminism is often used as a coverup for announcing one's sexual interests -- particularly for bisexual woman.

And here's the difference. Gay men have often showed romantic interest in me. More often than not, they express that interest directly and openly. No problem. Bisexual women, as I've said, can be relied upon to express their sexual interest in my wife by identifying themselves as feminists who have a bitch against men.

Often, I think that the feminism is more imagined than real. What is real is that they are bisexual and they have a problem dealing openly with that.

Stolypin, now that I've moved from the real world to academia I just have to laugh at the overwrought wailings from my colleagues. I routinely get sideways looks from women when I politely turn down invitations to join the current faculty women's group. What seriously bothers me is the assumption that I will give extra time and effort to my female students and not really help my male students. I have recently found out through the grapevine that the students think I'm "cool" because I actually speak with and engage students with a conservative point of view. Pretty depressing.

In the end, my job (and that of all academics) is to teach students *how* to think, not *what* to think. You wouldn't believe how often I get busted for that.

Stephen, your point is well taken - I suspect the Mars/Venus thing trumps ones orientation. I never doubted that you did not have a problem with the flirtation thing by the way. I do admit to being more than a bit jealous at all the attention you and your wife draw. I am left with a growing inferiority complex and a sudden urge for a Botox injection! :-)

Beckyj, it is no doubt cool that you engage your students without regard to their political orientation. The fact this should be the norm rather than the exception is, as you note, saddening. I don't for a minute doubt that teaching students how to think is as heretical to the academic bureacuracy as Galileo's teaching that the earth moves was heretical to the church. . . . And yet it moves.

Ideas, not ideology.
Student programs, not student programmers.

Brought to you by the Sensible Party (TM).

Dammit, someone stole my rhetorical thunder!

Dammit, someone stole my rhetorical thunder!

Yes, but thank God they didn't kop your kharma.

Correction - I should have said, thank goodness that Clara Cooper did not cop your copper clappers. Thank you Jack Webb.