The United States of America is kind of divided on the whole homosexuality issue.

A new study produced by the University of Chicago surveyed public opinion across the country to find out which regions are more accepting to gay people. The country averages show that overall opinion is fractionated. While 44% of people surveyed said that homosexuality is “always wrong,” a close 41% said it’s “not wrong at all.” The opinions of the unaccounted for 15% weren’t made available, though Jezebel speculates that it could be those who are okay with acts of homosexuality if the two individuals are hot (*cough*most guys when girls make out*cough*)

Having an outside (Canadian) perspective the results aren’t all that surprising. The worst tolerance was found in the South Central states, with a whopping 73.7% of adults saying it’s always wrong in Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi and Tennessee. This is followed closely by 68.1% of people in the Western South Central Regions.

The most accepting regions start with New England (27% saying it’s always wrong), which is not surprising since Massachusetts legalized same sex marriage in 2004. The region with the second lowest intolerance rate is the Pacific (37.5%), which counts Alaska, California, Hawaii and Oregon.

There are so many factors in how people choose which side of the fence they sit on when it comes to homosexuality. Some people will cite biblical passages to condone certain sexual orientations, while I know people who will say that under the New Testament people should simply “love all of God’s creations.”

But whatever the reasons you believe what you do, one thing that has been on the rise (in the media, at least) is the number of LGBTQ-indentifying young adults, which is something you should think about before you open your mouth to make a derogatory comment.

October is National Bullying Prevention Month, so let’s be a little less snarky or critical of our classmates and start setting a good example for our younger sibs. Okay?

Annoyed already? But oh, it get’s so much better…

I will refer to females as “targets”. They aren’t actual people like us men. Consequently, giving them a certain name or distinction is pointless.

I have to give these guys some credit. They make no attempt to hide what misogynistic, sexist, racist, horrible human beings they actually are from the very beginning, when they tilt the world backwards on its axis with this comment. I mean, really? Was there ever even a time when women weren’t at least viewed as human beings?

Drawbacks of this philosophy [not wearing a condom] are that you may have to visit the clinic more often than not, but a quick penicillin shot really isn’t that bad (trust me).

Note the complete disregard for the woman’s health and safety. Note also that the fact that not wearing a condom could result in pregnancy is not even a thought in this man’s head. It’s as though he doesn’t even make the connection that unprotected sex can result in pregnancy simply because he’s not the one who would be pregnant.

Be careful when you cheat, but still cheat.

The pride and joy of Kappa Sigma also goes on to list a ranking system for the girls, excuse me “pies,” one gets with, and gives the above advice for those ranked at number 5. I have no words.

Non-consent and rape are two different things. There is a fine line, so make sure not to cross it.

Last time I checked, rape was non consensual sex. Or did I miss something? Here is where, for me at least, this letter moves from disgusting to disturbing. It’s one thing to be a manwhore.
It’s something else entirely to be a manwhore who doesn’t understand the concept of no.

You can read the letter in its entirety over at Jezebel, but it’s pretty much just one horrifying comment after another. But there’s really not much I can say about this letter that hasn’t been said before. It’s a degrading, insulting, disgusting, sexist, misogynistic piece of trash that is a disgrace not only for Kappa Sigma but for men in general. (Okay I guess I could think of a few things to say.) And for that reason I can see why the rest of the internet (like our gal pals at The Frisky) is freaking out over it, because I am too.

But what I can’t understand is why they’re so shocked that stuff like this exists out there. On Tuesday, I wrote about the shocking statistics that prove that women are still very far off from achieving equality, and about how we don’t always acknowledge or even realize that. And this letter is proof of just that.

Behind closed doors, when guys aren’t trying to score a “Guap n’ Drop” by taking women out to dinner and pretending like they actually believe they are human beings, this is how a lot of men talk. Not all men, but a lot of them, and especially a lot of college guys who have yet to reach the stage of wanting a real relationship and are only concerned with scoring “pies”. (I apologize. I can’t not use the air quotes. It’s just too ridiculous.)  As a college girl in a college setting have I experienced college guys being misogynistic? Yes. Sexist?  Yes. Degrading and demeaning? Check and check. Just because every guy who embraces this type of thinking doesn’t type up an e-mail (or a newspaper article) and send it around to all his friends doesn’t mean this stuff doesn’t happen. That doesn’t make it okay, but it does make it reality.

A reality we are not always aware of.

So while the writer of this letter claimed he would track down and take the soul of anyone who sent his e-mail to anyone outside of Kappa Sigma, I for one want to shake that man’s hand. Not because he thought this e-mail was too funny not to pass along, but because maybe now a few more people will realize exactly what women are dealing with.

Thoughts? Comments? Angry rants? Share below.

But the article’s vocabulary isn’t the only baffling thing about it. In the piece, author Shane Watson proposes that all women have a “fashion sex,” a sort of gendered style that comes naturally to them.

Confused? So was I. Watson tries to explain herself by pinpointing the “fashion sexes” of some celebrities: “Anyone can see that Scarlett Johansson is a Girl, who should stick to asset-flaunting bodycon dresses” (whatever those are), she writes, while Kristen Stewart is “a tomboy through and through” whose outfits should never clash with her “natural urge to look a bit rough, undone, cool and … boyish.” Madonna is another celeb who Watson classifies as boyish: her “DNA is probably 12% bloke — in a good way. It’s the reason she looks like a man in drag in a pussy-bow blouse, but fabulously hot in a pair of chaps,” Watson writes.

I guess what this really means is that, according to Watson, women are innately either traditionally feminine, a little more hard-edged (read: manly), or androgynous. These traits are “non-negotiable,” she says, meaning that an inherently girly girl should never wear “the leather trousers, jacket and peaked-cap look” that serves Catherine Zeta-Jones so ill in the picture that accompanies the article.

Of course, the thing is that in that picture, Zeta-Jones doesn’t look uncomfortable or inappropriate. She’s Catherine-frickin’-Zeta-Jones—even if she hasn’t made a good movie since winning a Best Supporting Actress for Chicago, one thing she does have going for her is that she’s still one of the most beautiful women on the planet (and a very lucrative deal with T-Mobile). I think she would probably look smoking even if she was wearing a burlap sack and one of those big, furry Russian hats.

The notion of fashion sex is totally ludicrous; having short hair or, in Stewart’s case, a curiously surly demeanor (does that girl just not know how to smile?) doesn’t make a woman un-feminine—look at a pixie-haired Halle Berry in that famous Oscars dress, for just one example of why Watson is completely wrong. Hell, even K-Stew looked pretty, classy and, dare I say, comfortably girly at last week’s Oscars. So-called “boyish” types can look great wearing frilly dresses, and so-called “girly” types can look amazing in jeans and distressed Chucks.

Every girl should wear whatever she wants without fear that she’s somehow going against “type,” whatever that means. There’s no sense in pigeonholing yourself to just one kind of look, especially if you’re only doing it because some crazy British lady thinks you should.

We talk a lot about birth control around here (a natural progression from our daily musings about sex). We think its ability to stop babies is pretty badass, but many of us aren’t sure if that is worth all the crappy side effects: headaches, bloat, moodiness, debilitating cramps….We seriously thought we had it pretty bad until we found out that all of our suffering was nothing compared to those unlucky ladies who opted for the birth control patch.

While it was marketed as every woman’s dream birth control option (“Lower estrogen! Lasts all month! No need to remember those pesky daily pills!”), it has recently become every woman’s worst nightmare.

“The patch actually delivered much higher doses of estrogen than the pill; Johnson & Johnson failed to reveal this to the public for six years. At least fifty deaths have been attributed to the patch because of this, with thousands more women reporting alarming symptoms.”

The people behind the patch have been dealing with major lawsuits from patch users who experienced blood clots, strokes and heart attacks!

We love our ability to enjoy sex without the worry of havin’ a baby (and getting those awful stretch marks), but really? Stroke? Death? Does Johnson & Johnson really think women are willing to risk their lives for a little no-strings-attached booty?

If you are on the patch, get off of it NOW. There are plenty of other options for you: the pill, the Nuva Ring, an IUD, condoms, or, the tastiest option, Diet Coke? Just tear that thing off and call your doc. Fo realz.

How was Katie Holmes’ debut on Broadway?

It’s hard not to get laid these days, but some guys are just really good at it.

Paris Hilton has a champagne?

What does your Facebook group say about you?

She created the Morning After Bag; see what Rebecca Minkoff has coming next.

Tyra Banks is effing NUTS.

Audrina finally moves out of Chateau de Conrad.

This gives new meaning to the term “Big Daddy”

Pamela Anderson is dating an albino?

Puff Daddy, or Poop Daddy?

A little Will Ferrell comedy relief to get you through your Friday.

Giving credit where credit is due…hundreds of years later

Top Shop is coming to America with these awesome looks.

The top 10 penis types.

Margaret Cho won’t vote for Palin, but would totally eff her.

Soda flavored what now?

Pete Wentz feebly attempts to be badass

Who says bye-bye to the Hef?!

Perez gets even less likable

Oh snap!  Miley outsells Madonna

Frankly, I find this hard to believe…

No more Slut Machine?

Dakota Fanning: a breath of fresh (and normal) air

What a fantastic, eco-friendly hobby!

Disturbia, indeed

Because 2008 isn’t just the summer of expensive corn and Obama-rama, it’s also the summer of TMI. Over-sharing has become a form of communication for our generation; from blogging about bad dates, to blogging about our self-indulgent issues, to blogging purely to become famous. No matter who we are, we can become stars overnight by uploading naked photos, name-dropping about a wild party, or simply having an ounce of literary ability and a snarky way with words.

By late July, 2008, the percent of people in the US who haven’t seen a celebrity vajayjay flash or heard someone say, “dude, I’m gonna blog about this!” is monumentally small, and it seems like every day a new gossip or 24 hour news site pops up. However, amidst the clattering of fingers on keyboards and snapping of flashbulbs, I can’t help but wonder if this constant need to be seen and heard is actually doing us any good.

Is all this over-sharing about our drug, drink, and sexual exploits really helping women cultivate a strong, intelligent persona? Do we feel more empowered now that Britney, Lindsay, and Paris have made trashy the new black? Are our lives more complete now that we know what David Beckham had for breakfast?

These aren’t rhetorical questions. As a twenty-something myself, I really want to know:

In this age of over-sharing, are you confident about yourself and your image? Are you proud of how we as women have represented ourselves in the media?

Vote in our poll, and write in our comments — this is your chance to tell the world exactly how you feel.

Ben and Jen: Super Fertile.

Too cloudy to go to the beach? Add these 80′s classics to your Netflix queue.

Exclusive look at the crazy new script from Tarantino. Awww yeah!

Nothing ruins a day at the beach quite like a shark. And I really needed a tan!

The new iPhone is out. We are not too happy about it, but what do the critics say?

Teen pregnancy on the up and up for the first time in over a decade. Could this be Juno’s doing?

Also on the rise, Wal-Mart stores. They. Are. Everywhere.

As if TV couldn’t get any worse – Nicole Richie gets another show.

2 words that should never go together: orgasmic and childbirth. Yes, there is a video.

Maybe this will inspire you to recycle. Think of the dolphins, people!

Gender equality on the road at last! Well, at least on the signs. Baby steps, ladies; baby steps.

But what we absolutely do not want to do is send the message that sexual freedom and inhibition is a risk free lifestyle.

Recently, two writers from Jezebel – a website for women aged 25-35 – were invited onto Lizz Winstead’s show, Thinking and Drinking, to discuss their decisions to blog quite openly about their sexcapades and the message they send by writing about them (graphically) on the internet. Winstead, a former writer for The Daily Show, is a strong advocate of sexual empowerment and freedom, but argues it “can only be called a freedom if you protect yourself from rape, disease and pregnancy.”

Tracie Egan and Moe Tkacik, the Jezebel bloggers – who we have quoted and referenced many times before – showed up to the interview drunk and what they said caused quite a stir in the CollegeCandy office.

You can see the clip here:

We have no problem with the choices these women make in their personal lives, but we do have a problem with the fact that they take an issue like rape and make light of it. Pass it off like it’s funny, impossible, fictional and that they are too smart to let it happen to them.

No one is too “smart” to be raped. My friends are very smart people; some of the most intelligent, worldly and street smart people I know (Yes, I am bragging). But that didn’t mean anything when one of them went home with someone – a funny, attractive boy we knew through some friends – and found herself in an unsafe situation that she could not stop.

He was not some shady dude in the bar; she was “smart” enough to avoid that one.

It wasn’t the muscley guy buying rounds for every girl he saw; she knew not to go near that one.

It was a safe guy that she trusted and that did not make a difference.

Just as Winstead mentioned in the clip, the ladies of Jezebel have remained safe, not because they have made good choices, but because they are lucky. The same goes for me, and for a lot of the bloggers on this site. We are not doing anything different than the women who find themselves in danger; we are just really f-ing lucky.

Though we may not want to be role models, blogging comes with that responsibility. We would be jobless if it weren’t for the people who read and emulate us, so it is disgusting for these two ladies of Jezebel to ignore their responsibilities and make light of such a serious situation.

It may have been the wine talking, but what they said is embarrassing and just plain wrong. Women today are very lucky to live in a society that allows us the freedom to choose our lifestyle; we cannot take it for granted.

[Photo courtesy of Jezebel]

]]>