“On Top” not relevant to topic
In the latest “On Top,” columnist Jessica Pivik marches out every sad, antiquated notion about sex and relationships — resulting in unreadable tripe lacking in humor, perspective, and relevance.
Tired clichés are presented as new information and revealed to us in the form of run-on sentences and vague references to Britney Spears.
Pivik presents her own stereotyped experiences and parochial attitudes as universal truths: oral sex as a loathsome, grin-and-bear-it chore; gynecological appointments as the ultimate female dread; singledom as a state that lacks validation and must be ‘corrected’ by alcohol; insensitive gifts as proof of male boorishness; and sex as a duty that women are obligated to perform.
Upon completing the article, it became clear that someone who views sex and relationships in such a rigid, negative manner is incapable of bringing anything new or useful to the subject.
For example, we are told, “The key to good oral sex is to pretend that you enjoy it.” Perhaps the key to good oral sex is a relationship that does not rely on sexual jiggery-pokery for its survival — or maybe, even more surprisingly, technique.
Let us drink further from Ms. Pivik’s fountain of wisdom.
She dispenses the following invaluable Valentine’s day gift-giving advice: “Guys, get a girl something romantic. Girls, hang up your chastity belts.” But girls, don’t “get your panties in a twist” over the suggestion you should freely cast off your principles for the sake of male pleasure.
Don’t be offended by the notion that your underthings can be cozened off by chocolates and deceptive romantic scheming: “[Sex] is just what the guys want.”
Oh. Well in that case, consider my legs duly spread.
Gena Olson
Freshman
International Studies
Tuition will increase after laptop initiative
Can anyone possibly believe that a Mobile Computing Initiative would not result in an increase in fees and/or tuition?
First off, how many desks on campus can accommodate the awkward footprint of a laptop?  The only device I can think of that can do this would be a tablet PC, which although sensible, is very pricey.  Who would foot that bill?  A tablet costs more than a dorm room for the semester, and that is without any software.
The support staff would be enormous — the Office of Computing Services keeps all the computer labs working by effectively restricting what goes on those machines.  How would you keep tabs on the thousands of personal machines?  We would need a vast wireless networking infrastructure, easily accessible print stations, and licenses for the specialized software required for each major program. 
Student Government had been busy debating their election code, and had no time to dream up new fees.  It was a wonderful fall semester.  But now, a week after they passed that, they are itching to spend money.  They point out that the University supports their initiative.  Of course it does.  The University loves student-assessed fees that improve the campus image.  Remember how excited they were about our $54 million Union renovation?  It is like your roommate buying a new 54″ television.  You are ecstatic, because you get to use a beautiful television without having to pay for it.  You can be sure that the University will support anything that we have to pay for through our dear Student Government’s wide array of fees.
Our Senate Speaker may think that a laptop for every freshman might “spur economic development in Louisiana,” but I prefer to keep my feet on the ground.  After investing heavily, via the Technology Fee, in dozens of computer labs across the campus, Student Government wants to close those labs to finance this new fiscal endeavor. 
UNC Chapel Hill has this computing initiative, and is something SG points out frequently.  Chapel Hill also has a much wealthier student body, with only 29% of freshmen receiving need-based financial aid.  LSU has 45% of its freshmen receiving need-based aid, which means LSU will have to subsidize or cover the cost of a laptop for 45 percent of incoming freshmen.  That is a lot of money that has to come from somewhere.
I urge anyone who is skeptical about this proposed spending spree to e-mail or call someone and voice your concerns. 
 
Bryan Beyer
Sophomore
Civil Engineering
Abstinence not the only alternative
I am deeply disturbed by the announcement of the president’s administration to double the funding on teaching abstinence as the only form of birth control.
The administration has decided to not even mention other birth control methods while teaching sexual education to our students, even though research shows abstinence only sex education is ineffective. President Bush should look at the facts instead of ignoring them and stop trying to impose his beliefs upon everyone.
Abstinence should be taught in our schools, but only as one alternative, not the only alternative. Our government should spend our time and money on things that are proven to work instead of wasting taxpayer dollars on our president’s wishful thinking.
Bryan Rice
LSU Alumnus