P2 ➤ sex issue theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010

Romance: a virtual reality

By Jaela Bernstien
Gazette Staff
In the year 2010, sex has gone vir-
tual.
Today, users log onto fantasy
worlds, where they can interact —
and have sex — with millions of
people from around the world.
As far as who you are, or pre-
tend to be, the options are limitless
when it comes to Massively multi-
player online role-playing games
(MMORPGs). In a game like World
of Warcraft, not only is your gender
a choice, but even remaining
human is optional. Gamers can
represent themselves in countless
avatar forms, from Dwarves and
Gnomes to Orcs and Trolls.
Second Life, another virtual
community, is well known for its
red light districts — designated
areas where avatars can engage in
sexual activities ranging from flir-
tation to consensual intercourse.
In another game called Final
Fantasy XI, players looking for
more than a physical relationship
can exchange their vows and
rings in a formal wedding cere-
mony.
For many, these virtual worlds
are more than a few hours of
entertainment or sexual fanta-
sy; they are places to establish
long-term relationships.
“Right now, the lines are so
fuzzy on the issue of whether vir-
tual sex is really sex,” says Jennifer
Martin, lecturer in the faculty of
information and media studies.
It’s the hotly debated ques-
tion among academics and
experts in the cyber community
— what is “real?”
Martin pointed to the large
number of instances where cou-
ples are married in real-life as well
as in their avatar forms.
“Online engagements can be
just as valid or as important for
people as offline engagement,
so I’d hesitate to draw a line,”
explains Martin. “What’s role-
play and fantasy for one per-
son can be very real and
important for another.”
Ian Schreiber is the forum
moderator for the Sex and
Games special interest group of
the International Game Develop-
ers Association and has worked as
a designer on a Playboy-branded
console game.
When it comes to sex in cyber-
space, Schreiber agrees the line
between “real” and “fantasy” is dif-
ficult to distinguish. “Obviously
there is no physical contact, and
no risk of [sexually transmitted
infections] or pregnancy, so in that
respect it isn’t real,” he explains.
“On the other hand, the feel-
ings and emotional
connection can
be very
re al ,
given the right partners.”
For this designer, the most
important thing is for players to be
up front about what they want out
of virtual romances to avoid being
— or causing — hurt. The
anonymity that MMORPGs pro-
vide means identity and age are
easily misrepresented, leav-
ing many players open and
vulnerable to deceit.
Meghan Boast
is a psychothera-
pist at the Advan-
tage Professional
Counselling Centre
in Ingersoll. She
says online games can
be dangerous if people
use them to replace
real-life interactions.
Boast recalls a young
client who came for therapy
after being lured across the
American-Canadian border.
The young gamer was enticed
by an older player through World
of Warcraft and was convinced
their characters had established
an emotional bond.
Boast cautions online games
can be dangerous if individuals
depend on them to meet people
and establish relationships.
“It’s a social outlet where
you don’t have to
leave your
home
[…] It creates a false sense of secu-
rity and connection,” she says.
Guy Grenier, sex therapist and
psychology professor at Western,
compared the dangers of virtual
romance to gambling. “If you want
to go to the casino for a night of
entertainment, and you can afford
losing whatever money you take
[…] then that’s fine. But when you
start making compromises with
other real-world aspects of your
life, then you’ve got a problem.”
Despite the possible hazards of
relationships in online games,
many argue these dangers are the
exception.
Owen Livermore is a PhD can-
didate and lecturer in FIMS. He
says the media’s language is often
“sensationalist” and “alarmist”
when addressing romance and
sexual activity online.
“One of the major points of
contention seems to be that [vir-
tual] relationships are limited
and/or unauthentic because
online interaction necessarily
implies an altered or incorrect ver-
sion of the self,” he explains.
Livermore sees it differently.
“Here’s the big question: given
the fact that many of us spend
considerable time online, is our
online self any less authentic than
the self we form and reveal to oth-
ers in real life?”
Indeed, that is the question of
the day. In a world where sex can
be virtual or physical, and your
partner can be a human or Orc, our
lines between fantasy and real-life
are growing increasingly blurred.

A legitimate shot at love?

Rationalizing the rose ceremony
By Lauren Pelley
Gazette Staff
Next month, Jason Mesnick and
Molly Malaney are getting married
in the same place they met ––
inside your TV.
The bride and groom, from the
13th season of ABC’s perennial hit
The Bachelor, will likely draw a big
audience for their “I dos.” The last
televised Bachelor wedding of Trista
Rehn and Ryan Sutter had 17 mil-
lion viewers, and this latest happy
ending is far more exciting.
Malaney was actually the run-
ner-up of the show, whom Mesnick
brought back on a dramatic follow-
up episode. He also dumped his
previous fiancée-of-five-minutes in
front of the entire television audi-
ence.
But it’s totally cool that he found
love in a dozen episodes! And
dumped someone in front of the
world! It’s all in the name of true
love!
Okay, maybe not. We’re all smart
enough to see through the rose cer-
emonies and the staged romance of
reality shows like The Bachelor,
More to Love and the many date-a-
celebrity schlock flooding airwaves
these days. And yet we can’t get
enough of it, or so ratings suggest.
Romayne Smith Fullerton, an
associate professor in the faculty of
information and media studies,
says we connect with reality shows
because the contestants –– or char-
acters, depending on your perspec-
tive –– are more like ourselves.
“You start to think of those peo-
ple as sort of your circle of friends,
which is odd and bizarre,” she adds.
“The connections that people con-
struct to reality TV […] seem to me
to be more intimate.”
The world of reality television is
appealing for another reason, too –
— it seems to be a better version of
our reality.
“They don’t deal with realities of
life on reality TV […] they don’t do
the dishes [or walk] the dog –– the
things that people don’t want to
admit are a part of their daily lives,”
Smith Fullerton says.
“That might translate into peo-
ple thinking that when they find the
perfect person, [things like] laundry
will disappear.”
It’s the same thing as getting
your relationship advice from a Dis-
ney movie, says Western psycholo-
gy professor Guy Grenier.
“Relationships are complicated.
Learning about people is compli-
cated. What you’re going to learn
about a person in an artificial cir-
cumstance… for most of us, in life,
is a lot more complicated,” he
explains.
Smith Fullerton agrees. Reality
shows aren’t very good at explor-
ing subtleties and nuances, she
says, and they rely mostly on
stereotypes.
“One of the myths they’re por-
traying is beautiful people dating
beautiful people and living
lifestyles of the rich and famous,”
Grenier echoes.
“It does perpetuate that life is
easy and there’s lots of opportunity
if you’re good looking –– and those
of us who are mere mortals can
only hope to have those kind
of options.”
But it’s not all bad.
Anything that starts
dialogue can have
value, Grenier says ––
and reality TV certain-
ly starts dialogue.
“It’s supposed to
be entertainment and
it could be used as a
talking point about
relationships and devel-
oping our social etiquette,”
he explains.
“Anything that gets the dia-
logue about relationship dis-
cussion going is not a bad
thing.”
 theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010 sex issue ➤ P3

Tradition still affecting interfaith relationships

By Daniel Da Silva
Gazette Staff
Imagine a Muslim Arab-Canadian
man walking into class holding
hands with a white Catholic woman.
You realize they are in a romantic
relationship. That’s certainly not a
shocking occurrence, is it?
Well, consider the same scene
happening a generation ago. Or,
perhaps it occurred today in Asia or
in the Middle East. That couple
probably would have received a
very different reaction.
It could be similar to the situa-
tion former King’s University Col-
lege student Sandra* found herself
in 25 years ago.
“My mom’s direct quote was
‘thousands of years of Catholicism
down the drain.’ It was difficult for
my parents to accept [that he was
Baptist],” she said. “My siblings
both married people of a similar
background so it was difficult to do
something else.”
The taboo nature of inter-cul-
tural and inter-faith relationships a
generation ago seems to have been
largely replaced by acceptance, at
least in Canada. According to the
Statistics Canada 2002 Ethnic
Diversity Study, a fifth of married
couples are of different religions.
But why did this shift occur at
all?
“I think the main reason is immi-
gration. North America is an immi-
grant community,” Rev. Michael
Wagenman, Christian Reformed
chaplain at Western, said. “When
groups come to North America,
they tend to stay within their own
little enclave. But after a generation
or two, these groups have to start
dealing with the reality that there
are other people around.”
Sandra echoed these sentiments
with her experience.
“My parents emigrated from
Italy and they stayed within their
own little Italian community,” she
said. “However, it wasn’t as impor-
tant for me. Now the third genera-
tion, my daughter for example, is
completely integrated into
society in general.”
With waves of
immigration
occurring in the
past few genera-
tions, many
cities are filled
with second and
third generation
Canadians.
According to Sta-
tistics Canada senior
analyst Warren Clark’s
report, “Interreligious
unions in Canada,” there are
more likely to be interreligious
unions when one’s surrounding
population consists of people of dif-
ferent cultures and religions.
By the same token, those in a
homogenous community are more
likely to marry someone of their
own culture and faith.
Another factor is an individual’s
educational background. Students
who have gone to ethnic or reli-
gious based schools don’t necessar-
ily have the same exposure to other
cultures as those who attended
public schools.
According to third-year history
student Zack Silverberg, going to a
Hebrew school shaped his opinions.
“It affected my life and my
beliefs,” he said. “I went to Jewish
school for my whole life and Jewish
camps since Grade 2, so coming to
Western was a big change with so
many other backgrounds.”
Sandra also had a similar expe-
rience growing up in a small, sin-
gle-culture community, before
going to Western for her under-
graduate studies.
“My sister stayed at home and
went to college. She married some-
one of the same background and
religion. That was important to her
because she hadn’t left the commu-
nity,” she said. “When I went to uni-
versity, people’s backgrounds and
religions didn’t matter. Nobody
asked ‘Are you Catholic?’ or ‘Are you
Protestant?’ So when I met my hus-
band, his background didn’t matter
to me.”
The level of education a person
has also alters the likelihood they
will have relationships outside of
their own cultural group. According
to Clark’s report, “Highly-educated
groups have wider intellectual hori-
zons […] which may be traded off
against religious compatibility.”
Both education and immigra-
tion have played a part in the
noticeable trend in North America
towards secularism. Accord-
ing to the Statistics
Canada study, in the
last 20 years, the
amount of people
that do not asso-
ciate with any
religion has
increased by 10
per cent.
“We’re a secular
society with values
that are highly individ-
ualistic. Personal happi-
ness is seen as justifiable for
entering into something like
marriage,” Lara Descartes, a fami-
ly studies professor at Brescia, said.
Wagenman feels people’s atti-
tudes are no longer dictated by their
religious sect as was once the case.
“People used to live their life
according to what they felt God’s
plan was and now it’s ‘I can choose
my own path,’” he said.
Despite the noticeable shift
towards secularism, the practice of
marrying within one’s own faith or
culture still remains.
The liberal-to-conservative
spectrum in every religion can
affect people’s views on marriage.
Those who identify as more con-
servative “have higher levels of
involvement in their religious com-
munity and are less likely to be in
interreligious unions,” according to
Clark’s report.
Fourth-year King’s student
Angela* noted it can be very hard for
students to escape parents’ values.
“Many of my Muslim friends
who are dating white girls won’t tell
their parents because [their par-
ents] would be furious,” she said.
“My boyfriend won’t tell his parents
about me because I would never be
accepted into the culture.”
Silverberg is familiar with this
experience.
“[My parents] wouldn’t be happy
if I brought home a non-Jewish
girl,” he said. “I haven’t really talked
to them about it because it’s
assumed they are against it.”
So while there is a trend for
many youth today to date anyone,
no matter the religion or back-
ground, there still exists a large seg-
ment of our society that values the
strict maintenance of their religious
and cultural heritage.
However, the cultural changes
that have occurred in the past few
generations have largely allowed
each individual to decide what they
value in a romantic relationship.
“We live in a much more plural-
istic society today. We live in a Burg-
er King world – ‘We’ll make it your
way.’ You can tailor your life the way
you want it,” Wagenman said.
—With files from Heather Molyneaux
*Note: Names have been changed
to protect anonymity.

Vote YES :
• An additional student fee of $25.00 will be levied,
starting in September 2010.
• UCC Gyms will be renovated to become lounge, 24-
hour study, programmable, and meeting space.
• Renovation will be completed in time to be used dur-
ing the 2010/11 academic year.
• Fee will allow for ongoing renovations to student
controlled spaces within the UCC in subsequent years.

Vote NO :
• No additional student fee will be levied.
• No funds will be available to make significant re n ova-
tions to the UCC Gyms.
• Students will continue paying rent for UCC Gyms.
• Capital deficit will continue to grow for other student-
c o n t rolled spaces within the UCC.
• Other options for the UCC Gyms will be considered,
including maintaining them as is, making a limited
investment in equipment and furniture, or returning
them to the unive r s i ty’s contro l.
P4 ➤ sex issue theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010

Using domestic violence as a news peg

How the media reacts to, frames and teaches from abuse
By Carly Conway
Gazette Staff
Nearly 40,200 incidents of spousal
abuse were reported to police in
2007, according to Statistics Cana-
da.
A Liz Claiborne study on teen
dating abuse in 2005 found one in
three teenagers knew of a friend or
peer who had been physically hurt
by their partner.
So why does it take a pop star
punching another pop star in the
face on Grammy night to bring
such a widespread issue to the
forefront of mainstream media?
“The problem with abuse stories,
by and large, is that they are so com-
mon, so mainstream media doesn’t
really like to comment on things
that happen all the time. [As a result]
regular kinds of domestic abuse
don’t tend to get covered very much
at all,” says Romayne Smith Fuller-
ton, a faculty of information and
media studies professor at Western.
“Until some external situation
happens that gives you the peg to
cover it, it’s pretty hard to get
there,” she adds.
The events of Feb. 8, 2009 pro-
vided such a peg.
Breaking the Rihanna/
Chris Brown story
When news broke of a violent alter-
cation between Chris Brown and
Rihanna, it quickly turned into
what would become one of the
most talked about entertainment
news stories of the year — rep-
utable news outlets, tabloids, talk
shows and blogs all closely fol-
lowed the story as it developed.
“[It gives] an awesome opportu-
nity to a serious media outlet to
engage, not only with the story of
Rihanna, but also the larger issues
around abuse, because those types
of stories are ongoing, but they only
really get covered when there is this
news peg,” Smith Fullerton says.
But according to Susan Knabe,
women’s studies and FIMS profes-
sor at Western, it was a missed
opportunity for some media out-
lets. She points to the problematic
way in which these types of abuse
stories tend to be framed.
“The media tends to want to see
women as somehow serially wanti-
ng to be in relationships with ‘bad
men,’ and that there’s a pattern —
and it’s not really a part of patriar-
chal society that sanctions violence
against women, but rather these are
women who seek out dysfunction-
al relationships,” she says. “The
problem then shifts from being a
problem within society to being a
problem with an individual woman
who makes bad choices.”
Case in point — the reaction of
a panelist on arguably the most
influential talk show on television.
“I’m so worried [Rihanna’s]
sending the wrong message to
young fans,” celebrity personality
Gayle King said about Rihanna’s
handling of the event on an
episode of Oprah.
Smith Fullerton believes many
mainstream media outlets do
strive to represent people and
information in a fair and accurate
way. But she also agrees there have
been cases in the past in which the
victims have been portrayed in a
less than innocent light.
She recalls the media’s portray-
al of the Paul Bernardo killings of
Leslie Mahaffy and Kristen French
in the early 1990s.
“Leslie was very much framed
by some media outlets in exactly
[this problematic way]. The
reporters went out and found out
she left home a couple times, that
her parents had locked her out,
that she smoked and she was 15,
that she drank — there were clear-
ly implications that she deserved
what she got. That to me is a shock-
ing, shocking idea.”
Trevor Hinds is the program
director of Changing Ways, a Lon-
don-based organization that sup-
ports men in their efforts to end
abusive behaviour in their rela-
tionships. He believes the media’s
widespread justification and glori-
fication of violence is to blame for
the problematic way in which
domestic abuse cases are framed.
“We can look at sports and the
language we use […] It’s using
power to assert authority over other
people […] And all these things are
creating an environment where
violence is OK and it’s the men who
are being rewarded,” he says.
The notion of shifting the blame
from abuser to abused — be it
through the media’s portrayal of
victims making poor decisions or
its general acceptance of violence
— was one that also played out in
the public’s reaction to the Rihan-
na and Brown case. Blog posts and
comments that spoke out in sup-
port of Brown were common
occurrences online.
“Rihanna is totally faking the
whole thing and needs to get a life!
Chris Brown deserves way better
and needs to get a proper girlfriend
who won’t scam publicity and
money off Chris,” is how one per-
son reacted while commenting on
a VH1 blog.
“If that bitch needed her ass
[whipped] then so be it,” was
another comment made on
YouTube.
“There’s still a lot of tolerance
for people to say, ‘ I think she
incorrectly accused him [of some-
thing],’” Knabe explains. “It’s like,
if she hadn’t done [something
wrong], he wouldn’t have been
provoked.”
Another popular reaction to
this case of domestic violence
came in the form of humour. Sev-
eral YouTube parodies popped up
poking fun at the situation, as did
the terms “to Chris Brown some-
one” and “she got Rihanna-ed”
when referring to domestic abuse.
By making light of the situation,
the seriousness of the issue is
downplayed.
“What [humour] does is it nor-
malizes and trivializes the real
impact and trauma a situation like
this has. It also reinforces [and nor-
malizes] […] and the more desensi-
tized people become,” Hinds says.
“I think it is also a way that our
culture tried to deal with topics
that it really doesn’t want to neces-
sarily face. So humour often gets
used to deflect strong emotions
around things,” Knabe adds.
Misplaced blame and the ten-
dency for humour to trivialize
aside, there is some good to be
taken from the media’s coverage of
a high profile abuse case.
“Reporting on this […] creates a
catalyst. Reporting on it can get
people really thinking about it. Any
healthy dialogue about this issue is
a great opportunity,” Hinds says.
While talking about the issue of
domestic violence may be seen as
a positive, the discussion can be
limited in terms of its scope. The
diverse and complex nature of
domestic abuse can be over-
looked, and the important ques-
tions can forget to be asked in an
attempt to play off of the news
peg.
“The kind of conversation that
happens within the media […]
tends to actually not allow other
questions to get asked, like ‘what
did your friends do?’ ‘who knew
about this?’” Knabe explains. “So I
suspect that even though they used
[the case of Rihanna and Brown] as
a teaching moment, it was a very
narrow teaching moment.
“It’s very much a game for pub-
lic consumption that is not going
to look at the issue of domestic vio-
lence in a more systemic and sys-
tematic way.”

Is the beta male taking over Hollywood?

By Maddie Leznoff sentations of Hollywood.
Gazette Staff The terms alpha and beta come
from the Greeks, meaning first and
Is the Beta Male taking over Holly- second. It makes sense, then, that
wood? in the animal kingdom the alpha
Think of the typical male movie male is the leader — they get to eat
star — what attributes come to before the others and get their
mind? For many it’s probably qual- choice of mate. The beta male is
ities like hot, strong and brave. In secondary and less powerful.
Hollywood, these men are the When applied to humans
alpha males, and they generally though, the definitions change
embody our culture’s ideal man. slightly. Alpha males supposedly
Lately, however, the often over- possess ambition, aggressiveness
looked beta males have gained in and a dominant sexuality — they
popularity — they’re sensitive, lack are what many men aspire to be,
ambition and may not always be because supposedly these charac-
the easiest on the eyes. teristics are what attract women. In
Make no mistake, these hilari- Hollywood, these are the Brad Pitts,
ous betas are here to stay. Christian Bales and Gerard Butlers.
“In some ways, beta males So where does that leave the betas?
reflect our weariness with stereo- These days, it leaves them to play
typical, two-dimensional represen- hilarious roles, filled by actors like
tations of mas- Michael Cera, Jason Segel and Seth
culinity,” says Rogan. Thanks in large part to direc-
media, infor- tor Judd Apatow, there now exists
mation and a whole new genre of beta male
technocul- movies, such as Superbad, For-
ture profes- getting Sarah Marshall and
sor at West- Pineapple Express. The stars of
ern Selma these films are slowly re-defin-
Purac, who ing our current notion of on-
teaches a screen male sexuality through
course on humour, camaraderie and
repre- sensitivity.
“Perhaps what we
are seeing is a
return to a more
expansive
notion of what
constitutes
masculine sex
appeal — a
move away
from a narrow
focus on stereo-
typically mascu-
line physical attributes,” says Susan
Knabe, a MIT and women’s studies
professor who teaches a course on
sexuality in the media.
This is certainly true of Apatow’s
stock of males, as Rogan and Cera
aren’t exactly what one would call
classically sexy — they don’t boast
a six-pack like Pitt or biceps like
Butler.
Of course Apatow characters
aren’t the only betas on screen, and
that’s not to say beta males can’t be
good looking. The loveable Jim
Halpert character from The Office
can’t be overlooked, nor can Joseph
Gordon-Levitt’s character in 500
Days of Summer or heartthrob Zac
Efron in High School Musical —
though Troy Bolton may start off as
the typical alpha jock of East High,
he explores his full beta potential as
the star of the school musical.
Despite being easy on the eyes,
it’s not hard to find people who
value these men for more than their
physical appearance.
“I think that in a lot of ways [the
beta] is more attractive than the
cocky, self-centered, always-trying-
to-be-the-hero persona played by
alpha males,” says Marisa Damet-
to, a second-year MIT student. “A
good mix is probably the best, as
too much sensitivity or too much
confidence can be a bad thing.”
Others, on the other hand, tend
to think of the beta male negatively.
“They’re kind of feminine,” says
Kyle Graham, a second-year engi-
neering student. “I think they’re
funny, but I wouldn’t want to be
like them. You laugh at them, not
with them.”
Beta males, however, despite
sometimes getting a bad rap, have
always existed on screen.
“There have always been beta
type guys,” Knabe says. “Charlie
Chaplin was arguably a beta in
comparison with Valentino. Simi-
larly, Jimmy Stewart made a career
out of being this kind of guy.”
Even old Hollywood stars like
James Dean and Humphrey Boga-
rt, who were considered sex sym-
bols of their time, had beta quali-
ties.
“[James Dean] made a name for
himself in the 1950s by playing out-
casts who were both angst-ridden
and remarkably vulnerable — he
embodied ‘the sensitive man,’”
Purac says. “Bogart is not classical-
ly attractive — standing next to
Lauren Bacall, he looks like he
could be her butler.”
Although there appears to
be a rise in popularity of
beta male actors, alphas
arguably still rule the silver
screen. There was no short-
age of stereotypically mas-
culine roles last year with
movies like X-Men Origins:
Wolverine, Public Enemies
and Fast and Furious. With
anticipated releases like
Iron Man 2, Robin Hood and
Prince of Persia in 2010, the alpha
male is going strong.
However, if there’s any indication
the beta male is climbing the ranks,
Rogan is playing the lead in the film
adaptation of superhero comic The
Green Hornet and Jack Black will star
in Gulliver’s Travels — two roles that
could easily be played in traditional
alpha male style.
While the beta males aren’t like-
ly going to conquer Hollywood any-
time soon, their presence is unde-
niable and uniquely sexy — they
offer a realism alphas can’t.
“The alpha dog and the beta
male stand side-by-side,” Purac
says. “We want to lose ourselves in
escapist fantasies starring athletic
male superheroes, but we also want
to see ourselves onscreen —
those flawed but loveable
figures who are gener-
ally more realistic
and relatable.”
As long as direc-
tors like Apatow
keep making
movies, those love-
able, awkward but
always hilarious
betas aren’t going any-
where.

By Jesse Tahirali
Gazette Staff
I discovered a new personal fear
last week.
Apparently, going on dates with
strangers is just one of the things in
life that terrifies me. Maybe I took
the idea of “stranger danger” way
too seriously as a kid, but I spent
the hours leading up to the blind
date, which I was “volunteered” to
go on, freaking out in my room.
Being told not only that you’re
going on a date, but also that you
have to describe it afterward to any-
one who wants to hear about it is
pretty daunting. I must have
seemed like I was in need of a con-
fidence boost when two of my fel-
low editors picked me up to go out,
because what I heard before arriv-
ing at my date’s house was nothing
short of inspiring.
I was treated to something like
“that’s what you’re wearing? You look
stupid,” and, “By the way, her dad is
pretty important. You might have to
talk to him when you go to the door.”
As I walked up to her house to
meet her, I reminisced about the
times when saliva used to exist in
my mouth, and those carefree
summer afternoons that I didn’t
have to spend trying to avoid a ner-
vous breakdown. Then I knocked
on the door.
Thankfully, her important father
wasn’t the one to answer the door.
The young woman to answer the
door was way prettier than I was
expecting. In hindsight, this was
obviously awesome, but at the time,
in my mind, this just increased the
pressure.
When we returned to the car we
were told we were going out to din-
ner. My mouth was still dry as sand
during the ride over, so I’m pretty
sure I sat in silence the entire way
there. Pulling up to Coates of Arms,
where we were destined to dine, I
was given the instructions, “ask for
John. Tell him you’re Jesse.”
Don’t say Space Jam…
Not long after sitting down, we
both discovered one thing that
we had in common — both of us
had eaten not all that long ago,
and neither of us were particular-
theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010
ly hungry. At least incessant
chewing wouldn’t get in the way
of my clumsy attempts to make
conversation.
We managed to avoid extended
awkward silences during dinner,
and tried to get to know each other
as we picked away at our food. I
learned she studied film, which was
amazing for me, because I some-
how manage to see fewer movies
than just about every other person
I know. And by “amazing” I mean
whatever the opposite of amazing
is, and I prepared to be the worst
conversation partner ever.
As the inevitable question of,
“what is your favourite movie?”
arose, I tried to come up with an
acceptable answer. My internal
dialogue went something along the
lines of, “don’t say Space Jam, don’t
say Space Jam, don’t say Space Jam.”
My stupid mouth of course went
with “...Space Jam.” I promptly
rewarded my mouth by not letting
it eat any more dinner.
Even after explaining how my
favourite movie involved Michael
Jordan trying to save the world with
slam dunks, the night seemed to be
going fairly well. She didn’t receive
any suspicious calls that resulted in
her having to suddenly vanish, even
when I told her all about how I was
“basically, a physics and math stu-
dent who draws cartoons.”
The rest of dinner went proba-
bly as smoothly as you could expect
a blind date to go, and ended with
us both learning what exactly fried
cheesecake is — if you’re curious, it
looks like a spring roll. After
dessert, we called for our ride and
headed off to the next, pre-planned
portion of our date.
Beer-less bowling
Now, bowling isn’t something I usu-
ally do while sober. I explained this
to my date before we arrived at
Fleetway, and she seemed to share
a similar outlook on life. It was
either a similar outlook, or she just
didn’t dare interfere with a stranger’s
raging alcoholism. Either way,
before strapping on our bowling
shoes, we went to go grab a beer.
Well, we tried to, at least. Appar-
ently Fleetway offers as much alco-
hol as a Mormon McDonald’s. To
sex issue ➤ P5
my dismay, I was forced to quickly
prepare a new excuse to bust out in
case my first 10 shots happened to
be gutter balls.
My first few shots were promis-
ing, or at least were straight enough
to knock over some pins. However,
my stupid, gentlemanly hands
seemed to take over, and I ended up
letting my date beat me as I scored
a staggering 50-something points.
Thankfully, she didn’t do all that
much better, and we both seemed
to bond over being abnormally bad
at bowling.
We played a couple more games,
and I was able to flip my mercy
switch off to get my score into the
triple digits. For a game in which
the two participants are perpetual-
ly in different places, we still
seemed to be getting along well.
After finishing up and re-equip-
ping our normal shoes, we decided
to head down to Dairy Queen. We
agreed to split a slushie, and I was
assigned the task of choosing a
flavour with the advice of, “Anything
but purple. Or, maybe purple.”
Women are always playing slushie-
related mind games with me.
I decided on blue, because it
wasn’t purple, but it was kind of like
purple. The two of us sipped our
neon beverage, one of us managed
to avoid brain freeze, and we sat
around talking until we were
informed that Dairy Queen was
closing, and that it’d be pretty nice if
we left.
Expectations exceeded?
Overall, I would say the date went
well. In fact, after our official date
came to a close, she agreed to grab
a beer with me downtown. It was a
good way to cap off the night after
Fleetway failed to liquor us up.
I’m not exactly sure why I was so
distraught before going out that
night. It could have had to do with
the fact that, socially, I sometimes
have the grace of a newborn giraffe.
It could also have been the fear of
sitting down to write this article,
and having nothing more to say
than, “She didn’t really like me, and
I think I broke my wrist at bowling.”
Whatever the reasons, I’d like to
think that at the very least, I con-
quered one of my fears that night.
P6 ➤ sex issue theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010

2010 Sex Survey Results

14% still waiting
Notable
56
arena, fume hood on campus, jail What’s the strangest object % of respondents
cell at the London Courthouse. you’ve used to masturbate ? enjoy talking 40% of respondents have had 2 to 5
Long Answer The Gazette’s favourite answer…
Hair band around testicles, show-
er head, Kinder Surprise egg, pen,
during sex sexual partners
15% have had 6 to 10
Responses Got a handjob in classics 1000 lec-
ture in NS7 in first year while
highlighter, the (cylindrical) han-
dle of a hairbrush, once I shoved a
8% have had 11 to 25
3% have had 26 to 40
What is the strangest/dirtiest watching a movie on Pompei test tube up my ass, popsicle in a

thing you or your partner
have said during sex?
Wait, stop ... don’t you have a cello
lesson on Thursday?, Is it in yet?
Giv’er, I can’t believe I taught you
when you were 15, Skadoosh! If you
What’s your strangest fetish?
Light bondage and tickling, feet
being dominated in various ways,
walking my girlfriend on a leash,
ears, massive harems of women,
51
% of respondents
condom, a marker, ice cream have faked 2% of respondents have had sex
scoop, Xbox controller, whisk, an orgasm with a professor
inhaler, a pair of panties (stolen) 16% have had sex with a soph
from a close friend, fish tank air
pump, electric toothbrush. 6% of respondents have said the
wrong name during sex

don’t warn me when you’re going to
cum I’ll bite off your dick off, My
boyfriend is going to be pissed.
The Gazette’s favourite answer…
Once my ex-boyfriend shouted
doing it while I‘m trying on a new
dress at a department store, shav-
ing off body hair, pregnant
women, Burberry scarves, pop-
ping pimples, strip search, watch-
ing guys pee, Abercrombie’s
45
% of respondents
The Gazette’s favourite answer… masturbate 1 to 3
One time I came into a Frosty cup times per week 36% of respondents like to cuddle
from Wendy’s while watching up immediately after sex
Baby Blue 2 on CityTV when I was 26% like to clean up
like 16. Does that count? 8% like to sleep

out “Glencoe! That’s where the
tournament was!” right in the
thick of things. He was referring to
a hockey tournament I’d asked
him about two hours earlier…
In what public places
have you had sex?
Saugeen study room, movie the-
atre, library, SSC 2028, The Tasting
Room, UCC, Barking Frog, post
office, back room at Harvey’s after
hours — BF used to work there, on
the tank in Victoria Park, Italian
airport, Masonville Zellers, Cana-
da’s Wonderland bathroom, mov-
ing truck, Gazette office, tractor,
between Med and Syd, third floor
boardroom-style classroom in
University College — on top of the
table and walked out to a class
waiting to enter — Ooops..., bowl-
ing alley, Storybook Gardens,
Poacher’s Arms, roof of Thompson
“Fierce”, Photoshopping my own
porn, badminton.
We’re not going to touch any of
these…
Greatest lengths gone for sex?
Ran home (sprinted, actually) from
the bars at one in the morning,
made dinner, drove two hours for a
quickie, faked my age, pretended I
had to walk home alone and was
scared so I needed someone to
walk with me, sat through a terrible
amateur production of The Wizard
of Oz, I once covered my entire
body in Jello, kept a girlfriend I did-
n’t like for an extra year, buying a
cell phone and growing a beard,
ruining years of friendship.
The Gazette’s favourite answer…
Bought her a hot dog outside of
soph formal
Favourite role playing
situation?
I’m the king, breaking and enter-
ing, pirates, Princess Lea in a gold
bikini, vampire/prey, she’s a cow-
girl and I’m a wanted cowboy, the
only one I’ve done was a conve-
nience store owner and his cus-
tomer, I‘m Cookie Monster and
they are Big Bird, student-
teacher, whorecraft (World of
Warcraft role play), Batman and
Catwoman, princess and stable
boy, the “hit me” scene from Blue
Velvet, getting her to call me
Tiger, pretending to be a Hispan-
ic labourer pounding a rich
tourist, Mario Brothers, tennis
instructor and student, Snooki
and Pauly D from Jersey Shore,
Boy Scouts.
The Gazette’s favourite answer…
Mary and Joseph
26
% of respondents
have partaken in
first-year floorcest
36% of respondents are male
60% of respondents are female
7% of respondents are 18 or under
25% are 19
27% are 20
16% are 21
9% are 22
14% are 23 or over
2% blank
12% of respondents are not sexual-
ly active
24% of LGBT respondents are out
13% of respondents lost their vir-
ginity between 13 to 15 years of age
50% between 16 to 18
18% between 19 to 21
2 % between 22 to 25
12% of respondents have said “I
love you” for sex
18% of respondents have caught a
roommate having sex
12% of respondents have had a
threesome
4% of respondents have paid for sex
32% of respondents have role
played during sex
63% of respondents have been
involved in a friends with benefits
relationship
19% of respondents have made a
video with their partner
23% of respondents’ favourite posi-
tion is doggy style
19% missionary
10% girl on top
4% reverse cowgirl
theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010 sex issue ➤ P7
P8 ➤ sex issue
The great
marriage
debate
By Grace Davis
Gazette Staff
Love, flowers, food, music, stress
and happiness all combined into
one day — a wedding day. While
many people may fantasize
about that perfect wedding day
with the perfect dress or tux and
a decadent cake, most aren’t
ready for what comes after.
Instead, cohabitation has
become a popular choice.
Cohabitation has become
more common in Canada since
the 1990s. It’s often seen as
entailing fewer responsibilities at
the legal, economic and even
emotional levels, and is per-
ceived to be a freer lifestyle than
marriage since it’s a relationship
not bound by permanency.
Lara Descartes, an associate
professor in family studies at
Brescia University College,
emphasizes that, “there is less
taboo about living together
before or without marriage than
there used to be.”
“Cohabiting relationships are
less institutionalized than mar-
riage,” Descartes says. “That’s not
necessarily bad, but it does mean
that roles, boundaries and
expectations in the relationship
may be less clear, and it seems to
be easier to leave these relation-
ships, as they do have a higher
rate of dissolution than formal
marriage.”
“Obviously you can say that
you’re fully committed to each
other before you get married,
because we live in a culture
where commitment is relative,”
fifth-year student Esther Daly,
who is married, points out. “Even
when people do get married now
there’s still not that total commit-
theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010
ment because divorce is so
rampant. It’s not just your
perspective on people living
together before marriage but it’s
your perspective on marriage
that affects it.”
Although cohabitation has
become more common, many
people still say they want to get
married in the future. Popular
culture also supports the institu-
tion of marriage considering
many movies are focused around
a couple being engaged with the
climax being the wedding day.
“[Marriage] still represents the
cultural norm — even if divorce
rates are quite high — and of
course, it always makes a good
story,” Christine Roulston, femi-
nist researcher and associate pro-
fessor in the women’s studies and
french departments, says.
“In literature and pop culture,
there’s very often a focus on the
lead-up to marriage and on
the wedding day, as opposed to
the actual experience of being
married. Although couples mov-
ing in together rather than get-
ting married is a cultural reality,
it’s less appealing as a narrative
or storyline.”
So why the fascination with
marriage when people can sim-
ply move in together? Fourth-
year social science student Kari-
ma Betts, who has been with her
fiancé for about three years,
believes it has to do with the
human desire to be pursued.
“I think in every human being
there’s a deep longing to be
known and to be pursued, and
there’s something about mar-
riage that is almost like the ulti-
mate pursuit in terms of a rela-
tionship,” Betts says.
“I think that it’s [...] been dis-
torted in pop culture, especially
when you look at our celebrities
— they get married, they get
divorced then married again —
and it’s not so special anymore.
But I think that in our hearts
and in our minds there’s still
that longing for what it’s sup-
posed to mean, which is forever
[the] pursuit of loving someone
and choosing them […]. I think
the movie business and pop
culture plays off of that because
that’s what people are fantasiz-
ing about.”
“Today’s society is interesting
in terms of its relationship to
marriage,” Roulston says. “On
the one hand, it’s the norm for
couples to move in together
without being married, and yet
any survey of people in their
twenties will show that most of
them do plan to get married at
some point. So marriage is no
longer connected to the tradi-
tional values of one’s first-time
sexual experience or of starting a
family, but it still has a narrative
hold over our culture.”
A major idea that stems from
the marriage versus cohabitation
debate is that of commitment.
Julia* is a recent Western gradu-
ate and has been living with her
boyfriend, Jose*, since she grad-
uated. They moved in together
because it was the next step to
take in their relationship and it
was the most practical decision
in terms of housing. Jose says the
level of commitment in their
relationship wouldn’t change if
they were to get married.
“The commitment is the same
[as marriage],” Jose says.“I would-
n’t cheat on her nor would she
cheat on me. The only difference
would be financially in terms of
the shared bank account.”
“It would only be different in
that you decide to change your
name,” Julia adds. “This is basi-
cally what being married is; this
is what life would be like.”
Patrick and Esther Daly are
fourth and fifth-year students
and have been married since
August 2009. They dated for a lit-
tle under two years before getting
engaged, and didn’t move in
together until they said “I do.”
Both of them felt it was impor-
tant to fully commit to one
another before they lived togeth-
er, and their faith played a role in
that decision.
“We’re Christians and we
believe that God has set aside liv-
ing together for something in
marriage. Not because it’s a
moralistic law, but just because
He thinks that that’s the best and
is the best that’s going to work
out for [us],” Patrick says.
“The vow that you’ve taken to
each other, and not only before
each other but before witnesses
and before God, so you’re more
accountable to make it work,”
Esther says.
“Even if you get bored or frus-
trated or angry with whoever
you’re married to you’ll just have
to work through it instead of just
ending it.”
Since marriage is ideally a life-
long commitment, Julia and Jose
point out it’s important to really
know somebody before taking
that vow, and it’s possible to learn
about one another through
cohabiting.
“Spending a couple of days
with them and just seeing them
every once in awhile doesn’t tell
you what their habits are in a
routine,” Julia points out. “The
house is clean, but is it only clean
because you’re going over?”
“The counter to that would be
that ‘if you love the person, you’ll
love them through [everything].’
I just think that it’s important to
be realistic. You’ll learn about
everyday things, money, and
who’s doing what […] People get
into routines and in order to
become a part of a routine you
have to spend time with each
other,” Julia says.
Although marriage may be
the ultimate goal for many peo-
ple, we live in a culture where
independence is encouraged
and progressing as an individual
is often considered what’s most
important. Marriage requires a
lot of selflessness, which may be
why the number of successful
marriages is dwindling.
“If you get married and then
find out that they do something
really annoying, then you have
no choice but to work through it.
But if you’re just living with the
person, you might think ‘should I
bother working through it?’ It
makes for really cheap relation-
ships because you don’t have to
deal with anything,” Esther says.
“I find it’s a huge source of
comfort because even when we
do disagree or have issues we
know that this is a permanent
thing,” Patrick adds.
While the convenience and
instant benefits of living with a
boyfriend or girlfriend may be
too great to pass up for some,
there are some students like
Betts who have a passionate per-
spective on why waiting until
marriage is important.
“I think there’s something
about that relationship of living
with somebody that should be
special to the person that you
marry. So if I have already shared
all of my life with somebody,
every aspect of who I am, then [if]
I marry [a different person] what’s
so sacred about that relation-
ship?” Betts says. “I want to save
that for him and it’s my gift to him
when I marry him — this is my
life and it’s been sacred and saved
for you, not for anyone else.”
* Full names changed to protect
anonymity

Online dating shedding
traditional stigmas
By Nicole Gibillini
Gazette Staff
Dating sure isn’t what it used to be. The tradi-
tional approach to finding a mate — also
known as courting — has been abandoned
and replaced by a more efficient, non-con-
frontational method.
Welcome to a world of web-savvy soul
searchers, my friends.
“We often tend to think that technology is
new and that its effects are all-encompass-
ing. Of course, there have been lots of tech-
nologies introduced over time. Our fast-
paced environments combined with dis-
persed networks encourage the use of digital
media for communication,” explains sociol-
ogy and media, information and technology
professor Anabel Quan-Haase.
The argument of whether technology has
had a negative or positive effect on romantic
relationships isn’t an easy one to tackle. Are
we spending too much time hiding behind a
screen? Are long-distance relationships real-
ly more manageable with the convenience of
free services like Skype?
Rachel Greenwald, dating coach and New
York Times best-selling author of Why He Did-
n’t Call You Back, believes Facebook is slowly
becoming the newest form of online dating.
“I ask all my clients to send me their
online dating profile to edit it. But instead,
they ask me to edit [their] Facebook profile
because that seems to be more active in
[their] dating lives now,” she says. “It is
almost like the Facebook profile is the front-
line. People are beginning to use their online
dating profile as a last resort.”
The idea of being able to get to know some-
one over the Internet has revolutionized the
dating world. Although, when mentioning
sites like eHarmony or Lavalife to a university
student, the automatic response is almost
always, “are people actually that desperate?”
The answer is no, according to Greenwald.
“I think five or 10 years ago people viewed
it that way but today it is like saying Facebook
is a sign of desperation because you could
say, can’t you get your own friends in person?
Online dating is really just the same thing. It
is essentially a technology that allows you to
be more efficient in communicating with
people,” she explains.
University is a completely different world
when it comes to dating. Students are con-
stantly surrounded with people in their age
group. It can be easier for them to put them-
selves out there and meet people.
“University students have unique
lifestyles, almost nomadic where they move
between university, personal activities, their
residence or home and often work.
Their days are primarily structured by class
schedules and they have free time in between
— and often during —to be online, making
them highly connected and reachable.
“That is why these technologies are a sec-
ond nature to them. It is all normalized,”
Quan-Haase explains.
Even for those who don’t buy into the
whole online dating thing, they probably use
some form of technology to communicate
amidst a romantic pursuit.
Text messaging, for instance, is a big part
theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010
of communication for people in their teens
and twenties. It has become a common tool
used to pursue and maintain relationships,
but sending text messages to your love inter-
est can easily become a slippery slope.
A woman texting a man to tell him she had
a great time the day after a date is a prime
example. “Women don’t think it counts when
they send a text. They think they are being
polite and not pursuing him. They have to
realize that they are, in fact, pursuing him
and that — whether consciously or not — it
discourages him,” Greenwald says.
Technology has become a helpful and
almost crucial aspect of the dating game —
but what about those who are already in rela-
tionships — or better yet, in long-distance
relationships?
Twenty-year-old management and orga-
nizational studies student Josh Mack has
been in a long-distance relationship since the
start of university. “It’s definitely easier for our
generation to keep a long-distance relation-
ship going than our parents did.”
“I’m not certain how or if I could ever han-
dle being in a long-distance relationship
without the accessible technology that we
have today.” he says.
The easy access to technologies like Face-
book and Skype can, of course, have their set-
backs.
“As much as the new forms of communica-
tion can help a relationship, they can certainly
cause many problems. It’s amazing how much
trouble you can get in if you don’t respond to a
text within 30 minutes,” Mack says.
To say the least, technology has sparked a
whole new dimension of soul searching, but
it does have its uncertainties. “One of the
biggest complaints people have about online
dating is the disconnect between who some-
body is online and who they are in person. It
makes them not want to date online,” Green-
wald says.
Lying and false perceptions are always a
concern when it comes to online dating —
but maybe people are more inclined to
deceive someone in person.
Greenwald insists that, “online, somebody’s
picture may be more misleading, but in per-
son they can have a very charming personali-
ty and can deceive you just as much. I think
you have to be very cautious either way.”
The media has a big role to play in peo-
ple’s views about online dating. “Cyber-
world is often seen as this dangerous place,
where sexual predators can be found. This
is in part because the media tends to focus
on cases where unfortunately people have
had negative experiences. But overall, I think
that the Internet is a safe place,” Quan-
Haase says.
The Facebook factor
Social networking and relationships
By Shreya Tekriwal
Gazette Staff
Do you frequently visit your partner’s pro-
file page on Facebook? Have you ever felt
a tinge of jealousy when looking at pic-
tures of your partner posing with some-
one else?
What many individuals may not real-
ize is social networking sites such as Face-
book have a definite effect on individuals’
romantic relationships.
As stated in a recent study in the
CyberPsychology & Behavior journal,
“Facebook, by its very nature, provides
easy access to friends’ and partners’ infor-
mation, including changes to their profile,
additions of new contacts (termed
‘friends’) and messages posted on their
[Wall].”
“It seems Facebook uniquely con-
tributes to this experience and what we
found or seemed like was going on is that
Facebook exposes us to all this informa-
tion that we wouldn’t typically have access
to about our partner,” said Amy Muise, a
PhD candidate in applied social psychol-
ogy at the University of Guelph. Muise,
along with two colleagues, conducted the
abovementioned study and found Face-
book contributes to jealousy in relation-
ships.
“Deleterious effects on a romantic
relationship such as jealousy and suspi-
cion can be increased in such venues as
Facebook due to a constitutive misread-
ing of content added by other users,”
Kane Faucher, assistant professor of
media, information and technoculture,
added.
“Things like ‘it was great to see you last
night’ could be very innocent or can be
interpreted as a betrayal if you’re
in a relationship,” Muise said.
The study identified
four categories of jeal-
ousy-evoking situa-
tions, including when
one’s partner shows
interest in another per-
son, when another per-
son shows inter-
sex issue ➤ P9
est in one’s partner, when one’s partner
talks about or interacts with prior part-
ners and ambiguous scenes involving
the partner.
Muise noted while both men and
women face the same level of jealousy,
men tend to avoid visiting their partner’s
Facebook profiles while women continue
to do so.
“When women see something on
Facebook that triggers jealousy, they are
more likely to seek out information
about their partner. A lot more men told
us that they would never check their
partner’s page on Facebook […] they
tried to avoid getting into that vicious
cycle,” Muise said.
Faucher also mentioned more people
are using relationship statuses on Face-
book to act as the messenger for when a
relationship is over.
“Many times the public [is] being
informed at the same time as the affected
partner […] [This] can be particularly
humiliating for the affected partner. It is
more than being dumped by e-mail since
the dumping is being broadcast to an
entire networking of connections,” Fauch-
er said.
According to Gail Hutchinson, director
of psychological services at Western, sev-
eral of her clients have raised similar con-
cerns in regards to Facebook and other
social networking websites.
“I had students talk about their rela-
tionships statuses [on Facebook] and how
they didn’t know they were broken up. But
when they saw their Facebook, that is
what it said,” Hutchinson said. “Or they
have just broken up, and the other person
puts up [his or her status as] ‘Single’ right
away.”
Faucher suggested all new couples
should have a “Facebook talk.”
“Part of the ‘contract’ I propose would
be deciding in advance what is safely
public and what is sacredly private
[…] Perhaps, in the end, the best
course of action is in keeping
one’s relationship status private,
which may avoid any potential
future complications and
misunderstandings,” he
added.
P10 ➤ sex issue
Sex scandals: An American tradition
By Mike Hayes
Gazette Staff
Bill Clinton, Eliot Spitzer, Gary Hart,
Mark Sanford and Wilbur Mills: all
politicians, all connected by the
dubious distinction of career-
changing sex scandals.
Though America hasn’t really
cornered the market on political
sex scandals — it was recently
revealed Italy’s prime minister Sil-
vio Berlusconi has had quite an
appetite for prostitutes — the vast
American news cycle often puts
American politicians’ indiscretions
into the forefront.
Laura Stephenson, a professor
with Western’s department of polit-
ical science, felt the nature of the
American people also has a lot to
do with the attention given to polit-
ical sex scandals.
“I think the difference [between
America and the rest of the world] is
likely to do with the culture in
America,” Stephenson said. “We’d
look at Hollywood or New York and
say it’s sexually permissive, but the
average American is a lot more con-
servative in their views, which
makes a lot of these scandals far
more scintillating.”
But things weren’t always this
way. In the past, sexual indiscre-
tions were often overlooked by the
media. Over the years, stories have
surfaced about sex scandals involv-
ing presidents like Franklin D. Roo-
sevelt, Dwight D. Eisenhower and
John F. Kennedy.
“Clearly journalists following
Kennedy knew exactly what was
going on,” Don Abelson, chair of
the political science department at
Western, said. “[The media] cer-
tainly knew he was a womanizer
and that he was involved in several
extra-marital affairs.
“But there was a code that this
just wasn’t newsworthy.”
Of course, things have changed
since JFK’s days. Events like Water-
gate spurred a growing distrust of
government among citizens, and
the 24-hour news cycle has made
media look for content wherever
Forget the cuffs, role playing has evolved
By Meagan Kashty
Gazette Staff
Role playing isn’t just about nurses,
cops and school girl outfits any-
more.
People fantasize about a wide
variety of things. If we can dream
about winning the lottery or going
on a dream vacation, why exclude
fantasy from the bedroom?
For couples, role playing can
provide a way to bring some spice
back to a relationship.
“It’s an easy, cost effective, imag-
inative way to heighten sexual plea-
sure,” explained Michelle Everest,
psychology professor at Kings’ Uni-
versity College, adding exploring
fantasy and role playing is often
incorporated in a thera-
pist’s treatment of
individuals
possible.
“I think there’s certainly more
media now,” Stephenson said. “But
there’s also this idea that citizens
have the right to know.”
Abelson agreed: “The culture
has changed a great deal. By the
time we enter the late 60s and early
70s, this was fair game.
“In today’s world, it wouldn’t
have taken an assassin to end
Kennedy’s career — it would have
taken a post on the Internet.”
Abelson felt part of it came
down to the American public’s per-
ception of celebrity.
“As much as American people
like to put people up on pedestals,
they also love to tear them down,”
he said. “It speaks to a desire to not
only humanize these people, but
also point out they’re not perfect.”
One of the tipping points for this
change in media attention was Hart
— a senator from Florida who
sought the Democratic party’s
nomination for presidential candi-
date in the 1988 election. Soon after
he announced his candidacy,
rumours of marital infidelity start-
ed to surface.
Hart responded to these allega-
tions by daring the media to follow
him around, claiming he had noth-
ing to hide. Photos then surfaced of
a young woman sitting on Hart’s lap
on a yacht called Monkey Business.
The scandal effectively ended
Hart’s political career.
“The Gary Hart thing was stu-
pid,” Abelson said. “He’s not stupid,
but the sense of arrogance and enti-
tlement was what did him in.”
But a sex scandal doesn’t neces-
sarily mean the end of a political
career. Though the Monica Lewin-
sky affair dominated the news cycle
for most of the end of his presiden-
cy, Clinton’s political cachet seems
not to have suffered.
“Clinton was the type of politi-
cian who comes around once every
hundred years or so,” said Abelson.
“He had the capacity to combine a
strong intellect and reach out to
millions of people.”
Abelson recounted how Clinton
and couples.
While most people associate
role playing with costume, this is
not always the case. While cos-
tumes and props can make a sexu-
al fantasy setting more realistic, it is
certainly not a pre-requisite.
“There are so many different gen-
res [of role play],” Devon Timbrell,
owner of the Stag Shop in downtown
London said. “We sell tons of
related stuff on any given
day because [fantasy in
the bedroom]
encompasses
so many dif-
ferent things.”
Timbrell added
handcuffs and strap-ons are
in demand for role playing
games, but in regards to
dressing up, nurses and
police officers are the domi-
nating characters in role play-
ing games.
However, while couples still
have the option to stick to these
classic examples, as the times
change, so do the characters.
theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010
Notorious Sex Scandals
Wilbur Mills (D – Ark.)
In 1974, Mills was stopped in his
car by police in Washington,
D.C. Drunk at the time, Mills
was also accompanied by
Argentinean stripper Fanne
Foxe, who attempted to escape
by jumping from the car and
into the Tidal Basin. Several
weeks later, Mills delivered a
press conference from Foxe’s
dressing room at a Boston bur-
lesque house. He seemed to be
drunk at the time. Mills soon
stepped down from his chair-
manship of Congress’ Ways and
Means committee and sought
treatment for alcoholism.
delivered the State of the Union
address at the height of the Lewin-
sky scandal.
“Clinton walks in and delivers a
speech that will likely go down in
history as one of his best,” he
recalled. “He walked out of that
“[Choosing role playing char-
acters] has more to do with peo-
ple’s personal tastes,” Guy Grenier,
a psychology professor at Western,
said. “If you’re a big fan of Twi-
light, or if you’re really into Star
Wars or Harry Potter — it doesn’t
matter.”
Everest added modern sexual
fantasy doesn’t always have
to include couples.
“It can be
safer sex
behaviour
if it is
associat-
ed with
mastur-
bation or
cyber activi-
ty,” she noted.
Another form of fan-
tasy which is becoming increasing-
ly popular is a couple going out
into a public place and pretending
to meet for the first time. This con-
cept of couples being comfortable
in their present relationships pre-
tending to be perfect strangers is a
long jump from relationships in
the past, where being together in
public was key.
The increasing popularity of
Eliot Spitzer (D — NY.)
In 2008, New York governor Eliot
Spitzer cornered the market on
sex scandals. Following a steady
campaign of fighting against
organized crime, prostitution
and solicitation, Spitzer was
brought down after a federal
wiretap revealed he was using
the services of a high–priced
prostitution service. Investiga-
tions revealed Spitzer may have
spent as much as $80,000 on
prostitutes during his time as
attorney general and governor.
Within a week of the scandal
breaking, Spitzer stepped down
from office.
chamber like he was a rock star.”
Like their celebrity counterparts,
often the willingness of a politician
to atone for their mistakes
improves the chances of a career
rehabilitation.
As Abelson put it, “the interest-
swinger bars is also an example of
couples taking their relationship
outside of the barriers established
by society.
Grenier added fetishistic means
of role playing is becoming less
taboo. A combination of things like
plushy or pony play, as well as
BDSM, are examples of role playing
transitioning from a more tradi-
tional sense.
“That’s all about mixing themes
of power and control — submission
and dominance,” Grenier
explained.
While experts unanimously
agreed role playing is a harmless
means of adding excitement to a
relationship, Timbrell was hesitant
as to whether using cultural icons
was an effective choice.
“As far as famous characters, I
can tell my boyfriend to be Brad Pitt
as much as I want, but he’ll never
be Brad Pitt,” she explained. “I don’t
see much of a point to it.”
Ultimately the use of cultural
icons in the bedroom is a decision
to be made by the people involved.
“Identifying cultural characters
is a personal choice and different
characters suit different relation-
ship needs,” explained Grenier.
Mark Sanford (R — SC.)
Another governor who couldn’t
keep it in his pants, Sanford pre-
sents one of the more bizarre
scandals. In June of 2009, the gov-
ernor of South Carolina went
missing for several days, while his
aides claimed he was hiking the
Appalachian Trail. Unfortunately,
“hiking the Appalachian Trail”
actually turned out to mean
“meeting his girlfriend in Argenti-
na.” As the scandal grew, more
details emerged, including some
rather embarrassing e-mails.
Though impeachment was threat-
ened, Sanford is still in office until
his term expires in 2011.
ing thing about American popular
culture is that so long as people
come clean and acknowledge their
mistakes, the American people
have an unbelievable ability to
maybe not forgive, but certainly
overlook.”
No matter the choice for role
playing, safety is key for any couple
who choose to incorporate fantasy
into their relationship.
“There’s nothing dangerous in
[role playing] — but there are still
basic guiding principals,” Grenier
said. “Both people should be
doing what they want to do. If
someone is doing, or is being
forced to do something they don’t
want to, then that’s where there
are problems.”
Everest added couples need to
be wary their games are not their
only sexual interaction, and there
of no feelings of guilt or fear of
judgment when first trying fanta-
sy.
“Role playing should be fun and
stress free,” Everest said.
Grenier noted role playing is not
necessarily for everyone, and no
couple should feel obligated to try
sexual fantasy. However, role play-
ing is certainly an option for cou-
ples who feel bored or uninspired
in the bedroom.
“Having a sense of adventure,
playfulness and not taking yourself
too seriously — those are good
qualities to bring to a couple’s sex
life,” Grenier concluded.
 theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010 sex issue ➤ P11

I love you man… but let’s keep it platonic

By Abid-Aziz Ladhani
Gazette Staff
The term “bromance” has been
coined to mean an affectionate, but
non-sexual, relationship between
two males.
Popular culture is chockfull of
examples indicating a growing
approval for such relations — the
rapport in the new Sherlock Holmes
film between the title character and
his friend Watson was close to say
the least. Holmes even comes
across as clingy at various points of
the film, disapproving of Watson’s
desire to get married.
The MTV show Bromance fea-
turing Brody Jenner is another
recent example of how the term has
become popular.
And of course, Judd Apatow’s fleet
of bromantic comedy projects —
Knocked Up, The 40 Year Old Virgin,
Superbad — has fueled the genre.
“[Eve Sedgwick] suggested that
straight men often communicate
and relate to other straight men
through women,” Lily Cho, English
professor at Western, said. “The rise
of ‘bromance’ is interesting because
it seems to suggest that women are
no longer the currency through
which men express themselves to
each other.”
According to Cho, although the
language used to describe such
relationships is novel, the idea of a
bromance isn’t anything new.
“I’m not sure it constitutes a rad-
ical change from previous repre-
sentations of men’s relationships,”
Cho added. “Surely, the predeces-
sor of the bromance could arguably
be the kind of friendship you find in
the buddy film about which film
scholars have written extensively.”
According to Keir Keightley,
associate professor in the faculty of
information and media studies,
such relations are expressed freely
between men in particular cultures.
“In the Arab world, in Iran, in
parts of the Middle East, good
friends hold hands,” he said. “The
idea that there is some sort of sexu-
al dimension to that would be seen
as ludicrous.”
Keightley points to the growing
trend of sexualizing relationships,
which has accelerated in the 20th
century.
“[Such relations] were very com-
mon and were not seen as abnor-
mal or deviant. It’s only with the rise
of […] the hetero-homosexual
binary — the idea that one’s sexual-
ity exists in opposition to another
form of sexuality — […] [that a]
passionate friendship between two
men become seen as problematic
or even deviant,” he added.
Moreover, Keightley mentioned
the taboo over women’s homosex-
uality is diminishing women’s sexu-
ality as a weaker thing in western
culture.
“It’s a different set of regulations,
a different set of sexual regulations,”
Keightley said. “I think that’s what
makes us a little concerned about
bromances — it raises an issue only
to shut down a full discussion, and
what seems at first to be an open
minded exploration of the mascu-
line identity turns out to be a return
to the same old heteronormativity.”
Although bromantic relation-
ships remain the subject of giggles,
students appear to be comfortable
with such a relationship on campus.
“It’s everywhere,” Justin Leung, a
second-year social science student
at Western, said. “I guess I have one.”
“I think it’s adorable,” Kim
Wood, second-year social science
student, said.
Yet the humorous way in which
affectionate relationships between
two men are seen points to a larger
problem according to some, espe-
cially in regards to homosexuality.
“Bromance could be read as an
acknowledgement of an area of
anxiety that ultimately reconfig-
ures masculinity so as to maintain
its hegemony,” Keightley stated.
“The bromance ultimately reas-
sures us that liking another man
doesn’t make you gay, yet reiterates
the homophobic idea that being
gay is a problem.”

Macho men affection

The role and rules of hugging it out in sport
By Cheryl Stone
Gazette Staff
The arena of sport is traditionally
seen as a place where men can act
like men, and every teammate’s
greatest fear is being called “girly.”
However, a goal or a win can
send even the most macho of play-
ers into a hugging frenzy with their
teammates.
“There’s some head rubbing that
goes on, there’s some hand slap-
ping, some butt tapping. Generally
there’s a lot of hugging — one big
hug,” Patrick Johnston, libero on
the Mustangs men’s volleyball
team, said. “I’d say it just kind of
happens all the time.”
“You want to make sure that even
in the bad points you get together as
a team,” Jim Sage, coach of the team,
said. “We like to celebrate and it’s
important we celebrate.”
Part of this is the strong friend-
ships men make on the court,
according to Like Family: Power,
Intimacy and Sexuality in Male Ath-
lete’s Friendships by Michael A.
Messner. “[Teams] are often the
closest relationships that men ever
have,” he writes.
“We’re all best friends, so it kind
of helps we’re not too worried about
what other people think,” Johnston
said of the affection on the court.
According to Hegemonic Mas-
culinity, Friendship, and Group For-
mation in an Athletic Subculture by
Steven J. Harvey, these relation-
ships are built because of the
shared activities sport creates.
“Through their mutual experi-
ences in sport, the male relation-
ship develops a deep connection
that is based not on shared inter-
personal communication, but on
shared emotional experiences,”
Harvey explained. The shared emo-
tions and activities in sport allow
for men on sports teams to create
intimate emotional bonds.
“I guess you’re always just on the
court with everyone all the time […]
you’re just with your guys more,”
Matt Gibson, setter on the team
said. “It gets you closer I think, and
[…] as you get closer I think you get
more comfortable with your team-
mates and you rely on them. It
brings a team closer together so I
think we play better.”
Gibson was not the only player
who felt the affection made them
closer as a team, and made them
play better. “It really contributes to
the overall group cohesion,” Luke
Sim, middle hitter, said.
Harvey’s work argued the cohe-
sion came from the wins. “When a
team wins and all of the players feel
the same way, the team becomes
closer as a result,” he states.
“The public face that a team
attempts to present to the rest of
the world is that of a ‘family’ whose
shared goal of winning games and
championships bonds individual
members together,” Messner said
of the cohesion on sports teams.
Messner points out however
these teams can also have a dark
side. “Underneath the talk of
respect, love and closeness among
teammates lies another reality: ath-
letic teams, like families are also
characterized by internal antago-
nisms rooted in hierarchy.” Team-
mates are both in competition with
another team, but also in competi-
tion with each other for titles and
points.
Eric Simon, an outside hitter for
the Mustangs, explained the how
this manifests itself on the team.
“Generally whoever messed up is
not allowed in the group hug, it’s
just kind of how it happens. It’s not
really a rule, but kind of like an
unwritten rule.”
“I guess you just embrace them
in the heat of the moment,” Gibson
said. He also explained there was
not a need to remind teammates
the intentions of the hug. “Usually it
means good job though.”
Even though there is a lot of
good natured hugging on the court,
there is a minor rule, as Ulla-Britt
Lilleaas’ article Masculinities, Sport,
and Emotions explained.
“They can also hold and touch
other men’s bodies, but there are
also some restrictions for how and
what feelings the men can express
in matches. For instance, two men
kissing on the mouth breaks an
unwritten rule,” her work said.
“If it’s a big point maybe a little
cheek kiss […] whatever the heat of
the moment brings,” Johnston said
of the affection on the court. He
also explained that while this
behaviour can be “downtown or
wherever” off the court, it stays
between the teammates.
The players feel the affection is
an important part of being on the
team and a part of volleyball.
“People aren’t […] discriminat-
ed against for not being as affec-
tionate as others, but it’s kind of
better if you are,” Sim said.
“It’s my fourth year and I’ve yet
to have somebody not hug” John-
ston said. “I’ve played every sport
growing up and there’s nothing like
this.”
P12 ➤ sex issue theGazette • FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2010

All photos and graphics in this issue taken and composed by Laura Barclay, Brett Higgs, Corey Stanford and Stuart A. Thompson