Massachusetts Daily Collegian

Planned Parenthood can’t treat a sick society

By Yevgeniya Lomakina

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






A letter and apology from the Collegian editors

Editor’s Note: After discussion among the editors of The Daily Collegian, we have decided to restore Tuesday’s controversial column. Our editors have decided that, while we admit the decision to run was not made in solid judgment for our paper and, more importantly, our readers, we cannot hide that mistake and must own up to our bad decisions. We at The Collegian apologize for the offensive content in this column, but cannot take back what we have published. We will keep this column available as a reminder of what happens when we do not meet the journalistic standards that we strive to meet every day. While we realize that publishing this column has cast a negative light on our staff and publication, we will do our best to regain the trust of our readers and continue to raise our standards to a higher level.

Planned Parenthood, one of the largest health care clinics and the largest abortion provider in the United States, may lose its federal funding. It is a business. It is not, however, a charitable organization, as it is portrayed by its many supporters. Their services are not free, although they may be cheaper than regular hospitals.

According to the American Life League, Planned Parenthood performed 289,750 abortions in 2006. The number rose to 324,008 in 2008. However, the organization’s website misleads in reporting that abortions constitute only 3 percent of its services. In reality, it performs about 23 percent of all abortions performed each year in the U.S. The organization is also engaged in a number of morally questionable practices, such as opposing parental consent laws. They also support prescribing abortion pills without a doctor’s visit as well as the absence of ultrasound before abortion.

The problem, however, does not lie solely with Planned Parenthood or its practices. It lies within the values of contemporary American society where traditional values have widely been replaced with progressive thinking. .

The notion that sex be regarded only within the institution of marriage has nearly disappeared in modern American culture. It has been replaced by an abundance of sexual activity. This was promoted by feminist movements as “female liberation” – women having the freedom to have sex with anyone, anywhere. Ignited by the media and supported by many young females willing to become “liberated,” the trend took off.

Sex has become a service, like any other, but without fiscal exchange or shame. It is no longer associated with love, marriage or a committed relationship. In too many cases there is no expectation of any sort of emotional attachment. This feat was not accomplished by the pressures of a “male-dominated” society, but rather by the women themselves. They strive to keep up with being “modern” and “liberated.” The contemporary American female is advised to collect five or ten lovers, risk sexually transmitted disease, (some of which cannot be prevented by standard protection, like birth control) or, in the worst scenario, get an abortion. With the easy accessibility of noncommittal sex, men have gained or recaptured the upper hand in relationships. Women, instead of acclaiming “sexual liberation” have received, at the least, a bad reputation.

What is worse is that many women seem proud of their exploits. Sexual columnists such as Natalie Krinsky, who wrote “Chloe does Yale” before contributing a sex column to Yale Daily News, have flaunted into the spotlight. This is not exclusive to college campuses. Jessica Cutler, a staffer on Capitol Hill, posted her sexual adventures online and, after being fired, cashed in by posing for “Playboy.”

Today, sex with no strings attached is socially acceptable. If a young woman wears a promiscuous outfit to a party, then proceeds to drink and flirt excessively, she should not blame men for her downfall. She made a decision to dress a certain way, to consume alcohol and should be prepared to deal with the consequences. Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices. This is not to say that rape is inexistent. Sexual crimes should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

Furthermore, young women are starting to become sexually active earlier, pressured by the media, peers or psychological convictions. Often, they are not ready to face the consequences. If they cannot be responsible, they should not be having intercourse. But this is not the message they’re exposed to.

Abortion is also viewed in a different way. For many, it is no longer a last resort for victims of rape or in other emergencies. It is simply regarded as “Plan B.” In a Planned Parenthood YouTube advertisement for the “morning after” pill, a woman states the scenarios in which the product may be useful. “Accidents happen,” she starts, and then cites a number of them. These range from carelessness to the grim suggestion that, “maybe you were forced.” The ad ends with, “No matter how old you are if you are sexually active, it’s always a good idea to have some emergency contraception on hand ahead of time.” However, the ad is misleading. It makes virtually no distinction between forgetfulness and rape. These should not be held to the same standard at all.

Furthermore, the ad seems to encourage sexual intercourse at any age; all that is needed is birth control. Throwing condoms at the public, a method often used by Planned Parenthood, is ineffective. More contraception does not translate to fewer abortions. Parents should stop relying on exterior organizations to provide their children with sex education. Instead, they should look within the family structure. If sex is presented to young people in a proper and moral context, then unplanned pregnancy would be less of a problem.

Yevgeniya Lomakina is a Collegian columnist. She can be reached at [email protected]

 

131 Comments

131 Responses to “Planned Parenthood can’t treat a sick society”

  1. christine on February 28th, 2011 9:49 pm

    Amen! I am ashamed how many women trade their hearts desire for Mr. Right now…and heartache..where did all our self esteem go? Have some real “balls” ladies and hold out for your perfect mate….don’t sell yourself short.

  2. Ben on February 28th, 2011 9:49 pm

    lose not “loose”
    And what about kids who grow up in broken families without effective role models to teach them a moral code of conduct?

  3. Matt on February 28th, 2011 9:57 pm

    What an absolute piece of self-righteous garbage. The author, clearly a right-leaning gal who undoubtedly is for smaller government and individual freedom (who can argue against that), spews positions that are clearly in contradiction to individual choice and freedom. In addition to promoting the erosion of personal freedom, the author also incorrectly mixes discordant data and statistics in an effort to squeeze out a statement in support of her premise. Instead, what we’re left with is a poorly-written, logically broken diatribe that fails to sway the reader with cogent arguments for why America is apparently in moral decline and why abortion is bad. I assume this was the direction of the article, since no new or original thoughts have come to light since Roe v. Wade. It’s the same dry arguments repackages for each generation. This article lacks common sense and thoughtful insight. Instead, the article is an accusatory piece on the apparent failings and shortcomings of America. Further, the article fails to account for anything that falls outside the perceived narrow band of what the author feels is right for America and for woman’s individual freedoms.

  4. Vanessa on February 28th, 2011 11:15 pm

    Well written opinion piece however I have one correction. You state: “… the organization’s website misleads in reporting that abortions constitute only 3 percent of its services. In reality, it performs about 23 percent of all abortions performed each year in the U.S.” That makes no sense.

    Planned Parenthood aren’t saying that they perform only 3% of the countries abortions, they’re saying of the services they provide to individuals, only 3% are abortions. That may very well be 23% of the countries abortions but of the services Planned Parenthood provides that only 3%… so they haven’t mislead anything.

  5. Emily on March 1st, 2011 12:24 am

    Ms. Lomakina,

    When I first began to read your article, I was convinced that it must be satire. Unfortunately, I was mistaken. As a person who is has never taken Plan B, gone to a Planned Parenthood, and who does not engage in “sex with no strings attached”, I was offended by your article on multiple levels.

    The idea of sex being regarded only within the institution of marriage has nothing to do with the movement for “female liberation”. While sexual liberation was part of both waves of feminism, sex outside of wedlock was not the primary goal. Women used to be solely attached to their identity as wives and as mothers, and what you term as “female liberation” allowed for women to explore their sexuality and to see themselves as individuals instead of as a part of a domestic role that they were obligated to fill. There is no need to blame a movement that alloted you the right to vote, work for equal wage, and have every opportunity the U.S. can offer for what you consider to be a “sick society.”

    When you term sex a “service” you essentially name every woman having sex outside of wedlock a prostitute. It is not your place or anyone else’s to deem whether or not someone’s sex life is morally acceptable. Your statement that women have sex because they are trying to be “liberated” and “modern” is unbelievable. Women engage in consensual sex because they want to and, in this country, are free to do so. While you personally may not choose to do this, your moral code does not dictate that of the nation. While I have read Cosmo, I have never felt pressured by any magazine to “collect” any number of lovers. You, for some reason have decided that women are incapable of making choices based on what they want instead of fulfilling some need to “stay with the times”. Saying that the accessibility of noncommittal sex gives men the upper hand in relationships is also a load of bullshit. When it comes to sex, men will always have the upper hand because they cannot get pregnant. Also, the last time I checked men certainly had the upper hand in the society where morality reigned supreme, women waited for sex until marriage, and then were relegated to the domestic sphere with no hope for financial independence or a way out if they found that they did not like their life.

    What is wrong with being proud of sex? Proud of STDs would be disgusting, but sex is natural and fun. Men are constantly proud of their sexual exploits and yet you make no mention of their moral bankruptcy. Talk about a double standard, Yev. If I wear a short skirt to a party and flirt with boys, I do it because it is fun to flirt and feel sexy, not because I want to have sex. This portion of your article is the most upsetting. Calling a rape victim a victim of her own choices is apprehensible and you should honestly be ashamed. If courts of law saw things the way in your point of view, and there was a time that they did, then countless rapists would go unpunished. Women should not be required to wear burlap sacks because some men can keep their dicks to themselves. You are a lunatic, not to mention completely short-sighted if you think so.

    Obviously it is easy to say that you shouldn’t be having sex if you aren’t ready to be a parent. This, like most things, is easier said than done. It is also easy to say don’t drink until you’re 21 and you will never risk getting ticketed or put in jail. Don’t speed if you don’t want a ticket. Don’t write idiotic self-righteous articles expressing outdated and biased opinions that annoy almost everyone in the world. These things are easy to say. Clearly, people don’t always do what would be considered to be 100% moral. There is only one Jesus, and there is even some disagreement over that. You point the finger at an add that promotes a product that leads to less abortions and unwanted pregnancies for blurring the line between forgetfulness and rape. Maybe it’s a bad advertisement, but it helps put awareness for the product out there. Whether or not you like it (and clearly you do not), people are going to have sex. Sometimes those people will be drunk or caught up in the moment. In order to prevent getting pregnant or having an abortion, they take Plan B. It’s not telling 13-year-olds to go have sex because there are no consequences to sex, just that people of all ages who are sexually active should protect themselves from unwanted pregnancies.

    Finally, obviously parents should take the reigns in educating their children on safe sex. Thankfully mine did. Sadly, however, we do not live in a perfect world where ever child is afforded good parenting. School systems cannot always be counted on to relay sex education in an effective manner, if at all. It is an unfortunate truth, but a truth nonetheless. More contraception may not result in fewer abortions, but less contraception would certainly result in more. Try and entertain more than one perspective the next time you want to write an article that devalues a national progressive movement, calls the majority of women prostitutes, and effectively undermines an important effort to decrease the number of unwanted pregnancies in the U.S.

  6. Boris Ilfov on March 1st, 2011 12:52 am

    ^^^Matt

    It seems it is yourself rather than the author who is touting an indigestible shit-rant sandwich.
    The author has highlighted a very real problem within American society. Clearly, she is not dismissing the idea of abortions or pills, but criticizing the various guilt-remedies of her generation.
    Read Sylvia Plath’s “The Bell Jar”- the scene where the protagonist has sex with a sleazy wop shows this blurry line between what is considered rape and what is choice. The fact is, even the protagonist doesn’t know. I think this is point in the article here, cowboy 😉

  7. Sam on March 1st, 2011 12:55 pm

    This article is a self-pandering piece of fear and attention mongering. if I already believed that Planned Parenthood was evil, or that abortions are morally reprehensible, I would love this piece. Unfortunately, as I recognize the value of both of these things in a modern society, this piece fails rather spectacularly to convince me that I’m wrong.

    Your implication that liberated females are sluts (

    Rather than accomplishing anything for your cause, you have merely flailed around, made a bunch of noise, and created yet another focal point for hardliners from both sides to lash out at each other.

  8. Sam on March 1st, 2011 12:55 pm

    This article is a self-pandering piece of fear and attention mongering. if I already believed that Planned Parenthood was evil, or that abortions are morally reprehensible, I would love this piece. Unfortunately, as I recognize the value of both of these things in a modern society, this piece fails rather spectacularly to convince me that I’m wrong. Instead, I come away a little offended at the blatant and stale generalizations about my society and 50% of its population, the insensitivity to moral and social issues beyond your dislike of Planned Parenthood.

    You imply that liberated females are sluts (who “have sex with anyone, anywhere). You suggest that women just “take off with this trend” – that sex “become a service… without fiscal exchange or shame”. Why? Oh, because women, in their drive to “keep up with being “modern” and “liberated”” (things I thought were kinda good for women), apparently become huge hussies. Women are “advised to collect five or ten lovers”? Who are you listening to?

    You absolve any “pressures of a male dominated society”, then you go and complain how men have “reclaimed the upper hand in relationships” due to “easy accessibility of noncommittal sex”. Please don’t pretend you’re for women’s rights if your narrow definition is the right to be a good housewife with a faithful husband. Equality means equality – equal opportunities, equal choices, equal challenges and difficulties – not the protection of some idealistic definition of “womanhood”.

    Of course, you sum up your rather extreme diatribe with a quick salute to
    the values of the family structure, and the “proper and moral context” that will make everything better. Well done.

    Rather than accomplishing anything for your cause, you have merely flailed around, made a bunch of noise, and created yet another focal point for hardliners from both sides to lash out at each other.

    As a pro-choice, pro-Planned Parenthood student of a Massachusetts university, I’m honestly disappointed if this is the most educated and best written expression of the views of the other side that the Collegiate can find.

  9. Sam on March 1st, 2011 12:56 pm

    Sorry, accidently posted a draft of my comment. Mod – feel free to remove the first draft and this comment, if you like.

  10. Stephanie on March 1st, 2011 1:36 pm

    Emily, I wholeheartedly believe you should have written the editorial piece instead!

  11. Jenna on March 1st, 2011 1:36 pm

    I was going to bring up the use of your misleading statistics, but luckily someone else did that for me. (3% of planned parenthood services is not 3% of the country’s services). If you want to be a journalist at least get your facts rights.

    Second, I can’t believe umass published this. Articles about issues up for vote in legislation should be unbiased; as this one clearly is not. I’m not arguing for or against planned parenthood, I’m arguing for the responsibility of writers to create informational and unbiased pieces so that people can make a decision about it for themselves.

  12. amaresh on March 1st, 2011 2:07 pm

    shoo, shoo … go away, don’t write such garbage again ….

  13. pete on March 1st, 2011 2:16 pm

    What a self righteous rant.

  14. Jenn on March 1st, 2011 2:17 pm

    I knew a little boy that made the choice to get on his bike. Then he decided to ride it down his road. He got hit by a drunk driver. He’s not a victim of drunk driving. He’s a victim of his own choices. It’s not the case that drunk driving doesn’t exist, but if you ride your bike in the road, it’s like you’re asking to get hit. It really was the kids own fault, and you know, I bet he dented the car.

    This example follows the same logic as your promiscuously dressed woman. They are both ridiculous, incorrect and ignorant.

  15. Rachel on March 1st, 2011 2:23 pm

    Good job having absolutely no citations to back up your assertions. Quality journalism.

  16. Emily Thompson on March 1st, 2011 2:27 pm

    I understand this is an opinion piece, but I feel some of the claims you are making have not been backed with enough discussion or evidence to strongly support your view. Please provide logical arguments sustaining following unsupported statements made in your article:

    – “[Sex] is no longer associated with love, marriage or a committed relationship.”
    – “The contemporary American female is advised to collect five or ten lovers, risk sexually transmitted disease, (some of which cannot be prevented by standard protection, like birth control) or, in the worst scenario, get an abortion.”
    – “With the easy accessibility of noncommittal sex, men have gained or recaptured the upper hand in relationships.”
    – “Today, sex with no strings attached is socially acceptable.”

    In addition, I have a comment on the statement you make here:

    “If [young women] cannot be responsible, they should not be having intercourse. But this is not the message they’re exposed to.”

    I believe this is the statement companies such as Planned Parenthood is exactly trying to make. Be careful here not to negate the thesis of your article.

    Also please provide a reference in a refereed Journal supporting the following statement:

    “Throwing condoms at the public, a method often used by Planned Parenthood, is ineffective. More contraception does not translate to fewer abortions.”

    I can send references of studies done that show the opposite is true, if needed.

    Thank you in advance for addressing these comments. If you are unable to, then I would suggest this article should be published on an online blog or chatroom where the rules of journalism do not apply rather than in our University’s newspaper. Unsupported claims of this nature are dangerous and can be misleading in themselves.

  17. Anna on March 1st, 2011 2:35 pm

    “If a young woman wears a promiscuous outfit to a party, then proceeds to drink and flirt excessively, she should not blame men for her downfall. She made a decision to dress a certain way, to consume alcohol and should be prepared to deal with the consequences. Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices.”

    Um, no one deserves to be raped. There is a difference between making the choice to sleep with people consensually and having someone force himself on you. You clearly have not been a victim or know anyone who has ever been a victim of sexual assualt. You should be ashamed of yourself.

  18. Kim on March 1st, 2011 2:43 pm

    “She made a decision to dress a certain way, to consume alcohol and should be prepared to deal with the consequences. Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices.”
    Um.. excuse me?

  19. UA on March 1st, 2011 2:43 pm

    We, in the first place, should question the education given to you. You blame women being raped? I am sorry but this is as sick as what rapists do. They would definitely agree with your article.
    On the other hand, your article contains full of logical fallacies. Where are you references in the article? You just mention many things like they represents the reality but you provide no valid arguments for your ideas. I am shocked such an article was published in daily collegian!

  20. Abby on March 1st, 2011 2:57 pm

    “If sex is presented to young people in a proper and moral context, then unplanned pregnancy would be less of a problem.”

    It’s called PLANNED parenthood, lady.

  21. Cat Versailles on March 1st, 2011 3:11 pm

    Although the author makes some keen observations on some issues in American society and their acceptance of sex and the morality of it, I will say that I found this article to be a bit offensive. I am very close friends with a woman who was a victim of a rape. She was at a party, not drinking but there to socialize, and was attacked by a man who was also not drinking: he just thought it would be fun to do. She in no way brought this upon herself, nor was she a victim of her own choices.

    I believe that you have some very strong personal opinions on this matter and that you do raise a few good points of concern for society but I would strongly caution you to reconsider the severity of your accusations against modern women. Just because some of us choose to not wait til marriage does not make us any less respectable or responsible; it just means we made a different choice than you.

  22. Andrew Meade on March 1st, 2011 3:13 pm

    “Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices.”
    This is an unacceptable sentiment. If a woman says to stop, it is rape. If a woman is unconscious, it is rape. If a woman is threated, it is rape.

    I’m sure legally questionable cases exist, but the author’s statement, by mentioning rape, suggests that nonconsensual sex is occurring. The author implies that the woman’s behavior absolves the man involved of responsibility, because “she was not a victim of rape.” Blaming the victim for a crime is unacceptable an immoral.

    There are numerous statements in this article that are either false or factually unsubstantiated. I believe availability of contraception and family planning leads to a healthier safer society. But I will leave that for another poster. My issue is that this article goes beyond arguing for family values. It implies that people who are sexually active outside of marriage deserve to have bad things happen to them. You can argue that sex can have negative impacts, but it is reprehensible to suggest that a victims “amorality” is the cause of what is an inexcusable crime.

  23. wtf on March 1st, 2011 3:14 pm

    A woman should be able to wear whatever she likes without fear of being raped. RAPE is still RAPE. Implying that a woman raped based on what she wears (and even drinking, I dare say) being her fault is just another 1-dimensional view of pettily excusing such a horrendous crime. Men are not robots that have no choices themselves – if what a woman wears or drinks is the cause of them attacking her, it is THE RAPIST’S FAULT and theirs alone. The lack of education on this that STILL exists in society today is quite unnerving.

  24. frustrated on March 1st, 2011 3:16 pm

    What a sad, misinformed piece of garbage. What about men who engage in promiscuous sex? Double standard, anyone?

    Woman-on-woman sexism is one of the greatest tragedies of this generation.

  25. E.W. on March 1st, 2011 3:18 pm

    While it is your opinion that the sexual freedom enjoyed by our generation is inappropriate and uncalled for (I respect that), in no way do you have any right to call a rape victim a “victim of her own choices”. Whether they are sober or inebriated, rape is FORCED upon them; they have no choice. The choice is in the hands of the rapist, and they choose to disrespect their victim. And just because a sexy outfit and some drinks are involved, it does not justify a woman being sexually accosted against her will. Plenty of girls dress this way to make themselves happy and to have fun with their friends, and aren’t necessarily on the prowl for sex. Should a woman’s freedom to express herself be quelled just because some men out there are misguided and can’t control their own sexual yearnings? I think not.

    Please think more about what rape actually constitutes before defending it. You’re obviously misguided in your understanding of the act; go read up on what it is, how it makes people feel, then see if you can justify it.

  26. Russell on March 1st, 2011 3:25 pm

    “If a young woman wears a promiscuous outfit to a party, then proceeds to drink and flirt excessively, she should not blame men for her downfall. She made a decision to dress a certain way, to consume alcohol and should be prepared to deal with the consequences. Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices. This is not to say that rape is inexistent. Sexual crimes should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.”

    If she didn’t say this, she would just be an idiot. Because of this, she is evil.

  27. Julia on March 1st, 2011 3:43 pm

    o Abortion
    o Birth Control
    o Emergency Contraception (Morning After Pill)
    o General Health Care
    o HIV Testing
    o Men’s Health Care
    o Pregnancy Testing & Services
    o STD Testing, Treatment & Vaccines
    o Women’s Health Care

    What is this, you may ask? This is a list of services provided to the public by Planned Parenthood. Why is abortion first? The list is ALPHABETICAL–not in order of importance.

    Take away funding for Planned Parenthood and you don’t just take away funding for abortions and birth control. If Planned Parenthood crumbles, millions of Americans–that’s women AND MEN–will be without basic reproductive health care. If PP goes down, I’m willing to bet cancer rates go up.

    No one is encouraging anyone to have sex, only to be responsible about it if they do.

  28. Alex on March 1st, 2011 3:43 pm

    ^^^Boris
    Calling Matt’s comment an “indigestible shit-rant sandwich” is just as biased as you think he is. Whether or not his comment is a “shit-rant” is up to the reader, but it is important to recognize that Matt is not attempting to call his comment an Op-Ed, unlike Lomakina. He is merely summarizing the thoughts that he and most likely others held with regard to this piece. What’s more, no one can deny that Lomakina butchered both statistics and the idea of “female liberation.” If you didn’t follow these arguments, then you clearly were not reading with an open mind.

  29. This article on March 1st, 2011 3:46 pm

    Is extremely offensive on one of many fronts. If you’re going to insinuate that a woman is a victim of rape due to her own choices, you are gravely mistaken. You clearly have no experience getting to know rape victims and as one myself, I am absolutely disgusted with your audacity to say such a thing. You have no idea what kind of emotional and psychological damage rape imparts on a young woman because of the pure fact that she is unable to control the situation, let alone any other aspect of the situation. Disgusting.

  30. Julia on March 1st, 2011 3:53 pm

    “However, the organization’s website misleads in reporting that abortions constitute only 3 percent of its services. In reality, it performs about 23 percent of all abortions performed each year in the U.S.”

    That 3% is not the same statistic as the 23%. They aren’t misleading anyone. That’s three percent of all services provided by planned parenthood versus twenty three percent of all abortions performed in the US. Surely we all had to pass statistics to graduate high school? What that information means is that 97% of what Planned Parenthood does is completely unrelated to abortion and 77% of all abortions performed in the US each year are done by someone else.

  31. Terry on March 1st, 2011 3:59 pm

    Matt is absolutely right. This article is disgusting. The author has no right to tell anyone who they can and cannot sleep with. The fact that she embraces some absurd, Puritanical moral code does not mean that she can extend that to anyone beyond herself.

    And Boris, is it hypocritical to describe someone as “touting an indigestible shit-rant sandwich”? That sentence alone seems to exemplify exactly what it refers to. And the argument that choice is not always a line in the sand is irrelevant because a woman should have the right to an abortion regardless of why. And that’s not the message of the article, anyways. The message of the article is “All you UMass women who aren’t saving yourself for marriage, you should be ashamed and I’m going to try to take away your right to an abortion, even if someone slips pills in your drinks because you were drinking, which is just another form of prostitution.”

  32. mara on March 1st, 2011 4:17 pm

    First of all, as already stated by other comments this person has made several grammatical and logical errors in this piece of writing. For the sake of not being redundant I will not rehash them here. I will say that this author has a right to their opinion, however I refuse to accept anyone else’s standards on how to conduct myself. It is not your right to judge others on how they dress or conduct their sexuality. Nor is it your place to even begin to talk about what a rape survivor experiences. Had the author ever experienced anything close to rape this would sound very different. There is this idea perpetuated that Americans must define rape in order to justify how they conduct their bodies. This is no one’s choice or decision but their own. Also, the problem with American society is the fact that we, as Americans, have the right to judge others based on standards that don’t apply to the 21st or any other century.

  33. Josh on March 1st, 2011 4:21 pm

    Can I get some more talking points please? I am nearly out. While I appreciate the old standbys like “if you dressed slutty and drank then its not really rape” and “can’t we go back to the good old days when marriage was about love and female sexual slavery?”
    I feel like you missed some other cliched phrases that show an ignorance for recorded history, a self righteousness that shows either privilege or callousness, and a judgment on kids these days.
    Wherefor art thou “and whats with the rap music?”
    Why can’t I get a “a fetus is the most important thing because it is a LIFE (until it gets born because I don’t want to think about what it takes to raise a child)”?
    Did I accidentally miss the “and while you’re at it ladies, stop complaining if your husband hits you with a stick” or was it truly not there at all?

    Sigh. Its just so hard being a Republican here in Massachusetts. All these people with facts and figures about how abortions have no long term mental health effects and shit: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/26/abortion-mental-health_n_814582.html

    Why can’t they just accept that I’m right and that sex is wrong?

  34. Al S. on March 1st, 2011 4:33 pm

    Collegian, please screen the comments more carefully. Does the Collegian now accept ethnic slurs on its website? As an young man with an Italian heritage, I take offense to Mr. Boris Ilfov’s use of the word “WOP”, which is a derogatory word used to denote Italian immigrants, as it once meant “With-out-papers.” In a sense, it is an Italian’s “n-word”.

    And I understand that the Collegian wanted to publish a shock piece, but this article is just garbage. Yes, it is an editorial, but it seems more like a conservative Christian rant that is not backed up by any facts, instead playing off of whatever stereotypes Fox news drums up about young women.

    The writer should be ashamed of her classification of her own gender, and I am upset that the Collegian allowed itself to be an instrument of filth-spewing ignorance.

  35. Disgusted and Saddened on March 1st, 2011 4:41 pm

    This is positively revolting, poorly written, badly argued, ill-informed, misogynist bullshit. Ms. Lomakina should be ASHAMED that she published this despicable article. I cannot honestly believe that this is coming from a college-aged woman in the state of Massachusetts.

    This article BLATANTLY blames sexual assault survivors for “asking” to be raped without so much as a mention to rapists: “If a young woman wears a promiscuous outfit to a party, then proceeds to drink and flirt excessively, she should not blame men for her downfall. She made a decision to dress a certain way, to consume alcohol and should be prepared to deal with the consequences. Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices.”

    This degree of ignorant misogyny proves that the person who is “sick” in this situation is YOU, Ms. Lomakina. I am saddened and disgusted that I even have to make this comment at all.

    STOP blaming and lambasting women for their own rape.

    STOP denigrating Planned Parenthood for the wonderful free health services they provide.

    STOP imposing your sex-negative, ignorant views on people of all genders everywhere who ALL deserve to carry on healthy, happy, safe sex lives.

  36. Mike on March 1st, 2011 4:42 pm

    Some of the physics graduate students have taken offense to this article, but when I read it I found mostly insightful observations about the ‘party’ girls of our country.

    I wish more women had better morals, dignity, and reservation. Alas, the media is to blame, and most people buy into the media.

    Tough part is finding a nice ‘non party’ girl.

  37. Tom on March 1st, 2011 5:30 pm

    One of the main issues I have with this is that you do not address that MEN are like that too. We, however, do not have to “deal” with the consequences of being pregnant. Nor do men tend to be physically assaulted and/or raped. That said, I do not like promiscuity. I see some of the problems it can cause and I do not think that women OR men should act in this way. Does dressing in certain ways draw unwanted attention at times? YES. Is it in ANY way excusable for anyone to assault someone because of this? NO. I also think your article does not bring anything new to the discussion of abortion, it is just typical rhetoric that anti-abortion people make.

  38. Veronica on March 1st, 2011 5:36 pm

    I am so sick of hearing these attacks on women, based on archaic moral values designed to control women through shame and victim blaming.

    Rape is not the consequence of what a person is wearing, or where they are, or how much they drink. It is the direct result of one person deciding to rape someone. That’s it. It’s a simple concept, really.

    Absolute rape-condoning, victim-blaming misogynistic trash. I’m disgusted.

  39. Candace on March 1st, 2011 6:06 pm

    Let me begin by saying, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. However, when you are writing a op/ed piece you are still held accountable to your audience to be forthright as well as engaging. I agree with Vanessa, if you are going to use statistics to back up your point do it correctly. You should also have more than one source, that way if you goof on one, you have plan B (pun intended). Your editor should have caught that before it went to print.

    Another problem I had with this article is the lack of information about Planned Parenthood losing its funding or the author’s actual opinion on the program, more over what about the other services planned parenthood provides? Is there moral ambiguity in those? What are they? Majority of the article only rambles on about popular culture in todays society.

  40. Barry on March 1st, 2011 6:08 pm

    Please, do let us in on your “family structure” Yevgeniya. What sex is proper and moral? What do you do about the abuse waged by men, single and married? I applaud Emily’s remarks. What do you have to say about men’s sexual exploits? Your article sounds like a veiled religious diatribe. There are many problems with human relationships in society. Let’s start with capitalism and men’s choices, and stop blaming women for the failing Christian-centric version of “family values.” Sex is good. Family is good. Respectful sex with or without the intention of producing a family is by far the best.

    Now, I don’t know if you are a Christian, and I have no problem if you are, but for those who think a fetus is sacred, please explain this passage: “And if men struggle with each other and strike a woman with child so that she has a miscarriage, yet there is no further injury, he shall surely be fined as the woman’s husband may demand of him; and he shall pay as the judges decide.”(NAS, Exodus 21:22-24). I know it’s Old Test, and some cherry pick their values from it, but Jesus also lived by the golden rule. Apparently god thought a fetus had a monetary value for men. If a woman doesn’t want an abortion, she shouldn’t have to have one. If she does, society should respect her bodily existence and right to prevent a birth she DOES NOT WANT. To me, since abortion is constitutionally protected by judges (majority male I might add), women have legally won their freedom from the reproductive exploitation of men. Infuriatingly, men’s actions toward women are always ignored in the attacks on abortion rights. Women still suffer the psychological and physical abuse of men (and some women) for wanting control over their own bodies and must continue to fight to keep others from oppressing them again.

  41. Sara on March 1st, 2011 6:14 pm

    Yevgeniya,

    While others before me have surely touched upon similar points, I’m enthusiastic at the opportunity to constructively criticize your editorial, in essence, to pick it apart piece by piece.

    Firstly, I’d like to commend you on your introductory paragraph’s attempt to propagandize the organization of Planned Parenthood by distinguishing it as a “business” as opposed to a “charitable organization.” This was your first example of a poorly written article, as you do not utilize language as the technical tool it truly is. If you’d been a bit more careful in your description, I would not have been so immediately aware of how clumsily put together this entire article is. When you make the claim that Planned Parenthood is flat out “not a charitable organization,” you must be cautious of misinforming your audience. Planned Parenthood is indeed a charitable organization. I would refer you to their website’s section titled, “About Us,” as it thoroughly explains the role of charity within their organization by providing seemingly endless examples of how their organization uses charity to help our communities. In the way your article seems to create them, this section of PP’s website (among others) really helps to clear up common misconceptions, which seems to be a chief concern of yours.

    The next paragraph begins with a statistic you intended to be startling, the 324,008 performed abortions in 2008. While I respect a good rhetorician’s value of an alarming statistic, I think you can do better. And if not, I can. The National Child Abuse organization also has a very explicit website, in which similarly alarming statistics much like yours, are given light. While it’s easy to slap a number on to the amount of prenatal gestations that were prevented from occurring, it might be that less attention is drawn to the number of children reported as being abused by their families. Quoting the statistics section of the National Child Abuse website, “In 2007, approximately 5.8 million children [in the US] were involved in an estimated 3.2 million child abuse reports and allegations.” I’d challenge you to disagree that 5.8 million isn’t also a devastating number. In making the decision to prevent 324,008 births from taking place, it can be assumed that at least a fraction of those individuals would choose not to bring lives into this world in a selfless manner, that which ultimately protects the unborn from a life that may include neglect, improper living conditions, or even abuse. Do not so quickly label the choice of getting an abortion as irresponsible – as time goes on in today’s modern society, the argument against yours becomes increasingly weighted.

    Great segway. You move on to shift the blame from Planned Parenthood in order to target today’s contemporary society. You make the bold statement that a “notion” has shifted from sexual conduct being appropriate within the institution marriage to …not-so-much. You could not have had a more vague, four-sentence paragraph. Where are your references? I have no clue whether or not you’re comparing 2011 to 2003, or whether you’re comparing 2011 to America’s original, puritanical past. But even then, women were giving birth at much younger age than today. And while we’re on the topic of colonial times, it seems appropriate to draw attention to the close relationship between their emphasis on what leading a “good” life would mean and what you certainly flaunt yours to be – a morally “good” society, using good as a euphemism for god. Your article sings of religious contempt. Despite the cloak of vagueness you drape over your writing, you do make a loose reference to America’s time of female liberation. To be more specific, I’d like to add that while you interpreted the Womens Suffrage Movement as a rampancy of women’s sexual behaviors, the female liberation actually had much more to do with issues concerning reproductive rights, domestic violence, maternity leave, equal pay, voting rights, sexual harassment, and sexual violence. Yours is a much more insulting view of the movement, but thanks much to it, all opinions (even yours) are welcome.

    The point you make next may be more insulting, however, as you instigate that sex is “no longer longer associated with love, marriage or a committed relationship.” I don’t think I have to refer to organizations or statistics to argue with that point. I’m sure there are enough out there who have experienced what’s largely referred to as ‘heartbreak’ to argue that feelings certainly are involved with sexual engagements. I know you’re exaggerating to prove a point, but using the rhetorical technique of exaggeration as your best coercive tool may not have been your best strategy for success.

    You move on to highlight two female individuals among our society who prove to be deviants in both public and sexual spheres. Do you notice what I did there? I carefully and subtly used the word “deviant,” in order to describe a situation that does not fit the norm. This means that you’re using outliers as representative of a larger society. If you haven’t already fulfilled your Sociology requirements, here’s just a heads up: This is a big no-no. Any right-minded member of academia within the Sociology department would call you out instantly on your failure to provide accurate information.

    Then, we move on to what is arguably your most outrageous perspective throughout your editorial. You use a lot of words to say that a Plan B advertisement does not distinguish between forgetfulness and rape. I’d counter that with why should it? Plan B is not a quick-fix for rape victims. You’ve missed the point of the ad entirely, only to include it in your piece in such a way that helps you makes the very strong assertion that you are in fact one of the cold, callous individuals that believes that a woman who falls victim to rape did in fact “deserve” it. Wow! Even the assertion brings any woman with common sense to a boiling point. Keep in mind now that your audience is primarily the Umass community, consisting of over 20,000 undergraduate students, roughly 10,000 of those being female. Of the 10,000 female undergraduates, I wonder how many would agree that if they wear a “promiscuous outfit to a party,” proceeding to “drink and flirt excessively,” and then find themselves victim of rape, that they should not put any responsibility on the male counterpart that did commit this state and federal crime. Better yet, seeing as all states and the nation as a whole deem rape a crime, it seems the vast majority would not only disagree, but would be at least appalled at your view point, as well as disgusted. I would encourage you to take a step back from your extremist standpoint regarding rape as a one-sided event and look at the situation from multiple perspectives. You should understand that there may at least be a grey area, that responsibility for one’s actions may not solely depend on one half of the participating members, especially when one is forcing the action while the other may not desire it, may refuse it, or may even beg against it.

    Putting yourself in the spotlight of the above mentioned theoretical scenario may help you to gain a more broad perspective. Until then, while your frightening opinion is welcome, I am so glad that it, like your statistics, does not reflect or represent the deciding majority of today’s contemporary society.

    –And to the person above me who referred to someone as a “cowboy” followed by a winking smiley face: That exotic world play pretty much cancels out any of the credibility you may have had earlier in your posting… just sayin’.

  42. SMH on March 1st, 2011 6:18 pm

    So what about me? What about a young woman who wore a tasteful outfit that was not revealing? Who gets to judge my outfit? Where do I stand as a GIRL that has been raped? Do I, as a rape victim have any standing in your mind? Do I as a Christian girl have any access to adequate healthcare from Planned Parenthood? I did not want to have sex before marriage, but the man with control issues in my life thought otherwise. So, until YOU are held down and forced to take being raped, and YOU are pregnant with your rapist’s child I suggest you keep your idiotic opinion to yourelf. Or, as I’m sure your future husband will tell you.. “Get back in the kitchen and stop having an opinion.”

    PS) I doubt my church would have funded my abortion. And I doubt anyone would fund yours either you ignorant twit.

  43. sades on March 1st, 2011 6:20 pm

    Boris matt is absolutely right and his rant just spoke for every single enraged student upon reading this disgusting article. Thank you matt for ur clarity and bravery. Applause to you. I can hardley believe that this article was even published. Collegian FAIL. Even more fail to the author

  44. Heidi on March 1st, 2011 6:26 pm

    This isn’t the 1950s. Women can have sex just as any man is able to. They also have the right to afford crucial medical exams, regardless of their financial background. So what if a woman wants to have an abortion? It is a huge medical and financial burden if you are not willing to go through it. Even if the woman decides to put the baby up for adoption, she still has to be able to afford medical bills, a budget for a healthy diet, maternity clothes, medicine, etc. Pregnancy holds medical risks to the mother as well. All women have every right to not have to alter their lives for something they may not truly want. And witholding sex is not always the answer. It is a normal part of life (even certain non-human animals have recreational sex or masturbate), even if a baby is not the plan, and carries some major health benefits. Birth control has come a long way, and proper education about these methods is crucial, but they are not 100% effective. Even the most careful women get pregnant. This is the 21st century, women are no longer treated as property. The amount of sexual partners one has is none of your business!

    Furthermore, a rape victim is NEVER at fault for being raped! It is the fault of the rapist for forcing and coercing the victim to have sex against his or her will! By blaming the victim, you are encouraging crime! (and don’t even compare it to wearing a diamond necklace in a bad part of town. As I’ve mentioned before, women are not property!)

  45. Victoria on March 1st, 2011 6:35 pm

    I thought this article was supposed to be about the cut to Planned Parenthood’s funding, a siding with the cut, and why it is useless to the SOCIETY. It takes two to tango. Just because there is a large contingent of women who embrace womanhood (sometimes overwhelmingly) doesn’t mean men don’t act the same way. Yes it may be a woman’s own demise if she dresses slutty, drinks, and asks for it. But similarly men have are just as guilty. If men go to a party, drink, and start coming on to women, it’s not society’s fault if they could be called “daddy” within the next nine months. There is no need to completely bash one half of the problem without looking into the other half.

  46. M on March 1st, 2011 6:52 pm

    Rape is about POWER not attractiveness! Rapists don’t rape someone just because they are “so hot that they couldn’t control themselves!” It’s as much an act of violence as shooting someone! Women can get raped no matter what they wear (they can even get raped if the have taken self defense classes, though self defense is a great skill to know).

    You have every right to voice your opinion, but I also have every right to voice mine. Please educate yourself (maybe even speak to some rape survivors), before you touch the subject of rape again!

  47. EJ Clairmont on March 1st, 2011 6:56 pm

    Terrible article and terrible author.
    Take away abortions, that will fix your fantasy problem of women having too much sex and not holding out for “Mr.Right” like your childhood fairy-tales told you to do.

  48. Rob on March 1st, 2011 7:05 pm

    Boris, you forget who wrote the article in the first place. Matt’s response was a defense to these ridiculous arguments.

    It baffles me to no degree when I read articles like this, but I’d like to ask why it is just this that’s right and what’s “progressive” now adays is so wrong?

    Why is it that women going out, or people dancing, or people not going to church are acceptable in this society. In what would be considered a devilish society a few centuries ago, it seems as though you’ve selectively chosen the time period you want to support.

  49. Andria on March 1st, 2011 7:07 pm

    This article has simply left me in awe. I feel more pity for you, Lomakina then anger at your complete ignorance and blinded vision. If only you had received proper sex ed this unfortunate piece might have been avoided. The term “Abortion pill” was made up by anti-plan B activists. The pill itself doesn’t work if you are already pregnant, it cannot terminate a pregnancy, it was designed that way. And Planned Parenthood doesn’t do abortions, they give referrals to doctors at hospitals who perform them. And yes 289,750-324,008 abortions is a large number, but regardless of how big it is, it is still only 3% off all the services Planned Parenthood provides. The majority of their resources is aimed at educating young people in how to be safe with sex which in turn would prevent future abortions.
    Your comment about women as “far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices.’ entirely offends me. You obviously know nothing of what its like to be in that sort of situation. Almost one year ago a friend of mine was celebrating her 22nd birthday, so she dressed up, wanting to look nice and went out to dinner and a few bars. On walking to her car a man approached her complimenting her on how nice she looked and proceeded to sexually assault her. By your reasoning, that was her fault wasn’t it? She shouldn’t have dressed up, and shouldn’t ever again right? Perhaps a a full length amish gear dress would’ve saved her in our modern world?

    I hope you see the error in way you see the world

  50. Michelle on March 1st, 2011 7:12 pm

    Oh, you’ve written an opinion piece? Well, here’s a piece of mine.

    1. The statistic you quoted in the second paragraph makes absolutely no sense. Abortion as the percentage of the services that Planned Parenthood provides and the percentage of abortions performed in the US overall are two completely different things. No, the website was not misleading.

    2. “lose,” not “loose.”

    3. There is no such thing as an abortion pill. If you’re thinking of Plan B, you’re sorely mistaken.

    4. There is nothing wrong with replacing traditional values with progressive ones. “Progressive” implies positive change. If you’d really rather have your traditional values instead, then drop out of college and hang out in the kitchen.

    5. Who “advises” the contemporary American female to “collect” lovers? I sure haven’t been advised by anybody or anything to do that.

    6. Your generalizations of sex are just that – general. Generalizations will get you nowhere if you’re trying to make an argument.

    7. Girls who dress a certain way and who drink at parties are NOT asking to be raped. Yet you’re implying that it’s the girl’s fault if she was raped. Then, when you say that “Sexual crimes should be punished to the fullest extent of the law,” are you saying the girl should be punished? After all, the point of punishment is to punish the ones who are at fault for a crime.

    8. Plan B advertisements have NEVER implied that forgetfulness and rape should be held to the same standard. YOU are being misleading. Also, have you considered different scenarios other than ones that prove your point? What if a couple in a committed relationship is having responsible sex, but the condom breaks? Are you going to look down on them for using Plan B, Ms. Moral?

    9. “If sex is presented to young people in a proper and moral context, then unplanned pregnancy would be less of a problem.” Isn’t that what the Catholic missionaries who went to Africa tried to do? Oh, did that reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies? No, not really. Did accelerate the spread of HIV/AIDS? Heck yes! Look, woman. Young people are horny, and they’re going to have sex, even if Mommy and Daddy have told them that sticking your body parts in other people’s body parts is bad. I hope you understand this someday.

  51. Shannon on March 1st, 2011 7:41 pm

    “However, the organization’s website misleads in reporting that abortions constitute only 3 percent of its services. In reality, it performs about 23 percent of all abortions performed each year in the U.S”

    EXACTLY! THEIR services (which include various other things besides abortions) are not the same thing as total US abortions. Learn to read.

    “[The institution of marriage] has been replaced by an abundance of sexual activity.”

    Prove it.

    “Sex has become a service, like any other, but without fiscal exchange or shame. It is no longer associated with love, marriage or a committed relationship. In too many cases there is no expectation of any sort of emotional attachment.”

    Again, prove it. Don’t state your opinion as fact.

    “Today, sex with no strings attached is socially acceptable. If a young woman wears a promiscuous outfit to a party, then proceeds to drink and flirt excessively, she should not blame men for her downfall. ”

    Did you ever consider that women are comfortable with their bodies, and that your criticism against women being “sluts” has NOTHING TO DO with Planned Parenthood providing services to those who could not afford it? Have you considered that you are perpetuating the very stereotypes you rail against?

    “Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices. ”

    This is appalling. Going to a party to have a few drinks and flirt is NOT the same thing as getting raped. What are you even talking about and why are you mentioning rape in this context? Also, how DARE you belittle rape in this manner. I am ashamed of you as a fellow woman.

    Additionally, you are incredibly misinformed about the difference between an abortion and the morning after pill. The morning after pill prevents pregnancy, as opposed to terminating it. It prevents attachment to the uterine wall, and at that point, it is merely a sperm and an egg. Not a child.

    There are many legitimate medical reasons to perform abortions- be it for the woman’s health, in cases of rape, incest, etcetera. Denying funding to Planned Parenthood (funding which is already NOT used for abortions, as is required under federal law) removes this opportunity to many women who could not afford it otherwise. It is an attack on the lower classes by the upper class.

    “Throwing condoms at the public, a method often used by Planned Parenthood, is ineffective. More contraception does not translate to fewer abortions. ”

    Prove it, you nutjob.

    “If sex is presented to young people in a proper and moral context, then unplanned pregnancy would be less of a problem.”

    WHAT??? I have nothing more to say to you. Don’t mix YOUR OWN PERSONAL morality with a political issue of funding a health organization.

    PS- the reason sex education is publicly available is to provide a way around PEOPLE LIKE YOU for those who want to be educated about these matters, as a matter of personal health and safety.

  52. AR on March 1st, 2011 7:46 pm

    “inexistent” is not a word.

  53. Becky on March 1st, 2011 7:59 pm

    Frankly, I’m appalled this was published. Unplanned pregnancy happens regardless of societal context. Planned Parenthood provides an educational resource for young women in addition to a safe, sterile form of abortion instead of the more dangerous and infection-prone back alley version that would happen in any sort of world. Yes, the institution has its flaws and its merits. Personally, however, I would rather have a couple making an important decision not to bring a baby into the world that they are not ready to support than a young woman seeking a frantic, dangerous alternative.

    Furthermore, your personal opinions on premartial sex should not even enter into a debate about Planned Parenthood. Your opinions are simply that and you can live your life however you want. Making blanket judgments about societal values is ridiculous when discussing an institution, even one related to the act. The fact that you bring up long since decrepit feminist lingo stuns me. If you want to drag that into this, you might as well discuss the abstinence movement (and its high rates of failure and STD spread).

    The next time you choose to write such an ambitious article, get a few more statistics to support your argument and try to leave your opinionated broad judgments out of it.

    Thank you.

  54. Ellen on March 1st, 2011 8:19 pm

    Collegian, it is abominable that you would even post this. As a previous UMass student, I know that UMass is a school where alot of parties occur, and at those parties, I assume there are often inappropriate incidences. This article essentially condones rape from a male perspective, placing all of the blame squarely on the female’s shoulders. This is reprehensible, and if anyone’s opinion is swayed by this, congratulations, you have clearly stated that men are not responsible for acts of rape and molestation.

  55. Julie on March 1st, 2011 8:21 pm

    Your article is disgusting. You make it sound like not only are women asking to be raped, but that they should be because then they would acquire more “lovers” as society is apparently asking them to do. For me to begin to list the other reasons why this article is so horribly offensive would be an obscene waste of time. Please consider reading your articles before publishing them in the future.

  56. Carol on March 1st, 2011 8:24 pm

    This article is a sexist piece of shit. I legitimately cannot believe how many genuinely offensive things are crammed into it.

  57. Sylvain on March 1st, 2011 8:29 pm

    I’m unsurprised that there is at least one person on the DC staff that feels this way, and despite my utter disagreement, I respect her right to those opinions. What I do not, however respect, is the choice on the part of the editors to allow something so poorly written and riddled with inaccuracy, misrepresentation and outright lie into the paper. As several others have mentioned, in the first three paragraphs, there are misrepresentations I believe to be purposeful, casting Planned Parenthood in a negative light. Also I would hesitate to call Planned Parenthood a business, as it is an up until recently government sponsored enterprise designed to provide a service and not to amass revenue. Whether the practices and opinions of Planned Parenthood in regards to the parental-consent laws are indeed questionable is completely dependent on the reader, and in this case the author, and should not be put forward in such an opinionated fashion in an allegedly journalistic endeavor. With another article of indeterminate bias, I think perhaps Ms. Lomakina deserves more editorial oversight than she currently receives. If this piece was intended as an Editorial, I believe it should be indicated as such somewhere about the page, however if it was not, there is a problem. Slanted journalism is a proverbially slippery slope into morally reprehensible habits and machinations. You need look no further than your evening news on some channels to know this. Neither sympathies towards Ms. Lomakina’s point in this article nor a possible sad lack of editorial rigor should prevent such slanted and broadly offensive content to be printed.

    I would advise a higher level of caution in the future, and consideration towards the public at the present, in the removing of this content.

    As an aside to the author, I find your article truly disgusting, and I pity you.

  58. Matt on March 1st, 2011 8:35 pm

    It is amazing the broad and sweeping statements that you make about women in America today with no basis or factual information to back it up. It is quite a claim that “Sex has become a service, like any other, but without fiscal exchange or shame. It is no longer associated with love, marriage or a committed relationship” and “young women are starting to become sexually active earlier, pressured by the media, peers or psychological convictions”. What were your sources for the article? Or as I suspect are these personal views that you are presenting as “facts”?

    Your statistics about abortion percentages are written in a misleading way to support your point instead of providing us with actual facts. Despite being 23% of America’s abortions, abortions only take up 3% of planned parenthood’s services. Other services include breast cancer screenings, relationship counseling, other forms of contraception, OBGYN services and other general health care services. WIth the state of Health Care in America today, Planned Parenthood provides a very important service to those who are uninsured or underinsured. To eliminate it on the basis that abortions are performed there is to eliminate an essential health care service provider in America.

  59. Keshia on March 1st, 2011 8:59 pm

    There isn’t much I can say beyond what the people above me have already posted, but I was so offended by this article that I couldn’t, in good conscience, stay silent. This poorly written article was reprehensible and disgusting. Your biased arguments were utterly offensive and I’d thank you to not push your outdated, right-wing views of morality on us, especially if you are trying to justify a man’s right to rape.

  60. Kristina on March 1st, 2011 9:02 pm

    Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices. This is not to say that rape is inexistent. Sexual crimes should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

    ^ You should probably review consent laws and read what the definition of rape is because you CLEARLY do not know what you are talking about. A person dressing a certain way or consuming alcohol does NOT give an excuse for someone to rape them. You are truly SICK for thinking that rape can EVER be justified. Because of this victim-blaming attitude, rape remains a huge problem in our society today. Do you really think that a girl who wears a short skirt or drinks alcohol has made the choice to be raped? Rape is a heinous crime and the perpetrator is the only person in the situation who has a choice. You owe rape survivors a HUGE apology.

  61. Nate on March 1st, 2011 9:08 pm

    The writer is entitled to her opinion. But as others have said, she is not entitled to use misleading and false information to provoke an emotional response. In particular, her victim blaming when it comes to rape is appalling. As I said, she’s entitled to her opinion. And I’m entitled to think she’s a close-minded, shortsighted, woefully uneducated and over-priveleged young woman. Come on, Collegian, you must have better writers than this.

  62. seriously? on March 1st, 2011 9:10 pm

    This article is absolutely appalling for the reasons everyone else has already covered. Not only does the author owe rape victims an apology, but I would like the Collegian editorial staff to explain how and why they ever allowed such an inaccurate, misleading article that blames rape victims for the crimes committed against them to be published under their banner.

  63. DUHL on March 2nd, 2011 4:01 pm

    Yevgeniya,
    While others before me have surely touched upon similar points, I’m enthusiastic at the opportunity to constructively criticize your editorial, in essence, to pick it apart piece by piece.
    Firstly, I’d like to commend you on your introductory paragraph’s attempt to propagandize the organization of Planned Parenthood by distinguishing it as a “business” as opposed to a “charitable organization.” This was your first example of a poorly written article, as you do not utilize language as the technical tool it truly is. If you’d been a bit more careful in your description, I would not have been so immediately aware of how clumsily put together this entire article is. When you make the claim that Planned Parenthood is flat out “not a charitable organization,” you must be cautious of misinforming your audience. Planned Parenthood is indeed a charitable organization. I would refer you to their website’s section titled, “About Us,” as it thoroughly explains the role of charity within their organization by providing seemingly endless examples of how their organization uses charity to help our communities. In the way your article seems to create them, this section of PP’s website (among others) really helps to clear up common misconceptions, which seems to be a chief concern of yours.
    The next paragraph begins with a statistic you intended to be startling, the 324,008 performed abortions in 2008. While I respect a good rhetorician’s value of an alarming statistic, I think you can do better. And if not, I can. The National Child Abuse organization also has a very explicit website, in which similarly alarming statistics much like yours, are given light. While it’s easy to slap a number on to the amount of prenatal gestations that were prevented from occurring, it might be that less attention is drawn to the number of children reported as being abused by their families. Quoting the statistics section of the National Child Abuse website, “In 2007, approximately 5.8 million children [in the US] were involved in an estimated 3.2 million child abuse reports and allegations.” I’d challenge you to disagree that 5.8 million isn’t also a devastating number. In making the decision to prevent 324,008 births from taking place, it can be assumed that at least a fraction of those individuals would choose not to bring lives into this world in a selfless manner, that which ultimately protects the unborn from a life that may include neglect, improper living conditions, or even abuse. Do not so quickly label the choice of getting an abortion as irresponsible – as time goes on in today’s modern society, the argument against yours becomes increasingly weighted.
    Great segway. You move on to shift the blame from Planned Parenthood in order to target today’s contemporary society. You make the bold statement that a “notion” has shifted from sexual conduct being appropriate within the institution marriage to …not-so-much. You could not have had a more vague, four-sentence paragraph. Where are your references? I have no clue whether or not you’re comparing 2011 to 2003, or whether you’re comparing 2011 to America’s original, puritanical past. But even then, women were giving birth at much younger age than today. And while we’re on the topic of colonial times, it seems appropriate to draw attention to the close relationship between their emphasis on what leading a “good” life would mean and what you certainly flaunt yours to be – a morally “good” society, using good as a euphemism for god. Your article sings of religious contempt. Despite the cloak of vagueness you drape over your writing, you do make a loose reference to America’s time of female liberation. To be more specific, I’d like to add that while you interpreted the Womens Suffrage Movement as a rampancy of women’s sexual behaviors, the female liberation actually had much more to do with issues concerning reproductive rights, domestic violence, maternity leave, equal pay, voting rights, sexual harassment, and sexual violence. Yours is a much more insulting view of the movement, but thanks much to it, all opinions (even yours) are welcome.
    The point you make next may be more insulting, however, as you instigate that sex is “no longer longer associated with love, marriage or a committed relationship.” I don’t think I have to refer to organizations or statistics to argue with that point. I’m sure there are enough out there who have experienced what’s largely referred to as ‘heartbreak’ to argue that feelings certainly are involved with sexual engagements. I know you’re exaggerating to prove a point, but using the rhetorical technique of exaggeration as your best coercive tool may not have been your best strategy for success.
    You move on to highlight two female individuals among our society who prove to be deviants in both public and sexual spheres. Do you notice what I did there? I carefully and subtly used the word “deviant,” in order to describe a situation that does not fit the norm. This means that you’re using outliers as representative of a larger society. If you haven’t already fulfilled your Sociology requirements, here’s just a heads up: This is a big no-no. Any right-minded member of academia within the Sociology department would call you out instantly on your failure to provide accurate information.
    Then, we move on to what is arguably your most outrageous perspective throughout your editorial. You use a lot of words to say that a Plan B advertisement does not distinguish between forgetfulness and rape. I’d counter that with why should it? Plan B is not a quick-fix for rape victims. You’ve missed the point of the ad entirely, only to include it in your piece in such a way that helps you makes the very strong assertion that you are in fact one of the cold, callous individuals that believes that a woman who falls victim to rape did in fact “deserve” it. Wow! Even the assertion brings any woman with common sense to a boiling point. Keep in mind now that your audience is primarily the Umass community, consisting of over 20,000 undergraduate students, roughly 10,000 of those being female. Of the 10,000 female undergraduates, I wonder how many would agree that if they wear a “promiscuous outfit to a party,” proceeding to “drink and flirt excessively,” and then find themselves victim of rape, that they should not put any responsibility on the male counterpart that did commit this state and federal crime. Better yet, seeing as all states and the nation as a whole deem rape a crime, it seems the vast majority would not only disagree, but would be at least appalled at your view point, as well as disgusted. I would encourage you to take a step back from your extremist standpoint regarding rape as a one-sided event and look at the situation from multiple perspectives. You should understand that there may at least be a grey area, that responsibility for one’s actions may not solely depend on one half of the participating members, especially when one is forcing the action while the other may not desire it, may refuse it, or may even beg against it.
    Putting yourself in the spotlight of the above mentioned theoretical scenario may help you to gain a more broad perspective. Until then, while your frightening opinion is welcome, I am so glad that it, like your statistics, does not reflect or represent the deciding majority of today’s contemporary society.

  64. Brandi on March 2nd, 2011 6:26 pm

    My main problem with this is how poorly it was written, not the content of the message. The Collegian consistently publishes things that I totally disagree with and find very offensive. But her article was just a rant with nothing to substantiate her claims. If anything, she should have stuck to one topic and at least backed it up with evidence. This seems as though it was thrown together to meet a deadline. You cannot merely publish your opinions, my dear. You must substantiate them with evidence. 🙂

  65. Alex on March 2nd, 2011 7:52 pm

    Hey, you fixed the “lose” that used to be “loose” in the first sentence!

    Look, the article is really offensive and plain bad writing, but I’m glad it’s staying up. While I completely disagree with the argument Yevgeniya makes, we’ve also seen the opposing argument, the side I and most of the student body here is on, at least three times in the Collegian. I appreciate that the Collegian tried to at least showcase an opposing viewpoint, though it could have been a much stronger, less offensive, and more cogent argument. Hey, if the other side wants to represent themselves with this article, that’s fine by me.

  66. JN on March 2nd, 2011 7:56 pm

    I’ve read through this twice-I dread the idea of reading it again-and in the end I think this is just some poorly trained writer failing to express her ideas. The Collegiate is rife with articles that contain weak sentences, half-baked ideas, and incompetent uses of outside references. I refuse to be so quick as to assume that this woman is a sexist. Instead I see her as someone that is wholly oblivious to the modern critiques of ‘sex’ and ‘abortion’ in our society, besides what she’s gleaned from news headlines. It is too bad that everyone is taking their time to attack her instead of writing their own article that counteracts this in a more…intelligent…manner. Guessing by the fact that they printed this and every other article I’ve seen in the last 3 years, I’m sure that it can get published.

  67. Leigh on March 2nd, 2011 10:32 pm

    You know, I can usually stomach self-righteous, anti-choice BS like this. As much as it irks me, I’ve heard it all a million times before and take comfort in knowing how incredibly delusional and, frankly, stupid it is.

    However, the one bit I CANNOT ignore is this:

    “If a young woman wears a promiscuous outfit to a party, then proceeds to drink and flirt excessively, she should not blame men for her downfall. She made a decision to dress a certain way, to consume alcohol and should be prepared to deal with the consequences. Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices.”

    You should be ashamed of yourself. This is one of the most disgusting things I have ever read, and the fact that it was written by a woman is deplorable.

    Not only is it offensive to women, but to men as well. Men are rational human beings who are capable of making their own decisions and controlling themselves. Women should not have to expect or accept that they’re these moronic neanderthals whose brains are located in their penises and therefore the burden of sexual responsibility lies in us.

    This sickening victim-blaming is absolutely appalling. As a victim of date rape, I am horrified and offended. You should be ashamed to call yourself a woman.

  68. Brendan on March 2nd, 2011 10:35 pm

    She can be reached at [email protected].

  69. Becky on March 3rd, 2011 12:08 am

    …..you reposted this? …you’re kidding right?

  70. NF on March 3rd, 2011 12:42 am

    “If a young woman wears a promiscuous outfit to a party, then proceeds to drink and flirt excessively, she should not blame men for her downfall. She made a decision to dress a certain way, to consume alcohol and should be prepared to deal with the consequences.”

    Ms. Lomakina, i certainly hope YOU’RE prepared to deal with the consequences of what you’ve just written.

  71. Hannah on March 3rd, 2011 4:06 am

    You seem to be confused about the difference between emergency contraception (Plan B) and abortion. Emergency contraception works by delaying ovulation, thus preventing egg and sperm from ever meeting. If an embryo is already developing in the uterus, emergency contraception will not remove it. This is different to an abortion which causes the embryo to be expelled.

    Your opinions are disgusting, but you are entitled to hold opinions, however sick they may be. However, the least you could do when writing what is supposedly a reputable article is to get your facts right.

  72. Michelle on March 3rd, 2011 8:00 am

    UMass offers a breadth of courses in the Education and Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies departments that address issues of sexism and internalized oppression – I think the Collegian’s writers and editors would do well to educate themselves about the implication and nuances of these sensitive topics before discussing them in print.

  73. KA on March 3rd, 2011 10:14 am

    I find this piece helpful in situations that require an explanation of victim blaming.
    The Rape of Mr. Smith
    In the following situation, a holdup victim is asked questions by a lawyer.
    “Mr. Smith, you were held up at gunpoint on the corner of First and Main?”
    “Yes”
    “Did you struggle with the robber?”
    “No.”
    “Why not?”
    “He was armed.”
    “Then you made a conscious decision to comply with his demands rather than resist?”
    “Yes.”
    “Did you scream? Cry out?”
    “No, I was afraid.”
    “I see. Have you ever been held up before?”
    “No.”
    “Have you ever GIVEN money away?”
    “Yes, of course.”
    “And you did so willingly?”
    “What are you getting at?”
    “Well, let’s put it like this, Mr. Smith. You’ve given money away in the past. In fact, you have quite a reputation for philanthropy. How can we be sure that you weren’t CONTRIVING to have your money taken from you by force?” “Listen, if I wanted –“ “Never mind. What time did this holdup take place, Mr. Smith?”
    “About 11:00 P.M..”
    “You were out on the street at 11:00 P.M.? Doing what?”
    “Just walking.”
    “Just walking? You know that it’s dangerous being out on the street that late at night. Weren’t you aware that you could have been held up?” “I hadn’t thought about it.” “What were you wearing at the time, Mr. Smith?”
    “Let’s see … a suit. Yes, a suit.”
    “An EXPENSIVE suit?”
    “Well – yes. I’m a successful lawyer, you know.”
    “In other words, Mr. Smith, you were walking around the streets late at night in a suit that practically advertised the fact that you might be good target for some easy money, isn’t that so? I mean, if we didn’t know better, Mr. Smith, we might even think that you were ASKING for this to happen, mightn’t we?”
    From “The Legal Bias Against Rape Victims (The Rape of Mr. Smith).” Connie K. Borkenhagen, American Bar Association Journal. April, 1975 Facilitating The Rape of Mr. Smith
    The Rape of Mr. Smith is intended to highlight the notion of “victim blaming” in cases of rape. Often times, women are challenged according to how they were dressed, how many times and with how many different partners they have consented to sexual intercourse in the past, or their choices for being present in various situations commonly perceived to be risky (i.e. alone at a house party, walking across campus at night, etc.). While these scenarios are seen to be humorous in the case of Mr. Smith’s robbery, women are often challenged according to the role they played in the rape while the assailant’s involvement is excused or overlooked.

  74. Debbie McDermott on March 3rd, 2011 10:30 am

    I believe this article was written as an honest perspective on this subject. While few may agree with the author’s opinions expressed herein, it may in fact be a truthful look at the way in which our youth have changed given all the current technology and options available to them in our current society. In Umass’ haste to condemn and punish this author, perhaps it is time to take a closer look at the message being sent from an honest perspective. (As a side note, the editors should have read the content of this article prior to publishing it. The writer may have had the opportunity to incorporate additional information to provide some balance.)

  75. Christina on March 3rd, 2011 10:57 am

    Question. If a man went to a party, had a few drinks, dressed nicely (or even trashy, what if he went to this party and took off his shirt, as probably most of us have witnessed at some point), and flirted with people–if on his way home some other guy raped him, would HE be “far from a victim of rape” and instead a “victim of his own choices”?

    This article literally disgusts me. I cannot believe enough people agreed with it and thought it was a good idea that it got published. I can hardly believe ONE person was sexist enough to WRITE this, let alone a group being willing to PUBLISH it. Not to mention the author is one of the worst “journalists” I’ve ever read. Either incredibly uninformed and uneducated on the topic, or incredibly manipulative. She compares the percentage of abortions PP performs compared to its other services, and then compares the number of abortions to the number in America… like that is a comparison at all. It TRIES to make it look like PP is lying, but in reality it is comparing two completely separate things. Hopefully most of your readers are too smart to fall for that. And, unless this is somehow an editorial, in which case it should be marketed as one, you state ridiculous, “outdated,” “sexist,” “offensive,” and just plain untrue OPINIONS as fact:

    “Today, sex with no strings attached is socially acceptable.”
    “Sex has become a service, like any other, but without fiscal exchange or shame. It is no longer associated with love, marriage or a committed relationship.”
    “The contemporary American female is advised to collect five or ten lovers.”
    “With the easy accessibility of noncommittal sex, men have gained or recaptured the upper hand in relationships.”
    “Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices.”
    “Throwing condoms at the public, a method often used by Planned Parenthood, is ineffective.”

    Surprisingly, the world does not revolve around you and your opinions. Presenting it like your backwards opinions are fact is so egomaniacal and (considering your opinions) offensive, I can’t believe it. I honestly cannot believe this was published.

    By the way, this comment is from a 20 year old virgin who has made her own choices about when to have sex or when not to, as has EVERYONE else. Just because some people are ready before others does not make them sluts or bad people or mean they deserve STDs or an unplanned pregnancy. This comment is also from someone who’s sister was raped, which resulted in pregnancy. Though we didn’t use PP, knowing that it’s there for people who don’t have anywhere else to turn is SO important. You are so lucky you don’t have to imagine your sister, when you hear these debates about women who are raped “asking for it” and not having access t abortions. But the idealistic, naive world you live in doesn’t exist. People get raped and it’s NOT THEIR FAULT. Or, a condom breaks. OR maybe they do just forget. Either way, it’s none of your business. It’s their bodies, and their future child.

  76. HS on March 3rd, 2011 11:35 am

    There is a long list of inquiries I would like to make about your poor attempt (including distasteful choice of words) to make a bold statement about the “illnesses” of Planned Parenthood…but I believe my fellow students have made those arguments crystal clear. I am writing because it perturbs me that you are clearly misinformed about the purpose of Planned Parenthood – though you claim to have gone on the site – as well as women’s movements, and our rights (yours too), in general. You need to be more in touch with yourself and your body before perpetuating certain accusations. Most of all it is embarrassing – as a woman who believes and continues to fight for the equality and freedom of women’s rights as human rights, INCLUDING but not limited to the right to choose – that ANOTHER woman is so out of touch with her own consciousness. The Women, Gender, and Sexuality Studies Department offers classes, there is an Everywoman’s Center on campus, and not to mention the World Wide Web. Thank you for reminding me how ignorant and naïve people can be and that education – which, by the way is part of the services offered through Planned Parenthood – is a crucial component towards progressive change.

  77. Craig Lessens on March 3rd, 2011 12:40 pm

    I don’t agree with anything she has to say, per se, but, the author has a right to write anything he or she might like to say. Freedom of speech is a corner stone of our society, and from it, freedom of thought and expression. While most of you may not agree with this piece, and are certainly in agreement that the writing style is poor, however, none of that exempts the author’s basic rights. The Collegian should not apologize for publishing this piece, especially as an opinion piece. They should have the gall to publish it, and NOT apologize for allowing free speech. For once the Collegian seems to step up by printing controversial articles, only to be beaten down into submission and recoil. Publish it. Print it. Read it. Agree or disagree. Welcome to America.

  78. Marco on March 3rd, 2011 1:55 pm

    While Ms. Lomakina is certainly entitled to her own opinion, she is not entitled to a distortion of truth or a misrepresentation of fact.

    Despite the apparent attempts by The Collegian at minimizing collateral damage, the question remains as to who let this trash pass by the cutting room floor to the presses. The Collegian is certainly not a bastion of intellectual integrity and skill but the general public expects better than what Ms. Lomakina successfully published. Currently, disgust at what happened reigns supreme over all else.

  79. Nay on March 3rd, 2011 3:22 pm

    It is truly saddening that Ms. Lomakina has been so indoctrinated by the misogynistic rape culture we live in that she would dare to presume to know what a rape survivor experiences. “She is a victim of her own choices” – utterly baffling. Why is Ms. Lomakina so desperate to let rapists off the hook? And we sit here and wonder why rates of reporting are so low, why rapists almost always walk, why our culture is rank with privileged writers, on and offline, who feel perfectly comfortable tossing out the idea that wearing a skirt is an invitation for a person to force sex on another person against their will. Please educate yourself, talk to survivors and read their stories. This is a good place to start: http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/10/rape-culture-101.html

  80. Evan on March 3rd, 2011 3:27 pm

    Professor Mcdermott^^^ offers a sound suggestion: relax and actually consider the message the author attempted to convey. It takes far less brains to criticize as the majority of commentators have, than to try and consider another point of view.

  81. Psh on March 3rd, 2011 3:54 pm

    Well maybe if UMass women weren’t so damn easy.

    I slept with this girl from IGU just because I told her she was pretty while handing her a beer.

  82. Suzanne on March 3rd, 2011 5:23 pm

    Another strike for facts: Natalie Krinsky was a sex columnist at Yale BEFORE she wrote “Chloe Does Yale,” not after as stated by Ms. Lomakina. Of all the things to fact check, this is about as easy as it comes. If that wasn’t even done properly, why on earth would I trust anything that this writer has to say? Her utter lack of regard for facts is the most impressive thing about the column.

  83. Carol W. on March 3rd, 2011 5:28 pm

    I don’t think it’s that terrible.
    Sure, it isn’t well-written or anything near that, but she essentially gave a conservative-leaning opinion on an issue, and, predictably, the textbook-liberal UMASS community freaked out. Even if it isn’t finely articulated, surely there are some grains of truth within what she had to say? Women DO think they can be Very sexually liberated, but then still Expect respect from men. Respect is Earned, not Given, and if you fuck around too much and don’t place any value on yourself then Why should anyone respect you? And, though it is apparently insensitive enough to offend the delicate sensibilities of the UMASS community, if you put yourself in a position of Great vulnerability, such as the example she gave, shouldn’t you shoulder some of the responsibility for the consequences, whatever they may be, perhaps instead of shaming a woman who’s not too stupid to do that?

    Ultimately, I am pro-choice, but I also think that just because other people don’t think or feel the same way as You doesn’t mean their opinion is offensive or disgusting–so fucking grow up, UMASS.

  84. Kate on March 3rd, 2011 6:26 pm

    Craig Lessons,

    It isn’t that the author is not permitted to speak her mind. Far from it, she is welcome to voice her opinion. But, opinions generally need evidence or facts to back them up. Would you want a piece to be published that I wrote that had absolutely nothing to truly back it up? The author makes sweeping accusations, and implies that the “liberated” women of today’s society are “asking” for rape. I was almost raped, want to know what I was wearing? I was in swearpants, and he decided it was okay to come into my room and try to rape me. Is it my fault? Because, according to this author, what we wear leads to being raped. It was my fault then? Because I left my dorm room door open, as many other people do? Because I was wearing sweats and a t-shirt?
    Do you see why the Collegian has to apologize for publishing something like this? If the author could have backed up what she had said with something, anything, sure, let her publish it. But, spewing hateful things with nothing to back it up: is the Collegian also going to be allowed to publish blatantly racist pieces now? Or anti-gay sentiments? Should someone know right an article saying that homosexual people deserve to be harassed?
    By publishing this article: this trashy, uninformed, offensive article, the Collegian is saying it is okay to say hateful and insensitive things about other people.
    As a woman, what she said about Planned Parenthood upsets me. I know many people who have gone to PP to get basic women’s health care. And men as well, for that matter. As a person who was almost raped (and I was one of the lucky ones who managed to get away and defend myself, not many can), I found her comments about liberated women opening themselves up to rape to be hurtful beyond words.

    So, yes, she has a right to free speech under the first amendment, but, just because you can say something doesn’t mean you should with nothing to back it up. Or rather, she can say whatever she wants, but, that does not mean that the Collegian should validate it further by allowing it to be published.

  85. Sara on March 3rd, 2011 8:27 pm

    “Freedom of speech is a corner stone of our society, and from it, freedom of thought and expression. While most of you may not agree with this piece, and are certainly in agreement that the writing style is poor, however, none of that exempts the author’s basic rights.”

    NO ONE is saying we should never let the author write again. Don’t try and misconstrue the reason why so many people are upset. And while you’re at it, climb off your high horse, Craig.
    Speech has consequences. Words and symbols mean things, believe it or not. Spouting a bunch of harmful material that supports the regression of women’s rights (or ANY rights for that matter) in our society is disgusting. Sure, you can say it, but don’t expect to have praise and flowers rained down upon you for being a terrible human being.

    Barbara Jordan was right when she claimed that “if the society today allows wrongs to go unchallenged, the impression is created that those wrongs have the approval of the majority.” I know you don’t like it, but everyone opposing this article is also expressing their right to speech. Welcome to America.

  86. Taylor on March 3rd, 2011 8:30 pm

    I can’t believe this article even made it past the editors. I agree that everyone has their own opinions and are entitled to them, but you shouldn’t be posting articles that are based on someone’s opinion. The facts are very distorted and your view on rape is just utterly disgusting. I pity you and your, in my opinion, narrow mind. And I’m only 16.

  87. Rose on March 3rd, 2011 9:13 pm

    I do not think that this article is as bad as everyone makes it out to be. If anything, I think everyone’s comments are the worst part. The writer has a right to Freedom of Speech. I agree with her that too many people have sex just to have sex. You hardly see anyone in today’s world being with one person (or few people for that matter) their whole life. Of course it’s also the man’s fault if he rapes her, but it is also her fault for not being responsible if she goes to a party and gets drunk and whatnot. I don’t exactly agree with handing out condoms to everyone to prevent pregnancy because it seems to be promoting sex. People need to respect themselves AND OTHERS!!!!

  88. Jackie P. on March 4th, 2011 1:01 am

    I think people are getting confused about our constitutional rights as Americans. Yes, we are entitled to freedom of speech, but journalists are not entitled to present their opinions as fact. You could argue free speech if this were an editorial, but it is not. It was published as an article, and journalism has it’s own standards. If she is writing an article for a newspaper, she absolutely should not be publishing her opinions, as fact or not. The goal of journalism is to remain as unbiased as possible. This is clearly not befitting of that goal. She is making blanket statements, claiming her opinion as fact, and not citing any sources or references that support her opinions. That is wrong.
    And since we’re on the subject of writing, as far as I know, articles, essays etc should be consistent. She begins by claiming Planned Parenthood is a “business,” ends with chastising parents for not providing sexual education to their children, and along the way manages to slut shame, victim blame and discredit the women’s liberation movement as a group of horny women. This isn’t so much an article as an enjambment of misinformed, inflated opinions meant to sway the readers in one direction.

  89. Erica on March 4th, 2011 2:14 am

    I hope the person who wrote this has been fired if not for their incompetence then at least for their sexism and ignorance. I’m glad there is an editors note that acknowledges how embarrassing and shameful this is. I was going to personally attack whoever wrote this, and it worries me that whoever did has the ability to vote, but I should save my anger for the editors as it is your job to make sure trash like this doesn’t end up getting through. You’re publication is seriously lacking credibility and there are just no words to describe the disgust I feel for everyone involved.

  90. Sean on March 4th, 2011 6:34 am

    Interesting! I will add to the controversy by saying that many young college women I know, delibriately dress as low-cut as possible because they want to attract the attention of men at the bars. They pound back a half dozen drinks, give totally wasted, and then are surprised when they wake up the next morning naked in an unfamiliar bed. Then they proceed to bawl and cry to young men like me, who find drunk, sloppy and loose girls like them to be gross. If you drink you accept the consequences. However (not that anyone will read this part b/c they’ll only see red after the last part) real men don’t act like a**holes who delibrately encourage girls to get plastered then sexually assault them. Yeah, btw guys, a drunk girl saying yeah, legally = NO b/c they can’t give informed consent. Sorry if I spoil your fantasies of being a date rapist but yeah, no dice. My point is that girls shouldn’t get drunk, flirt outrageously or in a rather memorable personal incident, attempt to seduce someone, then cry ‘rape’. It’s rubbish. If everyone acted esponsibily, like the adults in theory they are, rather than a bunch of sophomoric high schoolers, there’d be a lot less b.s. in colleges. I actually once had a girl get drunk b/c she told me she wanted to act slutty; then she slept with me. However while sometimes women DO act provacatively and shouldn’t be surprised (b/c s**t happens) if they are raped, the sophmoric morons who do rape them (ie. most of the 18-24 college men I’ve sadly encountered), should be prosecuted to the fullest extent by law and hopefully spend at least a few years in prison bending over and holding their ankles. Enough said. If you disagree, feel free.

  91. Karen on March 4th, 2011 8:02 am

    Ahhhh – the lax ideals of the younger generation! No life experience but lots of opinions. It’s amusing, in a sad sad way.

    Read a few books on the history of marriage Yevgeniya. There are a few good ones out there. You sound like you need to learn a thing or 2 about the roots of female sexuality. When you talk “traditional values” I am truly amused…because “traditionally” you wouldn’t be allowed to be at school. You’d be the little angel at home tending to the girly things. If you did anything like thinking or voicing your opinion then your husband would be well within his rights to “correct” you (for the naive out there let me spell it out – your husband could beat you). So get down on your knees and thank your lucky stars that you don’t live in a society with “traditional” values.

  92. Steve on March 4th, 2011 8:52 am

    I’d like to know exactly who is advising the contemporary American female “to collect five or ten lovers” and “risk sexually transmitted disease.”

    This is one of many examples of passive voice and innacuracy in this article. Yes, her writing is terrible, and the message is abhorrent. However, as a former Collegian columnist, I can’t claim that she should have been prevented from publishing this on the basis of the message alone, but rather on the poor quality of the prose. Unfortunately, a lot of people share her opinion, whether they’ll come right out with it or not.
    If anything, this piece does a disservice to those who hold the “victim-is-to-blame” view, which is fine by me.
    Further, I’ve found that a good way to answer something like this is to write a high-quality response op/ed tearing apart the unfounded claims. Takers anyone?

  93. Brittany on March 4th, 2011 10:23 am

    Everything that needs to be said has been said already, but it bears repeating that this is disgusting. As a college student, I’m ashamed that someone from my generation can be so, so wrong about something this important.

  94. Laura on March 4th, 2011 1:43 pm

    Yevgeniya, do you ever go out in public with your hair uncovered? If so, by the standards of some cultures in the Middle East and other places, you are asking to be raped by displaying your hair in such an outrageous manner. So is any woman who dares to dress so immodestly. Men simply cannot be expected to control themselves when faced with such temptation. If you make a decision to go out with your hair uncovered and you get raped, you should be prepared to deal with the consequences. You are a victim of your own choices.
    …Sound familiar? I hope you never actually do get raped – NOBODY deserves to go through such a horrific ordeal, even as ruthless and merciless a person as you appear to be in this piece. But I do hope you will thoroughly consider all of these responses to your article, and try to understand why so many of us are so appalled.

  95. erin on March 4th, 2011 1:58 pm

    Claiming that a woman is “asking for it” because she is dressed “provocatively” is completely inane and ignorant.

  96. erin on March 4th, 2011 2:07 pm

    Yes, Planned Parenthood is a business. It provides customers with services, such as live saving cancer screenings and contraception. Yes, it is not a charity. Yes, the services are cheaper.

    Planned Parenthood is so important because it provides care to many women who, unlike you, are not privileged. Believe it or not, many women don’t have the luxury of having health insurance. Many women don’t also don’t have the luxury of attending college and writing completely ignorant and sexist columns for their college’s newspaper.

    I am not saying that the only women who use Planned Parenthood’s services are underprivileged, because that is absolutely not the case. I’m just pointing out that there are many women who need these services. Try thinking of them before you continue to attack women’s access to reproductive care.

  97. Erica on March 4th, 2011 2:26 pm

    Dear Sean, you should be arrested for your views you deplorable little boy. I’m getting the feeling that you’re not very popular with the ladies and have some misogynist tendencies to work out (hopefully with a professional).

  98. Jim A on March 4th, 2011 2:40 pm

    No time to wade through all the comments, but I hope it has been pointed out somewhere that a dress cannot be promiscuous. As Steve points out, the prose in this is shamefully shoddy. The thinking is lousy too, but I suspect it’s of a sort that only gets stronger the more it’s railed against.

  99. Jersey Girl on March 4th, 2011 3:29 pm

    I find it impossible to believe this article was written by a woman. If this individual is purporting themselves to be an actual female… I think someone better lift the skirt and check for a penis.

  100. Wandell on March 4th, 2011 4:09 pm

    Don’t like abortion? Don’t have one. But don’t try and tell me what to do with my body. I have a right to make a choice and so do you.

    Haven’t been raped? You’re lucky. But to be raped means that someone has had sex with you without your consent. End of story. It doesn’t mean that you were walking home from church wearing a turtleneck in the middle of the day and a terrible man jumped out of the bushes and attacked you while you screamed in opposition.

  101. Li on March 4th, 2011 5:02 pm

    This was clearly written by a misogynist and I am appalled that such poorly-researched drivel was run in the school paper of my alma mater.

  102. Mark C on March 4th, 2011 5:27 pm

    The author is correct on virtually every point, but doesn’t go far enough:
    “With the easy accessibility of noncommittal sex, men have gained or recaptured the upper hand in relationships.”
    This is where the author errs. She (he?) ignores the reality of the repercussions for men.
    Consider the following three scenarios:
    1. One-night stand. Woman lies to man that she is on birth control becase she wants to get pregnant. Pregnancy ensues. She proceeds with birth and brings him into court for child support. Regardless of what he says in defense (trust me on this), court orders child support. In Massachusetts, thats for 23 years. Man must also pay for health insurance, college, etc He may or may not have access to the child. That depends on whether or not woman wants him to have a relationship (he would have to fight a very expensive legal battle on this point, and *could* succeed. But bear in mind this has nothing to do with his obligation to pay about a third of his income to the woman for 23 years.
    Scenario 2. Husband and wife have sex. Woman gets pregnant. Woman does not want child — for WHATEVER reason. She doesn’t tell husband she is pregnant, and quietly gets abortion.
    Scenario 3. Man and woman are dating. Have sex. She gets pregnant. Man wants to be a father. He may offer to marry woman, orperhaps not, and just wants to be father to the child .. in every sense. Woman doesn’t want child. She gets abortion, after all, it’s HER CHOICE.
    So, what’s the story here? Question to all you enlightened, pro-feminist men: When do men get a choice? And furthermore, specifically for you, when are you going to proclaim your wish to rid yourself of your next human right? Like, perhaps, the right to defend yourself against a charge of domestic violence? You don’t need that right. WOmen don’t lie about that, right?
    Ha ha ha. Stupid men. You get what you deserve.

  103. pattiv on March 4th, 2011 5:56 pm

    wow it scares me that people actually think like this.
    where does she get her numbers? women want to collect
    5 or 10 lovers? who does she hang around with? also
    better birth control does equal less abortions. it is simple
    to me if you don’t want an abortion don’t have one but a
    back alley septic abortion is a horrible way to die and this
    always happens to the woman!

  104. Rose on March 4th, 2011 6:08 pm

    Jackie, you didn’t say anything about anyone’s comments or respect.

    I agree, Sean.

  105. Irina M. on March 4th, 2011 7:32 pm

    Why so many angry words?
    Are not you free to continue as before or reconsider some aspects of life every day?
    Steve says: “unfortunatly, a lot of people share her opinion”. Wow!!! Unfortunatly!!! Why?
    Is there any freedom of speach/opinion for somebody who thinks differently?
    Prove it. Please, stop bulling and even intimidate the author. As Rose says: “People need to respect themselves and others”. Yevgeniya included?!

  106. Amanda on March 4th, 2011 7:42 pm

    The worldview expressed in this article is so tragically misogynist …

    Yevgeniya, I don’t understand why you seem so intent on blaming women who, in many of the scenarios you’ve included, are clearly victims.

    Most disturbing to me is the scenario in which a woman “should be prepared to deal with the consequences” when she dresses in a “provocative” manner while drinking alcohol. You imply the women deserves to be raped if she does these things. But My God, Yevgeniya, do you not realize that rape is a crime? Are you saying that men should not be asked to control their actions — that rape should be legal if she’s “asking for it?” And don’t you realize that your exact argument was used for centuries across the world to effectively allow terrible predators to continue to roam the streets while rape victims were left to pick up the pieces of their lives?

    Let me ask you this: Should a child sleeping in the proximity of a killer be blamed for her own murder if her uncovered throat “tempted” that killer? The fault in rape, just like the fault in any such terrible crime, lies on the rapist alone, period. I don’t care how “sexy” a women looks. Rape is illegal, and it is a terrible form of physical and emotional attack. Women shouldn’t be required to avoiding dressing any certain way simply for fear that they’ll be raped and then blamed for it. Do not contribute to the shame that unfairly accompanies women who are victims of these types of crimes.

    Beyond the rape issue, while you so hatefully condemn women whose choices you apparently view as a sign of wanton promiscuity, you completely ignore the fact that such promiscuous behavior long has been tolerated — and in many cases, outwardly applauded — in men. If boys will be boys, why shouldn’t girls be girls? I’m not condoning that behavior among either gender, but to imply such an obvious double standard is the very definition of sexism. Not only that, but that particular kind of sexism effectively seeks to make women second-class citizens. Would you have us revert to a society that forces women to hold only the role of the chaste, obedient, kitchen-dwelling housewife — or be shunned? Would you like to return to a society that treats women as their fathers’ and husbands’ possessions? I don’t think you realize the dark history you are evoking when you make tout some of your hateful beliefs.

    I would encourage you to take a women’s studies class during your tenure at UMass. Perhaps that would help you realize how embarrassing and harmful this article truly is — not only to women, but to society as a whole. Women have come a long way in this country, Yevgeniya. Let’s not go backward.

  107. Mary O'Hughes on March 4th, 2011 9:37 pm

    Congratulations, Ms. Lomakina, you’ve sent the progressives and feminists into a serious tizzy. As George Orwell said, “During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.” We are truly living in a time of universal deceit, especially about men and women. Women are at a physical disadvantage to most men, and it’s true that walking around drunk and half-dressed puts a young woman at a serious disadvantage. Not that any women ever deserves rape, but some situations are far riskier than others. Previous generations knew this and passed on sensible advice to protect their young women. The current hypersexual popular culture is harmful to both men and women, but especially to women, who have more to lose (another biological fact, sorry!). Maybe that’s why more young women are waking up and choosing not to be sexually active until they’re in a committed relationship. They’re the revolutionary ones today! Smarter too.

    Shame on the Daily Collegian for firing Lomakina. How about freedom of speech and debating with those you disagree with?

  108. Trish on March 4th, 2011 10:58 pm

    This article is a blatant attack to women everywhere. It is an attack on the rights of a woman, the rights of an individual and most importantly the right to equal and free will. I am appalled that a respected institution such as UMass would ever publish such an outrageous piece of crap. SHAME ON YOU. You ought to be ashamed of yourselves, boy am I glad I never even thought of applying to UMass.

  109. Heidi on March 5th, 2011 11:25 am

    @Mark

    No, it isn’t your choice whether or not the woman you are seeing has an abortion. She is the one who is pregnant and she is the one who the pregnancy physically and mentally affects! Unless you can carry the fetus all 9 months for her, it does not get to be your choice. And ESPECIALLY NO, the woman does not have to marry you because she is carrying 50% of your DNA. She does not have to be pressured into marrying you, rather than getting an abortion and continuing to live her own life! A woman is not your property! Get with the 21st century! If you want to be a father that badly, start going through the adoption process! There are millions of children already born who would love to have a home and a family!

  110. Libby Brooks alumnus on March 5th, 2011 3:02 pm

    We had a saying back in the seventies: If the pope could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. Self-hating women are so tragic as you buy into who you think you should be in the male patriarch society instead of who you really are. We took over the Collegian when I was a student in the late seventies due to women being misrepresented on campus. I am still proud of the strong, smart and independent women were back then. It was not easy.

    Wake up,
    Libby Brooks class 0f 1978

  111. Sara on March 5th, 2011 8:30 pm

    “Maybe that’s why more young women are waking up and choosing not to be sexually active until they’re in a committed relationship. They’re the revolutionary ones today! Smarter too.”

    Not really, Mary. Their body, their choice. Punishing women for having sex is pretty draconian. What about the men? They’re still free to be as sexual as they want because their consequences for sex aren’t as severe socially (abortion is stigmatizing, but men don’t get those. Skipping child welfare checks and choosing to not raise a child is also much more of an option for a man than a women, who is expected to be the primary caregiver at any and all costs).

    Leave Orwell out of this. Misusing his words in order to claim the academic high ground doesn’t really work when you have no idea what you’re talking about.

    As for your ‘biological facts’ (physical inferiority, women having ‘more to lose’ in a relationship, however that is ‘biological fact’), those ‘facts’ are more social than biological. Yes, adult men are usually stronger than adult women, and there is some biology behind that, but not always. Don’t generalize so much. As children, many boys play physically aggressive sports while girls are encouraged to be more passive. If you don’t think that influences a child’s – and later an adult’s – physical prowess you’re wrong. Girls and women are socialized into submissive, non-physical roles. That’s just how our society functions. Your attitude isn’t helping us break from this regressive and harmful way of thinking and behaving.

  112. evan on March 6th, 2011 7:30 pm

    ^^^^^The opening sentences of the paragraph above sound more like a rap song than a legitimate criticism

  113. Sergei on March 6th, 2011 11:55 pm

    Yevgeniya, great work! Now go to the kitchen and make me some pie lil’ woman! If you love traditional values so much, you need to know your place. And why are you attending college? You should have been married at 16 with three babies already. No writing (shitty) articles. Go to the kitchen now!

  114. pen on March 7th, 2011 1:15 am

    I think it’s a tad of an exaggeration to say that “The notion that sex be regarded only within the institution of marriage has nearly disappeared in modern American culture.” I live in the oh-so-progressive San Francisco Bay Area and yet there, too, we have people who have decided that they will not have sex until marriage. Believe it or not, the rest of us are perfectly happy to accommodate them and respect their choices.

    And guess what? For the women at least, it is largely the successes of feminism that allow them to make this choice. Feminism, after all, fights for the idea that a woman has personal autonomy, which means the option to say yes OR no.

    One of the comments above mentioned that women tend to be socialized into passive roles, and men into active ones. This is one of the things feminists try to combat: the idea that women cannot control their own destinies. The convention that women must always be agreeable, whether that means smiling sweetly when someone talks down to you or agreeing to have sex when you actually would rather not.

    So basically, if you want to blame feminists for modern promiscuity, “provocative” clothing, or “liberal sexuality,” just remember: feminists also fight for the right to say “no.”

    Remember this the next time YOU say “no” — and he listens to you.

  115. rjwalker on March 7th, 2011 7:12 pm

    The views on sexual values and responsibility are mundane and have been beaten to death for decades.

    The really outrageous part of this article is the incredibly bad logic in a university publication:

    >>However, the organization’s website misleads in reporting that abortions constitute only 3 percent of its services. In reality, it performs about 23 percent of all abortions performed each year in the U.S.

    The percentage of abortions performed bears absolutely no relationship with the percentage abortions are of their business.

    Good lord! You folks are in college?

  116. Catherine on March 8th, 2011 6:15 pm

    Darling, where are your references!

    1. Percentage of services =/= percent of all abortions in the USA.
    2. Ultrasounds are not necessary before abortion
    3. Worth noting that they don’t receive funding for the abortions they do preform.
    4. You haven’t argued that there is a problem. I will assume it is abortion, given that’s fairly controversial.
    5. Men were already ‘having it off’ before the ‘liberation’ – presumably they were having it off with someone else. Non-marital sex has been around for a long time – heard of mistresses?
    6. Plenty of people still do “true love waits”.
    7. Plenty of people still associate sex with a committed relationship
    8. Men were already having casual sex, this was not something new
    9. Birth control is not the “standard protection” against sexually transmitted infections – that would be condoms
    10. Men have had the upper hand in relationships for quite some time. I wonder if this is related to their earning potential, and social constraints on the role of the woman.
    11. Women already had a bad reputation – original sin, much?
    12. What is wrong with women being proud of themselves? Men are not chastised this way.
    13. “Today, sex with no strings attached is socially acceptable.” Yes, it is – to a degree.
    14. “If a young woman wears a promiscuous outfit to a party, then proceeds to drink and flirt excessively, she should not blame men for her downfall.” If by downfall, you mean drunken make-out sessions, the sure. If you mean ‘and then the men have sex with her, without consent’ then that is rape, and the men are responsible for their actions. They made a choice to respond as they did, men do have control of their choices to act. To suggest otherwise is demeaning to men.
    15. Abortion was once considered a form of birth control. The doctors kicked up a fuss, because they were loosing business to midwives. So they decided it was a moral issue, rather than a medical one. Thus, we have an ‘abortion debate’.
    16. So you are suggesting we should punish women who forget a birth control pill with an unwanted pregnancy, and therefore an unwanted child? This is not to the benefit of the child, nor the mother.
    17. More contraception does not equal more abortions – and I can’t see how it could possibly equate to anything other than fewer abortions. References please.
    18. Presenting sex in a proper and moral way – now this I can agree to, however I believe we differ in our understanding of proper and moral. Mine refers to the idea of consent, and respect, as well as education around pregnancy and STD prevention. I am concerned yours refers to antiquated ideas about men being unable to chose to control themselves when seeing female flesh.

  117. Carolyn on March 8th, 2011 11:22 pm

    Trish, as a UMass student, I am actually offended by you condescendingly saying that you’re glad that you never thought applied to UMass. The writer of this article is obviously not representative of the school as a whole (because of the massive backlash the article has gotten), and the writer is also not the only student attending UMass.

  118. Kamila on March 9th, 2011 2:00 am

    “If a young woman wears a promiscuous outfit to a party, then proceeds to drink and flirt excessively, she should not blame men for her downfall. She made a decision to dress a certain way, to consume alcohol and should be prepared to deal with the consequences.”

    This is repulsive. You’re basically supporting rape and saying that just because a girl looks nice, and feels good if she gets raped that’s ok. I dress “promiscuously” to some people’s standards but I don’t do it entice guys. Considering 90% of the time when I’m in sweats and not going out, when I actually do have the time to go out with friend- I like to clean up. It is my decision to dress a certain way, but it is NOT a call to men to come and rape me. I do it for myself.

    I’m assuming you dress in some hobo outfits, or maybe trash bags. You definitely don’t get laid enough that’s for sure.

    And about the Planned Parenthood issue, did you ever think that it actually helps to support safer sex? I know over a dozen girls that were too scared to go to their family doctor, or a regular gyno for the fear that their parents would find out they had prescriptions for birth control. So alot of girls go to PP to get a prescription for BC so they DON’T have to have abortions later on. Because if their parents found out they are on BC, they would be off of it, but most likely still continuing to have regular sex.

    I have so many friends who have regular boyfriends, and get their BC through PP. So no PP does not only provide an emergency plan b contraceptive, it allows couples to have safe sex.

  119. Alex on March 9th, 2011 3:38 pm

    As a rape survivor, I honestly hope you burn in hell Yevgeniya.
    This girl should never be allowed to write for this newspaper again (not to mention her inane, terrible prose, and prolific amount of logical fallacies).

  120. alison on March 9th, 2011 3:43 pm

    This is probably one of the worst pieces I have seen in the Collegian the entire time I’ve been at UMass. Seriously, THE WORST.
    Apology notes aside, editors, I don’t understand why this isn’t considered more than just “offensive”

  121. evan on March 9th, 2011 3:56 pm

    ^^^to all the angry people above: you know, the Boston Globe asked the writer for an interview regarding this controversy. If you read the comments on that article, you will see there are many more supporters than you can imagine. Keep your mouth closed. “Burn in Hell!”; “worst piece I’ve ever seen”. STFU

  122. Matt on March 9th, 2011 8:10 pm

    It’s shameful how many of you miss the point. The author is by no means advocating rape. She’s referring to the number of women who choose to wear dresses that barely cover their vaginas, get trashed at some party, have consensual sex with some random dude, and then proceed to scream rape. Let me remind you all of this excerpt from the article:

    “Sexual crimes should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.”

    Hmm, that doesn’t sound like she’s advocating rape to me. It sounds to me like she’s speaking out against stupid behavior.

    Being drunk is not an excuse for your actions. Unless you are passed out, you have some awareness of what you are doing at the time you are doing it. You may not remember it in the morning (at which point you wouldn’t know to scream rape anyway), but you still knew what you were doing. Women want equality. If men cannot use intoxication as justification for their actions then neither can women. That’s not misogyny; that’s not sexism. That, my friends, is equality.

    I think you all deliberately took that part of the column the wrong way because you are all a part of the very demographic to which the author is referring. Sometimes the truth hurts. Get over it. If you want to behave like a whore, be prepared to be called out on it. ESPECIALLY do not wish for the author to “burn in hell” just because she expressed her opinion. Frankly, I don’t care if you’re a rape survivor or not. There is no reason to wish death on another human being, much less an eternity of suffering.

    Grow the hell up.

  123. Michael Frederick Mastrangelo on March 10th, 2011 3:25 am

    I hope you were just being lazy when you wrote this. Really bad stuff, but I also think it’s dangerous and hurtful to tell you to “burn in hell”. I’m glad your editors stood by you, you don’t deserve to be censored or attacked. Catherine above says it all, you basically missed everything, but it’s rage that hurts so many women everyday, why produce more of it here. Well I guess ignorance hurts women too, but that can be solved with conversation.

  124. Bonnie on March 11th, 2011 6:27 am

    Let’s play a game! What was true in this article and what was totally false?!

    1. TRUE – Planned Parenthood does oppose Parental Consent laws:
    http://www.aclu.org/reproductive-freedom/planned-parenthood-great-northwest-et-al-v-state-alaska

    2. FALSE – Planned parenthood is not against ultrasounds:
    http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/local-press-releases/response-my-turn-column-cathi-herrod-29351.htm

    but is against mandating ultrasounds: http://www.plannedparenthood.org/gulf-coast/2011-texas-legislative-session-36185.htm

    3. FALSE – Planned parenthood does not support an “abortion pill” (aka a “medical abortion”) without a prescription and will only provide this medication through a physician. However, they do support access to “Plan B: Emergency Contraception to Prevent Pregnancy” without a prescription: http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/newsroom/local-press-releases/planned-parenthood-applauds-fda-plan-b-26864.htm

    4. FALSE – Most women are not advised to collect “five or ten” lovers. In fact, one study released by the London Times shows that most women don’t approve of sex outside of a committed relationship: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article700218.ece

    5. OPINION – Your opinion on a woman’s responsibility in rape is certainly strong, but this I must concede is an opinion and nothing more. However, being a “victim of her own choices” implies that a woman who is raped somehow chose to be raped. In reality, if she were forced or coerced into having sex (ie, raped), there is no conceivable way that she could be responsible for it. A rape victim cannot be blamed for their rapist’s actions.

    6. UNSUPPORTED CLAIM: Your assertion that “many” women turn to Plan B as their go-to contraception of choice is ambiguous enough that technically it is not false. “Many” is terribly unspecific and could range anywhere from 1% to 50% of women. “Few” would have been a more appropriate word here.

  125. Michael Röhm on March 11th, 2011 2:24 pm

    Miss Lomakina,

    It takes a strong person to put forth a view that will inevitably be ridiculed and attacked by the more ‘progressive’ members of society. I commend you, and am sorry that the Collegian, and UMass in general, are full of cowards who cannot bear to hear dissenting opinions.

    I do not necessarily AGREE with you, but it takes a lot of guts to say something that you know will be attacked by the spineless.

  126. SamsonBarbarossa on March 12th, 2011 10:52 pm

    “Today, sex with no strings attached is socially acceptable. If a young woman wears a promiscuous outfit to a party, then proceeds to drink and flirt excessively, she should not blame men for her downfall. She made a decision to dress a certain way, to consume alcohol and should be prepared to deal with the consequences. Far from being a victim of rape, she is a victim of her own choices. This is not to say that rape is inexistent. Sexual crimes should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.”

    What I find interesting is I read this graf and I don’t see a woman being raped. I see the common instance of a woman seeking to the approval of men that have finally gotten the social situation where non-committal sex will be offered to them on a whim. “Women’s Lib” appears to have only subjected women to the wants of men. There are those who champion the Pro-Choice cause as the route to women’s equality but let’s face it: Abortion has only given men another reason to seek sex without commitment, love or a true partner. They view it with the perspective that if it’s her “choice,” then it’s her problem. Women are not chapstik for men’s pleasurable enjoyment and Planned Parenthood should stop teaching women to become it.

    I think the author has been electronically lynched by people that can’t handle the truth attached to what Planned Parenthood is doing in terms of somehow empowering women to be used by men for their own pleasure. The author’s only mistake was to not be specific in the instance that a woman dressing the way she described can easily be used and disrespected without rape even being part of the equation. There was no suggestion of anything other than two people making a bad decision … but somehow under the current social context women bear the brunt of these bad decisions, particularly if a pregnancy arises.

    Go ahead and say Planned Parenthood does great things for women’s sexuality and that you’re against abortion except for instances of rape and incest, then go ahead look up how many times those instances were present in the 324,008 abortions that occurred in 2008. A large number of Planned Parenthood abortions are done to women who have had contraception through Planned Parenthood that failed. Keep that in mind as the contraceptives offered cheaply through government subsidy could somehow fail conveniently to offer a new crop of cash-paying abortion customers (because the government won’t subsidize that kind of service; the poor women victims get to pay cash for that service). That’s blood money, folks. If you got angry reading this its probably because the truth isn’t always painless.

    Collegian, stick to your writers, as a past UMass Dartmouth newspaper editor-in-chief this shows bad form on your part. Your lackluster rationalization of owning up to your mistakes as the reason to leave this column up only shows that you lack the ability to form your own opinions as well as the backbone to stand for it.

  127. Boris on March 14th, 2011 3:10 pm

    catherine^^^ where are your references? You are citing hopeless, fantastic ideologies for that comment.

  128. Alexis on March 22nd, 2011 4:43 pm

    Can someone please explain to me what the title and first two paragraphs of this article have to do with the remainder of the body? The introduction starts off as an awkward, rambling attempt to demonize Planned Parenthood, but then it turns into an offensively cynical rant about how women are harlots. Beyond the obvious concerns this raises about the author’s moral compass, seriously people, who proofread this pile? If nobody is going to impose quality standards, what’s the point of a published paper? Just write a note on facebook like the rest of us.

    That being said, I’m personally hurt at the author’s opinion of women. I don’t dress provocatively, unless cheap jeans and hoodies are now considered provocative. I’ve had a very select few partners and treated each with respect and discretion and received the same in return. I’m marrying the man I lost my virginity to. My mother taught me to respect my heart and my body. So why am I not entitled to educate and protect myself, and what business is it of some random stranger to tell me what should and should no go on in my vagina? If you don’t support Planned Parenthood, don’t go – when you inevitably pop out some guy’s babies, teach them not to go – but let me make those decisions most appropriate to my life.

  129. DibIbblmyer on March 22nd, 2011 10:34 pm

    ^
    You’re a little late to the party, sweetheart…

  130. Kajira on April 9th, 2011 10:29 am

    Apparently, the author of the article claims that it was edited in such a way as to change the intended tone and message. I for one would like to see her original version, although I think her writing style and research methods leave much to be desired, no matter what type of editing is performed.
    I thought she was rather vague in the statements about women dressing sexy and getting drunk at parties. The implication is that ALL MEN are horny boors who will want to rape any girl who might look and/or act like a slut. This is actually sexist towards men. MOST men, if they are not drunk, can control themselves wheh faced with a sexily dressed, flirtatious woman. Our culture encourages young women to look trashy, and if men were the horny toads implied in the article, men would basically be jumping on women in the streets by the hundreds!
    For a more balanced, thoughtful and erudite take on this “date rape” issue (as well as other matters), I suggest people read Camille Paglia’s brilliant essaye, “No Law in the Arena”, in her book “Vamps and Tramps”.
    In the interest of full disclosure, I was in a situation, when I was a UMass student, which I suppose one could call “date-rape”, but I take partial responsibility because I feel I was damned stupid to get plastered and then have sex with a guy who was equally drunk.

  131. Emily Shepard on October 15th, 2011 12:23 pm

    Your article makes the implicit assertion that a woman DESERVES to be raped if she dresses promiscuously – that she is no longer possessed of the right NOT TO BE RAPED when she dresses a certain way. You are very sick. Seek help immediately.

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar.