To the Editor:

I have read your “Sleeping Around” column both this week and last. You might expect an old man like me to express shock that “The Bucknellian” would print this kind of stuff. But I would rather share with you some different reactions.

1) The column this week, like last week’s, is badly written: juvenile, vulgar, at best of middle school level.

2) Politically liberal friends of mine who live in the area pointed out last week’s column to me and asked: “Would you want to spend $50,000 a year to send your son or daughter to a school whose student paper prints this kind of stuff”? I could only reply that the student paper in the large university I taught in for 35 years was printing “that kind of stuff” in the 1970’s, but that at that time I thought of Bucknell as being a place with “more class.”

3) I recently saw a temple in India where the “hickies” and other physical traces described by your writer had been sculpted on the female body around the year 1000 A.D. Nothing new under the sun, is there?

4) The fact that your writer is anonymous takes away 99% of the reader’s interest in your column. How can a reader be interested in such an account of activities when you can’t see the anatomy of the  person performing such…”strong suctions”? or even seeing her hickey?

5) You are calling your column “a commentary on sex, love, and relationships in college.” Why not give us a searing, devouring, love story the next time…A story that last for more than a weekend? Maybe 2 weekends?

6) You write: “All submissions are for the columnist’s eyes only.” Why? Ms. Lace, are you afraid? Is the writer afraid? Are you both ashamed?

Hoping “The Bucknellian” will show more class…and style the next time,

Paul Archambault,
Ph.D (Ret.)