To the editor:
After reading the Feb. 7 edition of Sex and the 'Seo, I think it may be appropriate to rename the section. "Sexism in the 'Seo" has a nice ring to it, considering the article's content.
Allow me to summarize: Men cheat more because they are men. Women cheat more because they have a period. Geneseo is the premier SUNY school, a top liberal arts college, and yet The Lamron thinks it is OK to subject its readers to what amounts to blatant sexism?
The very large leaps of logic committed by the article do not help its case; men having "very strong sexual desires" does not mean men are more likely to cheat. It means men have stronger sexual desires. Women having a larger tendency to cheat during ovulation (if that is even true) does not mean women are more likely to cheat overall, as the article implies. Perhaps the authors should have looked at studies conducted on cheating behavior, instead of attempting to draw conclusions based on only one factor.
Additionally, any research done was subpar. According to Geneseo's Institutional Research Office, the ratio of females to males has been 3:2 for the past three incoming classes, a far cry from the 4:1 suggested in the article.
Though evolutionary biology has some merit when explaining mate selection, it does not take into account environmental factors. The answer to "nature or nurture?" when explaining behavior is usually both, and mate selection is no exception.
The fact that the article reduces our behavior to unconscious desires that we cannot resist is both wrong and insulting. Sure, the token, "we can rise above our genes" comment is made, but merely as a possibility. Every single day, our genes interact with the environment, thus altering what we are programmed to do. Rising above our genes is more than just a possibility.
If "Who Cheats More" is representative of future "Sex in the 'Seo'" articles, perhaps The Lamron should considering pulling the plug on that section and saving itself future embarrassment, as it clearly has run its course.