Female orgasm not that difficult

I would like to respond to several of the ideas in the article on female orgasm:

1) The female orgasm is not that elusive. The orgasm, for men and women, is about a buildup of blood in the genital area because of stimulation. Trying to characterize male orgasm and female orgasm as somehow totally different is absurd. Some men need emotional intimacy to get turned on and some women don't. It's got nothing to do with being male or female.

2) What is difficult is good sex for women in a culture that privileges male sexuality far above female sexuality. This hinges around treating men and women like they're different biologically and sexually. They're not.

3) Men's orgasms don't feel the same every time, and they cum from a variety of types of stimulation. Yet, we don't classify the male orgasm as the "taint orgasm" and the "penetration orgasm." The vaginal orgasm has been held above the heads of women since the times of Freud as the most mature orgasm. Get over it. All orgasms are good.

4) Many women, including myself, are aroused by physical and visual stimuli. I have one friend who has masturbation competitions with her male friends. The goal is to see who can cum the fastest while watching porn. She always wins.

5) To conclude: The real reason women aren't having orgasms is because of ideas like those presented in this article. Stop making the female body seem like a mystery compared to the male body. People are different and how they use their bodies sexually varies widely. Trying to pin down the female orgasm is a pointless form of sexism we should move past. People should just concentrate on what their partner likes, regardless of the type of genitals that person has.

Lisa Knisely
women's studies graduate student

Regents must show results at Legislature

On Thursday, the Arizona Board of Regents rejected all the proposals to levy program and course fees for undergraduates at Arizona's three state universities, including proposed fees for three UA undergraduate programs. All of the fees proposed by the UA administrative leadership appeared very reasonable, and all received support by UA student leaders.

The regents offered several arguments in favor of their action. One argument made by Regent President Gary Stuart, and others, was that the proposed fees inappropriately placed a burden on Arizona undergraduate students, when it is the state Legislature that should be stepping up to take the responsibility to provide support for undergraduate education in the state of Arizona.

While many agree that the legislature should take greater financial responsibility for university education in the state of Arizona, it's not so clear that they will. This is a reality that was eloquently described by President Likins in his bid to persuade the regents to pass the UA proposals.

Now that the regents have rejected these fee proposals, it's up to them to show results at the state Legislature. If the Legislature doesn't discharge its duty to provide an appropriate level of support, Arizona's state universities will suffer.

While the regents rejected the undergrad fee proposals, they passed all the graduate ones. This makes sense inasmuch as the graduate fee proposals were supported by the affected students. However, the argument made by Stuart in opposition to undergraduate fees was virtually the same as an argument made by the GPSC in opposition to the UA graduate tuition proposal that was put before the regents in March. The regents ignored our plea. It is unfortunate that the regents and state Legislature take such different views on the importance of undergraduate and graduate education in the state of Arizona.

Paul Thorn
philosophy graduate student