Philodemic Society’s sexual frustration finds an outlet

Imagine my delight at discovering that the Philodemic Society, Georgetown’s debating club, has its own blog. A skim of their constitution confirms that they’re basically Toastmasters with high self-regard–one of their officers is called the Amaneusis–but the real fun comes when Philodemic officers choose what topic they most want to discuss next semester: sex!

Specifically, safe sex. In interviews, Vice President Sarah Olsen and previously-mentioned Amaneusis Dustin Walker propose hot button debate topics that will look good on fliers (gays, weed), but they also both want to talk about condoms on campus, a boring topic that should draw absolutely no one.

I can already picture the discussion–spermicide as aborta facia, full openness to children, yawn. Everyone knows buying bulk at CVS is cheaper anyway. Still, I don’t blame the Philodemicians for grasping for sexy straws. An inside source in Philodemic told me that intra-Society coupling is discouraged and called, and this is serious, “Philodemincest”. With that avenue of working out sexual tension blocked, I can see why they want a sanctioned chance to talk dirty.

6 Comments on “Philodemic Society’s sexual frustration finds an outlet

  1. I find this entire entry incredibly offensive but luckily for the Philodemic Society about as many people read this blog as you speculate will show up for the condoms on campus debate.

  2. Wow. They say sex sells, but I thought that was just confined to otherwise inane MTV videos with no other hope for viewership – I guess the Vox bloggers must also be on the ropes for viewership. Attacking one of Georgetown’s longest-standing societies without even attempting to contact the officers mentioned or other active members to find out what we really talk about from week to week is unworthy of any Hoya writer.

    Maybe if you attended a debate or two you’d learn the difference between real argument and ad hominem attack.

    Oh, and if you think access to contraceptives on campus isn’t an issue, maybe you should also get in touch with Hoyas for Choice – *they* seem to think it’s worth talking about.

  3. That Philodomincest thing must’ve really touched a nerve.

    If not, I’m baffled by all the outrage about this post. A great cartoon, a little shout-out to the Philodemic blog, and a plug for safe sex–what’s not to like, Philodemicians?

  4. I’m all graduated and whatnot, and just stumbled across this today! This is now google search result number 4 for the philodemic, I think.

    Will – You’re a decent writer, but please please don’t be such a tool? “People who participate in different nerdy activities than my nerdy activity are clearly not getting laid” is insulting, I guess, as per the writers above, but more importantly, it’s really fucking lazy blogging. If you’re going to do the same poor-man’s-Gakwer blogging style that everyone else at college is these days (Hi IvyGate!), at least put an original spin on it?

    Besides, after 4 years and with plenty of friends in both groups, I can say with certainty that the Voice and the Philodemic are probably tied for the ‘campus organization with the most unwarranted self-regard’ crown. I mean, c’mon — the fucking title of your paper is supposed to invite comparisons to the Village Voice. Pretension is pretension, whether you practice it with the written word or the spoken one. Freud’s little quip about “the narcissism of small differences” pops to mind.

    Oh, and it’s “Philodemicest”. No ‘n’. It’s not so much ‘discouraged’ as warned against if you don’t know what you’re getting into, because things get awkward? Considering the level of incestual hookup-ery in the Voice-WGTB-hipper-than-thou axis, you should sympathize a bit. Incest can be wincest, but you’ve gotta be smart about it.

  5. Pingback: Vox Populi ยป Georgetown Philodemic Society parodies itself

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>