Far be it for me to rain on my alma mater's sexy parade, but it seems to me that this definition of sexiness is pretty skewed:
As a female student reports, “Men are high demand here since there are few of them, even fewer that are straight, and even fewer that are single. Guys who fit this bill will have girls all over them.” But it's not just the uneven number of males and females that creates a strong hook-up environment. “Lust is simply in the air” at left-leaning Vassar, where “conversation topics almost always revolve around sex, gossip or music.” There's even an official school publication called Squirm: “a journal of smut and sensibility, exploring sex and sexuality, involving lots of nudity and non-mainstream attitudes about sex.” All this said, one student offers an important caveat: “Vassar College is lovely and small. There are many hook-ups on campus, but –- as with any small school -– be prepared to run into that guy or girl all the time from then on out. Sometimes it's fine. Other times, it can get a bit awkward.”
Yes, Vassar has Squirm -- a magazine I always thought was oddly named because most people I know squirm when they're uncomfortable, not when they're aroused -- but who exactly does the uneven number of males and females "create a strong hook-up environment" for? Dudes. Basically Vassar's sexiness rating is being judged entirely on the ability of men to have sex with more women than they might otherwise, in part because there are fewer straight men around. Maybe that's sexy for the dudes, who in my view tend to get a skewed understanding of how attractive they really are based on altered conditions of supply and demand, but it's not too sexy for straight women, now is it?
