“Do you crave hookups without hangouts? Do you want to come without commitment? Do you want desire without all the drama?”
That was the opening of the article, “Sex & the CT: Beginner’s Guide to Casual Sex,” recently posted on the University of Rochester’s student newspaper, Campus Times. The piece, which appears to have been written by a student at the university, goes on to present casual sex as a simple solution to students’ romantic and sexual lives, offering a striking window into how poorly colleges uphold a culture of moral sexual ethics.
By now, we’re accustomed to universities partnering with Planned Parenthood, holding racy, sex-themed events, and telling students to prioritize pleasure and “sexual exploration” over commitment, let alone marriage.
But this Campus Times article pushes the envelope with lies that ignore entirely the implications of sex, selling students an idea about sex that is destined to hurt them.
[RELATED: College Don’t Hurt Me]
The Claim
The article begins by undermining the emotional effect of sexual intimacy, reducing it to a merely transactional concept.
It guides students,
Before clothes are ripped off tell your partner what you want out of this exchange. Are you looking to do romantic things outside of the sex? Do you want to have a friendly relationship but occasionally screw each other? Do you want them to act like they don’t know you in chemistry lab tomorrow?
The piece simultaneously advises against the burgeoning attachment that results from a sexual encounter. “Many people try to have casual sex without acknowledging if they are truly ready and end up heartbroken, confused, and feeling like a slut. You should never feel that way.”
It continues, “Your conscience should always be your number one priority — casual sex should not be something that makes you feel guilty.”
“You can tell the other person that you are absolutely not looking for a relationship, but your feelings may change after sleeping together for three nights in a row,” the op-ed warns. “You should not find yourself yearning for a text back, feeling nervous about the next hook-up, or leaving feeling more drained than satisfied.”
It further debases sexual intimacy, reducing students to insatiable, animal-like creatures, utterly devoid of self-control or depth beyond their sex drive. “Carry no shame in your game — human beings have needs,” the piece justifies. Instead of valuing sex as a powerful tool for bonding in committed relationships, this perspective strips away human dignity in favor of impulse and fleeting pleasure.
Drawing once again from its introduction, the piece asks, “Do you crave hookups without hangouts? Do you want to come without commitment? Do you want desire without all the drama?”
It flippantly provides a “solution:” “Casual sex,” the article reads, is “simply the thrill of having sexual partners without the pressure of a relationship. This way, you can worry about your next orgasm, and not your next argument.”
Through this, the article reveals a clear bias against committed relationships, portraying casual sex as the superior option by reducing relationships to little more than bickering, drama, and the burden of time and dedication.
The piece also emphasizes the replaceability of these relationships: “At the end of the day, this is a college campus, and there are plenty of people on campus who are open to having casual sex. If your partner isn’t doing it for you, go out and find a new one!”
Staying true to the left’s well-loved moral relativity and “my body, my choice” trope, the article concludes, “It’s your own body and there’s no judgment here!”
[RELATED: Higher Ed Discovers the Joys of Sex]
The Science
The University of Rochester’s Campus Times article falsely represents the most meaningful act between a man and a woman as something temporary and trivial; in reality, “casual sex” is a paradoxical term.
According to scientists—and we should trust the science, right?—sex can’t be “casual” because the brain and the body are inextricably linked. The Sexual Medicine Society of North America (SMSNA) reported that the act of having sex generates “feel-good hormones in the body such as dopamine, endorphins, and oxytocin. These hormones activate the pleasure and reward centers of the brain, boosting a person’s mood, relieving stress and tension, and supporting feelings of love, trust, and intimacy.”
In other words, the brain cannot distinguish between a casual encounter and a lifelong commitment; the emotional results are the same.
Prolific neuroscientist and human anthropologist Dr. Helen Fischer echoes the sentiment. “[Oxytocin and vasopressin] are the basic bodily and brain systems for attachment,” she said in one interview.
“Don’t have sex with somebody you don’t want to feel something for,” she urged listeners. “[T]he bottom line is, if you don’t want to get attached to somebody, it’s easier to not sleep with them … [b]ecause you might end up being attached to somebody who really does not fit into your life.” In fact, a yearly study conducted by her team consistently finds that 25-35 percent of one-night stands end in a long-term relationship.
Critics argue that because sex boosts “happy” hormones like dopamine and oxytocin, leading to improved mental health and lowered cortisol, casual sex may be positive and even beneficial.
But research shows that this is not the case. These same chemicals drive pair-bonding, and casual sex can diminish their effect, undermining the brain’s natural capacity for lasting attachment, resulting in decreased mental health compared to their committed counterparts, studies found.
The science is clear: casual sex is not conducive to human psychology, and telling students otherwise can hold severe psychological implications.
[RELATED: Campus Hook-Up Culture and Title IX Sex Police Meet Due Process]
Future Consequences
Articles like “Sex & the CT: beginner’s guide to casual sex” present impressionable young adults with an impossible task: To fight against their psychology to indulge in “casual” sexual encounters, meanwhile unknowingly jeopardizing current mental health and future long-term relationships.
The philosophy instilled by the behaviors endorsed in the article contradicts basic qualities vital to a healthy partnership, such as steadfast faithfulness and the continual giving of oneself.
Studies continue to prove that heterosexual, monogamous marriages produce the happiest individuals.
A report by Brian J. Willoughby, Ph.D., a fellow at the Wheatley Institute and co-author of the report The Myth of Sexual Experience: Why Sexually Inexperienced Dating Couples Actually Go On to Have Stronger Marriages, found that sexually inexperienced dating couples are two to three times more likely to enjoy highly stable marriages. Willoughby explains that sexual exclusivity between spouses “provides an underappreciated foundation for the intimacies of marriage and helps couples create mutually satisfying relationships founded on emotional intimacy and healthy communication.”
Further studies show that the amount of premarital sexual partners increases divorce rates exponentially: “Divorce risk is strongest for survey respondents with nine or more premarital partners, followed by those with one through eight partners, and lowest for those with none, thus indicating three ‘tiers’ of divorce risk based on number of past partners,” one source said.
That such an article—openly promoting casual sex—can appear in a campus newspaper underscores how far university instruction on sexual health and relationships has drifted from any coherent moral or ethical framework.
Last month, Minding the Campus reported on a “Sex in the Dark” event at the University of Texas, part of a growing trend across American universities. Similar, and at times even more explicit, events such as “Sex on the Lawn” and “Kink Across Diverse Bodies” workshops have proliferated in higher education.
University-sponsored events of this nature represent not merely misplaced priorities but a broader moral and intellectual decline within academia. They reflect an institution-wide shift from the pursuit of virtue and wisdom to the celebration of unrestrained desire.
The data are clear: casual sex does not end when the encounter does. It is an inherently bonding act, biologically and psychologically oriented toward lifelong attachment. If universities took their role as stewards of moral and civic formation seriously—and shaped their sexual education to align with the realities of human intimacy—students might be less inclined to write articles that celebrate casual sex.
Visit our Minding the Science column for in-depth analysis on topics ranging from wokeism in STEM, scientific ethics, and research funding to climate science, scientific organizations, and much more.
Image by Pixel-Shot on Adobe; Asset ID#: 1657840973
