An analysis of this article sums up just about all the problems with modern feminism. You adopt a universally inclusive tone and say things like "all of US were watching," and actually seem to believe in this assumption, without realizing that you are ironically committing the reverse error of those who use masculine pronouns to refer to universals. Confused? I'll clue you in - there is about 50% of the population that does not fit into your 'we', that does not and will not ever care, know, or care to know about half of the things that you mention, and have only involuntarily absorbed the other half while trying to watch the goddamn news. Seeing the comments on this board that make this same mistake of assuming that 'everyone' indulges in celebrity gossip as a 'guilty pleasure' and those that insist otherwise are just too embarrassed to share should make you weep to realize how insulated the worlds of women and men are from each other.

Before anyone pipes in with "Nonsense! My boyfriend...", the fact that you make him watch Project Runway with you doesn't mean that he actually wants to. I know you would like to think that only insecure macho jock types would deny themselves this amazing pleasure that you speak of. Keep thinking that. It has little to do with masculinism and more to do with basic intelligence. I'm a grad student at NYU. I hang out in the East Village. I've never been in a frat. And I can still guarantee you that I have never once heard the topic of celebrity gossip mentioned in a company of guys.

If you manage to absorb this knowledge - that what you assumed to be a universal condition is actually more or less limited to women - it should make you wonder if there is not some kind of link between the "women are dumb" articles that outrage you and your conception of the norm for women as something that involves downing Bacardi breezers and giggling over your celebrity addiction.

I'm not sure that there's a problem in the first place. As other posters have pointed out, you don't seem unhappy and you mention that you are good friends with both your roommates, which is more than most people can say, so you must have some social skills. If they really are good friends in the sense that they know you really well and you can talk to them about almost anything, I'd say you only need maybe a couple more people like that in your life, and perhaps a few acquaintances that you can hang out with once in a while. I'm only basing this on myself because I've been extremely shy and introverted for my entire life, but I've gotten to the point where I'm generally not perceived as lacking in social skills.

The problem may also lie with your college environment, which you imply is not a good fit for you. I made virtually no friends during my entire time at college, but I remained close with all my friends from high school and became better friends with some that I'd considered only acquaintances. Now that I'm in a better environment in grad school, I've had no problem meeting people, though I doubt that I'll be as good friends with them in the long run.

This may be completely out of left field, but where are you writing from? The feeling I got from your letter was that you come from somewhat sheltered circumstances that have led you to assume that you must either choose between being an anti-social outcast or being some sort of college party animal as portrayed in the media. Thus your implied lament that your college isn't a typical fratty party school (mine was and I hated every minute of it) and your assumption that campus hook-up culture is the end-all, be-all of romantic life. I'm not sure how to convince you, but you're wrong on both counts. There are more intellectually inclined social strata, and there are guys who would love to go on actual dates and hear all about your German class. Both may be harder to find, but don't lower your standards or feel that you have to be someone else in order to 'grow up' - I'd say you're more grown up than 90% of the people I met during college.