Here we have a great learning opportunity. Cause and effect in human relationship dynamics. Let's make a prediction about what will happen when the LW's BF graduates, and a new editor is chosen? I see three possibilities: 1. the new editor treats LW fairly, 2. the new editor has a vendetta, or 3. the new editor thinks that he/she should be next in line for LW's services.

Now, we now that people involved in journalism are practically all highly ethical people who don't engage in office politics, so the first option is bound to occur, right? Good luck with that. I think that LW is about to get an intense education in a big part of how people become successful in competitive fields. Your role in this little drama is defined, fairly or not. You cannot change this. You are the girl who is sleeping with her boss.

If you want to protect your long term interests, the best compromise is probably to meet with your BF and his boss (the faculty advisor?) and tell them that you hope that they will be careful to give you only boring, unpopular assignments for as long as the BF is the editor. When you aren't receiving the benefits of sleeping with the boss, few will criticize you for doing so. Who knows? Some might even recognize what you've done and appreciate you for it.

I've said this in this forum before, but being an artist is not an occupation. It is an identity. You do not study to become an artist. You either are an artist or not. It appears to me that you have two choices: trying to make your passion into a career or creating a career that allows you to pursue your passion. When you are young, the first seems to be the way to go. What a beautiful life! The problem is that your passion becomes tied into all the little daily problems of existence, which can render it dry and lifeless. The second path is much more practical, and generally more rewarding over time. You could separate your work persona from the "real" you. You could have a secret life filled with creativity and be a bean-counter during the day. All you have to do is let go of the idea that your creativity will be important to the world. All of us are creative. Only a few thousand of the world's 7 billion people are economically successful as artists. Plenty of people find happiness in life through creativity without pursuing it as a career. No one cares that my bass playing is as good as it has ever been. No one except me, and sometimes the wife. And that's fine because I play to make myself happy.

Porn, like everything else in life, is not a binary issue. It is neither all good nor all bad. Some people enjoy porn in a reasonable and healthy way, while others lose touch with real sexuality and are unable to have meaningful relationships because of it.

I would submit that "Slap Happy" and other things of that ilk can't be considered to be the same thing as the relatively innocent entertainments of more mainstream porn. Not all blowjobs are equal, and not all of them are degrading to women. Lots of nice healthy men have reasonable relationships with porn, Josalon, and Marc, we know guys who are totally screwed up about it.

As for this LW, all we know is that she has a problem with her BF about porn, among other signs of incompatibility. Why is it necessary to assign blame here? It doesn't matter whether she's bad, he's bad, or they're both ok; they're incompatible. LW: forget about deciding who's wrong. Lay it all out for this BF and tell him, "These are all deal-breakers for me." If he can't give you what you want, move on.

Well, the thing is, I do think life can have meaning. I just don't think that thinking about god does. It reminds me about the thing about teenage "rebels" and non-conformity. You know, the true non-conformist does whatever they want, without consideration of the other. Anti-conformists, though, are just as much under the control of the other as the conformist. "I must be different." Atheists who insist on debating theology are still being controlled by religion. Now, as a young pup, I used to love to harass the evangelists when they came to campus (in the Reagan years). Now I just refuse to give them my time, just like I try not to give the "evangelical" atheists my time. Flying Spaghetti Monster now, that is at least amusing, but remember, the Church of the Subgenius has been around forever, praise Bob's pipe. Arguing with folks about Jesus is not slack.

I don't know if there is a god, and I don't care...Can we make a new "ism"? How about apathism?

When people start arguing about the actual meaning of words, we must be getting somewhere! Personally, I think that atheism is an irrational belief system. Atheists do not believe nothing; they believe something (There is no god.) However, there is no evidence for or against this belief, and no rational reason for a person to care about the issue one way or the other. You can be a critic of religion without being an atheist. That's what it means to be agnostic: I don't know, and neither do you. However, I like to go one step further: I don't know, and I don't care. That's true freedom from religion and superstition!