In front of the Women’s Center this past week, “I Want a Truce” campaigners used aggressive tabling, free T-shirts, non-binding pledges and, most importantly, smiles to squelch the inner rapist of countless potential sex offenders. Teeming nearby, an array of signs were brandishing a shocking collection of female assault and “battering” statistics. Although the exhibition was presented in a manner reminiscent of Bubba’s “Forrest Gump” monologue (“I knows ’bout every kinds of batterin’ there is, Forrest. Thar’s spousal batterin’, teenage girlfriend batterin’, a-woman-gets-battered-once-every-15-seconds batterin’, shrimp batterin’…”), it disseminated a very serious message: The sexual assault of women is both a global and local problem.

The pervasive feminist fervor was informative and galvanizing, but hardly enough to effect a permanent change in Isla Vista. Male sexual aggression is an implacable reality. Men that are capable of committing rape and other atrocious sexual crimes are not so easily turned from whatever deeply engrained cultural and biological causes motivate them, and, as a consequence, women are still at risk every time they go out at night. With this in mind, the only real option for effectively preventing rapists is to divert them somewhere away from the streets and houses of Isla Vista – like to a building full of prostitutes.

Although it may seem radical, opening up a brothel in I.V. is the best way to diminish the occurrence of sex crimes against women. With the knowledge that cheap, accessible sex lies a few blocks away, desperate perverts and deviants would be more inclined to relieve themselves with a prostitute, rather than take the risk of drugging and taking advantage of an innocent person.

Of course, to ensure that the brothel doesn’t degenerate in to an exploitative whorehouse swarmed with angry pimps and overworked hookers, it should be developed and maintained as a university organization. Not only would university affiliation serve as an invaluable protective measure for the institution itself, but it would also provide unique opportunities for UCSB students. The benefits and possibilities are endless. Brothel positions could be incorporated in to the work study program, and undergraduates fed up with cleaning glassware in stuffy labs could apply for more fulfilling jobs, like hand jobs and blow jobs. Perhaps some academic departments, such as the Psychology Dept., would allow their students to earn class units working as prostitutes. The brothel could host classes on safe sex, and rather than using bananas and fake vaginas for their presentations, they could employ real genitalia attached to real people. Also, the brothel would be a great attraction for visiting prospective students, and maybe even their midlife crisis parents. Needless to say, the benefits and possibilities are endless.

As a campus entity the brothel would need to promote diversity and tolerance, and thus would attend to the needs of any and all acceptable sexual orientations and persuasions. Male and female prostitutes would be on hand for heterosexuals, homosexuals, transgenders, and if possible, a little garden could be kept in the backyard for dendrophiliacs. In this progressive environment, sexually confused youth would be free to partake in every imaginable carnal experiment without the discomfort and awkwardness of ordinary sexual encounters. Little freshman Timmy could stick his little freshman wee-wee in a myriad of orifices to discover his sexual identity, all for the right price.

In order to raise the funding needed for this ambitious project, I respectfully request that the Associated Students propose a $200 lock-in fee as soon as possible. Then they should hold a meeting to decide whether or not the fee should be reinstated as $200.14 to give it more of a sensible and judicious appearance. Afterward, another meeting can tackle the important question of whether or not the reinstated $200.14 should be re-reinstated as $200, which would avoid giving the impression that the A.S. is a group of imprudent self-involved cronies that actually met to discuss whether or not the addition of 14 cents to their proposed lock-in fee could dissemble its rash and unjustified motivation. Finally, I respectfully request that after a very long, a very heated, and a very necessary debate, an acceptable compromise is reached, and the lock-in fee is finalized at an inconspicuous $200.07.

Daily Nexus columnist Zach Phillips’s sarcasm will be lost on too many people.