Last week, a group of high school students in nearby Montrose, Pa., raised eyebrows by printing an article in their school newspaper about the growing trend of ‘friends with benefits.’

The article, titled ‘Not Everyone Thinks ‘Friends’ Have ‘Benefits,’ caused outrage among some parents, who were shocked at the notion that their children would even discuss a topic like this publicly, much less engage in such promiscuous activities. The community encouraged the local school board to censor the Meteor Chronicle from discussing such issues.

Meanwhile, just a few miles up Route 81, this University’s student newspaper printed an article titled ‘Going out? Don’t forget your wingman!’ (Pipe Dream, March 2). This article, which appeared in the Opinion section as part of a regular series, provided male readers with a detailed how-to guide to ‘fulfill in your scoring attempt’ at a bar by using a male friend to distract a female’s companions so one can ‘score.’

The Meteor Chronicle article, carefully written by the paper’s co-editors-in-chief, provided a surprisingly balanced view of the ‘friends with benefits’ concept, citing a chaste Montrose student and a Bowling Green University professor, and ending with a quote from another student who said he regretted his decisions to engage in casual sex.

The Pipe Dream article, while purely opinion in nature, rhetorically asked if the ‘hottie you fancy’ has a ‘younger sister (hopefully of legal age).’

While most students here at BU will say they’ve become more mature during their years of college, the recent Montrose controversy about a remarkably balanced, factual article reveals an ever-widening gap between what society deems acceptable between the 12th and 13th grades.

Could you imagine if a column like ‘Junk in the trunk, or booby-licious?’ (Pipe Dream, Feb. 16) ran in a high school newspaper? One could argue that the sex columns that run in Pipe Dream are meant as jokes, but I guess I’m missing the punch line.

While the controversy in Montrose stirs up both antiquated issues of freedom of speech and newer issues of casual sex among teenagers, comparing the Meteor Chronicle to Pipe Dream shows that, surprisingly, the younger group of students seems to have a more realistic grasp on the consequences of engaging in licentious sexual activities.

The editors at the Meteor Chronicle should be applauded for taking a serious look at the prevalence of casual sex in their high school. While those of us supposedly learning ‘higher education’ consistently have portrayed sex as a joke, the Montrose students ‘ several of whom are probably dreaming of one day getting into BU ‘ seem to truly understand the importance of these issues in modern society.