Opinions. Need to vent? Contact the editor at opinions@theotherpress.ca School of Thought: Preferred partners By Natalie Serafini, Opinions Editor newspaper issue on sex wouldn't be complete without getting down to the bare bones of why we ain’t nothin’ but mammals: attraction, lust, and plain ol’ desire. But let’s be honest, us Douglas College students are far from desperate. We can afford to be selective in our partners, so what makes for an ideal partner? Do we look for looks? Humour and wit? Intelligence? Know-how in the bedroom and out? Is there some other quality that gets our engines revving? And of course, a question on preferred partners and deal breakers necessitates the question: does size matter? The response from students was generally that a good person makes a good partner. When asked what makes for an ideal partner, Kevin Yee said, “Not an asshole.” Yee then continued, stating, “It’s gotta be someone you get along with.” Carissa felt it wasn’t a good idea to list ideal qualities. She said, “I don’t want to set standards, right? Because what if you can’t meet them? Not everybody follows the criteria that you’re looking for.” Tamryn agreed, stating, “Every girl has a dream guy, but you're not going to get everything on your list.” For others, like Sonia, it was difficult to say what quality would make her like or dislike a potential partner: “I honestly don’t know.” Manmeet said it comes down to “honesty.” Similarly, Lucas Atchinson also valued a truthful partner. He said, “Honesty. More than that, just loyalty, because if you can’t really trust someone or trust them to be loyal, it’s hard to actually have a relationship... That and, people who usually say appearance usually get frowned upon, but everyone goes for appearance a little bit. But it’s not a main factor. I do look for loyalty and a good sense of humour and stuff like that. Just things that make a quality person, not just looks.” Emily understood the importance of spending time with people who have good music taste, saying, “Bad music taste ... not liking The Beatles, that would be a deal breaker for me.” For Megan, the question of deal breakers was complicated. She said, “Well, if you like someone then you kind of just accept them, you know? You love the way they are, so you wouldn’t want them to change, right? Sometimes it might be a bit hard, but then you kind of have to go with it and adjust.” On the matter of size and if it’s important, Carissa said, “No. [have a friend who's been through that or is still going through that where her partner or whatever’s so much bigger, but I mean, it doesn’t really affect it. Seeing that, I don’t think it should.” In general, qualities like intelligence, humour, and some physical appeal act as a good base for partner preference, but apart from that you can’t plan out whom you'll like. I’ve had plenty of deal breakers Being Liberal with money A penny for your thoughts on Clarks governing By Eric Wilkins, Staff Writer “T think giving people raises didn’t sit well with citizens. I certainly heard that over the last week.” Christy Clark, ladies and gentlemen. “I take responsibility for it. I’m the premier and I’m fixing it.” It seems to be a regular routine for Clark and her BC Liberals: try to slip one past the public in broad daylight, seem slightly shocked when the ruse is discovered, and then “take responsibility for it” while attempting to come across as understanding. Clark’s latest escapade, in which she endeavoured to dole out some generous salary increases, comes right on the heels of the election victory. Amusingly, since Clark lost her riding, she had collected 16 $5,876 in severance pay, but was apparently going to pay it back—or at least that was the story once the Times Colonist called her on it. In any case, this latest blip on the radar has helped highlight just how much money is being tossed around in Canadian politics. Haakstad, the previous deputy, took in a paltry $149,027. For comparison’s sake, Ontario’s deputy chief of staff sees an income of $161,054. Meanwhile, Christy Clark makes $193,500; her own deputy would have out-earned her. Just when all that Everyones prefered partner, Ryan Gosling | Photo courtesy of www.mmj.tees.ac.uk that were made to be broken: if you like the person, it doesn’t matter if their political views are completely different, they only ever eat Kraft Dinner, or they’re not a cat person. Beyond discerning that they’re a good person and will treat you right, that list of pensioners stand to receive $1.5 million and up, based on their reaching the age of 80. Gordon Campbell’s pension starts at $98,000 per year. Meanwhile, the last lottery ticket I bought was for $1.2 million. If there was any doubt about where that pension It seems to be a regular routine for Clark and her BC Liberals: try to 66 slip one past the public in broad daylight, seem slightly shocked when the ruse is discovered, and then “take responsibility for it” while attempting to come across as understanding. The numbers need little explanation: were Clark’s raises to have held up, her deputy chief of staff, Michele Cadario, would have been set to earn $195,148 (her reduced raise will still see her make $175,000), and the maximum salary number would have gone up to $230,000. Kim nonsense has started to settle in, keep in mind that Barack Obama’s chief of staff, Denis McDonough, only makes $172,200. One can’t forget that on top of these top-dollar salaries, anyone who serves at least six years in Legislature qualifies for a pension. The top six on money comes from, it’s from the common man. The old NDP pension plan (1996) meant that for every dollar an MLA contributed, taxpayers would contribute a dollar as well. However, in 2007, the BC Liberals changed that to a 1:4 ratio. Justification for any of you have to enter a first date, a relationship, or a one-night stand open to the possibility of liking someone you wouldn’t have thought you could. these numbers is always a reach at best. Coming back to Christy Clark’s deputy chief of staff, Clark explained that Cadario’s position now includes duties formerly performed by a director of policy. In other words, for only $25,000 more, Cadario is now doing the jobs of two high-salaried people. Unless she’s simply one of the most efficient human beings on the planet, it’s more likely that the director of policy really didn’t do much, thus failing to justify a generous income, or the former position’s responsibilities are actually being spread out over several people. Those in politics often employ the excuse that they are giving up some of the prime earning years of their lives. What does that even mean? They’re all making near or over a six-figure salary; since when is that a burden? It makes no cents.