NEW FRONTIERS IN FAIRNESS!

It is often argued that people in our society don't have equal economic opportunities because some children are born into rich families while others are born into poverty. Since the purpose of government is to make life fair, it is argued that we should help the poor by taxing those who are better off and redistributing the social product to increase economic equality. While this policy of taxation to create equality is obviously laudable, at present it is only directed towards the problem of economic inequalities.

There are other forms of gross unfairness which have been completely and unjustly ignored by policy makers. For instance, through no fault of our own, the editors here at The Outrage look nothing like Richard Gere, Robert Redford or George Michael. Clearly, we are at a disadvantage in seeking a fulfilling sexual life. As evidenced by our mediocre appearance, we are sexually disadvantaged. I would like to suggest that the social sexual product be redistributed to help out disadvantaged guys like us.

After all, the beautiful ones do nothing to earn their pretty faces -- why should they be entitled to the benefits of an unearned advantage? It is their social duty to help out the aesthetically less-fortunate. If there's ever to be justice in this society, we must design a social system according to this dictum: From each according to his/her desirability; to each according to his/her lust.

It's true that we might be able to look more like Richard Gere or Tom Cruise if we went through the exhausting ordeal of physical training, cosmetic surgery, and endless shopping trips at Neiman-Marcus. But Gere and Cruise didn't have to do any of that stuff -- I don't see why we should.

The sexual equality system would have a progressive tax scale, much like the federal income tax system on which it is based. For example, a guy like Bill Clinton must surely be in the 50% bracket. According to our plan, half of all the women that sleep with him would also be obligated to sleep with us. The Outrage plan is non-discriminatory; it would also apply to someone like Madonna, who undoubtedly has more than her fair share of lovers. Half of these men, or women as the case may be, would be required to sleep with needy females. Of course, some of the requisitioned men and women might object to taking a lover not of their own choosing, but everyone must sacrifice for the greater good of the whole society.

Some will argue that, unlike dollar bills, not all sexual partners are of equal value. We have anticipated that objection: a government agency, sort of the sexual equivalent of comparable worth pay boards, would assign each individual a desirability rating to be used in assigning bedfellows. The system is complex, but no more so than, say, the tax code.

Of course, everyone would need to keep records of their sexual transactions. At the end of each year each citizen would be required to file a form listing their sexual experiences. A short form would be provided for the monogamous, while the more sexually adventuresome would be required to fill out the long form. All the forms would be fed into a central computer which would figure out who owed what to whom. (We've asked Microsoft to look into developing the appropriate software.) Periodic audits would be conducted, just to keep everyone honest. Those who had more than an average amount of sex during the year would be required to remain celibate until all of their less fortunate neighbors had been satisfied.

Good policy and brilliant ideas are never enough, if only because people fail to see what's in their best interest. Hence, The Outrage plan would require an enforcement arm, analogous to the IRS. Perhaps we would call it the ISS -- Internal Sexual Service. The ISS would hire agents (Sex Police?) to patrol the country, making sure that no one was under-reporting their sexual encounters.

There are, we admit, quite a few technical problems with the plan, but none that couldn't be solved by a lot of Harvard economists and social engineers. The program would be led by a blue collar commission composed of those who have spent their lives trying to make life fair for all of us -- John Galbraith, Ted Kennedy, Jane Fonda, and other leading lights of the intellectual and political world. The program would be expensive, if one thinks in crass materialistic terms, but would more than pay for itself in the form of satisfaction given to the sexually underprivileged.

Some reactionaries might suggest that government has no business interfering in peoples' sexual lives; these silly romantics keep spouting off about "personal liberty." The more enlightened among us can easily see that if the government is entitled to a fair share of a person's earnings, it must be equally entitled to a share of his or her sexual opportunities.

We're not ideologues here at The Outrage -- all elements of the plan are negotiable. We might even be willing to settle for a top sex tax bracket of 40%. There are no absolutes -- what's needed is moderation and a sense of fair play. The important thing is that everyone recognize the need to remedy the problem of sexual inequality. Details can be worked out later. The program, like the tax code, could be fine-tuned until it reached perfection.

Given the current universal cultural acceptance of sex and money as the only things worthy of pursuit, government will have accomplished its primary mission as an agent of fairness after it solves the tragedy of unequal sexual opportunity. Those of us who are sexually oppressed will seek the help of other oppressed groups in the battle to get the necessary legislation passed. Women, minorities, union workers, government employees, the handicapped, the economically disadvantaged -- all will rally to our side to form a rainbow coalition of the needy.

We're mediocre looking and proud of it. We'll stand up and be counted. We are tired of seeing an elitist group of beautiful people have all the fun. They discriminate against the rest of us by never inviting us to their parties. They never offer to share their trim waistlines, firm jaws, or aquiline noses with the those of us in need. The pretty boys and girls frolic in passion while we sit home and watch TV. You call that fair? Of course not. It's time for government to step in and provide for those of us who cannot provide for ourselves. All we need is a chance, and a few sexual subsidies.