Sex toy demo at university class raises questions (live person demo)

[Rage for Order]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41873819/ns/us_news-life/

Northwestern professor invited students to observe woman on stage

On Feb. 21, Prof. John Michael Bailey, a psychology professor known for pushing the envelope, invited students from his human sexuality class to observe a non-student naked woman being stimulated with a motorized sex toy on stage, NBC station WMAQ reported. About 120 students attended the demonstration, which was curated by Chicago sex tour guide Ken Melvoin-Berg, according to the Northwestern Daily student newspaper.

The session was billed as a question-and-answer session about fetishes with a demonstration at the end, said Pratik Shah, a senior math and economics student. Students were warned of the nature of the class several times, and some walked out before the demonstration. "Then, just out of nowhere, the girl just takes her pants off, takes her shirt off, takes her underwear off," Shah said.

The professor and administrators have defended the class. "I think that these after-class events are quite valuable," Baily said in a recording of last Wednesday's lecture obtained by the paper. "Why? One reason is that I think it helps us understand sexual diversity. Sticks and stones may break your bones, but watching naked people on stage doing pleasurable things will never hurt you," he said.

Northwestern's Dean of Students Burgwell Howard told the paper by e-mail that though "somewhat surprised" by the demonstration it likely "falls within the broad range of academic freedoms — whether one approves or disapproves."


***A little more at the link.

This is what passes as education these days? No wonder our students don't learn anything anymore.

[alp227]

1. and why conservatives hate colleges still sadly

but isn't freedom part of academia in the first place? Feel free to apply to Bob Jones University if sex is against your religion. And it's not like Northwestern is shirking math and science. And the goal of college is to open minds (which involves many fields).

[Rage for Order]

8. There's a time and a place for everything

I can see this type of course being helpful for people who are majoring in a field that will deal with human sexuality, e.g. psychology, medicine, social workers. However, allowing it to satisfy the requirement for a humanities elective for people who are studying, say, economics or accounting is gratuitous at best. There is no shortage of free internet sites available for people who need to see someone demonstrating how to use various sex toys.

[alp227]

106. seems this event was optional

the article reports: "After-class panels such as the one last Monday are offered as educational addendums to the class." That's right, addendums with invitations...not mandatory at all it seems. But...Fox News, David Horowitz, the anti-intellectual conservasnobs will spin this as "sexual indoctrination! aaahh!1!1"

[Maru Kitteh]

178. why do you care?

seriously? Why do you care?

[joeunderdog]

2. And I had to take Cassic Lit.

:mad: :mad: :mad:

[truebrit71]

4. No kidding...boy did I ever pick the wrong major...

:evilgrin:

[JVS]

173. Any Catullus?

[nc4bo]

3. Can't wait to see who passes the end of semester test!

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

5. AKA Tuesday

[lumberjack_jeff]

6. It's good to be tenured. n/t

[jberryhill]

7. Within scope, but really not necessary

The professor may be assuming a higher level of dispassionate intellectual inquiry than may be warranted among undergraduates.

[Rage for Order]

9. LOL! Ya think?

[jberryhill]

22. Well, I'd like to hear the rationale

But if you put a gun to my head I would lean toward, "not exercising the best judgment on this one."

[drmeow]

10. As someone who took

a class on human sexuality and has taught psychology classes which include discussions of human sexuality, I don't agree with this as a valid class endorsed outside of class activity. Watching a live sex toy demo does not, in my opinion, help students understand sexual diversity.

[KurtNYC]

60. There are chemistry classes with lab, and classes without

at some level lab is required. It's all just theory and words on paper until your test tube starts smoking.

[drmeow]

170. By that analogy

students in a class on human sexuality would have to be graded on their own PERSONAL sexual acts.

Bad analogy.

I also taught a psychology "lab" course - research methods. This wouldn't be appropriate for that class, either. Beyond research methods you're talking about practicums when it comes to psychology/social work/education and that is graduate level work (and this STILL wouldn't be appropriate there).

So, do you need a lab for a philosophy class?

[TheCowsCameHome]

11. Heh. I thought this was going to be a gun thread

Sorry.

[speltwon]

12. Any student who is curious about " sexual diversity ",

can find the exact same stuff with The Google. This class is "valuable?" Please.

[xchrom]

13. actually -- i approve. nt

[Glassunion]

14. HA!! How many 10's of thousands of dollars does one spend on tuition at Northwestern...

for the same shit I have been getting for free on the internets for years...

I win!!! I should have a doctorate by now.

[Yavin4]

32. Nice Post, Will Hunting

How do you like them apples?

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

15. I wouldn't pay $9.95/mo to see porn... let alone pay a college tuition to see it.

The free stuff works for me!

[seabeyond]

16. when are they gonna put a man up there hooked up with a vibrating cock ring jacking off for all to

watch....

[Rage for Order]

17. That's the mid-term lab project

:rofl:

[seabeyond]

31. like hell it is. my son is being heavily recruited by this school. just sent an email

asking them to tell me when the vibrating cock ring is going into the lesson plan.

[Warren DeMontague]

66. Good for you!

Tell us what they write back, okay?

I know some adult bookstores in evanston, if they need any directions on where to find that stuff.

[Fla_Democrat]

126. Maybe that is why they are recruiting your son....

:shrug:

[seabeyond]

130. ha hahaha. lol

i had to go back in to read my post to see what the hell you were talking.

nah.... his sat scores. i am sure. the nifty, it is not even about his grades. all about the sat he has taken last couple years

[Shiver]

18. In Chicago, you can find that on the street.

:hide:

[Bunny]

36. And/or a vibrating butt plug up his ass.

What a big steaming gratuitous pile. That professor is a dick.

[Warren DeMontague]

56. You probably could find plenty of volunteers for that job.

The question is more whether it would find much of an audience.

[MineralMan]

85. That was last weeks' demo.

[seabeyond]

87. worthless without pictures... nt

[MineralMan]

89. Nah, I don't do porn. My imagination takes care of all that.

This all seems like much ado over not much. Adults watching a sexual performance? Ho-hum. Really. I wouldn't have attended, to be quite frank. But, I don't care if people did.

[seabeyond]

91. gotcha

it would be much ado about nothing, if it had actually pertained to the class and not simly reinforcing the ever present, girl here to entertain the guy

[MineralMan]

93. Oh, I don't know. From what I understand sex with machines is

the latest thing. I don't get it, but it appears that others are experimenting. I just don't care about stuff like this, and don't really care what college students are doing with regard to sexuality. That's way in my past, and is just old memories now. I don't know if you remember the late 1960s and early '70s, but there was a lot of crazy stuff going on. This isn't all that odd, really.

[NashVegas]

109. Awesome!

lol

[ReggieVeggie]

116. vibrating cock ring?

tell me more...

[lpbk2713]

19. "Dear Mom ...

How are you? I'm fine. You'll never guess what we did in class today."



:rofl: :rofl:

[myrna minx]

20. I had no such electives.

[jdlh8894]

27. Sure you did.

Maybe not in the classroom,though!

[WinkyDink]

21. If "live sex show" doesn't = pornography, pretty much nothing does. Prof seems a tad kinky.

Wanted to observe the woman AND the group's reactions.

[hedgehog]

65. BINGO!

[Paradoxical]

23. They should have had both a female and male.

[jberryhill]

24. That's at the graduate level

You can't introduce that much theoretical complexity in the introductory courses.

[Paradoxical]

26. I spent three hours yesterday talking about menstrual blood and anal sex.

In one of my classes. I'm an undergraduate at a major university.

I think they can handle it.

[WinkyDink]

28. You DO grasp the difference between a lecture and watching a live person?

The law does.

[Paradoxical]

30. This was a discussion, not a lecture.

Topic was sexual liberation. Class of 15.

[Hannah Bell]

184. so what? what does that have to do with a sex show?

[jberryhill]

33. Did the word "Santorum" come up?

[Paradoxical]

34. Surprisingly, no.

[SwampG8r]

175. haha ...my wife says

i can call hers "the santorum"
says it sounds kind of classy

[Iris]

37. What I find questionable is billing a woman using an electronic toy as a fetish

[Paradoxical]

38. Yeah that's kind of weird. Masturbation is not a fetish.

[seabeyond]

39. it is a fuckin game..... for male entertainment. that simple. there was nothing academic about

it.

[Iris]

40. exactly.

[blogslut]

169. Yes, but people who are devoted to Sybian-type devices are fetishists

It's a niche and it's real.

[bluedigger]

25. We just got to watch Swedish clinical films in Human Sexuality.

Meh, it was pass/fail...:rofl:

[superduperfarleft]

29. But Northwestern students can spit hot fire!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QShqj5dKqpQ

Tom Hanks, Jr. or something.

[Tyrs WolfDaemon]

35. Wasn't there a Monty Python skit about something like this?

I seem to recall a scene where the professor brings in his wife on a bed and goes through the motions, including responses to students that were not paying attention.

[Sonoman]

64. I saw that for the first time a few weeks ago.

Pretty danged funny, too.

Sonoman

[cali]

41. ridiculous. what intellectual value does this serve?

[seabeyond]

43. so a whole bunch of guys and male professor can stand there and giggle.... nt

[JI7]

48. yup, the fact they only had a woman do it and not a guy says a lot

[ReggieVeggie]

117. so they should have had a couple fucking on stage

would that be better?

[Bunny]

134. Actually, yes it would have been better.

Then their claim of using it for educational purposes might at least sound convincing. Or, if they used a man and not a woman, it would seem more like it had a true academic purpose. The fact that they chose a young woman just shows that they wanted to get their jollies by watching her masturbate herself. To pretend that the exercise had any academic value is laughable, and really disgusting as well.

[Paradoxical]

44. It serves the patriarchy.

And reinforces gender stereotypes.

The professor missed the point by such a large margin that I find it difficult to understand how he became so powerful in the first place.

[seabeyond]

46. exactly. that is exactly what it was all about. nt

[Raine]

67. continuation of the degradation of women IMO nt

[joeybee12]

42. They were given an opportunity to leave, they are all adults...move along,

nothing to see.

[Iris]

99. When your prof says this,"I think that these after-class events are quite valuable"

are you REALLY free to leave?

[truebrit71]

171. Unless he locks the door, yes...

...

[villager]

45. not controversial to send them to kill or be killed in war - -but orgasms!? Good God -- no! No!!!

n/t

[seabeyond]

47. do you ever see the males ass up there jacking off for all of our entertainment? nt

[villager]

49. I expect that would be preferable to killing, or being killed in war, as well

n/t

[cali]

50. lol. and this has jackshit to do with war.

[villager]

53. ???

I was simply commenting on what "outrages" people in terms of what "the young" are exposed to...

[seabeyond]

51. i dont think one has to jack off on stage to oppose killing. do you? nt

[villager]

55. no, but I think it's ridiculous what's termed "outrageous" in an insane culture

n/t

[seabeyond]

61. being outraged at reinforcing the patriarchal heirarchy isnt ridiculous. nt

[Warren DeMontague]

63. It is if you're wearing this outfit.

But, please, continue being outraged. I'm sure one day your large amounts of outrage on various associated topics will accomplish great things, like leaving you with a whole bunch of outrage.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Paradoxical]

52. I think this is the other way around.

The idea of a woman masturbating is so beyond the realm of the "norm" that placing her on stage for everyone to see is radical education.

[Hannah Bell]

189. bullshit.

[Rabrrrrrr]

57. I hear ya! Show all the babies being blown up you want, but don't show the nipple that feeds it!!

SEX BAD!!!!

VIOLENCE AWESOME!!!!!!!!!

Too many goddamn prudes in this country. Makes me sick.

[Hannah Bell]

188. you'd think it was 1950. i see nipples all the time, and anyone who wants

to see nipples has no trouble seeing them.

what the hell does any of that have to do with the function of a university?

[seabeyond]

195. people on another thread yelling for boobies. wanna see boobies. really? they really have a tough

time finding boobies. there is a real disconnect here in their argument.

[Hannah Bell]

185. the function of universities is to send students to war? who knew?

i don't see what "sending students to war" has to do with live sex shows at universities.

[Warren DeMontague]

58. Jesus. That's appalling.

I mean, it's cold in Chicago, right now. They should have waited until May or June.

[fittosurvive]

59. It's a private university...

[KamaAina]

62. My dear friend will no doubt be seeking a position at Northwestern

she teaches sexuality at another university that is far, far behind the curve on this. :P

[BlueCheese]

68. What's the educational value in this?

Sounds like a waste of time. There have to be better uses of a college student's course time than a class like this.

[hedgehog]

69. I wouldn't want to be paying for a student loan to cover tuition that

pays for this. I'm also pretty peeved about the mandatory student activity fee that my kids are paying now. It's higher than my tuition was, and a lot of it goes to support a football team that my kids have absolutely no interest in.

[somone]

70. No laws were broken, no tax money involved

The guy is a well-known sex researcher. I have no problem with it.

[alcibiades_mystery]

154. Yup

:thumbsup:

[Liberal In Texas]

71. JHC, not going to go over well in this Purian country.

I can already hear the outrage from the RW spin machine gearing up.

[cali]

72. It's gratuitous sexist dogshit.

[Warren DeMontague]

73. "Students were warned of the nature of the class several times"

That pretty much sums it up. Was everyone involved an adult? Sounds like it. Were any laws broken? I don't think so.

[Paradoxical]

77. Are you suggesting that adults are not capable of overt sexism?

Laws don't need to be broken in order to enforce the status quo. In fact, it's very rare that laws are broken.

[seabeyond]

79. welcome to du

you feminist, you.

[Warren DeMontague]

95. I'm suggesting that if everyone involved is a consenting adult

There is nothing to be outraged about.

[Paradoxical]

108. Have you ever watched the movie "Requiem for a Dream"?

You know the part at the end when the main female character attends a sex party in exchange for drugs (I believe heroin)? Do you remember when she had to perform a sex act with another female in front of a group of chanting men?

"Ass to ass"

The act of willingly performing in a humiliating sex show for others is technically completely legal. Yet, I somehow find it difficult to not be outraged. And I would question the moral constitution of anyone who could look at such a situation and be completely alright with it.

See, legality is not the basis of ethics. Some things that are legal are completely unethical. And some things that are ethical are very much illegal.

Presenting a completely nude woman, masturbating, to a class and justifying it by saying that it's an example of sexual fetishism (or as the distinguished professor said, "...sexual diversity") kind of boggles the mind in at least two ways.

The first is the shear moral depravity of believing that a woman masturbating is a form of sexual fetishism. It's a belief that would only develop from a society that completely despises women and their sexuality.

The second part is that the "lesson" very closely resembles a peep show. Which I think we can all agree is debasing to both women and their sexuality.

[Warren DeMontague]

113. "sheer".

The word you want is "sheer", not "shear". You "shear" a sheep.

Nope- didn't watch all of requiem for a dream. Sorry. Speaking of gratuitous. Not my idea of a good way to spend a couple hours, but to each his or her own. Certainly wouldn't censor it.

Bottom line is, either ADULTS are capable of consent, or they're not. Beyond that we get into this goofy, endless game of trying to determine which of other peoples' choices we think we should let them make, and which we shouldn't. Same thing anti-choicers do; they won't come right out and say that they get off on running other peoples' lives and telling them what to do, so they infantalize any woman who makes a choice they, personally, don't agree with.

I think believing a woman masturbating is "sexual fetishism" is sort of goofy, but that's about it. I don't know if I would categorize it as "moral depravity", but then I wouldn't categorize a woman masturbating as "moral depravity", nor would I categorize a woman masturbating on stage for fun or profit "moral depravity".

I'm reminded of the old joke;

"kinky is using a feather- perverted is using the whole chicken"

Speaking of sheep.

[SidDithers]

133. Agreed...

It's only sex and nudity. Nobody ran screaming from the room, their eyes bleeding, from seeing some woman masturbating. They were warned of the the graphic nature of the presentation several times.

People are so freakin' uptight about sex and nudity.

Sid

[Modern_Matthew]

74. There's nothing wrong with this. End of story. n/t

[RedCloud]

76. Sounds like it "raised" more than questions.

[customerserviceguy]

78. Reminds me of 'Psychology 210: Human Sexual Behavior" class at the U of WA

back in 1975. We didn't have live models, but we did have some films. The first one was what they used to teach medical students, it had people in there who were so clinical in their approach, that the professor said you could imagine them wearing white lab coats!

Then, there was the film demonstrating the technique used to treat premature ejaculation, and we heard a swoosh-swoosh sound in the background of the soundtrack. Turns out, the folks in the demonstration were on a waterbed, how Seventies was that??!!

The prof announced to us one day that the Psych 210 "lab" class announced in a classified ad in the school newspaper was not officially sanctioned by him, but he didn't tell anyone not to go.

[seabeyond]

80. except they used both males and females and actually discussed sexual situation

which is academic. this is spreading a girls legs for male entertainment. no more than that. what do you think they gain, watching a girl masterbate. why didnt we see the male jacking off on stage too.

[customerserviceguy]

81. I'll admit

the film I saw showed both genders engaged in most every form of sexual behavior. Being as this was 1975, there was no same-sex activity featured.

[Warren DeMontague]

94. I didn't see either, but then It's been a long time since I was in college.

In fairness, though, you're right. They should have an equivalent presentation with a dude.

[flvegan]

82. I love these threads.

[seabeyond]

88. ya ya ya. lol nt

[flvegan]

90. There she is!

:hi:

[Warren DeMontague]

96. Are you kidding?

It would be like Thanksgiving without the cranberry sauce.

I'd say turkey, but that's a different fight.

[flvegan]

101. LOL!!!

I'm rolling over this post. Turkey is a different fight! lmao

[seabeyond]

104. oh, and like it is any different with you.... oh, there he is, biting at my ankles.... nt

[Warren DeMontague]

114. You shouldn't have put that rib eye steak in your socks, then.

[seabeyond]

103. lol. i did it just for you....

yup

[MineralMan]

92. Yes, indeed. They bring out the very best in DU, I think.

Very entertaining they are.

[Recursion]

83. Every school has the creepy professor

Looks like we've found Northwestern's...

[MineralMan]

84. Hey! Back when I was in college, lab experiments in the Human

Sexuality class took place in private, outside of class hours. Of course, that was the late 1960s and early 70s. We didn't get any public demos, so we had to sorta figure it all out for ourselves. There was this one time...

[bemildred]

86. Dang, trampled all over that taboo, eh? nt

[jillan]

97. And I was embarrassed when we had a naked model in art class?

[MineralMan]

100. I was embarrassed the first time I was a nude model in an art

class. I got over it. I discovered that it was hard to get guys to pose, so I made food money by posing. It's hard work, actually, but the pay wasn't bad. There's even an oil painting of me in a small museum in California. I was in better shape in my 20s...I can tell you that for sure. :rofl:

[lapislzi]

135. I posed nude for the first time--last year, at the age of 48

An artist friend and I did a photo shoot for an art exhibition.

It turned out to be immensely liberating, and the final pieces were provocative (in the political sense) and really interesting. We generated a lot of discussion in the gallery.

I'm not above using my body to make a point, but I don't understand the point of this particular lesson.

[MineralMan]

136. I don't see the point of the deal in the OP, either.

As I said in an earlier post, I'd have skipped the live demo. I prefer private lessons in that subject, anyhow. :rofl:

[ismnotwasm]

98. Creepy

And of course they use a woman. How about putting a guy up there with a sex toy in a orifice or two? Never happen.

Then I think of one of our local SMBD clubs holding female anatomy class ie. this is what female genitalia looks like; This is a clitoris etc. Using live models in the lithotomy position. No touching, no bullshit. (How I know is, I had a friend that went to it, he thought it was a good idea) Made me think.

Sadly, As long as women are objectified, live demonstrations like this reflect social ills rather than promote sexual enlightenment.

[Zanzoobar]

102. Prurient idolatry

If something like this is beneficial, I would like it to be shown.

The years ahead will be extremely hard on current students. They are already hard on experienced professionals.

Practicality is called for.

Porn publishers well understand human sexuality. This should not be university material.

[Warren DeMontague]

115. Wait. I'm sorry.

The years ahead will be extremely what?

[Zanzoobar]

174. Your inner misanthrope is showing

But then again, I've read a few of your posts. Maybe it's not so "inner".

It's a good pic of your hospice caretaker. Have fun.

[Warren DeMontague]

177. Fun. Yes.

Fun Good.

Misanthrope. Yes.

Misanthrope Good.

[Lucian]

105. Oh noes think of the ADULT children!!!11!!1!!11

:eyes:

[readmoreoften]

179. +1

[Bardley]

107. I feel bad for the other professors in his department

growing up as a faculty kid myself, from my perspective, all this guy did was bring a bunch of needless controversy and scrutiny upon his department (if the university president has to make cuts, that department now has a bullseye on it's back), and college within the university, without any real corresponding benefit to justify the risk - it also invites another examination of tenure upon all university professors everywhere, in an age when everyone else is losing or has already lost their security - an insecure public resents such flaunting in times like this "nyah!, nyah! You look at your boss wrong and you're fired, but i can dildo a chick onstage and my job is secure!!! Great to be me and sucks to be YOU LOL!!!"

do i really believe there was much more to this than a perverted publicity stunt? no

the students could have seen the same thing on the internet

am i saying that professors should put public reaction first in their decisions? No. I'm just saying that privilage should not be used frivolously. there will be times in any department when a stand needs to be taken, that is politically edgy - that is when the political capital should be spent

[Hannah Bell]

186. definitely. pure pointless self-indulgence on the part of the prof. if i were

a co-worker i'd be out for his ass, & hell if i'd support him if he came under fire.

[kiva]

194. Yup, he wouldn't be

getting a pass in my department either - this is exactly the crap that deans and chairs love to use an excuse to mess with disciplines.

[NashVegas]

110. How Much Does a Credit Hour Go For At This School?

[Mimosa]

111. How did Einstein and our ancestors get an education without this crap? n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

112. Actually it is valid as education

not that I would do it, there are a few science channel programs on human sexuality that would work better IMHO and are quite graphic... but that is another story. My all time favorite, as it were, in that series, was actually the act in an MRI, it was interesting to say the least.

Americans get all icky about sex. Get over it, after all IT IS a natural act.

Oh and they hate colleges since they trend liberal, not because the odd sex class or for that matter the odd women's studies class.

[cali]

118. codswallop. and it has nothing to do with getting icky over sex

what educational values does this promote?

[bemildred]

119. No, no, sex is taboo, kids need to be ignorant about sex.

:sarcasm:

[seabeyond]

120. cause none of these "kids" believe a woman can have an orgasm. they need to see it

to believe it.

all these centuries we have been in a mindboggling misconception that it is only about the man

[bemildred]

121. Billions of times every day, it happens, sex.

Genital organs being employed for fun, profit, and reproduction, sometimes all three at once. It's like as common as dirt, and we treat it like it is some mysterious taboo subject that cannot see the light of day. And then we wonder why we are so f**ked up in our heads.

[cali]

122. lol. that's nonsense.

it sees the light of day every day, but this is just prurient and sexist crap masquerading as education.

[bemildred]

127. That's simple observation.

What is nonsense is the idea that this sort of demonstration is disgusting and unneccessary.

[cali]

129. no, it's not. it's opinion.

and sorry, it's sexist.

[bemildred]

139. Enjoy your disgust, I hope it is satisfying to you. nt

[cali]

143. enjoy your smug "open mindedness"

It's clearly deeply satisfying to you as you demonstrate in one condescending, lofty post after another.

[bemildred]

153. You ought to know. nt

[seabeyond]

131. are you fuckin serious. you are really arguing we treat it as mysterious taboo in a sex obssessed

culture. everywhere, all the time, further and further and further....

really?
that is your perception?

bah hahahah

[bemildred]

137. Taboos and obsession are not only compatible but almost necessary to each other.

As one may easily observe. We have lots of sex-related taboos in the USA, and we are obsessed with sex, we think sex is an "addiction" yet, and the rest of the world knows we are nuts.

[cali]

138. really? we think sex is an addiction?

obviously, nearly anything can be an addiction, but that Americans as a whole think sex is an addiction is more silliness. you have provided no evidence for that claim.

[bemildred]

141. Don't trust me, Google it. nt

[cali]

142. I don't trust or not trust you. YOU made the fatuous claim, it's your responsibility

to provide the evidence.

[bemildred]

146. LOL.

I have a feeling that there is no "evidence" that will satisfy you, however:

http://www.google.com/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&site=webhp&source=hp&q=sex+addiction&btnG=Search

[cali]

149. uh, I stated in my post that anything can be an addiction

I didn't say there isn't such a thing. I asked you to provide evidence that most Americans think sex is an addiction. Really not that complicated a distinction, my dear.

[seabeyond]

145. actually it is in question whether or not to label it an addiction by psychology profession.

majority weigh in favor of not catagorizing it as an addiction. but there is much more about this issue then a mere sentence.

it is destroying peoples lives in the last decade. but i am sure you are aware of the issue. when anything gets to the point of an obsession that interfers with life, then it becomes an issue

[bemildred]

151. That's because the notion of sex as an addiction is ridiculous.

People can get quite obsessive about sex, to be sure, just read all the strong emotional reactions in this thread, and that can be a real problem, but it is not an addiction, addiction is being used as a scare word in that context, to imply you need help.

[seabeyond]

159. you are the one that lumped americans in as a whole that they declare sex addiction. facts say you

are wrong.

what is the point of this post. the medical field as a whole is saying they will not declare it an addiction. the people that are obsessed with it, and are ruining their lives are wanting it declared an addiction. the people making money off these people want it declared an addiction. those not obsessed and not making money off it does not want it declared as an addiction.

how does that jive with you post pointing the finger at all americans see it as an addiction.

it is the same bogus generalization that sex is taboo in the u.s. because of prudishness as a nation pbsesses with it continually all over the place.

like this demonstration

[seabeyond]

140. the rest of the world is not an utpoia on this subject, anymore than we are.

and i agree.... it is extreme on both sides, ergo unhealthy on both sides. and that is my bitch. and that is what this little demonstration promoted once again. the obsessiveness of it all.

[bemildred]

144. Well, OK. We do have company, but not the sort of company I want to keep.

It seems to come from agrarian cultures, where they get worked up about seeing that the family estate stays in the family, so to speak. So it's about money and power, like everything else.

Nevertheless, we ought to just ignore it, making a public fuss about this sort of "demonstration" is a mistake. Let the students complain if they like, the rest of us should butt out.

[seabeyond]

150. so people are not allowed an opinion or ability to discuss, per you? continual reinforcement

of the patriarchal heirarchy should always be challenged.

along with racism
and homophobia

and you telling me to sit down, be quiet like a good little girl just is not gonna cut it.

[bemildred]

157. Yes, I am a deeply embedded minion of the "patriarchal heirarchy".

I do their bidding at every turn, never thinking for myself.

[seabeyond]

160. finally. sigh. agreement. nt

[cali]

165. I must say, you truly don't stand out as someone who does think for themself

you are predictable on every possible subject.

[bemildred]

168. I had no idea you cared that much about me.

:hug:

[Hannah Bell]

190. do universities in the rest of the world stage live sex shows & call it education?

who knew they were so fucking enlightened.

[bemildred]

192. I'm not saying it's a good thing, it's not, I'm saying it's not important.

We are a corrupt, decadent culture, so of course we see corrupt decadence all around us. That is what's important, not a bit more public sex.

[seabeyond]

196. so, it is not a good thing. but keep mouth shut and allow to continue and line be pushed....

what next. exhibition of a gang rape since we know there is a culture for this?

or speak out and say, this is not a good thing.

[Codeine]

128. Another nadinb post, another gratuitous shot at Americans.

Like fucking clockwork. At least she didn't say "'Murkins" this time. I suppose we should be pleased.

[seabeyond]

132. i was thinking the same. as in stupid americans not wanting 8/9 yr olds watching child rape

how we coddle our kids....

kinda mentality

[ReggieVeggie]

147. wow! talk about over the top!!!

So now a woman masturbating in front of other adults is equivalent to wanting 9 year olds to watch child rape? What the hell?!

[seabeyond]

156. jumping in when you dont know the reference.

this poster last week went on a rant about the prudishness of americans because parents were bothered when their children were showed a film in fourth grade (8/9 yr olds) graphically showing rape of children.

[ReggieVeggie]

161. you were making an equivalency between two separate incidents

I have no idea who would show 9 year olds rape videos or why but I can certainly see why the parents were bothered. This is not the same thing at all or even close to it.

[seabeyond]

163. you are missing what this subthread is about. follow

the poster challenge the other poster about the same old same old american bashing that she does. i was agreeing with that poster that there is a consistent theme to american bashing. i gave the example of just last week bashing americans for being prudes because parents were bothered their children watched a film that had child rape.

i was not comparing children watching child rape and a woman spreading her legs, masturbating for pure entertainment of a bunch of men.

[cali]

166. ok, let's be clear. she wasn't masturbating. she was being penetrated

by a sex toy by her partner- who is, btw, the dominant in their relationship- and 48 to her 24.

[Skip Intro]

182. .

.

[Hannah Bell]

187. garbage. shitting is a natural act, that doesn't mean having someone shit

in front of college students = "education".

[fascisthunter]

123. lol... the prudishness here is amazing

[cali]

125. prudishness? right. because if one finds this absurd and pointless

it's all about prudishness. Not to mention the ugly sexism inherent in this little demonstration. Yeah, women just want to be used.

[ReggieVeggie]

148. so it IS about the woman

why don't you just say that?

[cali]

152. I have said that in part it's about the woman

but it's also something that provides no educational value.

[ReggieVeggie]

158. according to you

why don't you write the professor and tell him how his education and training serve no purpose that you can discern?

[seabeyond]

162. his colleagues and fellow professors are doing just that. nt

[GliderGuider]

180. Delete - wrong place.

[Upton]

155. Agreed

a lot of prudishness here. Oh, they hide behind different reasons or terms, but it's just folks uncomfortable with sex...

[Union Scribe]

164. ...

So is there any combination of place and act you'd find unacceptable? I bet I can find a prude in you.

[cali]

167. uh, no. I don't feel uncomfortable about sex.

[Exultant Democracy]

172. +1, I try to stay on the side of academic freedom.

[TheMightyFavog]

124. Where was this class when I was in college?

:)

[darkstar3]

176. In all the noise I've read about this incident, one thing seems clear:

It seems to be implicitly accepted by the members of this board that such a demonstration, when considered in the face of all the free porn currently available, has no educational value. I would like to beg to differ, and put forward an idea as to why I personally think that this demonstration may have some merit. Please read to the end before condemning me as a sexist pervert.

The old proverb says that "nothing is certain but death and taxes." I disagree. There is another constant in this world that our puritanical ancestors spent quite a bit of time trying to hide or make taboo, and that is sex. Sex is a natural biological process, engaged in by every mammal on the planet at some time during a normal life cycle, and yet homo sapiens are the ONLY ones who treat the action as if it were somehow unacceptable or inappropriate.

Sidebar: How many parents here have ever pressured or somehow nudged their young adult children about having babies so you could have grandchildren? How many young adults here have received this type of nudging from their parents? We, as a society, EXPECT people to have sex, but we constantly treat the action as if it were somehow a social faux pas.

We have lived on this planet for hundreds of thousands of years, and yet, rather than evolving into open-minded explorers with incredible capacities, we have managed to inject fear and self-loathing into the very process that maintains the propagation of our species. In this day and age of growing educational capabilities and the long-overdue relaxation of the religious stranglehold on society, this failing of the human society is something we should be ashamed of.

Now let me be clear, or else some textbook discussion forum persona will go hyperbolic on me: I am NOT saying that we should all live like bonobos and hump anyone we want, anytime we want, at any place we want, with no regard whatsoever for possible consequences. We are, after all, a highly evolved species with some level of self-control and social structure. I AM saying, though, that we all need to start acting as though we are rational adults with our own sexual histories whenever the subject of sex comes up. We need to stop treating everything sexual as some sort of taboo, and start acting like we've been doing it for 200,000 years.

THAT'S why I think this particular demonstration had some small amount of merit. Small because the students there would need to have eyes to see it, and obviously it was easy to miss if I am to judge by the replies on this board. Look at the situation: An exhibitionist performed in front of an audience of voyeurs. The sexual kinks of more than one person were sated that night, and with the help of the professor's authority and invitation, the demonstration made it seem like that was OK. As it should be. We've been fucking each other into overpopulation for a good long time now, so we ought to all be OK with the idea of safe* sexual kinks.

It would have been a better demonstration of human sexuality to have two consenting exhibitionist partners up on that stage (participating rather than facilitating, as the male here was), but if it managed to get the point across that sex, even socially taboo sex like exhibitionism, voyeurism, group sexual activity, etc., is a normal human function and desire, then I think this demonstration had at least some merit. Yes, that merit was diminished by the fact that a solo female was the object of the demonstration, playing further into other societal problems we should be ashamed of, but don't let the sexism detract completely from the lesson.

BONUS POINT: What would happen if we could convince the societies of this world to regard sex as nothing more than biology in action? What would happen if we as a race treated sex a little more like we treat alcohol and a little less like we treat crack? Is it possible that, when we finally stop acting as though this necessary action is somehow taboo, we will stop treating our citizens differently because of the way they participate in it?

*Auto-erotic asphyxiation, snuff films, and various forms of sadism would generally fall under the category of unsafe, so let's not the ride the hyperbole trolly.

[GliderGuider]

181. Is it the university setting that's off-putting to people?

After all, performers like Annie Sprinkle have been educating people on a wide variety of sexual matters much more flamboyantly than this for many years now, but they do it under the guise of art. Does that make it more acceptable?

I can see value in something like this, because - all sniggering aside - it's a demonstration in quite a clinical setting that makes a whole different impression than a porn show. A lot of women have problems with orgasm and are shy about using vibrators or other aids. Many young men have no idea about the response chain that leads to a woman's orgasm and are very threatened by the idea of using sexual aids, either from insecurity or unfamiliarity. So a demonstration with a real live human being could be quite valuable for some people, as well as giving the audience members a chance to explore their personal reaction to public sexuality and providing a jumping-off point for any number of valuable sociological discussions.

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. It seems academically valid to me, certainly within the scope of a human sexuality course.

[Hannah Bell]

191. you mistake education for personal counseling.

[GliderGuider]

193. Not at all. Everything depends on how the professor handled the subsequent discussions.

We have no information about those discussions, and without it we are engaged in nothing more than context-free personal reaction. The sniggering and knee-jerking on this thread are ample evidence of that.

I'm quite prepared to assume that the prof didn't do this on a whim, and had sufficient academic chops to create an appropriate, it intense, educational experience out of it. To decide a priori that it had no value requires the assumption that the prof did it solely for - what, shock value or titillation? I find that unlikely in the extreme. He took a major career risk in confronting a deep social taboo, and opened up an opportunity for a unique set of educational conversations as a result. I just don't see him wasting that opportunity, which makes it a valid exercise.

[Skip Intro]

183. No. Just no.