Northwestern University defends after-class live sex demonstration

It's the fact that academia is not equivalent to simply learning. Academia also means status, presentation, navigation of social mores, etc.

So, if it was better presented and the participants were more prepared, then you'd not have so many problems with it?

"It's the fact that academia is not equivalent to simply learning. Academia also means status, presentation, navigation of social mores, etc."

So? That's part of pretty much any social environment, not particularly unique in that regard. I see that stuff as kind of bull anyway. And nobody has to be there if they don't want to.

@kaschei You did? Well, I don't care enough to disagree.

You realize the professor had to approve it, right?

I realize we've been arguing about his decision this whole thread, but I don't think a professor of human sexuality would be quite that blind to his own subject.

I live here and I'm just now finding out about this. What. Makes me wanna go back to school...

The first article's definition of "BDSM" is wrong. It's actually a compressed acronym which expands to BD/DS/SM, which are Bondage and Discipline, Dominance and Submission, and Sadism and Masochism.

Don't ask why I know this.

Finally got a reliable account of what this was supposed to demonstrate.

Like I've said multiple times, it wasn't demonstrating the existence of female orgasm itself; it was demonstrating female ejaculation (and possibly the existence of the G-spot).

So, to recap:

• Sitting through the demonstration was completely optional to the students.
• The content of the demonstration was made quite clear to the students beforehand, and they were given the choice of whether or not they wanted to leave.
• It didn't just involve the squirting demonstration, but other, potentially more valuable things as well.
• It wasn't covered in exams, meaning the people who might not have seen it weren't left behind.
• The demonstrators weren't coerced into it.
• The students loved it.
• Far as I can tell, the time and money investment for these demonstrations falls solely on the professor's back.

What is the problem here?

None, except for people being irrationally bothered by a basic bodily function.

@Black Humor- That one's the best I've seen on the topic yet. As a sidenote, I think where most people were getting the "prove it's real" from is from the first article

Some journalist clearly can't read, then.

@Drunk: That's a bit of an over-generalization though. Yes, there were plenty of people grossed out over overt sexuality in or around an education facility, but there were also concerns over the educational merit of the demonstration.

While I don't necessarily see a problem here as no one was harmed or abused in any way, shape, or form, I do have the question the educational validity and merit of the event. Of course, since I wasn't there and since journalism is, more or less, non-fiction with spin, I'm disinclined to make any kind of judgment about the incident itself save for that it's a bit suspicious that there happened to be someone there who happened to be an exhibitionist, who was more than willing to give a live demonstration. Beyond that, all I get is a bunch of morality and ethical comments concerning the "bad" nature of the event itself.

All in all, nothing to see here (unless you want to). Move along.

@newfable: As I understand, they were there to give demonstrations of things (they were from a local BDSM group) which did not, in the original plan, involve genital contact.