Northwestern University defends after-class live sex demonstration

Oh, Wanderhome. I'll never claim to be a psychologist, but I do tend to notice 10 times out of 10 that whenever someone quickly defends a point made agaist them, it was usually in a tender spot that said victim tends to cover up and defend suspiciously quick. Not that I'm insinuating that I may have been spot on of course.

Still, it seems highly suspicious that the exhibitionst in the classroom was the first to jump at the opportunity to a hands-on approach. Couldn't it have just been put to an intellectual forum?

edited 9th Mar '11 7:33:33 PM by Newfable

@Wanderhome: ah, dude...believe it or not, there are guys out there who think the female orgasm is a myth. Besides, as has been pointed out before, the demonstration does have educational value and is not the "sexual escapades of a deviant" or whatever.

If it doesn't, then art classes shouldn't get models (clothed or otherwise) for figure drawing classes, biology students shouldn't have to dissect frogs, and people who learn carpentry shouldn't touch a chisel or router until they graduate and get a job.

Hands on experience and learning is a good way to learn for everyone, the best way for some, and the only way to get certain details across. I agree somewhat with Fable; people's objections are grounded in the purely emotional Squick-factor of public sex, and they're cloaking this behind arguments claiming that "it's not educational".

It's. Just. Sex. That's what college is for is home to.

Don't get me wrong though Drunkscriblerian, I can also agree to a lot of what has been said in the negative. It's a sticky situation.

Not every student in such a hands-on approach would be completely educational about the scenario, and the whole thing may, may, border closely to becoming an orgy if not kept under control by all involved. That's the underlying argument made for the negative for such a course; when asked, "What's preventing this from getting too sexual and stop being educational?" the answer is a meek, "Human willpower," which has been shown time and again to be particularly ineffective when it comes to sexual matters here in America. However, all that is due to the prudish, stand-offish mindset of American as a whole when it comes to sex. Sex wouldn't be seen as such a public taboo if what made it taboo was done away with. But in order to do so, it'd have to be more public, which won't happen until America's opinion on sex changes greatly.

You can see where this takes us.

@Fable: So the solution seems clear; forge ahead, deal with a few growing pains and make a better place for ourselves. one where people aren't hung up about sex and can learn about it the same way they learn about everything else.

Or just look to our allies across the lake and ask, "How'd you guys pull it off?"

I'd be willing to bet that their answer would border, "Stop being tightasses."

Just a guess though.

@Wanderhome: Not that article, but a later article does, which I'm presuming is more reliable.

Would you happen to have a link?

@Drunk By reading about it? We all learn differently, you know.

I get that, and I believe I gave a nod to it in my post. Besides, sex is a "doing" thing: just like one cannot learn woodworking without picking up a tool and making some sawdust, one cannot learn all that much about sex without actually getting in the trenches and having a bit. Watching it done (in both cases) is a close second.

Tell me; if you wanted to learn woodworking, would you object to a live demonstration involving people putting a cabinet system together?

@Drunk If I wanted to learn how to do so, yes. If I simply wanted to learn about woodworking, no. There's a difference between the two.

@KCK: I didn't ask if you'd go. I asked if you'd object.

EDIT: if you were taking a class on woodworking and the teacher arranged a field trip to watch cabinets being put together, would you go or would you object on the grounds that it was "not educational"?

edited 9th Mar '11 8:21:18 PM by drunkscriblerian

@Drunk Never mind. Er, no? Unless I felt I had a reason to.

edited 9th Mar '11 8:21:01 PM by KCK

@Wander: http://www.suntimes.com/4150853-417/northwestern-sex-prof-apologizes-for-after-class-sex-demo.html

Okay...all other discussion aside, GODDAMN. I've used a reciprocating saw (also known colloquially as a "Sawzall") at work, and the idea of someone being fucked by a dildo-equipped one is...wow. Woman's insides must be made of rubber or something. Color me impressed.

Anyhow, KCK: what I was getting at is that the demonstration of a sexual act is functionally no different from any other demonstration in any other subject. An argument that a sexual demonstration holds no academic or educational value in a human sexuality class has no basis in logic...it's grounded in irrational Squick-based concerns regarding sexuality, which are personal and have no place in what a subject can and cannot cover.

edited 9th Mar '11 8:39:28 PM by drunkscriblerian

You know what I find strangest about this whole deal?

No matter how in depth any article about this is, they always describe the sex toy in detail.

It's so bad at this point I'm beginning to suspect that there's something about getting a journalism major that causes you to be sexually repressed.

@Black: It's an industrial power-tool, modified for fucking someone. I'd describe that, it's worth describing.

@Black: I think it's more that there's a running game to see who can get the most provocative material past the editor.

@Drunk Scriblerian: They usually also lower the RP Ms so that it doesn't cause massive trauma. Either that, or they use a variable speed saw and only use the lowest setting.

edited 9th Mar '11 8:41:54 PM by DrunkGirlfriend

@DS: But from what you've told me, it seems like it's just a way to get "And she was fucked really hard, boys! I mean really hard! *pointless wink*" past the editors.

@DG: Well, yes. But that just means the editors are in on it too.

I just showed that article to two of my four female co-workers (well, just the two paragraphs about the sex toy). They both went wide-eyed and generally Whiskey Tango Foxtrot faced.

@Drunk Who said it didn't have any academic or educational value?

@KCK: several people, back in this thread. Not going to name names because that would be a personal attack.

@Drunk Ah. Well, while I don't approve of the occurrence, it would be silly to say no lesson was learned from all this.

Most notably, how to turn a reciprocating saw into a sex toy.

edited 9th Mar '11 9:54:08 PM by Iaculus

@laculus Now that's something to object to! [shudders]