U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-05-2011, 07:05 PM
 
Location: Baltimore
8,287 posts, read 7,313,635 times
Reputation: 3650

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Amazing how many people on here don't realize how offensive and inherently wrong this was.

Seems the University might be catching a clue;

Northwestern prof apologizes for live sex act - U.S. news - msnbc.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41892016/ns/us_news/ - broken link)
"Inherently wrong," as you put it, is not something that he acknowledges and certainly isn't something that his apology is meant to imply. While the professor regrets the effect the demonstration has had and wouldn't do it again, he asserts that "no harm" was done and the demonstration was relevant to the class:

"The demonstration was relevant to a topic relevant to my course, it occurred after class in a completely voluntary setting with ample information about what would occur. It involved an act that although unusual, had no harmful effect on anyone . . . Those who believe that there was, in fact, a serious problem have had considerable opportunity to explain why: in the numerous media stories on the controversy, or in their various correspondences with me. But they have failed to do so. Saying that the demonstration "crossed the line," "went too far," "was inappropriate," or "was troubling" convey disapproval but do not illuminate reasoning. If I were grading the arguments I have seen against what occurred, most would earn an "F." Offense and anger are not arguments. But I remain open to hearing and reading good arguments."
http://www.dailynorthwestern.com/mobile/campus/prof-bailey-apologizes-for-damaging-nu-s-reputation-with-optional-sex-toy-demonstration-1.2505786 (broken link)

Don't hold your breath, Dr. Bailey.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-05-2011, 07:56 PM
 
152 posts, read 333,345 times
Reputation: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Amazing how many people on here don't realize how offensive and inherently wrong this was.

Seems the University might be catching a clue;

Northwestern prof apologizes for live sex act - U.S. news - msnbc.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41892016/ns/us_news/ - broken link)
I realize how offensive and wrong this was! I wonder what the professor's intentions were by having this tart laying spread eagle on the table going to town with every object in sight? What was that supposed to teach anyone?

I am normally a very liberal person, but this is going too far! Sex shows are for strip clubs, brothels, and back rooms in Vegas, not in an educational institution. I have lost all respect for Northwestern. The students who watched this "lady" shamelessly pleasure herself for all to see should be ashamed!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2011, 08:02 PM
 
11,145 posts, read 13,550,038 times
Reputation: 4209
Quote:
Originally Posted by maja View Post
First of all, I never said they didn't have the "right" to present this. That is up to the President of this private University (who, by the way, has come out against it.) I did, however, state my opinion on the matter, of which I do have a "right." Of course, the University can and should teach about wars and the holocaust, etc. but as with the course on human sexuality, I don't think there's any need for live demonstrations of abusive behaviors. These are, as you pointed out "adults" (who must have adequate I.Q.'s or they wouldn't have made it into this University) and adults, unlike preschoolers, are capable of reading and comprehending information. They really don't need the live porn show.
I think this is simply rooted in your closeted views of human sexuality. You refer to a woman masturbating as "abusive behavior"? Really?!? I've never met a woman who used that phrase to describe it. It's certainly not an abusive act in any way, shape, or form. In fact, science has proven over and over again that it's extremely healthy both physiologically and psychologically.

So, again, you're projecting your lifestyle choice on other people and insisting an entire class on human sexuality stop learning about human sexuality (as you did in your OP). I don't think I would have chosen this approach for my own class, but as the professor noted, no one's made a coherent argument how this is damaging in any way. Something tells me the students will be just fine.

Last edited by Bluefly; 03-05-2011 at 08:13 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2011, 08:07 PM
 
11,145 posts, read 13,550,038 times
Reputation: 4209
Quote:
Originally Posted by CO_Transplant View Post
I realize how offensive and wrong this was! I wonder what the professor's intentions were by having this tart laying spread eagle on the table going to town with every object in sight? What was that supposed to teach anyone?

I am normally a very liberal person, but this is going too far! Sex shows are for strip clubs, brothels, and back rooms in Vegas, not in an educational institution. I have lost all respect for Northwestern. The students who watched this "lady" shamelessly pleasure herself for all to see should be ashamed!
For all your griping, you certainly did paint a vivid picture.

Do you really believe human sexuality should be relegated to sketchy backrooms and strip clubs where women are objectified as a commodity? Is that really your "enlightened" solution? You're right, though, that shameless is what sexuality should be, but seems we're not there yet.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2011, 08:07 PM
 
3,681 posts, read 5,389,414 times
Reputation: 1484
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emeraldmaiden View Post
Nope. A guest speaker (and performer) in an after-class presentation with completely voluntary attendance? Not the same; harassment involves some degree of coercion, whether it be via use of power or insistence. Since there was no pressure to attend, and multiple warnings of the explicit nature of the demonstration, there was no coercion or use of his authority/power as a professor. Also, these voluntary sessions were not counted as part of the grade in the class - material was not covered on exams.

Remember, too, that this particular demonstration had a certain shock value. Imagine that, when the subject is "Kinky Sex"! But the primary focus of the after-class sessions was the conversation, the Q&A. The students were discovering why these people like the things they like, even though they are outside the "lights out, missionary style" sex that many people consider "normal".
My post was regarding Posts #77, 82 & 85. Another poster already gave the standards for "sexual harassment" specifically at this University. The question was made that if this was okay then why not another act performed by the professor, himself? (post 77) They said that would be sexual harassment; but apparently if he hires someone else to do it, then he avoids the sexual harassment tag; i.e., loophole. Both instances could be made "optional." Although, I would argue that his role as "professor" would probably negate that concept because of the disparity of power in the relationship - kind of like an employer hitting on (not forcing himself on) an employee. Is it really "optional?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2011, 08:11 PM
 
3,681 posts, read 5,389,414 times
Reputation: 1484
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly View Post
I think this is simply rooted in your closeted views of human sexuality. You refer to a woman masturbating as "abusive behavior"? Really?!? I've never met a woman who used that phrase to describe it. It's certainly not an abusive act in any way, shape, or form. In fact, science has proven over and over again that it's extremely healthy both physiologically and psychologically.

So, again, you're projecting your lifestyle choice on other people and insisting an entire class human sexuality stop learning about human sexuality (as you did in your OP). I don't think I would have chosen this approach for my own class, but as the professor noted, no one's made a coherent argument how this is damaging in any way. Something tells me the students will be just fine.
I think most would agree that using a "f*cksaw" (you know, looks like a chainsaw) is not quite the same as "masturbating. BTW, if you read the article, you would know that her boyfriend assisted her - not really "masturbating" then in any case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2011, 08:16 PM
 
152 posts, read 333,345 times
Reputation: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefly View Post
For all your griping, you certainly did paint a vivid picture.

Do you really believe human sexuality should be relegated to sketchy backrooms and strip clubs where women are objectified as a commodity? Is that really your "enlightened" solution? Seems like you have your "shameful" and "shameless" scenarios backwards.
Most of these women are not objectified. Objectification, IMO, only comes when you perform a degrading act against your will! Strip clubs, brothels, and back rooms are places that are appropriate to willfully let loose because they are meant for those types of acts.

A university is a place for education and betterment. There is nothing educational about a woman of the night coming in and shoving things in her orifices in a classroom teeming with people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2011, 08:28 PM
 
6,400 posts, read 6,515,496 times
Reputation: 9803
Quote:
Originally Posted by maja View Post
My post was regarding Posts #77, 82 & 85. Another poster already gave the standards for "sexual harassment" specifically at this University. The question was made that if this was okay then why not another act performed by the professor, himself? (post 77) They said that would be sexual harassment; but apparently if he hires someone else to do it, then he avoids the sexual harassment tag; i.e., loophole. Both instances could be made "optional." Although, I would argue that his role as "professor" would probably negate that concept because of the disparity of power in the relationship - kind of like an employer hitting on (not forcing himself on) an employee. Is it really "optional?"
Considering that many of the students didn't attend the demo, and they were repeatedly told that it had no bearing on their grade and that it was explicit - no, I don't think that the disparity in power had anything to do with it. Making an offer for a deeper understanding of the subject at hand is completely different than requiring it as a part of the curriculum.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2011, 08:34 PM
 
11,145 posts, read 13,550,038 times
Reputation: 4209
Quote:
Originally Posted by maja View Post
I think most would agree that using a "f*cksaw" (you know, looks like a chainsaw) is not quite the same as "masturbating. BTW, if you read the article, you would know that her boyfriend assisted her - not really "masturbating" then in any case.
I am aware of the male present and the sex toys. What word do we use for that? It's still a form of masturbation.

Whatever. I'm just tired of people undermining the values of our nation by restricting grown adults' freedom of choice to make their own decisions. Such a liberal tactic. Always want big brother to step in and regulate behavior (in this case, the president of the school rather than the nation, but same core value of "big brother" intrusion). People who cry the loudest for freedom are the first to ban it when it doesn't look like their version of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-05-2011, 08:35 PM
 
Location: Boston, MA
10,963 posts, read 7,744,357 times
Reputation: 5323
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Amazing how many people on here don't realize how offensive and inherently wrong this was.

Seems the University might be catching a clue;

Northwestern prof apologizes for live sex act - U.S. news - msnbc.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41892016/ns/us_news/ - broken link)
These people think that there is something wrong with the nation and that, somehow, live sex acts in our college classrooms are the solution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top