Northwestern University: anti-sex whining trumps academic freedom

Last week, a human sexuality class at Northwestern University was followed by a non-mandatory demonstration. The professor warned everyone that it would be “explicit and graphic.” 467 of the 567 students in the class left. 100 stayed behind “to watch a sexual act involving a woman, a man and an electric-powered device.” (source)

Initially, Northwestern had a pair of academic balls.

As the incident gained notoriety in the Chicago media, Northwestern University initially supported Prof. Bailey.

“The university supports the efforts of its faculty to further the advancement of knowledge,” a Northwestern spokesman said earlier this week. “Northwestern University faculty members engage in teaching and research on a wide variety of topics, some of them controversial.” (source)

But, after an “outcry” by “a substantial number of people expressing concern and unhappiness,” the University changed its mind.

What I would like to know is how many of these “people” who were “expressing concern and unhappiness” were actually in the room? If any, they were forewarned. (So they should fuck off) or the were not in the room (and thus should fuck off). College kids can handle seeing a live sex act, especially when done in the context of a human sexuality class. Anyone who is scandalized by it should, in a painful manner, fuck off.

10 Responses to Northwestern University: anti-sex whining trumps academic freedom

  1. Justin T. says:

    What I find funny is that people are complaining about the demonstration in question rather than complaining about paying Northwestern University tuition to be in a class with almost 600 people. Jesus.

  2. charles platt says:

    I don’t think it’s as simple as that. I want to know whether the students (and by extension their parents) paid for enrollment in the class without knowing there was going to be a live sex act. When you buy a product, the package should tell you what you’re going to get.

    • Cam says:

      Aside from it being as simple as that…

      Do you similarly want to know that when you pay for enrollment in a class if there will be anything that could conceivably offend you in any fashion whatsover? Or is it only when sex is involved?

  3. I spent almost 14 years in higher education, and the only thing I ever saw in the course catalogue was a three-sentence description of the course.

    Furthermore, if you read the article and the blog post, it is clear that this occurred *after* class. It was not a required portion of the class.

  4. Arunas says:

    Marc I agree with you – They should Fuck off. What was there to protest about?

    1) The students are adults.
    2) They were warned about the content.
    3) It was not mandatory to attend.
    4) It was done outside of scheduled class time.

    If I were still in school I would protest for not having these class room demonstrations more frequenlty.

  5. Marc says:

    While I agree that he appears to have given everyone fair warning, I question his style…. For the first (only?) of these non-mandatory demonstrations, he went straight to “full penetration with the power saw dildo”? Right out of the gate? Wow.

    • JT says:

      If it doesn’t have a pull start, a choke and a primer pump it might as well not be called a dildo.

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: