Live Sex Show! Free, with your semester tuition. Follow

http://www.suntimes.com/4099633-417/northwestern-university-defends-after-class-live-sex-demonstration.html

More than 100 Northwestern University students watched as a naked 25-year-old woman was penetrated by a sex toy wielded by her fiancee during an after-class session of the school’s popular “Human Sexuality” class.

Ummm, ok. Unsure of the value of a live demonstration in this case. Sounds ridiculous.



PS - Anyone else reminded of this? :D

Would have been a much more useful demonstration if it were used after history classes. At least then the students would have a reason to stay awake.

On the radio the other day, the hosts were saying that the primary issue with this wouldn't be among the students (who were probably calling their friends and telling them to come down) but among the parents who are paying $45,000 a year for their kid to go to Northwestern.

"I'm paying forty-five thousand for you to see WHAT??"

Which seems kinda silly, really. I mean, the course is human sexuality, the subject of the particular lecture was fetishism, and the post-lecture presentation was optional. I dunno, seems like parents didn't really think much through at all if they are just objecting now

It seems like they also played a video depicting BDSM before the live demonstration, but there wasn't an outcry against that

Sure. Now get a job as school administrator and explain to people paying $45k that they're "silly" for caring.

I didn't mean their caring was silly, I mean that they only care when outrage **** (lulz) makes it to the news. The parents wouldn't have known nor cared up until this point. It's like the grandmother who buys grand theft auto for their kids and then is outraged that there's a hidden sex scene. Except the kids in this case are (presumably) adults.

The age was an idea for me too, but since it hasn't been discussed yet I'm guessing it's not a factor (would have been posted all over the articles, I'd think).

As for the second, if the woman's fetish was voyeurism, why would the man get naked unless it was his as well? Neither of them had to do this - they were asked and she agreed. If he didn't want to, or it didn't work for him, he would be under no obligation to do so.

WHAT??!

I'M OUTRAGED!

Eat your applesauce, Grandma.

So the obvious answer is the guy would have obstructed the view.

Meh, why go to class for it? That stuff happenes all the time at Parties and Frats all the time in college.

Looks like it was intended as a more standard fetish presentation that turned into a less typical scenario.

Usually this stuff is reserved for private parties and conventions for legal and other reasons, and a large part of the issue is that prior notification wasn't done. If they had located this at any of the normal venues, and followed the standard protocol, it would have been significantly easier to protect from public flak via consent waivers, etc.

I've got no problem with the actual content, only the procedural issues.

To learn how Home Depot is really a sex toy store...

Playing pure devils advocate here, but:



So since it was a choice the students had, knowing full well the consequences either way, and with other alternative choices available, it's perfectly acceptable. I agree.





Interesting double standard. Didn't the student also make a choice to attend a school with a strict honor code, knowing full well the consequences, and with other alternative choices available to him?


Is your approval really based on the ability of the people involved to make an informed choice, as you claimed? Or is it based on something else entirely?


Oh. And while I have no dog in this hunt at all, the article doesn't say what part of the honor code he violated. While I'm sure he did admit to having premarital sex, that doesn't mean that's the reason he got kicked off the team. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that there's more to it than that.