Poll about Northwestern's latest news story

[creekland]

Here's the news story:

 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/4099633-418/northwestern-university-defends-after-class-live-sex-demonstration.html

 

Don't read it if you don't want graphic. It's not that important.

 

I'm just curious about the poll results. I know how I feel, but I'm curious to see how the "majority" feels (and I don't know who the majority is yet...)

Edited March 4, 2011 by creekland

[Debbie in OR]

For crying out loud...is NOTHING sacred anymore? :glare: (I voted "completely inappropriate" and NW is now off of any list)

[Murphy101]

The school, or at least that department, is a joke of an education then, imnsho.

 

Even if I were to buy the argument that he couldn't think of any reason why students should not see him use a sex toy on his fiancé, which I don't -

 

Really? The prof is so stupid he can't think of any reason not to have sex (via object) with his fiancé in public during class or come up with any other way to explain sexual issues with his students sans actual penetration?

 

Then he is an idiot unfit to teach anyone, much less offer psychological guidance.

 

To me, this isn't even about religious beliefs. You don't have to be religious to see the foolishness of this or to have qualms with it.

[dirty ethel rackham]

Northwestern wasn't on our list (too big, too expensive, not as likely to get merit aid) but this just seals the deal. I'm afraid to ask my nephew, a PhD student there, what his opinion is on this whole fiasco.

[Chris in VA]

That is remarkably...repugnant.

[coffeefreak]

Sick, sick, sick. Why do you need a human sexuality class anyway?

[Imprimis]

I can't even express how disgusted I feel after reading that...

[creekland]

Northwestern wasn't on our list (too big, too expensive, not as likely to get merit aid) but this just seals the deal. I'm afraid to ask my nephew, a PhD student there, what his opinion is on this whole fiasco.

 

It was on our potential list for middle son. It's not now. I'm just curious how others feel.

 

Fortunately, middle son has no problem crossing it off the list since there are plenty of other equally as good schools out there.

[Daisy]

I think it is HORRIBLE, but I'm not sure I can mark that the school is off MY list. I don't have a list. I imagine one day my adult children will have a list. I'd discourage a university like that but I'd hope my children would make that choice for themselves.

 

I didn't answer the poll.

[AuntieM]

I cannot grasp how this is even remotely academic.

[Murphy101]

Sick, sick, sick. Why do you need a human sexuality class anyway?

 

The class in question is a noncredit class, so you don't.

 

However, most psychology majors do study human sexuality to some degree. Deviations, therapies, compulsions, and so forth all are possible issues a patient might bring into the office for help dealing with.

 

However, one does not need to watch live porn to learn how to discuss and help patients with their sex lives in order to practice psychology.

[Mrs Mungo]

I didn't vote. It was totally and completely inappropriate. It was without academic merit. Whether or not I would now discourage my child from applying there would really depend upon how the university reacts.

[justamouse]

Who the heck can orgasm in public like that? That's the psychological question, right there.

 

The class was audited, (it's not my $ for the class if my kid went) and I don't care really.

 

They were adults so there's not much I can say. But I would be interested to hear what benefit the prof thought this would bring to the class.

Edited March 4, 2011 by justamouse

[LidiyaDawn]

Ew! :ack2:

 

That's the only thing that I could think as I read through the article. :laugh:

 

(and no, I wouldn't support a child of mine attending a university that allowed that kind of thing of happen.)

[Murphy101]

I didn't vote. It was totally and completely inappropriate. It was without academic merit. Whether or not I would now discourage my child from applying there would really depend upon how the university reacts.

 

So far the university is backing up the idiot.

 

I agree. If they had fired him for gross inappropriate conduct (if ever a term applied to a situation - this is it), then I would be less harsh in my opinion of the school/department.

[Murphy101]

“Northwestern University faculty members engage in teaching and research on a wide variety of topics, some of them controversial and at the leading edge of their respective disciplines,†said Alan K. Cubbage, vice president for University Relations. “The University supports the efforts of its faculty to further the advancement of knowledge.â€

[Veritaserum]

Do you really need a public demonstration to prove that female orgasm is real? Does anyone think it isn't? :001_huh:

[Murphy101]

Do you really need a public demonstration to prove that female orgasm is real? Does anyone think it isn't? :001_huh:

 

I agree. I had the same reaction to reading that. Tho I guess some men could be so upset by their lack of ... Technique... That they prefer to believe it doesn't exist than that they aren't getting the job done?:001_huh:

[Kalypso]

appalling - I can't believe the university backed them up.

[Imprimis]

So far the university is backing up the idiot.

 

I agree. If they had fired him for gross inappropriate conduct (if ever a term applied to a situation - this is it), then I would be less harsh in my opinion of the school/department.

 

Ok, call me naive (maybe even really naive ;)), but, how is this type of "demonstration" even legal in this setting?

 

What if there were students there under 18?

[Murphy101]

Ok, call me naive (maybe even really naive ;)), but, how is this type of "demonstration" even legal in this setting?

 

What if there were students there under 18?

 

Not only that, but if she was paid to "speak" then as far as I can tell this was just school endorsed prostitution.

 

Which the prof openly admits he seeks as part of his "“Weird Chicago Red Light District Sex Tour" club.

 

It is apparent to me that this person practicing and teaching psychology is like the untreated acutely mentally disturbed expounding on what is normal healthy behavior.

[justamouse]

Ok, call me naive (maybe even really naive ;)), but, how is this type of "demonstration" even legal in this setting?

 

What if there were students there under 18?

 

The same way fetish clubs are legal. All are consenting adults. You are an adult in the performance, you are an adult watching.

 

It's interesting to me 1. why she chose to, 2. how she did. 3. What did she get out of that whole thing? The voyeurism? Validation? Did they need those people watching? I mean, yeah, I can see this as a psych class, totally. Especially a sex psych class. And the more questions I ask, the more I see the validity in it.

 

I mean, sex is a totally private thing for us now, but what about 100 years ago when everyone was sleeping in one room and all that separated you from eyes was a blanket? So we haven't always had these feelings that sex was so private.

[Imprimis]

The same way fetish clubs are legal. All are consenting adults. You are an adult in the performance, you are an adult watching.

 

 

 

Yes, but this took place in a University classroom. Of course it was under the guise of a "lesson," but still...

[Guest aquiverfull]

:thumbdown: That is just sick!!!!

[Joker]

Yes, but this took place in a University classroom. Of course it was under the guise of a "lesson," but still...

 

I thought the article said it was after class and only 100 out of his 600 students stayed to watch. They weren't required. I think it was definitely inappropriate but it would have no bearing on where my child went to college.

[justamouse]

Yes, but this took place in a University classroom. Of course it was under the guise of a "lesson," but still...

 

Still legal.

 

I may not like it, but that doesn't mean its not legal.

 

I wouldn't go so far as to assume that the prof did it so everyone would get off. He may have had a lapse in judgment as far as some are concerned, but to think he allowed it to sexually gratify the class? I think not.

[Murphy101]

The same way fetish clubs are legal. All are consenting adults. You are an adult in the performance, you are an adult watching.

 

It's interesting to me 1. why she chose to, 2. how she did. 3. What did she get out of that whole thing? The voyeurism? Validation? Did they need those people watching? I mean, yeah, I can see this as a psych class, totally. Especially a sex psych class. And the more questions I ask, the more I see the validity in it.

 

I mean, sex is a totally private thing for us now, but what about 100 years ago when everyone was sleeping in one room and all that separated you from eyes was a blanket? So we haven't always had these feelings that sex was so private.

 

 

I disagree. Even when sex was in one room with other sleeping nearby, no one was inviting strangers to take the blanket off and watch or make suggestions. Heck, most of the time they were nearly fully clothed under the blanket and trying to be quiet. Idk about anyone else, but I'm not picturing ma ingalls screaming for joy and tossing the covers off her bare naked self in the sod house.

 

I will agree there are a few ancient cultural exceptions and every culture has had some deviants. But I can't readily think of any culture where it was okay for women or men to just have at it in the public square.

 

I agree the study of deviation should be studied. I simply do not agree that a live performance was necessary. What is more, I think it was inappropriate and unethical to encourage unhealthy psychological issues.

[LidiyaDawn]

The same way fetish clubs are legal. All are consenting adults. You are an adult in the performance, you are an adult watching.

 

 

 

Were all of the students there legal adults though? Some university students are only 16 or 17...

[Imprimis]

 

What is more, I think it was inappropriate and unethical to encourage unhealthy psychological issues.

 

:iagree:

[simka2]

I can't get my emotions solidfied on this one. I really feel like the University could be in for a legal battle if this young woman ever changes her mind about "wanting" to do this. She was 25, a student, and she was put on display. Yes, she is a consenting adult, but she is also in a place of unequal authority. 1. because she was a student. and 2. because her proffessor sanctioned this.

 

I actually think it would have been much more appropriate if this had been two paid, non-student adults who were illustrating bondage issues. (and of course no mandatory attendance.)

The fact they used a student makes me very angry. She was not in a position to predict the possible consequences for this action. :glare:

 

It would affect my faith in the schools staff to make decisions based on the best interest of the students.

Edited March 4, 2011 by simka2

[justamouse]

I disagree. Even when sex was in one room with other sleeping nearby, no one was inviting strangers to take the blanket off and watch or make suggestions. Heck, most of the time they were nearly fully clothed under the blanket and trying to be quiet. Idk about anyone else, but I'm not picturing ma ingalls screaming for joy and tossing the covers off her bare naked self in the sod house.

 

I will agree there are a few ancient cultural exceptions and every culture has had some deviants. But I can't readily think of any culture where it was okay for women or men to just have at it in the public square.

 

I agree the study of deviation should be studied. I simply do not agree that a live performance was necessary. What is more, I think it was inappropriate and unethical to encourage unhealthy psychological issues.

 

Are you saying that what the people in the class were doing?

 

You can read about those deviations and become interested enough to go-and this wasn't a deviation per se-they were showing how a woman could orgasm with a toy, right?

 

Look, I'm *not* saying I wholeheartedly agree-it gives me pause, for sure. But we're not in the class, we're not talking about this it with the prof today and we're not studying it. So we're armchair quarterbacks. You have no idea where he's going to take this and it may be very worthwhile.

 

No, Ma Ingalls may not have. But I bet a pretty penny many did.

[happypamama]

Not my thing, and I definitely think it's inappropriate (and just plain weird), but that's not necessarily why I'd discourage my child from applying there (I'd far prefer them to go to our BigTen alma mater instead). If that sort of thing was seen frequently at a college, that would make me not want my child to apply there, but weird stuff is everywhere, and if it's not terribly prevalent, it should be avoidable, especially for an otherwise high-quality school.

[justamouse]

I can't get my emotions solidfied on this one. I really feel like the University could be in for a legal battle if this young woman ever changes her mind about "wanting" to do this. She was 21, a student, and she was put on display. Yes, she is a consenting adult, but she is also in a place of unequal authority. 1. because she us a student. and 2. because her proffessor sanctioned this.

 

I actually think it would have been much more appropriate if this had been two paid, non-student adults who were illustrating bondage issues. (and of course no mandatory attendance.)

The fact they used a student makes me very angry. She was not in a position to predict the possible consequences for this action. :glare:

 

It would affect my faith in the schools staff to make decisions based on the best interest of the students.

 

Yes, THIS is where my trepidation comes in. *why* did she do this and was she fully realizing the consequences. Though her fiancee was there for support.

[FaithManor]

I have many concerns. I still wonder if hidden cameras were in the room and something will pop up on p**n sites. Did she agree to that? Did everyone surrender their cell phones that take pictures? If she is the fiance of the professor, did he coerce her, "Honey, I'll dump you if you don't?" If she has classes with him, "Honey you'll get an incomplete if you don't?" There is a host of questions concerning abuse of power here.

 

Additionally, when one teaches a class in human s**uality, one is supposed to keep clinical distance. This does not maintain any kind of clinical distance. Psychology and medical profs are supposed to role model appropriate, professional behavior. O***sming your girlfriend, whatever the means, in front of your students isn't exactly maintaining an appropriate, professional distance!!! A professor with personal boundaries so far beyond reasonable standards, is a professor I would not want my children to have and especially my daughter.

 

My sis majored in psychology and took one of these classes from a well reputed school. I asked her one time what it was like. She said that it was clinical, medical, psychological, and not the least bit titilating. So, she's been a part of a class in which the subject material has been covered thoroughly and properly. This was not.

 

Thankfully, Northwestern is not on the list for any of my kids. I don't even have to think about that part!

 

Faith

[RanchGirl]

Completely inappropriate and repugnant and caused me to cross Northwestern off my list. For this to be accepted, supported, paid for and defended by the University officials is honestly shocking to me. Even without the physical act demonstrated, the BDSM community speakers, the red light district tour -- it's all completely disgusting and in no way could it be considered academic. What an embarassment for that school.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Here's the news story:

 

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/4099633-418/northwestern-university-defends-after-class-live-sex-demonstration.html

 

Don't read it if you don't want graphic. It's not that important.

 

I'm just curious about the poll results. I know how I feel, but I'm curious to see how the "majority" feels (and I don't know who the majority is yet...)

 

This isn't the only school with similar demos, although the extent to which this one went does seem to be further along.

 

Last year National Review did a series of columns about S*x week at Yale. Bawd and Man at Yale is the title of one column. There was some difference in that the Yale activities are part of a student organization, but college facilities and (I think) funding were still used to support and promote it.

 

I can see how discussion of such acts would be essential for therapists, clinicians and medical personal. Perhaps even for law students. I don't see how a public demonstration advances the level of intellectual discourse.

 

I find that schools that cherish such educational opportunities often don't make the cut for the sort of academic environment that we're looking for.

 

As for the prof's final comment that the students proved themselves to be thinking adults rather than fragile children, I have really grown weary of academics who go on and on about how the students in their classrooms are adults and should be treated as such, while expecting the parents of these adults to pony up for tuition. If they are such independent actors, then why not only assess the students' personal assets, instead of reaching down into my tax records and savings accounts. :rant: Seemingly when it comes to money, then they are back to being precious children again. Sigh.

[Mrs Mungo]

They were adults so there's not much I can say.

 

Are we 100% sure of that? I started college when I was 17.

 

“Northwestern University faculty members engage in teaching and research on a wide variety of topics, some of them controversial and at the leading edge of their respective disciplines,†said Alan K. Cubbage, vice president for University Relations. “The University supports the efforts of its faculty to further the advancement of knowledge.â€

 

Hm, this is the quote I found:

"I am troubled and disappointed by what occurred," President Morton Schapiro said. "I feel it represented extremely poor judgment on the part of our faculty member."

 

How is demonstrating a sex act advancing knowledge?

Still legal.

 

I may not like it, but that doesn't mean its not legal.

 

Sex acts in public places are not legal. You could be arrested for that.

 

I can't get my emotions solidfied on this one. I really feel like the University could be in for a legal battle if this young woman ever changes her mind about "wanting" to do this. She was 21, a student, and she was put on display. Yes, she is a consenting adult, but she is also in a place of unequal authority. 1. because she was a student. and 2. because her proffessor sanctioned this.

 

:iagree:

 

From Northwestern's Student Handbook:

Some examples of sexual harassment may include

• pressure for a dating, romantic, or intimate relationship

• unwelcome touching, kissing, hugging,

or massaging

• pressure for or forced sexual activity

• unnecessary and unwelcome references to various parts of the body

• belittling remarks about a person’s

gender or sexual orientation

• inappropriate sexual innuendoes or humor

• obscene gestures

• offensive sexual graffiti, pictures, or posters

• sexually explicit profanity

• e-mail and Internet use that violates

this policy

 

You can be thrown out of school for making an obscene gesture, but live sex demos are supposed to be okay? No, I don't think so. You can't have it both ways.

[elegantlion]

I don't remember where, but I read that she labels herself as an exhibitionist and apparently enjoyed the attention. :001_huh:

 

I also would be concerned about the legal age. Isn't it still in some states you must be 21 to enter an "adult establishment"?

[elegantlion]

 

You can be thrown out of school for making an obscene gesture, but live sex demos are supposed to be okay? No, I don't think so. You can't have it both ways.

 

The irony might be if she gets kicked out of school for her display, while the professor gets by with a oops and a slap on the wrist.

[Mrs Mungo]

If she is the fiance of the professor, did he coerce her, "Honey, I'll dump you if you don't?" If she has classes with him, "Honey you'll get an incomplete if you don't?" There is a host of questions concerning abuse of power here.

 

She was the fiance of the guest speaker, not the professor, just to clarify.

 

Additionally, when one teaches a class in human s**uality, one is supposed to keep clinical distance. This does not maintain any kind of clinical distance. Psychology and medical profs are supposed to role model appropriate, professional behavior. O***sming your girlfriend, whatever the means, in front of your students isn't exactly maintaining an appropriate, professional distance!!! A professor with personal boundaries so far beyond reasonable standards, is a professor I would not want my children to have and especially my daughter.

 

I agree, although it was the guest speaker who did this, not the professor. Still, I agree that it goes beyond educational and into titillating. That's the problem. No clinical distance maintained.

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't remember where, but I read that she labels herself as an exhibitionist and apparently enjoyed the attention. :001_huh:

 

http://www.suntimes.com/4115230-420/live-sex-demonstration-troubles-disappoints-northwestern-president.html

 

I also would be concerned about the legal age. Isn't it still in some states you must be 21 to enter an "adult establishment"?

 

Good point. Also, MANY states only allow the women to be topless, they cannot be fully nude. I wouldn't worry about sketching nudes in art class, that is not done in a titillating fashion.

 

The irony might be if she gets kicked out of school for her display, while the professor gets by with a oops and a slap on the wrist.

 

:iagree:

[Homeschooling Again]

From what I understand, the prof brought in a couple (she's 25, he's 45 or something) that are active in the S&M community. She's quoted as saying that she thought they were just going to discuss the community and fetishes, but that during the "class" she was asked to demonstrate. She's also quoted as characterizing herself as a masochist who enjoys being watched and being dominated. If the psych prof was really interested in discussing human sexuality I think there's about three semesters' worth of content right there -- why does she say she enjoys being dominated, etc. That's psychology. Watching a woman get penetrated by her (very much older) dominating "fiance" using a power tool in front of 100 students at (what used to be) a presitgious university is something quite different. I would suggest one has to wonder about this "professor" -- what he's "into" and what perspectives he therefore brings to this "class." My view is that S&M is not sex-based, rather it is about power.

[creekland]

 

Additionally, when one teaches a class in human s**uality, one is supposed to keep clinical distance. ...

 

My sis majored in psychology and took one of these classes from a well reputed school. I asked her one time what it was like. She said that it was clinical, medical, psychological, and not the least bit titilating. So, she's been a part of a class in which the subject material has been covered thoroughly and properly. This was not.

 

Faith

 

This is what I am expecting when middle son might indeed have to take one of these courses pending which direction he chooses for pre-med.

 

The more I read, the more I am convinced that there are better choices for us and Northwestern will stay off our interest list. Kiddo has about 20 schools as possibilities and I only want him to apply to a max of 8 - 10, so we need to pare down anyway. It's not like this was a dream school of his. He doesn't have a dream school yet. He's very open to many options at the moment. A professor like this one would not be something I'd want to be paying for.

 

Thanks for sharing your sister's experience. I hope that's more the norm.

 

Edited to add that the reason I was curious enough to start the poll is because it's a "personal" consideration for us. I know how I felt, but I started wondering if there was more I should be considering or if I was just really "old fashioned." I appreciate all of you who have shared their thoughts.

Edited March 4, 2011 by creekland

[Joanne]

I agree the study of deviation should be studied. I simply do not agree that a live performance was necessary. What is more, I think it was inappropriate and unethical to encourage unhealthy psychological issues.

 

BDSM is only considered unhealthy (from a clinical perspective) if it is ego-dystonic. In other words, if the person is not wanting that aspect of their "selves", it would be unhealthy.

 

I'm not defending the live sex demonstration. I voted inappropriate and I'd not encourage my kids to apply. But I also don't think that what they did = encouraging unhealthy psychological issues.

 

There is a wide spectrum of sexual expression.

[Mrs Mungo]

More info:

 

an award-winning scholar and clinician announced Thursday evening she will file a formal complaint against psychology Prof. John Michael Bailey for what she calls "a gross violation" of the American Psychological Association Code of Ethics.

 

You can read more about the professor's current and past ethics troubles (including previously being sued by the subject of one of his books) HERE. Apparently, the university's psychology department could lose its accreditation.

 

Chicago sex tour guide Ken Melvoin-Berg, the man who ran the demonstration, said in an interview Thursday that NU will be paying him $300-500 for the hour-long session, his usual fee.

 

So, the couple was PAID. Isn't that prostitution?

[creekland]

More info:

 

 

 

You can read more about the professor's current and past ethics troubles (including previously being sued by the subject of one of his books) HERE. Apparently, the university's psychology department could lose its accreditation.

 

 

 

Thank you for your update. That also makes me feel my thoughts are not out of line - even for a more "personal" field.

 

It bothers me that the University supported their professor at first, and only later did the Pres make a statement otherwise. It seems to me that he did so only due to outside pressure.

 

I think we just want a different college, period.

[Mrs Mungo]

AIUI, she isn't a student.

 

You are correct about that:

The optional presentation last Monday, attended by about 120 students, featured a naked non-student woman being repeatedly sexually stimulated to the point of orgasm by the sex toy, essentially a motorized phallus.

[simka2]

AIUI, she isn't a student.

 

Yes, I read the article incorrectly at first. Sorry for the confusion :001_huh:.

[Parrothead]

That was decidedly odd. I can't get past what happens when this young lady sees her parents again.

 

Can you imagine the conversation when her dad walks into the hardware store. "Say, Bob, I saw your daughter in the paper this week..."

 

As for the school, I don't think the prof is firing on all 8 cylinders to allow such a "demonstration" in the class. Either that or the reason he couldn't think of a good reason not to allow it has more to do with his own desires to watch.

[Parrothead]

 

 

 

So, the couple was PAID. Isn't that prostitution?

More like pimping I think.

 

It could get kind of murky if it ever when to court since the woman was not paid to have s3x with a person.

 

I know there are laws about having s3x with animals, dead people, etc. I don't know if there is a law about having public s3x with a mechanical device.