<p>Well, that’s pretty much it in B10 Country. I’d say the common during losing seasons (and incorrect) NU chant at games of “That’s alright that’s OK, You’re going to work for us someday” and the frat dominated social life have much to do with that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not if you’re in the porn industry and sex is part of your job description.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not if you voluntary signed up for a class in sex education. Plus viewing of the sex acts was optional.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Orgasms come in many strengths and forms. Other than those cases where you can feel the actual contractions, how can you be sure? I think it is still pretty insensitive and inexcusable for a man to start calling a woman who says she just had an orgasm a liar.</p>
<p>You guys have for the most part truly had a very mature on this subject. My question now is why this thread has been a “hot” topic? It has been a “hot topic” (both figuratively and literally)since I posted it. I wonder now why it has not been made a hot topic by CC. My guess is for the same reason that sex does not belong in University classes. Because its not appropriate for the theme of the forum. Just a thought.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>ROFL, like I don’t know “Big 10 country.” Don’t you live in Virginia?</p>
<p>My concerns with this professor and his stunt are plenty. This was a sexist and dangerous act. The fact that the students watching the show are adults is the only thing that is keeping him out of jail (exposing a child to porn is a felony), however, the students watching did not really know what they were about to see, only that it would be “intense.” I heard that some of the girls covered their eyes and said “oh my gosh…” and the guys were moving closer to see better. The students didn’t complain, true, but social pressure is strong against the students complaining. Not to mention the fear that “complaining” could affect their grade. Some of the students may not even understand some of their emotions at this time either. when Professor said that these students are “open minded adults” and “not fragile children”, that pretty much closes the door on any complaints, as well as peer pressure. If this stunt had happened in a work environment, or any porn pictures on someones cubicle, or discussion of porn, there would a sexual harasment suit. It was totally sexist on the part of the professor as well…watching a women get naked and masturbate to orgasm is a turn on for many guys…no secret there. Educational??? thats a fallacy to justify watching this. Where was the guy masturbating on stage…there are women watching the “show” who may have never seen a guy ejaculate…these are typically 19 and 20 year olds, and yes, there are still some sheltered girls out there from all cultures at Northwestern. Professor Bailey has a sorted past…his research is riduculously biased and he thinks it’s fine to have sex with a research subject… HUGE ethical no-no in APA. Fire him. The guys a perv!!!</p>
<p>Ethics? Michael Bailey? What ethics? As people have pointed out, he isn’t required to be ethical.</p>
<p>It reminds me of the way he tried to argue that his failures to to comply with scientific research requirements (like, say, not sleeping with your research subjects) in connection with his book (I refuse to repeat the disgusting title) didn’t matter because – despite all the promotional materials and interviews and other descriptions saying the contrary – none of it really involved “science.”</p>
<p>I don’t like the word “perv,” but he’s definitely somewhat creepy. (I used to run into my share of “admirers” back in the day; the creepy ones are generally referred to as “chasers.” Which is what he quite possibly is. Ironically enough, given his public attitude.)</p>
<p>And you’re absolutely right; he’d never have two guys performing sex with each other on stage. Not for his class. He’d rather play tapes of men talking and have his students guess who’s gay. Because he’s just so entertaining. Loathsome.</p>
<p>Just spent an hour reading this entire thread, and all I can say is, Wow! I’ve led a… very, very sheltered life!</p>
<p>That being said, we had dinner with a NU professor and his wife (who is an attorney) Friday night and it was interesting to hear his take on it. He is completely convinced that absolutely nothing will happen to this professor. As some have mentioned here, Northwestern has enough experience dealing with a Holocaust denier prof that they will somehow manage to do damage control and move on.</p>
<p>There are quite a few things wrong with your post, d101parent. </p>
<p>The act was not sexist. It was performed on a female because the day’s lecture was about female sexuality. It had nothing to do with any sort of gender bias, but related to an issue that is pertinent to what they were studying that day. Given the topic of the previous lecture, would it make sense to have a male masturbate on stage to make it “equal?”</p>
<p>I’m not sure if it’s fair to you to judge what the students <em>really</em> feel, although they do not complain. As a current NU student with several friends in that class, I feel comfortable saying that I do not know a single person who witnessed the demonstration who was in any way shape or form upset by it. Most of us are honestly baffled by how much this has been blown out of proportion; everybody seems to be absolutely up in arms about it… except (quite notably) the students, who were supposedly most hurt by it. </p>
<p>I think the outrageous reactions of the media and older generations really shows WHY classes like this must be taught. We lived in a socially conservative, one-size-fits-all, closed-minded society, which most people quite honestly don’t fit into–especially in regards to sexuality. We need to be more open minded to different forms of sexuality that are safe, consensual, and involve no harm. That is what this optional lecture panel was about–showing a less conventional form of sexuality; the media’s outrageous response proved just how closed minded we really are as a society.</p>
<p>Was the girl hot? I think that’s the real question.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wow Abbsalah, you sound like you could have read that in a textbook! As a current NU student you lack a lot of life experience. </p>
<p>When I was in college, I learned about a lot of those “less conventional” things, the only difference was that I didn’t need my professor standing there to show me the “ropes”. We were treated like intelligent people who could seek this stuff out “live” if we so desired. Watching live sex acts at school doesn’t equate to open mindedness.</p>
<p>quote:
“The act was not sexist. It was performed on a female because the day’s lecture was about female sexuality. It had nothing to do with any sort of gender bias, but related to an issue that is pertinent to what they were studying that day.”</p>
<p>Ok, but the point is still true that no live demonstrations were shown for other lectures. Would you have stayed if 2 men were having sex? I’m betting many of the guys would have thought “I don’t want to see THAT” and would have left. </p>
<p>quote “I do not know a single person who witnessed the demonstration who was in any way shape or form upset by it.” </p>
<pre><code>Really? Have all 100+ students been anonymously and privately polled to get their response? As a licensed clinical social worker, I can guarantee there are thoughts and feelings out there that you are not aware of.
</code></pre>
<p>quote “I think the outrageous reactions of the media and older generations really shows WHY classes like this must be taught. We lived in a socially conservative, one-size-fits-all, closed-minded society, which most people quite honestly don’t fit into–especially in regards to sexuality.”</p>
<pre><code> Here’s the issue. Apparently in this class there is a one-size-fits-all-close-minded class. Professor Bailey needs to appreciate that his attitude isn’t the only attitude that matters. Again, as a white male heterosexual he is not subscribing to basic rules of cultural competence. I fear the class is hearing his rhetoric and not thinking for themselves on this one. Sorry, bud. It’s wrong.
</code></pre>
<p>Absolutely right Caillebotte. That IS the real question. Which is why it was a sexist stunt.</p>
<p>Teriwtt: I agree nothing will happen to the professor most likely. What did the NU professor that you speak of think of this live sex show? Did he or his wife think it was appropriate?</p>
<p>“The fact that the students watching the show are adults is the only thing that is keeping him out of jail (exposing a child to porn is a felony)”</p>
<p>Well, the fact that your most recent sex partner is an adult is the only thing that’s keeping YOU out of jail (having sex with a child is a felony). Same goes for me and every other adult on the thread. It’s literally true, but it sure doesn’t suggest that you came close to committing a crime.</p>
<p>When one man pays another man to penetrate a woman with a powertool - that is sexist.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This idea keeps popping up on this thread, i.e., that our society is closed-minded about sex. I feel, and have always felt, quite the opposite - that no one really cares what other consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes. There are shops not far from my neighborhood that sell all kinds of sex toys and paraphernalia, and there is no public outcry at all. Most popular movies and books and music include depictions of sex acts, some of them disturbing (e.g., Girl with the Dragon Tattoo), and how-to books about alternative techniques have been available since I was a kid.</p>
<p>America in general is quite tolerant of gay sex, sex before marriage, masturbation, sex therapy, porn and more porn, and dressing up in animal costumes. The idea that this demonstration was necessary to make some kind of statement makes me wonder if I am living in some sort of bubble of sexual appreciation and tolerance, or maybe its just CA.</p>
<p>I agree with you, Bay (and I’m in the midwest!). In fact, H and I were working out this morning at the gym - it was about 5:45 am and we were looking up at a TV (sound was off) that was turned to a movie channel and had some pretty explicit sex acts going on. We were like - “this is a bit early to be seeing this, isn’t it?” LOL.</p>
<p>Thought it was an incredibly stupid idea, but my take is that he is still more offended by the reality that they have a Holocaust denier prof on campus. </p>
<p>But the school will do nothing about it. I even asked if the departments could do things to make their lives miserable on campus, so that they might ‘choose’ to leave and he said it was incredibly unlikely that there would be any sort of consequences because once you open that door, other faculty members would worry about it happening to them for other reasons. I’m sure this guy knew all this before he did it, did it anyway, knowing he’d get away with it once, and then promise to never to anything like it again.</p>
<p>I’m sure Schapiro and the Weinberg dean got an apology and a mea culpa from Bailey (whether he had his fingers crossed, who knows) and they agreed to call it a day.</p>