"Scientists" At Northwestern University Finally Unravel The Age-Old Mystery of the Dildo

The final frontier. This has been bothering me since I first saw Fermat's marginalia about a proposed solution to the mathematical question of Power Tool, Sex Toy, and LadyPud.

Now we know.

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

The demo, which was optional, was part of the popular class taught by Prof. John Michael Bailey, the Sun-Times is reporting. More than 600 students take the class, which the course description says “will treat human sexuality as a subject for scientific inquiry.”

This class is popular? I guess so. Pornography is popular. So is playing XBOX. So is getting drunk and hitting on people. We need classes like these, because we really need to issue academic credits for stuff people do in their downtime.

The professor defiantly stated that he will not succumb to the forces of "sex negativity."

This Pajamas Media article from a month back puts this sort of thing into context. Colleges are losing any sort of discipline and playing to the desires of their clients -- their clients being 18 to 21-year-olds finally out of their parents house and looking to hook up and get their drink on.

Look — if your child did well in high school, got excellent SAT scores, and signed up for a demanding major, you have nothing to worry about, except the price tag. And if that’s not a problem, you can stop reading right here.

But plenty of you parents know you have children who rarely cracked a book, got mediocre high school grades, and really have no interest in the demands of a real college learning experience. They got into less demanding schools or curricula, or you’re paying out-of-state tuition money for the privilege of sending your kid someplace he couldn’t have gotten into if he lived in-state.

When you toured the campus and saw the surrounding bars and clubs, when you saw the campus shopping mall that was designed to look like Rodeo Drive, and when you toured the athletic facility that rivals an upscale sports club, did you pause to think that those were not assets to the pursuit of the life of the mind?

...

We have to sit through lectures by our incomparable elected officials and our distinguished administrators telling us how many people the state needs by such and such a year with college degrees. We know how to give degrees. We’re good at that. But an education?...

Now your son is carrying a load of debt that he can’t pay off, and he can’t find a meaningful job because he really has no skills that translate into the marketplace. He never committed himself to the discipline, rigor, and fortitude it takes to get a meaningful education. He didn’t know what to do with himself; you didn’t know what to do with him, and you thought he should have a college experience. He did, in the sense that four years of recreational sex, hard drugs, and bars that are open late into the night provided him with a college experience.

You would have been better off giving him the cash to invest and sending him to the Caribbean or Vegas for several weeks every year where he could have indulged his sexual appetites and legally smoked ganja. Financially you would have both been ahead. So too would we.

(That article tends to attack both the unprepared, unserious student as well as the college catering to his non-academic agenda; I've omitted the stuff about the students' failures because it's not on the point I'm making.)

All of this stuff -- dildoing a woman in class For Great Science, creating your own major about media criticism of Gilligan's Island, etc., etc. -- is the university attempting to become the Cool Mom or Cool Dad, that is, the parent who strains mightily to be a "bud" to his or her kid instead of, you know, a parent. Such parents are popular (but not respected) since you can walk all over them and they are all too eager to let an inexperienced, unwise child make impulsive and hedonistic decisions without the restraint (or even the elder counsel) of an adult.

Colleges are similarly abandoning standards and tradition in order to appear hip to what are, basically, hyper-libidinous know-nothing barbarians.

If colleges are basically now "learning" from their students -- Oh, you want to see a woman frigged in class? Okay, we can do that -- what is the point of sending your kid there? Shouldn't the college then be paying him, since he's apparently designing the curricula?

I do believe that there should be nothing off-limits to actual science, and that includes sex. I hate to point out the obvious here, but there is no actual scientific inquiry going on here -- I know how to do the Disappearing Dildo Illusion, and I'm pretty sure that our current crop of kids, raised on the Internet, know this magic trick too.

This wasn't science; this was, as they used to call staged outrages in the 60s, an "Event."

And you're paying for it. And professors know that to keep their jobs and make tenure they either have to be outstanding in their fields or stage a series of public outrages that will make their classes overenrolled and, therefore, make them in-demand.

Since the first option is hard and the second is easy... well, the alleged students want it easy, the alleged professors want it easy. So "education" shall be easy. Works out for everyone.

Except when you leave college $120,000 in debt and your unqualified to do much except write a pseudo-scholarly paper on comparative dildology.

posted by Ace at 12:55 PM

| Access Comments