In an event that recalls the Sex Education scene in Monty Python’s The Meaning of Life, on Feb 21, after sitting through a class on Human Sexuality, about 100 Northwestern students stuck around in the auditorium and watched a woman cream.
Professor J. Michael Bailey, as part of a series of optional lectures that aren’t included in tests or exams, invited “Chicago Sex Tour-Guide” Ken Melvoin-Berg to speak to students that opted to attend the lecture. The topic that day in class had been female ejaculation and the G-spot, apparently two controversial subjects in sex scholarship. Ken brought along a woman for his demonstration, and she used his toy, known as a “fucksaw,” to make herself cream in front of the audience.
This is not the first time Bailey, a celebrated professor, has aroused controversy: his book The Man Who Would Be Queen explores “autognyephilia” – the term for when a dude is turned on by imagining that he’s a woman.
I wish that my supposedly-progressive college had offered this kind of course, but considering its already-soiled reputation (lots of drugs, not much productivity, etc. etc.), I don’t think it would have happened.
The event engendered no small amount of controversy and the administration was not pleased. Conceding that Bailey had warned the students and made the series optional, University President Morton Schapiro still stated that “I simply do not believe this was appropriate, necessary or in keeping with Northwestern University’s academic mission” (quoted in The Daily Northwestern).
Nonetheless, many students support Bailey. In a speech delivered after the event to the whole class, he received a loud applause upon his conclusion: “Sticks and stones may break your bones, but watching naked people on stage doing pleasurable things will never hurt you!”
Looking over Bailey’s statements – whether you agree with him or not – it is clear that he is not some attention-seeking sensationalist, and he truly believes in the edifying value of his series.
In an e-mail sent out to the whole class and later published in the school paper, Bailey explained that “Sexual diversity is surely a reasonable thing to address in a human sexuality class. I certainly had no hesitation inviting [Ken Melvoin-Berg], and I asked him whether he could recruit others, as well, to give the presentation. (I especially thought it would be useful to have a woman as well as a man).”
Bailey goes on to explain why he let Melvoin-Berg provide this specific demonstration: “My decision to say ‘yes’ reflected my inability to come up with a legitimate reason why students should not be able to watch such a demonstration. After all, those still there had stayed for an optional demonstration/lecture about kinky sex and were told explicitly what they were about to see.”
Indeed, I cannot see any reason why one wouldn’t want to organize such a presentation, nor can I see why anyone wouldn’t attend – especially considering all the alleged mystery surrounding the female orgasm and, by extension, female ejaculation.