This is a follow-up piece to further discuss the University of Maryland’s Sex Week. The previous article detailed the event, as well as particularly highlighted some of the more controversial programs and featured one student’s guest column in the school newspaper who was not pleased with the week’s activities.
As mentioned in Juicy Ecumenism’s first piece, the University of Maryland is a publicly funded university. Thus, there is the possibility of concern coming not only from students at the University of Maryland and their parents, but also those taxpayers in Maryland.
Should a university partly funded by the public put on such a questionable event as Sex Week? The teaching of sexual health and what that encompasses may be up for discussion as it is, but ones that outright promote sexuality and discuss sex toys and practices will certainly cause some ire. And this is rightfully so.
Should any university put on such an event, with such programs and hosts that no doubt will be found vulgar and offensive to some? The program was put on in part by student groups, but when the university’s own health center presented the event, there may be cause for concern. A problem definitely arises when you have University of Maryland’s Health Center putting on an event promoting graphic sex toy demonstrations, or any event besides mediation or free screenings.
At many private universities, particularly religiously affiliated ones, such programs would not be tolerated, and the university administration would know better than to sponsor these events. A sense of learning and intellect doesn’t exactly come to mind for many of the programs the University of Maryland put on.
Many college aged students engage in sex. If they don’t, they’re at least being exposed to it. It is unlikely and perhaps even impossible that all students at any university, public or private, secular or religious, are virgins and will remain so until they are married or in a committed and loving relationship. Nobody is arguing that. It is still worth considering as to whether the university should play a part in further exposing, to the point of explicity and immorally promoting, sexuality.
Of course, students can maintain their morals even while attending public, secular universities. Private and religiously affiliated universities are also home to students who do not subscribe to all moral values of the administration. For many students and parents, it is a sign of comfort and money well spent to attend and pay for a place where they know their values won’t be so counter-cultural to the rest of the student body and powers that be.
For many of the students at University of Maryland, and colleges in general, sex seems to be a hot topic. This is understandable, especially given the age and the amount of freedom and independence of college students. Sex need not be such a free-for-all though, where anything goes in the name of fancy, dressed-up terms like well-being, tolerance and diversity.
The student newspaper, The Diamondback, put the university once again in the media spotlight when TheBlaze reported on the newspaper publishing an album of students posing sexually. The piece was titled “Sex in College Park.” While the pictures could certainly be worse, there are many racy photos of students with condoms, and appearing to be about to engage in or engaging in sex. In the first picture of the album on the website for the newspaper, one can see that the “Do Not Disturb” sign is provided by the Department of Residential Life.
TheBlaze also concludes its reporting with The Diamondback’s attention-grabbing “Secret hookup spots on campus.” From the article itself:
From the fountain on McKeldin Mall to parking lots to dorm showers, students seem to partake in sexual escapades just about everywhere. Although the stacks of McKeldin Library and various locales on the mall have long made the list of destination on-campus hookup spots, Terps get creative when they’re getting busy.
The Diamondback has talked about “sexual misconduct,” dedicating an entire piece to it even. The piece focuses solely on sexual assaults, however. While it is certainly noble and important to address the issue however, hooking up in public places, on campus or otherwise, should certainly fall under the realm of “sexual misconduct.”
The Diamondback certainly publishes articles other than those that do with sexuality and Sex Week. But with the writing they have put forth, such pieces very much put out the idea that college students are all about sex. And it’s one that the newspaper seems to have little, if any, qualms about.
University of Maryland is a public university. And unfortunately, promotions of sexuality like Sex Week aren’t unique just to this university. This almost seems to be the norm at many public universities.
LifeSiteNews.com last September had a piece discussing Nathan Harden’s book Sex and God at Yale: Porn, Political Correctness, and a Good Education Gone Bad. And for Live Action News, Ashley Herzog, who also references Harden’s book and her own interview with him, writes about other universities and how “Campus porn culture: a real “war on women.””
When we hear of what goes on at University of Maryland, and even reputable Ivy Leagues like Yale University, it’s no wonder that parents and students may have trepidation about attending a public university. Yale and Columbia will certainly look prestigious on one’s resumé, but is it worth it to compromise one’s values over? We’ve heard much about school choice in the public policy arena, and it is perhaps time that higher institutions of learning enter the debate.
No comments yet
