In detailing the University of Maryland’s Sex Week, the controversial nature of the program was examined, as well as to if a publicly funded university should be putting on such a program, especially when some parts were so explicit. There was some reflection in the second piece, but this one is really going to get into the thick of the matter in discussing sex.
Few would argue that sex is not beautiful thing. And the students at University of Maryland, particularly those who write for The Diamondback, the student newspaper, certainly seem to think so. There is a world of difference though between how some of those who have written for or to the newspaper versus how Christians view sex.
The word Christians appears here, but it actually need not be so exclusive. When the content that appears in The Diamondback is examined closely, it becomes clear as to why such a viewpoint of sexuality is actually potentially damaging to body, mind and soul.
The previous piece conceded that there is likely no college campus where every student is a virgin and amongst those students who are virgins, that they will wait until marriage before having sex. That’s not the point though.
Yes, the Christian viewpoint is that sexuality is a gift from God for one man and one woman to share together in the context of marriage. Sadly, our world has fallen where not many wait to have sex in the context for which it was intended.
This piece could discuss the morality and differing opinions about sex to death. But it is not going to waste your time, dear reader. It’s not going to try and convince you that within the context of marriage is the best way to have sex. It is at least going to argue in favor of giving sex meaning though.
When you have sex with someone, you are intimately giving yourself to that person in the most special way. It is not just about yourself, and it’s not about your own self-gratification or empowerment. It’s about a special bond between two people.
And because of this special bond, whatever the reason for the sex, the details of the act, even if just the place where it occurred, do not need to be submitted to the student newspaper for all to read about. Such a piece as “Secret hookup spots on campus,” starts off like this. The emphasis is original:
EDITOR’S NOTE: Some students asked to have their last names omitted because of the sensitivity of the subject.
It is a sensitive subject indeed. It is so sensitive, that it need not be submitted for all to read in order to get ideas for their own hookups or just a chuckle over.
Sex should at least occur in a relationship or with commitment between two people. It seems we cannot even expect that of college students these days though. Because hey, if it’s fun and feels amazing, and as long as it’s consensual, that’s what matters most. Granted, of course all sex acts should be consensual, but that is not the only factor as to if the sex is right.
What is learning about how one can use a sex toy and display it as a piece of art, with its real purpose hidden from your mom, as one event focused on, going to achieve? Besides evoking controversy and disgust from some, it’s jut not necessary.
A few responses to a student’s guest column speaking out against Sex Week appeared in The Diamondback. In “Responding to Sex Week Opposition” Michael Hobgood concludes:
Sexual health is about more than just condoms and STI testing; it is about educating people about ALL of the many nuanced ways in which human sexuality manifests itself, creating an environment in which everyone is afforded the opportunity to express — and explore — their own sexuality safely, without fear of judgment or unwanted experiences.
Yes, Sex Week has grown to include many events that do not pertain to safe sex practices, but these events are far from “unnecessary” and do fall within the realm of “sexual health.” On a college campus of more than 30,000 students, and in a world where rape culture has permeated our societal milieu, we desperately need a Sex Week that is as diverse and as comprehensive as possible.
At the end of the piece, the author expresses her hope that “serious reforms are made” when Sex Week returns in the future, and I couldn’t agree more. I hope that Sex Week is “reformed” into a larger and more varied initiative than we’ve ever seen. In fact, Sex Month has a nice ring to it.
In his last paragraph, he almost appears to be mocking the guest author in a way, or at least her views, in which she asks for Sex Week to be reformed. Hobgood addresses the author’s concerns, but does not seem to fully appreciate or understand them.
There is another response to the column, in the form of a Letter to the Editor, bearing the title “Sex Week promoted empowerment,” by Connie Chow. In her concluding paragraphs she makes the point that:
The author states that sex toy demonstrations and learning how to talk dirty in the bedroom “trivialize human sexuality.” But how is being confident and comfortable with your own body not sexy? Learning to communicate with your partner is an important part of sex because it helps to deepen your spiritual connection. That sounds pretty healthy to me.
For partners “to talk dirty in the bedroom,” is not the kind of communication schools need to promote, however.
One of her paragraphs seems to offer a justification for why Sex Week is so great:
Students should also have a safe environment to learn about what actually goes on behind closed doors. I think it’s great that Sex Week provides students with informational sessions about sex toys and discussions with an actual sex therapist. Let’s be honest — I’m pretty sure most of the things college kids know about sex is either from porn or from random Google searches because I know I never saw a single sex toy in my 5th grade sex education class. Students shouldn’t have to resort to the Internet to find this kind of important information. We all know how untruthful the Internet can be sometimes, and sexual health is not something you want to jeopardize. If students are going to learn how to have sex, it should be from an experienced health professional who truly has their best interests at heart. Not from Wikipedia.
She mentions that she “never saw a single sex toy in [her] 5th grade sex education class.” That is because they absolutely do not belong there. As to if students should pursue sex toys on their own is up for debate, but it’s not something the university should be promoting. Students have other places to “resort to” other than “the Internet” for information. And the university’s health center can be such a place, again, without promoting.
Her piece concludes with this, which brings up Chow’s main point in her opening paragraph, empowerment:
Sex Week is one of the best things that has happened to our university in a long time. Not only does it break down barriers on traditionally taboo subjects, it’s managed to portray sexual education and empowerment from a variety of perspectives, including people from both the LGBT community and religious organizations. Thanks to Sex Week, I feel infinitely more comfortable talking about sex, and in turn, I have never felt more at peace with myself.
Sorry, Connie, but sexual empowerment is about a lot more than “how to talk dirty” and being “at peace” with yourself. The latter is certainly a good point, but it is not the bulk of what sexual empowerment truly is.
In a piece appearing just before Sex Week, The Diamondback seeks to educate students with “Sexual health on the campus.” The piece however does not discuss abstinence and seems to take a one-sided approach with regards to sex being a good thing.
The piece’s conclusion:
Avoid making assumptions
Beckwith said she hoped the assumption people make when they see someone carrying around a condom or getting tested is that they are smart, safe and responsible.
“Sexual health is a physical, mental and social experience of wellness,” she said.
If students can adhere to these tips, Beckwith hopes the perception of sex, to any degree, can be positive for everyone involved.
“If we as students on campus own this ‘awareness is sexy’ mentality, and taking ownership and being really responsible with our bodies is the positive thing instead of the shamed thing, then we can really flip the script,” Beckwith said.
We certainly don’t have to shame people, and our bodies are a positive thing, but that does not mean we should just write off self-control and commitment because sex feels good. And while “[s]exual health is physical, mental and social experience of wellness,” such can also include abstinence or saving sex for only certain committed circumstances, such as a long-term relationship or marriage.
In their “wrap up” for Sex Week, The Diamondback has a section, “Let’s Talk About Sex,” with various pieces pertaining to the week’s events or sexuality in general. Perhaps the most troubling is the piece from Ezra Fishman.
Its title, “Distorting the meaning of sex,” may seem refreshing at first, but anyone who is expecting the true nature of sex to be discussed, beyond how “awesome” it is, will be sorely disappointed. For a different, more refreshing view one can examine Nathaniel Peters’ piece on author J. Budziszewski’s On the Meaning of Sex. But let’s see what sex is all about to Ezra:
Sex is about having fun. It’s about two or more people getting together, deciding they are ready to open their bodies fully to each other and having a jolly good time. That’s why we do it. We have sex because we like it; if we didn’t, we wouldn’t, as a culture, keep doing it. This isn’t to say everyone enjoys sex or that every act of sex is enjoyable. But as a species, we wouldn’t keep forcing ourselves to do what is largely a gross, smelly, sticky and pretty horrific-sounding activity if we didn’t like it.
Where Ezra does discuss sex as a problem, is that some people may not be able to do it or don’t like doing it. He does also discuss how people use sex against others. But when it comes down to it, to Ezra, sex “is about having fun.” Newsflash Ezra, it is also meant to be about being intimate with one (not more, at least not at one time), person in the most special way possible. It’s also, you know, about having babies. And if we didn’t, “as a culture keep doing it[,]” our species would die out.
Perhaps even more alarming about Ezra’s point is not just the flippant and casual way in which he views sex, but how he also regards other viewpoints in the same manner. Ezra speaks with almost an air of authority, and tellingly opens his piece in such a manner (emphasis is mine):
Sex is complicated. At its core, it’s an activity two or more people do on their own. But in our culture, it’s become much more. Sex is a topic we talk about constantly, but one we avoid at all costs. It has all the complexities that exist in any interaction among multiple people but adds the complications of taboos, politicization, religion and a general lack of understanding of what it is and how it works. We put so much thought into sex and its place in our society, but when we do, we miss the point completely.
Certainly not all at the University of Maryland feel like those other than the anonymous guest author who wrote to The DiamondBack. Those who have contributed and are mentioned are only a select few. But these select few represent the unfortunate view of what sexuality in our society, and our college campuses have become. Students may hail Sex Week, even wish for it to be a “Sex Month,” but that does not mean the university should or needs to promote it. Worse, to do so may present mixed or even wrong signals about what sexual “wellbeing” truly constitutes.
No comments yet
