Tuesday, November 5, 2013

Proof That University of Oregon Has All The Funding It Needs

The College Fix reports on how the University of Oregon paid $24,000 to have gay sex journalist Dan Savage come out and lecture (apparently, on one day) about sexual topics that I will not even allude to, much less quote.  Pretty clearly, the University of Oregon has no shortage of money.  Even more amazing:
The Register-Guard reports the speech was also partly a launch party for the university’s new smart phone app that teaches students how to have kinky sex.
Did you ever play twister as a kid? Well, toss in sex and smartphones, and you’ve got the University of Oregon’s new SexPositive App, ostensibly developed as a sex health tool. 
Look, if that's what you want to do, fine, it's a free country.  (For the moment.)  But does anyone really think that the function of a public university is to spend time and money on promoting sex among college students?  What next?  Are they going to encourage toddlers to say, "No!"?

2 comments:

Josh said...

At least the smartphone app seems to be actively focused on use of prophylactics and the recognition of proper consent, something that we've gotten into the habit of teaching college students, and which they're not naturally predisposed to doing. This can lead to some strange results -- the first 'spin' warned about the importance of trimming nails and getting knowing consent before finger-to-finger contact -- but it's not exactly a guided tour for how to do anything raunchy. You can set it to some fairly outre combinations, but it'll just end tell you to use lots of non-silicone gel, and be sure to receive consent from the stuffed animal.

((I'd honestly expect this sort of thing to be a team project for a junior programmer, which would be a legitimate-if-goofy use of school funds. Probably was made by a non-student shop that cost them a hundred thousand, though, which I can't condone.))

I'm hard pressed to think of a worse speaker on the matter than Savage, though. Standard complaints, like how he denies a lot of other people's experiences, says some rather hateful stuff, and most relevant to you, he's a jerk jerk jerk. More directly, he's focuses on controversy over information. There has to be someone with decent name recognition that can get a point across significantly better.

StormCchaser said...

" But does anyone really think that the function of a public university is to spend time and money on promoting sex among college students? "

Apparently, yes. And that's pretty scary.