Sex Week needs to restructure its ideas and events
Nikolia Rallis, SESP senior, is president of Northwestern Students for Life. The views expressed are not indicative of those of that group.
Sex Week’s mission is “simple”: to get people talking. The Web site cautions, “Ignorance is far from bliss.” However, Sex Week provides students with only one side of the story. Sex Week is supposed to help students explore the role of sex and sexuality in their lives. Instead, the week’s events focus only on sex in college, instead of equipping students with tools to be sexually healthy throughout their entire lives.
For example, many students are or plan on being in a monogamous relationship at some point in their lives, and then subsequently having or raising children. If Sex Week is supposed to provide students with information to combat sexual ignorance, then omitting these topics is extremely irresponsible and not in line with its mission. None of the events planned for Sex Week explicitly address these topics.
Sex Week claims to have no ideology; Sex Week’s mission statement proclaims, “There is no religious or ideological affiliation.” Yet nearly every event advances the idea that sex is an activity meant for personal pleasure, an activity not reserved for a meaningful relationship, and the word marriage is not even mentioned on the website. To take sex out of the context of a meaningful relationship is an ideology. To make sex about one’s own pleasure and not about the partner is an ideology. To claim otherwise is preposterous.
Furthermore, there is nothing of interest during this week for students who are interested in reserving sex for a meaningful monogamous relationship, or even for, shockingly enough, marriage. If Sex Week is not dedicated to a particular ideology, there should be events about chastity as one viable option. If Sex Week is about providing information, then why the lack of information about chaste lifestyles? Is Sex Week opposed to this lifestyle choice? If so, then clearly Sex Week has an ideological affiliation.
The organizers of Sex Week should consider expanding their horizons for next year. What topics will reach those students who currently have no interest in Sex Week? How can the organizers reach out to groups not traditionally involved in Sex Week (i.e., Northwestern Students for Life, College Republicans, Sheil, or Caris Pregnancy Clinic, to name a few)? When the aim of Sex Week is to be provocative, what about the students on campus who are turned off by provocative events?
Sex Week clearly fails to reach all of campus and should restructure its program to bring all students together in a meaningful way. The Web site boasts to have drawn 1,500 students to their events, but this is less than one quarter of the student population. Sex Week’s claim to reach all of campus is simply a falsehood.
Looking back at the archives of Sex Week, I can see some positive events, particularly those focusing on human trafficking, female genital mutilation and sexual health. This year’s schedule lacks those positive events with the exception of the sexual health fair. Making sex about personal pleasure can lead to objectification of the other person involved, which I am sure is not the purpose of Sex Week. Treating sex casually can lead to devastating consequences. It is something for the organizers to take into consideration when planning next year’s Sex Week.
| Print
Want to know more about sex? Read Carnal Knowledge. Or you can return home.
Chaste lifestyles? It’s not like Sex Week offers workshops on “scoring chicks at the bar” or one night stands. Sex week is about sex, which is just as prominent in the lives of married couples.
cm
April 14, 2009 at 12:17 am
I think that, in writing this article, you’ve actually exemplified the mission of Sex Week – to get people talking and create discussion about sex on campus. Sex Week is open for interpretation, and welcomes many different opinions. Without the provocative nature of Sex Week, do you think you would have written this article?
I disagree that Sex Week represents a certain ideology. The Sex and Religion fireside, the Sexual Health Fair, the Q&A with a Sex Therapist – all of these events are great examples of the variety of events and perspectives represented through Sex Week. Evidently, a student group cannot put on events to please every student and organization on campus, but I think Sex Week does a fairly good job at giving a multitude of activities for a variety of people to attend. If your group wants to cosponsor an event with Sex Week next year, I’m sure the committee would be receptive to new ideas like yours!
As for those interested in monogamous relationships or waiting to have sex until marriage, wouldn’t it be nice to have good sex in that relationship or when the time comes? Isn’t it a good thing to be aware of sexual health practices before an issue arises? No one ever said that the only type of sex being discussed at Sex Week is one night stands, or hooking up, or outside of a meaningful relationship… I think having pleasurable sex and being in a monogamous, meaningful relationship are not mutually exclusive ideas.
Lastly, Sex Week is only in its third year of existence at NU. To have reached 1500 students last year is phenomenal. And those are only students who have attended events. Other people (like you!) are still aware of and talking about Sex Week! :)
Katie
April 14, 2009 at 12:18 am
I agree with this article. It was a lot better than the one defending Sex Week.
Sydney
April 14, 2009 at 12:31 am
“When the aim of Sex Week is to be provocative, what about the students on campus who are turned off by provocative events?”
Please find a definition of the verb provacative below:
“serving or tending to provoke, excite, or stimulate; stimulating discussion or exciting controversy”
(provocative. Dictionary.com. WordNet® 3.0. Princeton University. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/provocative (accessed: April 14, 2009)
Based on that definition, those students have little to gain from attending lectures, higher education in general then, no?
N
April 14, 2009 at 7:26 am
haha, adjective that is :)
N
April 14, 2009 at 7:27 am
Honestly, I don’t really think Nikolia is really paying attention to what the events in Sex Week actually are. There is not one event that she can say specifically caters to a non-monogamous, lack of meaningful relationship ideal of sex. We provide a series of events that talk about sexuality and the different manifestations of such in our culture. There’s no event “Have no-strings-attached meaningless sex.” We are providing resources for both students who are having sex now and students who plan to wait. It’s just as important to know how to “rock her world” when you’re married. Also, I think Nikolia is at a bit of a disconnect with reality. Sure, we don’t really mention marriage. But for a lot of college students (which, if you hadn’t noticed, are who these events are targeted at) aren’t married or even thinking about marriage yet. We want Northwestern students to have safe sex if they’re having it now or if they’re having it in the future. And just because someone’s planning to wait, it doesn’t mean they have no interest in sex. Why not learn now? Surely, it will help in the future.
Hanna
April 14, 2009 at 1:01 pm
Of course sex week doesn’t include events that explain chastity. Chastity is the lack of sex.
There are plenty of students at Northwestern who are in meaningful, monogamous relationships, and I think that in many cases these are the students having the most sex. Students who are in a relationship with a partner who they care for will want to understand sex better so that they can give that partner the best experience possible. You criticize sex week for advancing the idea that sex is about an individual’s personal pleasure and not about his or her partner. If you look at the descriptions of sex week’s events, you’ll see that none of them advance this idea. Events like “Rock her World” are actually meant to help students improve sex for their partners.
I’m slightly disturbed that you say events about human trafficking and genital mutilation are “positive”. Of course these are important subjects and we should learn about and understand them, but I would say that they are negative issues.
terry
April 14, 2009 at 4:16 pm
“To make sex about one’s own pleasure and not about the partner is an ideology.”
Why does sex for the purpose of pleasure (and not childbearing) have to be “not about the partner?” If both people learn how to make sex more pleasurable, doesn’t that benefit both of them? Why does it mean they don’t love each other or are not committed?
This point of view is an oversimplification.
Mimzy
April 14, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Sex Week encourages discussion about sex, with the ultimate goal of allowing people to be safer about how they approach (or don’t approach) sex in their lives.
If some people consider that an ideology, then so be it. I’d personally prefer this ideology to one where marriage is equated (and requisite) to a meaningful relationship, or one where personal pleasure implies some sort of disrespect for one’s partner.
Furthermore, as members of this society, we’ve all been thoroughly taught its ideals about monogamous relationships and having children. Especially when these topics often *proliferate* sexual ignorance, it would be silly and useless for Sex Week (with the above “ideology”) to make them a priority in programming, rather than exposing students to a range of topics that are not often discussed that we can then choose to have our own views on.
julliard
April 14, 2009 at 10:46 pm
What on earth would an event about chastity be like? And who would attend? Seriously? I can’t see anyone saying to themselves, “Oh, sweet! Sex Week! Let’s go to the abstinence seminar!” And then that lecturer would just sit in an empty auditorium feeling terrible, and that’s no good for anyone.
Having attended several sex week events this year and last, and though I have my own issues with sex week, I feel that this article was written from a position of ignorance. It reminded me of those who criticized the “devil worship” in Harry Potter books without having read them. Nothing in any sex week class or workshop I have attended encouraged casual sex, or told people NOT to wait for marriage. Sometimes the instructors implied that they had very active and non-monogamous sex lives. But every event I’ve been to has spoken about sexual techniques and understanding for current or hypothetical future partners, psychology of human sexuality, religion and human sexuality, studying human sexuality in pop culture, and none of this denounces a decision to wait in the slightest. There’s not an event called, “Slutting It Up 101″ or “Everyone Should Have Casual, Meaningless Sex!” The events are geared in particular (for the most part) towards women who, as a general rule, do not have as complete an understanding of their own sexuality, and are often very, very uncomfortable with it because of the societal double-standards that dictate they must be. The event is put on by college feminists – they intend to titillate and educate. And whether or not you’re having sex now, the tips and techniques are still relevant. It’s not like your bits are going to change a whole hell of a lot, and I assume you don’t want to have terrible sex once you finally do find yourself in a loving relationship. It’s common knowledge that the first time is a lot better if you both kind of know the ropes, and it can save you a lot of frustration and heartache in some cases.
But seriously, no one really needs to learn more about how not to have sex – it’s Northwestern, I think we’ve mastered that one.
Kathy with a K
April 15, 2009 at 12:18 am
One who has set in his or her mind not to have sex before marriage is not likely to be interested in learning about how to have more pleasurable sex now. If you had made a decision that you weren’t going to eat pizza for the next five years, you probably shouldn’t hang out at Giordano’s. This is how many events are slanted towards those who are having sex now.
Hank
April 15, 2009 at 12:47 am
“Sex Week clearly fails to reach all of campus and should restructure its program to bring all students together in a meaningful way. The Web site boasts to have drawn 1,500 students to their events, but this is less than one quarter of the student population. Sex Week’s claim to reach all of campus is simply a falsehood.”
In response to this statement, and as stated above, getting 1500 Northwestern students motivated to come to events outside of classes during midterms is a huge feat. HUGE. As someone with experience planning and running campus events, its a very difficult process not only to generate interest in an event but to ACTUALLY GET PEOPLE TO GO… which is a whole different animal. The fact that Sex Week has generated as much interest, attendance, dialogue, and even opposition as it has in past three years is AMAZING. No one week of events is going to reach all of campus, but thanks to Sex Week the Northwestern community now has more of a resource for sexual health and information than ever before. Personally, I would like to see more events and speakers on campus sparking discussion about sex and sexuality, and have it not be limited to just one week. But, I respect and applaud the committee members for their hard work starting the discussion, and their dedication to a mission of open sexual dialogue during the last three years. Discussion is extremely important for college students…for their current explorations and to encourage their future healthy sexual relationships.
If Students for Life would like more attendance for their events, they should seriously inquire about partnering with Sex Week.
k
April 15, 2009 at 2:42 am
Hank, then don’t go into Giordano’s.
What I don’t understand is how people can be so against Sex Week’s mere existence. What if the college dems started to complain about a college republicans meeting? It doesn’t make sense, does it?
I’m sure many students on this campus aren’t pro-life but I don’t see them bashing your club.
If you don’t subscribe to the views that an event promotes, then just don’t go. It’s a shame that people don’t want to learn about their own bodies and stay safe but hey, to each his own.
c
April 15, 2009 at 5:35 pm