Since The Daily published a story Wednesday about an optional after-class sex toy demonstration in psychology Prof. John Michael Bailey's Human Sexuality course, a media firestorm has descended upon Northwestern. On Thursday, the University announced it is launching an investigation into the incident, and President Morton Schapiro said Bailey exhibited "extremely poor judgment" in choosing to show the demonstration.
The Daily does not feel the need to comment on whether or not the administration should be defending Bailey's work in the media. Right or not, Schapiro was completely within his right to issue a critical statement and the University has every right to launch an investigation into Bailey's demonstration.
But that is where its authority over the class must end. NU should not be allowed to dictate what Bailey or any University professor teach in their classrooms. Once an established member of the faculty, professors must be able to control what they do in academic settings. Judgment calls about what's educational and appropriate for students fall solely within the discretion of professors, not of students, parents or administrators.
Many students and alumni seem to be expressing widely varying opinions about whether the demonstration had an legitimate educational purpose or whether Bailey erred in approving the demonstration. The Daily, again, will not engage in that debate. What's important here is that Bailey felt it was educational (because it advanced his students' understanding of sexual diversity, a central theme of the course), and he made a legitimate case.
Beyond that, he should have the academic freedom to determine what he teaches on his syllabus. One of the best parts of any university is its ability expose students to new perspectives and force them to push their limits. For that dynamic to work, NU professors must have the power to exercise academic freedom and teach even the most controversial viewpoints in their research fields. Personal morals shouldn't affect the decisions professors make within the classroom. NU is a private research institution, and students have the option of taking a wide variety of classes. In this case, they also were warned of the nature of the demonstration and had repeated opportunities to leave the room if they chose.
Even if Schapiro and the rest of the administration believe Bailey erred in judgment with the sex toy demonstration, they should not take action against the professor. The University can publicly criticize Bailey and even warn students against taking Human Sex if they are sensitive to the explicit nature of the after-class speakers. But to allow the University to limit the material Bailey teaches in his own classroom sets a dangerous precedent of administrative control.
If NU censured Bailey or prevented him from repeating the demonstration in future Human Sexuality classes, it would possibly deter qualified professors and students from coming to this institution. While most professors aren't planning to stage live sex shows during their classes, the idea that a university administration can monitor what professors teach in the classroom may be enough to deter some professors from working at NU. Faculty aside, some prospective students would also refuse to attend a university where professors were restricted in what they are allowed to teach.
That hypothetical outcome, not potential harm to students who freely chose to attend the demonstration, presents the worst possible repercussions of this incident.
Full disclosure: Two members of The Daily's editorial board are current students in Human Sexuality.
is a member of the 
39 comments
I am certain that one of his NU colleagues wrote a book about regret. If only...Mr. Bailey were to 'hook up' with said colleague now----he might learn, first-hand, how to turn this now alleged regret into 'opportunity' (which, in the world of entitlement well represented by many in academia, is often times consistent with doing whatever hedonistic pursuit du jour one finds palatable, no matter the collateral cost). On second thought, never mind. It would appear that he's already earned his 'credentials' in that area. Karen Roese
For many undergraduates, Northwestern University is the first exposure to life choices outside of the suburban-white bread existence many of us were raised in. Coursework, including guest speakers and demonstrations, like those offered by Professor Bailey, is not only important academic research on the human condition, but is also important part of many undergraduate personal growth and maturity. The first step in acceptance and tolerance is often understanding; without a course like Human Sexuality, many would not understand, for example, transgendered and transsexual persons, and may contribute, knowingly or unknowingly, to the continued discrimination against such persons.
While I was not there and do not know the tone of the presentation, as an active alumni, I hope that the University continues to appreciate the experiential and academic value of courses like Human Sexuality. Regardless of what the University finds, I believe that Northwestern is successful because of its commitment to academic freedom, both in the classroom and outside.
And let���s face it, Baily has issues and I sure as hell wouldn���t want him teaching my daughter. The editorial statement "What's important here is that Bailey felt it was educational (because it advanced his students' understanding of sexual diversity, a central theme of the course), and he made a legitimate case." is ridiculous.
Because there is such a value in allowing students to see live shows of human behaviors, I would propose that in Anatomy and Physiology class we have live shows of people defecating.
Defecation is a complex and controversial subject. Some people do it once a day, some do it three times a day, some do it only twice a week or less. Some are unable to do it at all because their colons are damaged. They have colostomies. Defecation is a beautiful, misunderstood, human behavior. There is much we don't know about defecation. Anyone opposed to showing beautiful human beings involved in the beautiful human act of defecation are just anal-negative, or defecation-negative. What unenlightened human beings they are. Let's have a class for the defecation enlightened. What neanderthals that you who are opposed to defecation shows are.
Come on, student children. Are you with me? Can we show defecation for the beautiful experience it is? Come on, are you with me?