This week the Review covered a slew of Valentines-themed events focusing on sex and promiscuity.
First, there was the “Valentines Special Queer Sex Ed” event. Advertised in a graphic email sent by the LGBT Resource Center (which ironically does not have a Q in its name), the event purported to teach attendees about safe sex.
Then, there was “Sex in the Dark,” which was hosted in the Sky Lounge of Jameson Hall– a freshman dorm. The event was organized by The High Rises, a community group for Jameson Hall and the neighboring High Rise 5. The contact button originally listed the names of two RAs, though it has since been scrubbed.
While it’s indisputable that students have a First Amendment right to advertise, organize, and engage in these events, some criticism is not unreasonable. I might opine that Valentine’s Day ought to be spent creating and maintaining meaningful, monogamous relationships, but college students have ignored that type of argument for decades.
Instead, consider the manner in which the events were advertised. The promotion for Valentine’s Special Queer Sex Ed was sent to a large swath of cornell.edu email accounts. Apparently, anyone who had ever taken a class cross listed in FGSS (Feminist, Gender and Sexuality Studies) received the email. It promised answers to the following questions: “Are fisting and scissoring real? How much lube is too much lube… and why am I sticky all over?!” Not exactly the type of thing you’d want to pop up on your screen when you open your email in class.
Likewise, the name “Sex in the Dark” is blatantly licentious, and the advertisement hints at more than just an “educational” chat. The CampusGroups listing invited students to “come to Sex in the Dark to get the sex education you never had and some HOT goodies!” The infographic depicts a hand leading the viewer off to the side, presumably to engage in sexual activity. The viewer could be forgiven for mistaking the advertisement as an invitation to an orgy.
It’s not unfathomable that some students might be made very uncomfortable by such blatant sexual messages, for reasons that are personal, religious or traumatic. There is no need to expose the general student population to such graphic descriptions of, or allusions to, sexual activity. Sexual education seminars can very easily be advertised in a less explicit way, and frankly should be, if the event is to allow all those involved to feel safe.
Historically, there has been at least some agreement that sex should not be openly broadcast in certain areas of life. These realms include work, school and, in general, public spaces. This is why PDA (Public Display of Affection) is considered ‘icky.’ It’s why even relatively modest sexual advances and sexual jokes made at work or school can be considered harassment. It’s why you should “get a room” if you’re in the mood, which brings me to my main point.
The public lounge of a freshman dorm is not the place to host an event titled “Sex in the Dark.” For students, the dormitory is their home, and the lounge is their living room. Fully equipped with a TV, chairs, and a ping pong table, it’s where they hang out after classes, study, and meet up with friends. If any space should be a “safe space,” it’s the dormitory lounge.
Many freshmen are not even legal adults when they come to college. They are just out of high school and wholly unexposed to the vicarious lifestyle that upperclassmen often pursue. There was no age requirement given for the event. It’s a little creepy that the High Rise dormitory community group is hosting an event with obvious sexual appeal and handing out sex toys in a building full of 17 and 18 year old kids.
There are other places to host these kinds of events. Why not the LGBT Resource Center itself, which is supposed to be a home for LGBT activities? Why not an empty classroom, or an event space? All of Cornell’s other clubs and events seem to be able to utilize those spaces without issue. Why must “Sex in the Dark” occur in a freshman dorm?
In conclusion, I’ll repeat a point I touched on in my last article: if an individual sent an unsolicited email to another student with the same level of sexual innuendo used in these ads, it would probably be reported as harassment.
The conversation around sex has become one of incompatible extremes. It cannot simultaneously be true that organizations that send sexually suggestive emails are immune from judgment, but individual, genuinely romantic advances are automatically creepy and potentially harassment. It’s no wonder our generation is so lonely and confused about dating life.
Cornell Media Relations did not respond to requests for comment.
