Quote:

Northwestern University professor who allowed students to watch a live sex demonstration in his class has defended his decision, saying 'that is what I get paid for'. The after class event involved a woman being brought to orgasm by a machine-powered saw with a phallic object instead of a blade. The graphic act was performed in front of about 100 students in psychology professor John Michael Bailey’s human sexuality class last week.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1G8CfdL8o

i wouldnt have stayed to watch that, but for those who did, hope they got wat they wanted after watchin somethin like that

Obviously I chose the wrong major in school.

I'm not saying "Yippee, what a great idea!" but I think this is only mildly controversial at best. The demonstration wasn't done in a middle school and unless using power tools for sexual gratification is illegal in Illinois I don't see what the big deal is. The class was "human sexuality" and it was done after class. Students were given repeated warnings as to the graphic nature of what was going to happen and no one was required to stay.

Yeah, I don't see the big deal.

I agree with Alan. Maybe it wasnt "appropriate", but the students knew ahead of time what to expect. A big deal it is not.

Guy must not be a good professor if he needs to show people doing it to teach his class.

Big assumption there.

^^^^If he was any good, he wouldn't need live titillation to make his point.

Showing your age again.

^^^^Age again? That's like the default concession grunt around here, ain't it? It ain't my age, just my skeptic talking. If the guy was any good, he wouldn't have to do this. He thinks he's being radical but he's actually being kinda pathetic.

No, I think you are showing the naivete of your age. You seem to think you know anything about being a professor when you probably know next to nothing.

^^^^Even somebody knowing next to nothing can see when somebody is screwing up. People who don't know jack about a profession always comment on it, especially here. lol It's not the naivety of age. It's just being able to see when somebody is relying on a cheap stunt in lieu of teaching.

No, it's somebody spouting off opinions on something he doesn't know a damn thing about. Just because this is a place to state your opinions doesn't mean you should always have one. There are plenty of topics I don't post in because I know nothing about the topic.

Oh, and I just want to repost this quote from your signature:

Quote :

"I'm a man of results. Professionalism is overrated." - Kevin Martel

I honestly don't think people know a damn thing about 90% of the stuff they comment on, here or otherwise. I feel I am perfectly able to comment on this guy's tactics being lazy.

I don't think you want to quote that guy.

Rockbird wrote:

Yeah, I don't see the big deal.

Nice Avatar isn't that Snidley Whiplash?

It is! I was going to go with Dick Dastardly, but Snidley is far more sinister.

Rockbird wrote:

It is! I was going to go with Dick Dastardly, but Snidley is far more sinister.

I don't know how I remembered that but didn't he have some sidekick and I don't remember what cartoon he was from?

Dick had a dog as a sidekick. He's from Wacky Racers.

Rockbird wrote:

Dick had a dog as a sidekick. He's from Wacky Racers.

Him I don't know I must have seen Snidley on some cartoon at some point in my life.

Snidely is from Dudley Dooright.

Rockbird wrote:

Snidely is from Dudley Dooright.

LOL Dudley Dooright wasn't he some kind of doofy kind of State Trooper or something like that, a Mountie maybe?

Yes, Dudley Do-Right was a Mountie and Snidely Whiplash was a caricature of the silent movie villains who tied damsels to railroad tracks.

alan smithee wrote:

Yup!