Get The Brown Spectator delivered to your emailFemSex, Caught in the ActGuilty of Sexual Harassment
By Joshua Unseth • October 2007 • Parents’ Weekend • Volume VI Number II • Brown University Rate this article:
(39 votes, average: 4.36 out of 5)
Loading ..."FemSex sexually harassed me."
Bad food at the Ratty is a Brown tradition as entrenched as the naked donut run and as pervasive as hippie girls who do not shave their legs. It is as expected as the verdict in an OJ Simpson murder trial, and as customary as the singleness of Catholic clergy. There is no getting around it. Just like I know Democrats want to raise my taxes, I know that today’s Ratty lunch is going to be sub-par dining worthy of the worst reviews. Needless to say, I do not need help feeling nauseous when I eat BUDS’ food.
But earlier this academic year I was surprised when, even before I got sick from eating the food, I upchucked a little at the sight of a certain table slip. There in front of me was an advertisement for a Brown University program called the FemSex workshop. Now, if you are a freshman (or a parent of a student), and you have no idea what FemSex is, for the sake of clarifiying context, I will inform you. FemSex is that program all those books about the scary, liberal University, talk about. Attendees of the program learn about female sexuality and how to explore female genitalia. They discuss masturbation, and journal about using mirrors to look deep into their cervix. They talk about sex toys and how the use of a dildo is more liberating than lighting your bra on fire or throwing your panties at Tom Jones. For the women of Brown University, FemSex is a good excuse to masturbate (and for guys, I have heard, it is a place to find a horny hookup). But do not worry, in the interest of being fair, Brown University now has the male version called MSex (it is like FemSex without the need to discuss how to use a strap-on).
On the tableslip advertising the workshop, the directors of FemSex somehow got into their heads that it would be a good idea to put three vaginas lined in a row for all the world to see. There, next to me—next to my food—were three exposed vaginas. I guess you only need to put the porn behind black plastic when it is not free. Now, for the sake of not making people like Amy Littlefield (my favorite Herald Post- author) angry, I will admit that I am calling the exposed female genitalia a “vagina” for the sake of rhetorical effect. The truth is, they were vulvas (the vagina is, apparently, part of the unexposed female reproductive system, a fact I would have known if I had taken FemSex). But they were exposed female genitalia nonetheless.
I am fairly certain if you legally have to be 18 to buy porn, you, more than likely, cannot supply porn to those under the age of 18. Now, considering there are some students at Brown under 18 who eat at the Ratty, it seems that a violation of the law certainly occurred. But beyond that, Brown’s own sexual harassment code states that posting “sexually suggestive…pictures…that may embarrass or offend individuals” constitutes sexual harassment. And so, it seemed pretty clear to me, FemSex sexually harassed me. Two days later a group of fellow victims were on the Main Green calling people over to have them sign Brown’s sexual harassment student reporting forms if they too had been sexually harassed. In all, 10 people filled out the forms. I turned them in to Dean Klawunn who subsequently informed me that she was to meet with the directors of FemSex to discuss their advertising.
This article reads like “The Onion”. I seriously hope this is a huge joke.
I’m sorry the first time you have ever seen female genitalia was at the Ratty.
But on the other hand, according to your strict interpretations, I’ve been sexually harassed more than once by the biology classes I took in high school. I’m definitely going to file a lawsuit now! I was under 18 when I saw those pictures!
My favorite part of your article is this:
“I will admit that I am calling the exposed female genitalia a “vagina” for the sake of rhetorical effect. The truth is, they were vulvas (the vagina is, apparently, part of the unexposed female reproductive system, a fact I would have known if I had taken FemSex). But they were exposed female genitalia nonetheless.”
You’re telling me that before this, you had no idea that the vagina was a different part of the female genitalia than the vulva?
I am about 99.9 + .1% sure that pretty much anyone who is above the age of 14 knows that WITHOUT having to take FemSex.
I’ve seen those table slips you were talking about. They were black and white, and not at all clear. In fact, one could scribble a better picture of female genitalia with a pencil and paper.
Oh by the way, here’s more “porn” to offend you with.
(’)
{o}
[||]
Oh noes! Your virgin eyes!
[Reply]
A Different Guest reply on October 29th, 2008 5:45 pm:
There is a difference between anatomical images and pornography. The author has argued that the point of these FemSex “workshops” is to heighten your female student bodies’ awareness of the sexuality and how to get more pleasure out of it, more or less. When images of a vagina are part of the advertisement for such an event, it can and should be considered pornography.
Though I’ve never spoken to him about it, I’m pretty sure the author would have to be living under a rock to not have known the strict difference between a vagina and a vulva. He says he is using the word vagina for rhetorical effect. He makes the comment about attending FemSex feciously. Way to read sarcasm!!
Oh, and very classy with the cyber vaginas. I’m very impressed with your skills representing the female anatomy with a keyboard.
p.s. Your university is totally f-ed up…. sorry dude.
[Reply]
A Different Guest reply on October 29th, 2008 5:47 pm:
(the cyber vaginas comment was sarcastic, in case you didn’t get that…)
[Reply]
I find most of the FemSex ads repulsive. The one with silhouettes of sex paraphernalia (used last year, I don’t know if its still around) disturbed me almost as much as the one you describe.
[Reply]
Your University is totally “fed up”? Really? I guess your right, we are pretty fed up. dude.
“For the women of Brown University, FemSex is a good excuse to masturbate (and for guys, I have heard, it is a place to find a horny hookup).”
Two things come to mind when I read this sentence. One, I would wonder if you’ve never masturbated before? If you really haven’t, I will still disagree but accept your judgment that masturbation is a bad thing and one would need an “excuse” to do it. If you have masturbated in your life, then you are being pretty overtly sexist. Also, you have referred to a picture of a vagina on your table as sexual harassment. Although I also disagree with this, I would be able to accept your point of view if not for the latter part of this sentence. Here, you pretty much directly compare the women in FemSex to “a horny hookup”. There are several problems with this. The first issue is the way this objectifies the women in the group. Not only have you taken away their identity as people, you have made them solely an object of male desire. Secondly, you have just announced to the population of the school that they can find a “horny hookup” at FemSex. To me, sexual harassment can be classified as something that forcibly removes you from your zone of sexual comfort. It’s pretty clear that you just sexually harassed the entire FemSex group both by objectifying them and making them a target of male desire. Completely ignoring the moral implications of what you just wrote, (which is rather ironic because this article is argued entirely from a moral point of view save for the weak legal argument about age and nude images) it is still pretty difficult to take anything you said seriously with the obvious contradictions.
[Reply]
Joshua Unseth reply on November 12th, 2008 5:27 pm:
Chris, perhaps you didn’t read the article, or maybe your reading comprehension isn’t up to snuff. Let me help you figure out some of the rudimentary bits of this puzzle.
First, the reason the table slips were sexual harassment is because there is a Brown University rule in the student handbook that makes it sexual harassment. I even quoted the bit: “sexually suggestive…pictures…that may embarrass or offend individuals” constitutes sexual harassment. I think the rule’s stupid, but I think that the table slips were even more ridiculous. Even so, your philosophical cretinism is evident in that you believe that being against masturbation while practicing it makes one sexist. It may make one a self-righteous bigot, but certainly, you will have to agree, it does not make a person sexist.
Second, I never once in the entire article explicitly articulated or implied my own feelingsa toward masturbation, whether or not I participate in the activity, or judgment toward those who actively masturbate. I merely discussed what FemSex is and talks about. I think that FemSex probably does offend the sensibilities of traditional Americans. But all I did was tell you what goes on in FemSex. If you think that my characterization of that is inaccurate, you can criticize that, but to date, everyone has told me that what I wrote is basically accurate. But they think I’m a chauvinist because I put it in writing. Apparently people don’t want the world to know what they learn in FemSex.
Third, I didn’t announce to the population that FemSex is a place to find a horny hookup. It’s something that I have actually heard from other people. Also, it doesn’t objectify women. The hookup culture at Brown is objectifying. If you actually want to take aim at something offensive, perhaps you ought to look there. Additionally, it doesn’t take away their identity as people. That’s just idiotic; you’re just making stuff up at this point.
Fourth, I congratulate your masterbatory self-denotation of the word sexual harassment, and you may even be right. But methinks this hits on the necessity of seeking remedial help regarding your literacy. First off, if your definition of sexual harassment holds true, then wouldn’t seeing table slips prominently displayed in public areas that make me uncomfortable certainly be sexual harassment. Second, WTF! don’t you get it, you just paraphrased the quote I used from the student handbook. Third, if what I did is sexual harassment (that is to say, by writing my own opinions regarding FemSex on paper that a person can choose to read or not to read), than anything a person thinks that might remove a person from their zone of sexual comfort if it is made known in conversation or in writing, is sexual harassment. Basically, you are saying that a person can’t decent regarding free-sex culture because that automatically makes it sexual harassment. I could write another 9 pages as to why your definition is inadequate and small-minded, but I won’t waste my time (or yours considering I give you enough credit to know that what you wrote is discredible on its face).
Fifth, I didn’t make FemSex or the girls that participate in the program a target of male desire. If I did, then I guess I’m among the ranks of such fashionistas as Isaac Mizrahi, Versace, Dolce & Gabbana and others that create stuff in order to make women the “target of male desire”. I mean, after all, isn’t that the purpose of low-cut shirts and iddy-biddy miniskirts?
Sixth, this article is 90% facetious. If you had read it fairly, you would see that there isn’t even a tinge of moral indignation anywhere in the article. It is both critical of FemSex’s decision to put those table slips out, as it is critical of the rule in the handbook.
A final word: I hope that your a freshman. Because to unleash your analytical abilities on the world today would be dangerous. But nice try. I suggest that you check the placement of your head, and put it back on your shoulders.
[Reply]