|
NEWS News in Brief Beyond the Burg Police Beat Street Beat Under the Microscope OPINIONS Letters to the Editor Staff Editorial VARIETY That Guy – That Girl Horoscopes Comics Confusion Corner Behind Closed Doors SPORTS From the Sidelines Home Field Advantage REVIEWS Film Music Dining Arts On Campus Critical Condition ABOUT US Subscribe Advertise Archive |
The sex show a go-goNichol grants venue for Sex Workers’ Art Show; Powell vows to develop content policy College President Gene Nichol announced yesterday that he will not prevent the Sex Workers’ Art Show from appearing on campus. “The president does not generally review requests for campus space for specific student events — that is usually delegated to Student Activities,” College spokesman Brian Whitson said in an e-mail. “However, given the amount of interest and questions expressed about this performance, the president wanted to review thoroughly and discuss with the student sponsors before [the] announcement.” In a statement released yesterday, Nichol said that he met with organizers of the show in an attempt to move the show to an off-campus location. The organizers, however, insisted that it remain on campus. The president stressed that he does not agree with the show’s content. “Like many on campus and beyond, I wish that the show were not coming to the College,” he said. Nichol, a former constitutional lawyer, added he could not censor a show because of its content. “The First Amendment and the defining traditions of openness that sustain universities are hallmarks of academic inquiry and freedom. It is the speech we disdain that often puts these principles to the test,” he said. “The College of William [and] Mary will not knowingly and intentionally violate the constitutional rights of its students. Censorship has no place at a great university.” On behalf of the Board of Visitors, Rector Michael Powell supported Nichol’s decision in a statement released yesterday. “The choice to bring this show to Williamsburg was made by our students, who believe the show offers some value — the same decision also made this year by students at George Mason University and Virginia Commonwealth University,” Powell said, referring to other schools at which the show is touring. “While not everyone agrees with that conclusion, we have faith that our students have the wisdom to put such programming in context if they choose to attend the show.” Some faculty and students are opposed to the show and have already expressed displeasure with its coming to campus. “Based on the research that I have read, I foresee that the Sex Workers’ Art Show is likely to bring increased aggression [and] sexual aggression, and by itself may also lead to a short-term increase in incidents [of] sexual assault at William and Mary as well,” he said. Others, like Thomas Chappell ’11, founder of the Facebook group “Don’t spend our money on the Sex Workers’ Art Show,” are opposed to the use of mandatory student funds to help bring the show to campus. “The show should be allowed on campus, but those that choose to attend should bear the full cost of the ticket prices instead of using everyone else’s money to help the people that attend pay for admission,” Chappell said. “The money simply could have been used for more appropriate and effective purposes.” The show organizers said that they expect to raise enough money through ticket sales and funding from other groups to pay back the Student Assembly in full. Powell said the controversy surrounding the show has raised a serious issue about activities funding and implied the administration may enjoy content oversight in the future. “What has emerged from the discussion is the need to develop a more coherent policy involving the allocation of limited College resources,” he said. “This is something the College will endeavor to do.” The Sex Workers’ Art Show will appear at the University Center Commonwealth Auditorium Feb. 4. One show will take place at 7 p.m. and another at 9:30 p.m. A question-and-answer session will take place following the late show. Tickets are on sale this week. |
||
The Flat Hat The Student Newspaper of the College of William and Mary since 1911 |
Seed Newsvine
I am infuriated that the controversy over the Sex Worker’s Art Show has now caused the administration to consider inserting itself into the student-controlled allocation of activities funding. It infuriates me more that some of the same voices who strongly opposed the “biased reporting system,” because it meant the administration was exerting too much control, have now brought about this Big Brother-esque possibility.
— Devan Barber Jan 29, 09:05 AM #
Shame on the FH to adopt the language of the critics and abandon their position of journalistic neutrality. Although maybe inadvertent and done due to space constraints, the FH’s decision to drop the terms ‘workers’ and ‘art’ and merely refer to the show as a sex-show does a disservice to the dialog.
— Tom '04 Jan 29, 09:15 AM #
“the FH’s decision to drop the terms ‘workers’ and ‘art’ and merely refer to the show as a sex-show does a disservice to the dialog”
Beats calling it what it really is: Strutting Ho’s Bamboozling a Bunch of Naive, Immature College Students Into Believing Porn is Art While Timid, PC President Does Nothing
— lord of nothing Jan 29, 11:36 AM #
So now its a taxpayer subsidized stripper porn show on campus. Can you imagine if a student Christian organization wanted the university to sanction it’s evangelistic presentation on campus in the name of first amendment freedoms that Nichols claims to prize? No way Jose.
Nichol has already demonstrated his hostility to organized religion quite clearly. But organized porn? Hey, no problem, y’all come (pun intended).
Nichol’s mouthpiece, Mr. Powell, further insults our intelligence by insisting, “we have faith that our students have the wisdom to put such programming in context if they choose to attend the show.” Oh really? I’ll file that one away the time the Inter Varsity Christian Fellowship wants the university to sanction its events. What a crew.
Go see this show on Warwick Blvd for a quarter if you must. But W&M has no business sanctioning illegal sex acts in the ridiculous name of “aademic freedom.”
Gene Nichol has been a walking disaster for W&M from day 1. His contract is up for renewal in June. Contact the Board of Visitors now and urge them to send this guy packing. He brings nothing but more bad news and ridicule that we just don’t need.
— Jeff Reynlds Jan 29, 04:55 PM #
Have either of you actually seen the show? If not, please stop generalizing. It makes you look (more) ignorant.
— Devan Barber Jan 29, 05:35 PM #
I have two questions for critics of the Sex Workers’ Art Show.
(1) As I noted in a FH article last spring, the College’s English department has on its syllabi many works of literature — all of them highly-esteemed — featuring graphic sex scenes, arguably pornographic in nature. E.g.: the poetry of the Earl of Rochester and the Marquis de Sade; D.H. Lawrence’s “Lady Chatterley’s Lover”; James Joyce’s “Ulysses”; John Updike’s “Couples.” If the Sex Workers’ Art Show contributes to increased sexual assault, do these books, too? Should they be banned from classrooms?
(2) The College does not limit its students’ access to the internet, and our technology infrastructure was presumably funded, at least in part, by taxpayers. Right now, one of the most popular sites on the web is “2 Girls 1 Cup,” a streaming video in which lesbians practice coprophagia. Do you believe that filters should prevent us from viewing internet pornography?
I ask for these clarifications not out of any desire to corner you, but simply to better understand the extent to which you are against the commingling of sex and public education. Thanks for any responses you can offer.
— Dan Piepenbring Jan 29, 06:09 PM #
“Like many on campus and beyond, I wish that the show were not coming to the College,” he said.
That is just a blatant total lie by Nichol. He only says that to appease critics of the show.
It’s laughable for Nichol to insist his hands are tied on this show and there’s nothing he can do about it. He could do something about it if he REALLY wanted to.
This is the same president who unilaterally made a decision overturning decades of powerful William and Mary tradition with the Wren Cross. He can’t have it both ways. His actions regarding institutional or traditional constraints at the College seem to vary according to his personal preferences.
Sure his hands may be tied, but he tied them himself this time.
— C.K. Jan 29, 08:19 PM #
If you haven’t seen the show…do us all a favor and SHUT UP!
— sick of the misconceptions Jan 29, 10:23 PM #
“If you haven’t seen the show…do us all a favor and SHUT UP”
Spoken with the wisdom and maturity of a college student. Is there anything we don’t have to see before we judge it, or must every revolting human proclivity be witnessed before we can assess its worth?
If you’ll exercise some critical thinking, you’ll discover that taxpayers and students alike don’t appreciate being forced to pay for frivolous activities that provide nothing related to a classical education or the advancement of civilization. Contrary to what your self-serving and oh-so-avant garde professors may have told you, there are centuries-old standards used to judge art. These standards have been discarded by academics who believe themselves smarter than Plato, Hume, Kant, or any other “dead white male” in history, and who mistake “shocking” for “important.”
So if I may be so indecorous, you are long on opinions and short on both knowledge and wisdom. You would therefore be wise to heed your own advice and shut up until you grow up.
— S.W. Jan 30, 03:51 AM #
““Like many on campus and beyond, I wish that the show were not coming to the College,” he said. Nichol, a former constitutional lawyer, added he could not censor a show because of its content.
“The First Amendment and the defining traditions of openness that sustain universities are hallmarks of academic inquiry and freedom. It is the speech we disdain that often puts these principles to the test…”
What convenient spin. Since when do college communities “disdain” the celebrated bohemian ingredients of sex and porn? It is not open-minded or courageous to embrace such things in an environment like that of the adolescent environs of W&M’s collegians. If we were looking at an exhibit celebrating slavery, racism, or the subjugation of women, or pedophilia, or—groan—the merits of presidency of George W Bush, does anyone seriously think the college would even consider an invitation?
A university must and does make decisions about what is art worthy of study. As an Art Prof at a Va. state School, I am keenly aware of how much energy goes into choosing what and who will benefit from the attention of a years curriculum.
And as for students themselves choosing such material, what a bit of Britney-worthy whining. Since perhaps only a quarter of them even pay taxes (and how many are out-of-staters?), and by their own admission through their choice they are there to be taught and not to teach, such an argument is as childish as this whole affair suggests.
There was a time when I regarded W&M as the premier school in the state. Stories like these make me revise that opinion. You would never see supposedly meaningful garbage like this—and I use that description aesthetically—at one of the HBCUs in the state that know and appreciate the dignity they are entrusted with. The resources being showered on W&M seems to now be pearls cast before swine. Watch everyone wallowing in the mud of the sex workers. Isn’t it all just avant garde and arty? I feel the need to buy a Trent Raznor CD, to read up on global warming, to drink a beer, get laid, maybe get a piercing and some new ink right now, Dude…
Maybe the President or the Dean could put on his Big Boy pants and stand up to the fury of student opinion. Right now his handling of taxpayers money is a moral both an intellectual and a moral scandal. What’s next, leather-bound copies of Hustler in the special collections? Some performance art featuring live videos of prisoner torture. Can’t wait.
“Knowledge is power” is a statement any experienced artist would spat upon. Wisdom is power. Beauty is not subjective. And Goodness is an element without which the human spirit dies. At W&M, the vital signs don’t look at all encouraging.
— JM Jan 30, 09:08 AM #
Dear Ms Barber – Have I seen the show? No. Did you ever see “Methane Man” put on a performance (lights farts while telling jokes)? Don’t worry, the way things are going he’ll be at PBK pretty soon. Followed shortly afterwards by the Defecation Artist Show.
There are thousands of things you and I haven’t seen and no possibility of seeing all of them. It’s your choices and your seriousness I question, not your morality. Or are you now endorsing Fart Man and the Defecation Artist since you can’t criticize what you haven’t seen?
— lord o' zip Jan 30, 10:52 AM #
Mr Piepenbring – I hardly know where to start. As to your point #1: I fully appreciate the barely post-adolescent, hormonally driven nature of young people’s interest in sex. Believe it or not, everyone has this experience. That’s why dog-eared copies of those books you mention, if dropped, tend to fall open to the “juicy” passages. That doesn’t make you immoral, just young (being male doesn’t help – more testosterone). HOWEVER – tearing out all the other pages and reading ONLY the sex parts removes the context and thus the art. Hopefully, you chose not to do this, despite a normal, healthy interest in the sexier passages.
The so-called “Sex Artist Show” is a sham. And hormone-filled youths, which include most college student, are the suckers. It’s just a titty show, nothing more. You can find the same sort of things on the main drag leading to any military base in the country. However, you’re in college where it’s hoped you are learning something of greater importance.
As to your point # 2: All I can say is – huh? I could care less what you do on your own time. As for “2 Girls 1 Cup”, was your whole diatribe simply a way to promote this site? Do you have a financial reason or could you simply not restrain yourself from letting the entire campus know of your peculiar interest? Please… get a girlfriend. One you’d be proud to take home to Mom.
— lord o' zip Jan 30, 11:24 AM #
So now by joining the University of Michigan, Harvard, and Duke (to name a few) in hosting this event the College is now a bastion of immorality and foolishness? I think if any of the comments disparaging the show were true it wouldn’t return to ivy’s and other well established and respected institutions.
Also, I believe the show is being funded, as reported by the FH, by student activities money, which comes from tuition, not state support, i.e. tax money. It would do you all well to look at the issue before injecting a political (tax) spin that isn’t valid. Also, the same money that funds this show funds many activities such as pro-life or pro-choice speakers, and other “biased” viewpoints. The idea that these funds aren’t available to all students is misguided.
Further, this same show is sponsored by administrative and academic departments at many schools it visits. I think those scholars would disagree that the show lacks content.
Lastly, I think the fact that the word ‘sex’ on a college campus insights so much controversy is an example of just how immature the dialogue in this state is when it comes to public higher education.
— CL Jan 30, 11:35 AM #
“So now by joining the University of Michigan, Harvard, and Duke (to name a few) in hosting this event the College is now a bastion of immorality and foolishness?”
Sigh… actually, yes.(And I can’t believe I have to say this to a W&M student): So if the other kids jump off the roof are you going to jump too?
3 idiots + 1 more idiot = 4 idiots, not 4 examples to be lauded, much less emulated. A successful scam, perhaps, but art? No. Your hormones raging? Probably. So rapid was the keyboarding “incites” became “insights”! (Typos – do them all the time myself.) Immorality, no, but foolishness – tons and tons. You’re just saps being taken advantage of by clever porn pushers with the connivance of a lot of left-wing pseudo-scholars pushing a political agenda.
— lord o' zip Jan 30, 11:58 AM #
We should blame Nichol. And have him resign.
— student Jan 30, 01:31 PM #
1. The show was funded by student activities fees, paid by STUDENTS, not taxpayers. Get your facts straight.
2. Having never seen it, you have every right not to endorse the Sex Worker’s Art Show. However, to generalize its contents, pontificate on its educational value, and criticize its intentions without having seen the show is just plain ignorant. No one is asking you to support the show, but please refrain from admonishing an event of which you have no first-hand knowledge.
— Devan Barber Jan 30, 02:20 PM #
Ms. Barber, it will be interesting to see if you take this tack in every other area of life. Do you remain silent on questions of war, torture, abortion, AIDS in Africa, etc.? Surely you don’t have first-hand knowledge about all these topics. In addition, your presumption that those objecting to this nonsense have no first-hand knowledge indicates that you are indeed a college student who, with two mighty decades of life under her belt, believes she has the kind of knowledge, wisdom, and experience to lecture the rest of us.
— S.L. Jan 30, 04:17 PM #
S.L., have you, in fact seen, the Sex Worker’s Art Show?
— Devan Barber Jan 30, 05:31 PM #
Ms Barber – So you ARE endorsing Methane Man and the Defecation Artist Show? I just want to get a general idea of what things must be seen, in your view, in order to have an opinion as to their appropriateness or whether or not they constitute art. I think what your are REALLY trying to do is create is a convenient atmosphere in which you are entitled to do whatever you wish at the College while avoiding any and all criticism. In fact, you wish to shut down discussion or at least limit it to a small, self-appointed elite. Aren’t you one of the editors or on the FH staff? Is curtailing discussion and calling others “ignorant” something the FH encourages?
Again – Methane Man and the Defecation Artist? Real art or not? How about tractor pulls, wrestlemania and monster truck rallies? How about an execution or a mob riot? Have you seen attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion? (Don’t you just love Blade Runner?) Been to all the above? If not, are you able to give an opinion of any kind about their artistry nevertheless?
“I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched c-beams … glitter in the dark near Tanhauser Gate. All those … moments will be lost … in time, like tears … in rain. Time … to die.” According to Devan Barber, his despair was misguided! Since she wasn’t there and only first-hand knowledge has validity, it didn’t happen in the first place. So Roy should go ahead and die as those things were already lost to mankind.
Does Ms Barber nod off during sci-fi shows knowing there’s little possibility of ever experiencing any of it first hand? A rare kind of narcolepsy, no doubt. I did the same thing during certain math courses figuring there was a snowball’s chance in hell of my ever coming face to face with a quadratic equation, so I’m not totally unsympathetic.
— lord o' zip Jan 30, 05:43 PM #
I would not endorse a performance I knew nothing about and had not seen. I would also not work tirelessly to insult that event’s organizers, assert that the event had absolutely no value to anyone, or declare that the show should be censored since I personally didn’t agree with its message.
I am saying that you, having not seen the show, should not lodge such specific, outlandish, and overarching criticisms. I never asserted that I was the final judge on art, the way, it seems, you are.
And for the record, I am a Staff Columnist for the Flat Hat. I do not speak for the Flat Hat, or any organization.
— Devan Barber Jan 30, 07:21 PM #
Maybe everyone needs to just get laid more and not waste time on a show
— Joe Towney Jan 30, 08:59 PM #
Dan Piepenbring,
That is one of the worst analogies I’ve ever seen. Our student assembly doesn’t decide what books we read in class or which classes we take, nor do they buy the books. Granted, I don’t have to go to this crap, but that being said, but I don’t want to fund it either. If taking a course of graphic porn was a GER that I had to dedicate money towards, I’d be at a different school. Our SA is supposed to be responsible in allocating funds, and that includes not making a mockery of our school by funding whores, pornographers, and other lunatics to come here and glorify the degradation of women and sexual torture in the name of “art”.
Again, with your second analogy, equally, if not more worthless, if the College of William and Mary used my money to fund the makers of that perverted website to have a show here, yes, I would object. Please please please… I beg you, take a course on logic or a read a book or SOMETHING, because that was painful to read.
— BA Jan 30, 09:04 PM #
So Fartman and Feces Folks are just fine with you? Can you for once just answer the question? Or are you saying there is no bottom dweller too low in your book?
Never said it should be censored, just not subsidized. College facilities, believe it or not, are NOT free. Will they be turning on the lights, cleaning the place afterwards, providing security, etc.? Time, money and resourses wasted on sex shows, fart comedy and poop artist is time, money and resources not available for truly meaningful things. Let ‘em stand in the Sunken Gardens or on DOG street and say whatever they want – for free. What I question is your judgment, maturity and priorities. What is the College giving up so your little frivilousness can be brought to campus? Why is the dignity of the College being lent to con artist? I am sorry you can’t see you’re being fooled. But your inability to see that, while unfortunate, is not reason enough for the rest of us to be silent.
— l o' n Jan 30, 09:13 PM #
BA,
Thanks for the response. I’m trying to keep this debate civil, i.e., free of ad hominem arguments. (Coincidentally, though, I’m taking a course in symbolic logic right now. Thus far, I’m a passable logician, but the semester is young.)
I think my earlier analogies have more worth than you’ve allotted them.
As for #1: The SA’s money comes from tuition and taxpayer dollars, as far as I know. The money used to finance the English department comes from the same sources. You don’t have to take the English courses with sexually-graphic texts, but your money does, in part, fund them. Ergo, the issues of accountability are the same as those for the Sex Workers’ Art Show. If you believe the show is a waste of money, it seems inconsistent to approve of the English syllabi. (This assumes, of course, that you find lewd poems to be as bereft of artistic value as the forthcoming Sex Workers’ Show. If you’re curious as to what I mean by lewd, you can find a quick example in the Earl of Rochester’s “The Imperfect Enjoyment,” to which this comment links.)
Regarding #2, your response is a bit stronger, but counterarguments can still be made. While students might pay for their internet connections, the College paid — with taxpayers’ money — to install the technology that makes web access possible. Thus, in small part, students can view pornography on campus due to the College’s use of your money.
The underlying questions remain: How much of the College’s money, if any, should be allocated to activities that carry the same message as the Sex Workers’ Art Show? In principle, it seems that anyone averse to spending money on the show should oppose our school’s endorsement of smutty poems and access to porn, too.
A last question: What if, as they believe will be the case, the show’s organizers raise enough money to reimburse the SA in full? Does this become a moot issue, then?
Again, I raise these questions out of a genuine interest in understanding your views. I mean you no disrespect. I can’t stop you from attacking me personally, but I would appreciate it if you were kinder in the future. We don’t know each other, after all; I don’t even know your name. That’s perfectly alright, but please consider this forum a place for reasoned conversation, not embittered bickering.
— Dan Piepenbring Jan 30, 10:59 PM #
While I admit that I (like many) let a typo slip into my unedited internet posts it seems a bit foolish to blame that and my perceived opinion rest only on my “hormones.” Please, up the level of debate.
Frankly I can’t really understand this “you’re being taken advantage of by
insert people here“ argument. Using a telephone, or just the flat hat article, and the list of venues being performed one can do a quick estimate of how much this show is bringing in for the performers. I’ll put it bluntly. After subtracting for being on the road, performance costs, etc. they aren’t making much. Furthermore, I’d venture a guess and say they could make more doing what you all fear most, just being sex workers.Also, lets say we are being “taken for a ride” I think we should all be adult enough to say: that’s your right as students who pay for this performance and as a community of scholars. I have no problem with people disagreeing. However, I do have a problem with people injecting outside “authority” into student affairs, or conflating what we do with an administration that has no right, duty, or power to stand in the way of student self government.
I think one major problem is that people have objections to the concept of the show, but no one has leveled any substantive claim against the actual content. An art show isn’t war. I think we all get that it is more complicated.
— CL Jan 31, 07:59 AM #
“An art show isn’t war” – that’s true. Even allowing that the sex show is art, which I do not accept, that’s beside the point. This is politics. And politics, CL, et al, IS war.
Please, no more boring arguments about you resent being talked down to. How else can you tell someone they’re being foolish? If there were a kinder, gentler way, I’d use it. Had it occured to you that others don’t appreciate your hubris? Your fanciful idea that youth knows all and everyone else is just not “hip” enough to get it?
I still haven’t had an answer to my question: Will you be welcoming Methane Man and the Defecation Art show? The purpose of the question, once again, is to determine if the sewer contains a bottom in your view or if it is simply endless. Call it a query concerning moral relativism.
— l o' n Jan 31, 10:49 AM #
Let’s not presumptuously level such criticisms against all college students with “just two decades of life under their belt.” The question of age seeks to ask how much adult experience a person has had, and some of us have had more than others. Some of us will never have enough, and some of us have had entirely too much. Keep the debate at the correct level, please.
— Devin Feb 3, 09:06 PM #
Yaaawwwnnn… is that Ms Barber pontificating again? I’m sorry but I guess I didn’t see your Official Flat Hat Debate Referee Badge. Please give it a rest. If you don’t care to address someone’s arguments at least stop with the pretense of being unfairly belittled. You’re young, outspoken and resent being told to sit at the kids table. We get it. Quit being repetative. Protesting how grown up and mature you are over and over and over tends to show that, in fact, you are not.
— westerlies Feb 3, 09:25 PM #
Sorry, no, “Devin” wasn’t Devin Barber. I’m a different Devin (Debacker), also a senior.
— Devin Feb 4, 08:23 AM #
I just happened to be browsing FlatHat articles online, and noticed that some were attacking all college students as being too “young” or “immature” – just wanted to set the record straight that not all of us (but unfortunately, most give a few the bad reputation).
— Devin Feb 4, 09:30 AM #
The show was in no part paid for by taxpayers, (unless you want to be pedantic, and consider things like the sewer lines connected to the UC, but I digress…)
The budget from which the show was funded comes from Student Activity funds, which is part of the tuition paid by all W&M students. The SA is responsible for the allocation of those funds. Considering that the SA is an organization composed of students elected by their peers, I fail to see how this is an issue. The students themselves are the only ones paying here.
And no. I personally wouldn’t have allocated the money, but the vast majority of the campus seems to support it, and who am I to tell them that they’re wrong?
— Andrew Schmadel Feb 4, 04:25 PM #
Tuition money was wasted in that crap?! Even worse than I thought. So all students paid no matter what their opinion. Also, apology to Ms. Barber. And finally, you’re Andy, damn it. Speak up boy! And if you think a building operates for free, think again. The insurance alone is enormous. Ever own a home? The taxpayers of Virginia are paying part of the cost.
— westerlies Feb 4, 07:11 PM #