Comments on: Tristan Taormino, Ann Coulter, And The Disgrace Of Oregon State University

By: viking gal

viking gal — Sun, 30 Jan 2011 01:51:34 +0000

I work at a small college, not at a big university, but I can see some funding connections that might not be obvious to the outsiders. First of all, Jason is absolutely right about the job shortage–I hear about that at, and I’m a prof, not in administration or student life. Secondly, it isn’t just funding for staffing, or funding for the event in question. There is also the possibility that ‘word will get out’ that conservative alumni with large pockets might be offended. Which shouldn’t matter for academic discourse. But it does, especially as state and federal funding is vanishing. Tuition just is not enough to run the many functions and support/repair needs of a college or university. Which means those phobic rich alums matter more than ever.
I would infinitely prefer an intelligent speaker on sexuality to a toxic political opinionator (of any political persuasion). But I’m not a rich alum, so my opinion is not going to have much influence. I can only control my own classroom.

By: Tristan Taormino

Tristan Taormino — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 18:00:48 +0000

Jason, you obviously feel very strongly about your opinion since you’ve posted it on multiple blogs. I don’t understand why you want to hold fast that this is *all* about funding and you fail to see the political implications of the situation, which have been eloquently illustrated by folks on Sex in the Public Square (http://sexinthepublicsquare.org/ElizabethsBlog/state-budgets-higher-education-and-sexual-freedom) and the Sexademic (http://sexademic.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/the-privilege-of-pleasure-osu-and-tristan-taormino/), among others. I want to correct some of your assumptions with the facts: the students did not apply for nor “try” to use general funds. They were given general funds to fund the Modern Sex conference by the ISS. Students searched for a policy about how the funds could be used and asked repeatedly but were never given any information. This is not about someone not knowing the rules. There are no formal, written rules that anyone has been able to point to. It’s clearly “at the discretion” of administrators, who decided it wasn’t a good idea precisely because of my involvement in porn, according to their statements. No other student group has been denied funding for a speaker recently, so this is an anti-sex, anti-porn statement. In fact, my replacement, Charlie Glickman, is being paid with the same funds denied to me. How is this just about funding (a rhetorical question, really).

By: The Beautiful Kind

The Beautiful Kind — Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:08:45 +0000

From the press release it looks like it boils down to money. SO many awful decisions boil down to $$$.

The whole thing is so unfortunate. I never thought I’d see the day that Tristan Taormino got slut-shamed. They hoped in this patriarchal society, blaming it on pornography would shut people down, because porn is a bad word, especially when linked to a woman.

So funny that people spend more money on porn than theater,opera,ballet,art shows combined. I picked up that fact reading Sex at Dawn.

And now they look like hypocrites and bullies. “Modern Sex”?!? Try again. Let this be a teaching moment.

By: J. Applebee

J. Applebee — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 20:16:31 +0000

This is really sad to hear. There isn’t enough sex-positivity aimed at college/university students as it is, plus I bet Tristan would be great! Things are (as per usual) worse in the U.K. I’ve been invited to speak at universities, and then cancelled at the last moment without reason. However, one good experience was when I went to Manchester University last year. I had a great time giving a talk about my experiences of writing queer erotic fiction. The whole thing was organised by volunteers, and I covered my own expenses, but I was aware that everyone was being very careful about it. I sold a load of books and made many new friends. I overheard one of the students later saying, ‘I thought I’d be bored by this, but now I’m really horny. I want to write something!’

By: violet

violet — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 13:27:17 +0000

R, you asked the same question my friends asked me offline when I posted this. I don’t know – but I’m guessing it’s a patch situation:

http://www.accesshollywood.com/roll-call-true-blood-stars-on-the-nudity-sock-the-patch-and-no-sock-at-all_article_35753

By: R

Sun, 23 Jan 2011 07:45:16 +0000

I have an almost entirely unrelated and largely trivial question, which I’ve wondered idly about before but it came up again because of the Playboy cover here, and you might know the answer.

When they do those body paint costumes, how do they handle the vulva? The girl in the picture obviously isn’t wearing any actual pants, but she doesn’t seem to be sporting any painted-over labia either. Do they slap some kind of patch on it and paint over that? Or what?

By: violet

violet — Sun, 23 Jan 2011 02:35:33 +0000

@Jason, it’s always great to see your name. Please don’t be a stranger!

Thanks for chiming in; obviously lots of us are on the outside (like me) and your comment sheds a lot of light on what could be (most likely) happening here. I hate that we’re still guessing, but your comment is illuminating.

It just sucks all around. The problem is exactly that we’re all guessing, and the CYA being done by OSU is just totally confusing and contradictory – which is why the blogosphere is going into bizarro-land about the sex issue.

That’s why I (and I hope it came across) made the point that it can’t be about the sex – but it’s not good that OSU’s statement claims it is about Tristan’s website or profession. OSU isn’t being clear – but they *need* to be. I felt it was necessary to point out Coulter so that people could see that OSU has done far more controversial things in the past than ask a pornographer to keynote a Modern Sex event.

I actually think this is a tremendous opportunity for OSU to pivot and make lemonade. With the amount of negative attention they’re getting over this, they could make that into a whole lot of positive attention. They could start by getting Tristan back on the schedule (it would be highly attended at this point) and ramping up the Modern Sex event to be the most talked about event of the year.

By: Ken Y

Ken Y — Sat, 22 Jan 2011 16:30:16 +0000

Ugh. Jason’s comment is so depressing, how it seems to ring true. I’ve watched California’s public universities under financial pressure for god knows how long now. This actually makes more sense than a “direct” censoring of Taormino (though, effectively, it is an “indirect” censoring in response to expectations of perceived criticism)

By: Jason Riedy

Jason Riedy — Sat, 22 Jan 2011 15:53:14 +0000

Ok, this is the last time/place I’m going to give a different perspective. The responses are tending towards an echo chamber with very little consideration of what’s going on at Oregon State. I’m not there, but I am related to a state university and have been at a few previously as a student. I’m seeing similar issues occur in non-sexuality contexts.

In 2001, public university budgets were relatively stable and secure. Administrators could permit risks without putting uninvolved peoples’ jobs at risk. And if someone was laid off, there were other jobs out there.

In 2011, public institutions have already eaten at least two rounds of at least 5% budget cuts. Those cuts affect the staff the most. At my university, staff members are doing the work of from two to five people, and many who know the rules and regs for funding in areas are gone. (The UC system is terrified right now of having to cut everyone who actually knows the laws and rules about funding with the upcoming 16% cut…) No, they didn’t plug her name into Google. They’re too busy with demands from larger groups with more money involved than this conference.

This is what happens when you dump more work than a human can do on an already underpaid staff member.

Also, a quick check of the Oregon State student affairs pages shows that the higher levels have changed since 2001. Indeed, the year 2001 appears in a few peoples’ hiring dates. Stories behind 2001-dated staff changes may be worth some investigation. The people involved in the 2001 decision are not the same as those in the 2011 one.

And yes, if Hef sponsored the entire conference, THIS PROBLEM WOULDN’T HAVE HAPPENED IN THE FIRST PLACE. Her un-invitation is directly related to the source of funding. That others slipped through just means other screw-ups. And the rest of the “reasons” being sent now are people covering their butts and desperate to keep their jobs through the *next* round of layoffs. The story up to the latest butt-covering has been utterly believable to someone who deals with funding at a public university. My knee-jerk reaction on hearing of the un-invitation was literally “whoops, someone tried to use general funds for this.”

The actual subject matter here (sexuality) isn’t the core issue of *this* problem. I’ve seen people have their funding cut for mentioning ultra-conservative people simply as examples. Schools are running scared and running out of money with increasing demands. The lack of funds gives political groups with strong pro-this or anti-that positions a ridiculously strong tool. And this is state-level, so it’s quite difficult to free up money by, say, not fighting wars or legalizing things that would become huge revenue sources via taxes.

This situation sucks all the way around. I don’t know the Oregon State folks, but people in similar situations elsewhere already are horribly demoralized. I’d bet most at Oregon State aren’t feeling good about this. And with the echo-chamber-feeling response of “Oregon State bad,” I wouldn’t be surprised if the entire conference is cancelled just to make the extra work load go away.

By: Tanya

Tanya — Sat, 22 Jan 2011 14:01:15 +0000

As a former student at OSU, I’m not surprised that the Student Affairs pulled the plug on this. In spite of OSU’s solid reputation as a party school, Corvallis is a small, rural-ish and very conservative town with a prolific religious community. This sounds more like community pressure than anything to do with tax dollars and state funding.