The Badger Herald

NEWS

Organization confident ‘Sex Toys 101’ will go on

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Nick Penzenstadler:

Law School shuts down 'Sex Toys 101' talk (April 30, 2008)
McCain drives economic line (April 17, 2008)
McCain stopping in state today (April 16, 2008)
Unofficial Mifflin date to be May 3 (April 8, 2008)

by Nick Penzenstadler

Thursday, May 1, 2008

Representatives from the student organization that had their sex toy forum canceled last week spoke out Wednesday with optimism for a future event in the University of Wisconsin Law School.

Administrators responded to a formal complaint by Wisconsin Law Students for Reproductive Justice Tuesday, saying the cancellation was a misunderstanding.

Law School Dean Ken Davis said university guidelines prohibit the use of facilities not only for sales but also “to promote or endorse commercial products or businesses.”

In a statement Wednesday, however, Wisconsin Law Students for Reproductive Justice chair Maria Selsor said the presentation was not a promotion for area retailer A Woman’s Touch.

“We anticipated A Woman’s Touch would feature their products at our event and might get good PR from it, but we do not see that as a commercial promotion,” Selsor said, pointing out the retailer has already done presentations in women’s health classes on campus.

Selsor also said other student groups advertise their events prominently featuring businesses like pizza restaurants and Madison-area bars without “commercial promotion” being an issue at the Law School.

Donald Downs, political science professor and chair of the Committee for Academic Freedom and Rights, said the policy for events with commercial goods needs to “pass First Amendment muster,” then must be applied to each organization equally.

“If, however, it’s not being applied to groups equally, that indicates viewpoint discrimination and there’s a First Amendment problem,” Downs said.

In their complaint, WLSRJ representatives contended the Law School’s decision to cancel the event and remove posters was “both procedurally and substantively unjust, constituted discrimination against our organization and sets a dangerous precedent for the future freedom of expression of all student organizations in the Law School.”

Davis sympathized with the group over the miscommunication of rules and said the school would reimburse the group for their food and beverages not used at the event and permit the program if it did not promote any commercial goods.

“I too take great pride in our university’s and Law School’s history of commitment to promoting the free expression of ideas,” Davis said in his letter Tuesday.

Selsor said their board was “pleased” Davis responded to their complaint in a timely manner and was encouraged by his commitment to refunding the money and allowing the event to proceed in the future.

“We still wish to see the Law School develop a better procedure if the school is concerned about a student organization event, one that is not unilateral, but fosters dialogue with the student organization in question,” Selsor said.

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (May 1, 2008 @ 8:56am):

As a law student, this is embarrassing to me and to the law school. If these people want to have a sex-toy party, they can do that at home. It sounds like this student organization just wanted some attention, and that is exactly what the administration handed to them.

Congratulations, Selsor, I'm sure you will have a productive career as something other than a lawyer. No firm in their right mind would hire you.

Anne Bensky (May 1, 2008 @ 9:23am):

Dear Anonymous law student,
Perhaps next time you publish mean spirited personal attacks against others you will at least have the courage to attach your name to them. It is a good thing for you that the First Amendment protects anonymous speech. It would be a shame to prohibit all student events at a public university that may have a tendency to offend, embarrass, or provoke controversy.

Anonymous (May 1, 2008 @ 9:42am):

Oh, Anonymous, you are an example of why the law school needs to tighten its admission requirements. While I'm sure Ms. Selsor will enjoy a long, successful career based on her courage and her understanding of the Constitution, you might find a job search more difficult as you are a coward without even the most basic understanding of the First Amendment.

And you don't speak for the law school. It might embarrass close-minded, repressed fools like you, but the majority of the law school has no problem with a frank, open discussion of sexuality.

Anonymous (May 1, 2008 @ 10:21am):

I love everyone yelling about free speech and constitutional rights...no one said you can't hold the event. They said that they didn't want it in a Law School Building. Find an appropriate location and hold it!

The big question: How does this event tie in and promote the mission of the Law School of UW-Madison?

Anonymous (May 1, 2008 @ 5:03pm):

Chuck at the University of Minnesota.

Ha, and once again, I am glad I chose Minnesota over Wisconsin. We have wackjobs also, but not quite as looney as the sex toy organizers. What are you guys, 14 year olds? And yes, Anonymous is correct, you are making an ass of yourself.

Add a comment

We welcome your thoughts, but please keep your feedback thoughtful, on-topic and respectful. Offensive language, personal attacks, or irrelevant comments may be deleted.