PRINCETON, N.J.—A simmering campus controversy is dogging the decision by Princeton University’s student government body (USG) to grant $1,500 to a student group called Let’s Talk Sex (LeTS), which plans to schedule an event during the current semester that includes the screening of clips from pornographic films followed by a discussion with a porn industry director or actor.
The money was granted during a USG meeting Feb. 21. By March 2, students opposed to the screening had organized an online petition, which has since garnered 236 signatures. According to a March 6 article in The Daily Princetonian, “A sizable number of the signatories, however, are Princeton alumni or individuals not affiliated with the University.” The article says that Anscombe Society President Shivani Radhakrishnan, who also is a member of The Daily Princetonian editorial board, started the petition.
“Pornography portrays women as objects of sexual desire and normalizes this objectification,” said Radhakrishnan. “In addition to these social costs, there are health costs [like] addiction.”
LeTS president Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux said the screening, which was approved by a majority vote of the USG Senate, will take place. “We’re still in the planning stages, and we will release more information about the exact nature of the event when we know what the date will be,” she said.
According to USG president Michael Yaroshefsky, there was nothing unusual about the LeTS event request or the approval process that followed.
“A disbursement of over $1,000, it must also be approved by a majority vote of the USG Senate,” he said. "Before coming before the Senate, this funding was vetted by the Projects Board and found to be eligible for funding.”
Monday, however, The Daily Princetonian editorial board published an editorial that argued against using USG funds to screen porn clips, even if there is a discussion afterwards. Radhakrishnan recused herself from voting on the editorial.
The complete text follows:
The majority correctly argues that the University is a place for intellectual inquiry. To that end, it should foster speech that is intended to be a part of intellectual and artistic expression. Several issues arise, however, in airing pornography as part of any presentation meant to foster discussion. In terms of its pertinence to the presentation, pornography is not designed to communicate, persuade or express—it is intended to cause sexual arousal. As such, the screening of the pornography, while providing a visual aid to the speaker, is not necessary for the sake of the talk. It serves merely as a presentational tool. But such utility must be weighed against the larger concern that arises from the screening.
Many of the opponents of pornography find not only its production and existence but also the act of watching pornographic images to be deeply problematic and immoral. Whether or not such convictions and beliefs arise from moral inclination, the screening of pornography prevents many opponents from attending the event. They literally cannot watch the pornography, even in the context of the lecture, for that act of viewing pornographic images is itself immoral.
The addition of pornography to this lecture thus actually undermines its central goal—to foster dialogue. No matter the potential artistic merit or presentational benefit provided by airing pornography, this screening all but prevents its opponents from attending. It undermines both the University and Let’s Talk Sex’s goal of encouraging dialogue, and for that reason, it should be prevented.
