March 30, 2006

Real Sex, College Edition

Courtesy of Steven York

Steven York and an adult film star in one of the tamer images from the UCSD cable show.

The oral sex-loving fictional characters of the WB’s “The Bedford Diaries,” a sexually charged series about students attending a fictional New York City college, have got nothing on Steven York, a real-life recent graduate of the University of California at San Diego. With a little help from a porn actress, he’s set off lasting campus debates after literally letting it all hang out on a student TV program.

Last fall, York, who’s now in the process of applying to law school, decided to take on what he says is an uptight administration, not in tune with students. He had long enjoyed poking fun at the follies of administrators and faculty members through his student-produced “Koala TV” show, but in October, he stepped things up a notch, hiring an adult film actress and producing a video of them performing mutual masturbation and oral sex, as well as having intercourse.

The video aired twice on the university’s student-run television station before administrators cut the broadcast feed, which is operated through the Triton Cable network. The station could be viewed through closed-service television by nearly 8,000 students living on campus, most of whom are freshmen and sophomores.

“This incident, where we had a student air a hard-core pornographic video, illuminated to the campus that we had a resource that we should be able to decide how to manage and administer,” says Gary R. Ratcliff, acting assistant vice chancellor of student life at the university. “Steve York wouldn’t have been on our radar if he didn’t try to push the limits.”

The limits of what could be broadcast on the station, however, have been somewhat hard to define, since administrators haven’t had control over its content since the station’s founding in the 1990s. The station was initially set up and funded through a charter by the student government. When York’s broadcasts first aired, administrators requested that the student government take actions to prevent the airing of graphic sex and nudity, and they obliged.

But the sexcapades didn’t end there. York and several students affiliated with the station were able to garner enough signatures to have a special referendum earlier this year, letting the student body vote to decide whether or not they felt graphical depictions should be allowed to air on the station between the hours of 10 p.m. through 6 a.m. A majority voted against the ban, effectively preventing the student government from enforcing more stringent regulations. Since that time, some members of the student government, including its current president, Christopher Sweeten, have opposed administrators’ efforts to enact control over the station.

“We have a charter that we believe in,” says Andrew Tess, a station manager at the university’s Student-Run Television station. “And the administration hasn’t cared at every step of this situation.”

“We’re an outlet for student productions,” adds Tess. “We want our media to produce discussions and campus dialogue.”

Some students have argued, too, that if campus residents are going to be forced to pay for the cable services, the university should offer a way to opt out of the service entirely.

Further angering Tess, York and other students is a new policy that Ratcliff drafted with the assistance of university lawyers. The policy states that “broadcasts of indecent language or material are prohibited between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.” (During the daytime hours, such content wouldn’t be allowed to be aired due to Federal Communications Commission rules.) Under the policy, the term “indecent language or material” has the same meaning as the current definition used by the FCC.

According to the FCC, indecent language or material, in context, depicts or describes sexual or excretory activities or organs in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community standards for the broadcast medium.

The policy would also give Joseph W. Watson, the vice chancellor of student affairs, the power to cut the station’s feed without “notice, to halt or prevent suspected violations of this policy.”

Comments on the proposed policy are being accepted through April 7, at which time administrators will then decide whether to implement or modify it.

“I think it’s conceivable that the policy will be enacted,” says Ratcliff. “And the station’s signal will soon be reactivated.”

York isn’t convinced that the administrators will win this battle. He sees the creation of the policy as a way to highlight what he calls “the power hungry bureaucrats in the California education system.” He and others plan a publicity campaign to get alumni to support their efforts.

Students have also said that they have contacted legal representation in the event that the university attempts to enact the policy.

Toni Urbano, president of the Association of Higher Education Cable Television Administrators, says that universities would be wise to review their policies regarding student-created media before such scenarios develop. At New York University, where Urbano manages the institution’s television station, she says that the student station has long operated under FCC guidelines.

“As more and more cases like this UCSD scenario come about, I’m sure more universities are going to be proactive about how to monitor what goes out on their stations,” says Urbano.

With mainstream television shows, like “The Bedford Files” depicting a range of sexual behaviors among college students, some have questioned whether administrators are fighting a losing cultural battle. But even that show has recently faced censorship from the WB network, in light of the FCC’s decision to fine networks that air material it deems as indecent.

“Students have sex,” maintains York. “And we like it.”

But Ratcliff argues that he doesn’t see an increasing number of students expressing the desire to have sex on student television with porn stars. He says that some students want to get attention for their exploits, but sharing their adventures isn’t necessarily fair to the rest of campus.

Marsha Malinow, a junior majoring in international studies at UCSD, says that she’s worried about students living in dorms who are under age 18 who have access to such content. She thinks that York could have filmed a more tasteful video, as well, and she believes that the attention it’s received could be harmful to the institution.

Tess and Malinow both say that they wouldn’t have starred in such a pornographic production, and Urbano says she hasn’t seen such a situation come up at NYU.

Even York admits that he isn’t so fond of doing more porn work in front of the camera. “I don’t really like being naked,” he says. “I’m actually more comfortable behind the camera.”

— Rob Capriccioso

Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Comments

I always find it incredible that colleges (and students like Marsha Malinow) seem to see protection of the small sliver of under-18-year-year-olds as a justification to censor things they find “indecent.” Does Marsha Malinow really think that the seventeen-year-olds who see this will be so irrevocably damaged that it is worth depriving everyone else of this, uh, expression.

It is worth nothing that a nude image or even depictions of sex cannot be obscene, as a legal matter. But, it is difficult to actually figure out what this guy is doing to see how it would fit within both the FCC’s definition (which might not be constitutional, itself) and the constitutional limitations on any definition of prohibited obscenity.

York does have a point though, to many students, sex is a pastime. Unlike sports just about everyone can be involved. Therefore, since it is on everyone’s mind, some discussion is probably relevant to their lives. (Personally, since I find sports boring, this seems like a good use of bandwidth.)

Larry, at 6:55 am EST on March 30, 2006

InsideHigherEd Innovation???

I’m not the most observant person on the face of the globe, but, unless I haven’t been paying attention, the is the first time IHE has included a photograph with one of its articles.

Good choice! Go team!!!

RWH, at 8:35 am EST on March 30, 2006

slowly innovating

While IHE does seem to shy away from pics, I’ve noticed a few:

http://insidehighered.com/news/2005/11/10/strike

http://insidehighered.com/news/2005/12/01/penn

http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/02/03/arts

John, at 10:20 am EST on March 30, 2006

And Serious Debate Ensues

Wow. I can’t wait to follow the undoubtedly weighty “discussions and campus dialogue” that spring from this puerile attempt at attention-getting.

Our starlet’s comments serve as a predictor of the intellectual gravitas of these discussions: “Students have sex. And we like it.”

I’m also still trying to figure out how hiring an adult film actress as an accomplice in porn-making (read: “buying a woman’s body") becomes a statement of liberation rather than the decidedly oppressive act that it is.

Bryce Myers, at 10:20 am EST on March 30, 2006

how is ANY of this oppressive?

Bruce, How is ANY of this oppressive? Everyone seems willing and capable of real consent. Sex is an issue that impacts just about all of us, and, unlike sports (which colleges seem obsessed with) most people participate in, in some form or another.

Like it or not, as the adult entertainment industry has gotten bigger (and it is very big), it has pretty much conformed to normal employment laws, and the professional actresses involved are well-represented by lawyers, agents, and all the people that make life wonderful. If you want to do something about employment-related oppression, go help migrant farm workers, grad students, or eccentric lawyers.

Larry, at 10:35 am EST on March 30, 2006

RWH, IHE had photos of unidentified people standing naked in front of a window awhile back. This, I think, is the first time there are identifiable people. However, every time I see this picture I smile.

Incidentally, there is a CNN piece being passed around by email regarding a girl who is suing a “Girls-Gone-Wild-type” place for something that appears to be “negligent infliction of emotional distress” (I can’t find the complaint) because they 1) obtained a release from her; 2) videotaped her having drunken sex with another girl; 3) posted the video to the web; 4) (here is where it gets complicated) caused her to attempt to commit suicide (but she was not good enough at it); 5) caused her to call a neighbor to clean up the mess of her pathetic suicide attempt; 6) caused the neighbor to call the police; and thereby 7) ruined her life. At least this lad is not some drunk girl at a frat party who deserves no sympathy.

Larry, at 10:35 am EST on March 30, 2006

What’s with these people who think that “sex is fun and we like it” is their justification to do it/show it to everyone else. York is looking for a way to get attention and cause a stir. I think he should work through his self-esteem issues in a more private manner. He’ll probably get bored with the sex theme and move onto something else equally outlandish. Don’t indulge him by justifying and applauding his exploits.

Kara, at 10:35 am EST on March 30, 2006

Kara, why not indulge him ?

Kara, Everyone’s fascinations with different things comes and goes. I used to like fixing cars. Now I don’t. That doesn’t mean that discourse regarding automotive repair is invalid or that we shouldn’t “indulge” people that like to discuss it in public.

There is a large audience for sex discussion (especially amongst college students). Ironically, my guess is that most people watch his show not to indulge him but they find it a combination of interesting and funny.

See, the beauty of living in the USA is that 1) no topic is off limits; and 2) Americans have the resources to indulge just about anything that fascinates them. If we lived in another country, we would have to make sure the government approved of our topic, and we probably couldn’t afford most of the stuff we wanted to do, anyway.

Larry, at 12:05 pm EST on March 30, 2006

Larry, Larry, Larry,

I’ve noticed you are a frequent contributer of judment and lecture to this listserv. What would you do without criticizing others’ opinions? As this is America, I am free to express my opinion. Get a life!

Kara, at 12:30 pm EST on March 30, 2006

Boogie Nights In San Diego!

Thanks, John, for putting me straight on the photos. You’ve got to admit, they’re getting better.

I agree, Larry, every time I see that photo I smile. I think I’d enjoy having them both over for dinner some evening ... and try to direct the conversation away from those fuzzy-thinking administrative dorks they’re stuck with at UC-San Diego.

Also, for the administration at UC-SD ... would you like to know how to make yourselves look like a bunch of idiots who are completely out of touch with what’s going on in the lives of a great many young folks these days? Oops ... sorry ... you already know how to do that, don’t you?

And, while I’m completely in agreement with Bruce Myers about the profundity of this event, what’s this stuff about “the decidedly oppressive act?” Is that somehow related to the “fact” that the poor, oppressed young porn star sold her services to Mr. York? Although Larry is right on the button on this subject, I’d like to add one observation. Let’s suppose the young lady sold her body for say $500. Last month I charged WACOS the same amount, $500, for performing an equally oppressive act, facilitating a workshop titled, The Sociology of Cyberspace in Third World Countries in the Southern Hemisphere.” See the difference?

Finally, I’d like to know if young Steven is related to Dr. Steven York, the San Fernando Valley internist who has worked with porn stars, helping them deal with the dangers of HIV and AIDS? Anyone know?

RWH, at 12:40 pm EST on March 30, 2006

Kara, Of course you are free to have an opinion. But, if you want to convince people to adopt your opinion, you must express it in a way that stands up to criticism. I think I made a good argument (lifted, actually, in part from Martin Redish) explaining why your opinion is not only incorrect but violates first amendment principles.

In short, in a democratic society that values free expression (and, by via the 14th amendment, a state university) the entire point of free expression is not simply to assure individuals of honest government but to, in fact, expose both the speaker and the listener to an ever-expanding realm of human possibilities. This includes sex, chess, and car repair. (Or, in more academic terms, “The self-realization value to be derived from nonspeech experience depends upon the speech capacity, for without that capacity, activities and experiences such astravel and work would mean no more to us than they do to animals.”)

If you want to take Robert Bork’s approach, go ahead.

Larry, at 1:00 pm EST on March 30, 2006

Wow again. If I could bottle Larry’s condescending self-righteousness and stir it up with a jigger of RWH’s juvenility, I’d have one potent formula for turning people off to discourse on this issue.

Yes, I continue to believe that an environment which tolerates and, in fact, encourages young women to perform sex for money is indeed oppressive. On myriad levels.

My name is Bryce.

Bryce Myers, at 3:35 pm EST on March 30, 2006

He’s (maybe not) offended

Good Ol’ Larry:

A few days ago you were telling us about how bugged morally you were about stripteasing undergrads (such as the accuser of the Duke lacrosse players)—"Why can’t I tout platitudes about morality. Everyone else does! I figure if people think that Ward Churchill and gay marriage are two of the four horsemen of the apocalypse, I can think that female strippers are.” Today, however, you seem to think it’s okay to hire an “adult entertainment industry” worker to have sex with. Of course, it just might be that you don’t believe half the stuff you post.

normalvision, Prof. of English (ret.), at 3:35 pm EST on March 30, 2006

I don’t really understand how our opinion about porn is that important in this discussion. I consider myself pretty pro porn, and I still don’t think that a channel subsidized by the university, and presumably by fees charged for having a TV connection has the RIGHT to distribute porn. Why, given limited resources, should UCSD, and California tax payers be paying for porn? Note that this is a different question than whether ‘obscene’ materials should be allowed to be shown — I would argue that there is no reason to censor a film because it has an ‘obscene’ scene. The difference between porn, and something obscene but not porn? I’ll know it when I see it.

S. Silver, at 3:40 pm EST on March 30, 2006

why college?

Why does this “innovator” want so much to spread inane stuff like this over the TV and college airways....do it somewhere else....what are colleges and universities for?...this issues/show is devoid of ideas, a self-respecting institution should not allow this...let him come up with his own channel and outlet....in any case the creators of “real sex” are not addressing any essentially human issues....pigs have sex too.

Leon Rozmarin, at 3:40 pm EST on March 30, 2006

To Normalvision and Bryce on the nature of argument

Normalvision, So what if I don’t believe � the stuff I post? That doesn’t mean that it lacks intellectual rigor or merit. Life isn’t about talking about our beliefs and feelings. Whatever the case, I don’t think that Mr. York and his co-star are violating any (constitutional) statutes, and nobody seems to be injured by their behavior. In general, as a man, I am not offended by anything. In my culture, this is just simply not an emotion that is acceptable.

Bryce, Declaring something to be oppressive “On myriad levels” does not explain 1) what “oppression is”; or 2) why something is “oppressive.” You need to provide more specifics.

Larry, at 4:30 pm EST on March 30, 2006

If students are having so much sex and liking it so much, then why did Mr. York have to PAY someone to have sex with him? Oh, yes, I see.

Lynn, at 4:30 pm EST on March 30, 2006

college TV stations

Mr. Silver, While I don’t know the specifics of UCSD’s system, many public colleges attorneys have concluded that their in-house TV stations are a public forum and can only be regulated in accordance with the 1st Amendment. There is your answer.

Larry, at 4:30 pm EST on March 30, 2006

Just Wondering, Bryce ...

If you pay a porn star $500 to sleep with you, that’s called oppression.

If you take a beautiful woman out to a fine restaurant, followed by the theater, and spend $1,500 in the process, that’s called romance.

If you co-habit with a lovely debutant and spend 50% of your salary for the next five years keeping her happy, that’s called love.

See the difference?

RWH, at 10:15 pm EST on March 30, 2006

Universities have decided that their TV stations are protected by the first amendmant, and can therefore show whatever they like? That does not make any sense. Presumably if the show was of bad enough quality, the University would cease to fund it. I think it is a reasonable decision of the university that porn is not something worth funding. This is not a free market here — students, if they want to watch TV, are forced to fund this television station. Likewise, anyone paying student fees at UCSD, and probably any California taxpayer is forced to fund these programs. Likewise, students should feel free to make and distribute porn with their own time and money. Seriously, since when does freedom of speech mean I’m entitled to have my views broadcast to the world??

Ms. S Silver, at 6:00 am EST on March 31, 2006

answering Silver’s questions

Mr. Silver, Even though this issue has been discussed before on here, the logic goes like this. Since public universities are part of a state government, they are bound to follow the 1st amendment (via the 14th amendment). A bulletin board, theatre, or whatever that is funded by the school is generally considered a “public forum” in which the university (that is, the state government) cannot discriminate against people based on the content (though it can impose content neutral regulations and, if there is an actual news program it can exercise non-viewpoint discriminatory editorial discreton).

If the argument can be made that it is not a “public forum” (these terms terms of art), the Supreme Court has held that “"[C]ontrol over access to a nonpublic forum can be based on subject matter and speaker identity so long as the distinctions drawn are reasonable in light of the purpose served by the forum and are viewpoint neutral.” Cornelius v. NAAACP, 473 U.S. 788, 806 (1985). If it is a public forum, however, regulation must be “content neutral.” Now, there has been some question recently as to whether public access stations are public or non-public forums in Denver Area Educ. Telecom. Consortium, Inc. v. F.C.C., 518 U.S. 727 (1996) but even the plurality in Denver Area didn’t appear to allow any additional restraints.

Since “quality” is in the eye of the beholder, most people know that references to “quality” of shows on TV might just be a guise for viewpoint discrimination. (For instance, I consider any TV show that doesn’t provide specific citations to regulatory provisions and or Supreme Court cases to be of abysmally low quality and worthy of censorship. But people claim that this is just because I prefer discrimination in favor of my viewpoint.)

In this context, however, it seems that the producer (and actor, etc.) of this show has a viewpoint that is supported by many, and it is exceedingly popular. Therefore, even if the school might lose even the greyer question of whether individual students can argue that they are wrongly having their funds taken from them to fund a message that they disagree with.

Larry, at 7:15 am EST on March 31, 2006

First, I don’t know how I could have made it clearer that I am a woman, so please stop calling me Mr. Silver.I admit that your citations of the law are compelling and rather persuasive. But isn’t the difference between postings on a message board and a television show that someone posting on a message board may be using the college’s resources to propagate a message, but someone producing a television show for a university is in some way an employee of the university, and if they are not paid, at least under some contract to the university? And as such, doesn’t UCSD have the right to decide what they want their employees to produce? Doesn’t a university have the right not to invite a controvertial speaker to give a speech? Thanks.

Ms. S Silver, at 9:00 am EST on March 31, 2006

Sorry about confusing genders. Since the Supreme Court has used the same analysis for bulletin boards and speakers corners as it has for public-access-type TV stations, the question of who is employed by who doesn’t enter into the analysis. Arguably, a town that maintains a speakers corner employs grounds-keepers to keep the place nice, like a school presumably hires someone to maintain a bulletin board (and keep it lit). But this doesn’t take it out of the public-forum realm.

So, there isn’t much of a distinction as the law goes.

Public schools generally don’t have the right to prohibit a student group from inviting a controversial speaker based solely on his message. Of course, deans are not obligated to invite everyone. (Though there are some grey areas in this one relating to, of all things, product liability, rather than a controversial message.) However this is a slightly different issue as it goes to allocations of student funds.

Larry, at 12:00 pm EST on March 31, 2006

Dang Lar — need privatization?

Earth to UCSD: “adult entertainment” help build the economic foundations the ‘Net (right after sports). I understand the issues with common signal-carriage, private carriage, and gub-mint carriage. That’s what makes many so nervous these city WiFi net’s — the second packet-stream will be from ClubJenna.com.

IMHO, that’s why you privitize. Let someone else (e.g., Hugh Hefner, Larry Flynt) fight the legal battles. UCSD should be ed-ja-ma-cating, not litigating.

OK, Lar — get out the cite book ..

Bart J., at 4:40 pm EST on March 31, 2006

response to Bart

Bart,

Since most of my citations are off the top of my head (except when I quote), I don’t need a “cite book” whatever it is. UCSD is free to end all TV programming, or limit it to only class-related material and prohibit all students from airing their stupid shows. No constitutional issues would be raised here.

I don’t think that your commercial v. non-commercial dichotomy is viable, however. There are many types of expression that people pay money for besides adult entertainment. Some examples are: music, film, and, yes, even poetry. (I wouldn’t pay for poetry.) If you are to set out a rule that only non-self-supporting fields are able to access this channel, it would probably be unworkable, since, at some level, probably someone is willing to pay for anything.

I might also suggest that this program (which I have never seen) is not really conventional adult entertainment that would command the big bucks. (No pun intended.) Indeed, from what I am told, shows about sex rarely have extensive pedantic discussions before and after the main feature.

Yes, I agree that broadband internet is a great way to distribute media. But this isn’t where the college chose to go now.

Finally, all schools should be educating – not litigating. But, schools do a lot more than just provide students with classes. Some of their activities are overtly commercial (indeed, they are large purchasers of lots of stuff). They are politically active (if just for their own self-preservation). However, the interests of a college are different than the interests of most firms that produce and distribute media. While such an entity might be willing to argue its own position regarding pornography, they probably would not be in a place to litigate whether universities must assist students on an equal basis.

Larry, at 5:30 pm EST on March 31, 2006

You make a compelling point when you say that you don’t want to pay for poetry, and so if someone does not have to pay for porn.... etc. To me, this suggests that universities should not take it on themselves to provude media access, and certianly should not have a monopoly on TV access, or access to any media. It is hard to draw the line though — what if someone didn’t want their student life money used to fund Pro choice student groups? Or a black studies department? Or an economics department? I think some endevours are central to the mission of a university, and some aren’t, and it might be problematic to force students to fund the endevours that aren’t (I am not sure whether I think political student groups are central to the a university).

ms. silver, at 9:45 pm EST on March 31, 2006

Ms. Silver, Perhaps, as you say, schools should re-evaluate what sort of access they provide their students with. But, when a school starts cutting its services in order to prevent the spread of certain types of messages, it may be hurting itself in other ways. For example, when I was shopping for colleges (before the age of cheap internet access), I was very interested in a radio station. If a school cuts its radio station because the “music” that kids listen to today just isn’t that nice, then students might look elsewhere.

By the same token, many students may be scared away from a university that discourages all political activity. Personally, I think that all political activity by students is a waste, but I am in the minority.

The question of funding specific student groups is somewhat different, and a little more complex. But, I don’t think that is at issue here.

However, the decision of a university to have or not have a specific department is usually completely within the university’s control, and is, ironically, much simpler, even though at bottom there are fundamental intellectual assumptions under each discipline.

Unfortunately, whenever one of these controversies brews in one area, flames seem to erupt in others. But, if we all work together, we can keep the fire contained.

Larry, at 8:15 pm EDT on April 2, 2006

Jobs Related to Real Sex, College Edition

or search for jobs directly.

Assistant/Associate Professor, Systems Engineering
Penn State University

The Engineering Division at Penn State Great Valley School of Graduate Professional Studies is seeking qualified applicants ... see job

Medical Administrative Assistant Instructor
Corinthian Colleges

Everest Institute, a respected member of the Corinthian Colleges’ network of schools, is dedicated to helping students ... see job

Adjunct Faculty, Dept. of Philosophy (Part-Time)
Bridgewater State College, MA

BSC is one of the largest and most exciting centers for higher education in the commonwealth. Here in our idyllic setting, ... see job

Technical Services Librarian Ii
College of the Bahamas

DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES Applicants should be dynamic, innovative individuals with a strong commitment to service within a ... see job

Operations/Systems Manager (112230)
Northeastern University

Northeastern University, founded in 1898 and located in Boston, is a private research university that is a leader in ... see job

Associate Dean, Sellinger School of Business and Management
Loyola College in Maryland

Associate Dean and Director of Graduate Business Programs Sellinger School of Business and Management LOYOLA COLLEGE IN ... see job

Adjunct Assistant Professor — English as a Second Language/English for Academic Purposes (ESL/EAP)
Johnson County Community College

A career at Johnson County Community College is more than a job. We believe it’s important to invest in our employees and ... see job

Math/Stats Assistant/ Associate Professor (Tenure Track)
American University

American University is an independent liberal-arts university located in Washington, DC with 12,000 students. The faculty are ... see job

Nuclear Medicine Technology (Adjunct) Instructor
Hillsborough Community College

Hillsborough Community College is a public, comprehensive multi-campus, state-supported community college located in the ... see job

Associate Dean — College of Visual and Performing Arts
West Chester University of Pennsylvania

Join a vibrant campus community whose excellence is reflected in its diversity and student success. West Chester University ... see job