To the editor:

The arguments supporting Dennis Dailey’s class have been underwhelming. Examples: Graphic videos are crucial to understanding sexuality, HBO is worse, the videos were made for educational purposes, they’re only 10 minutes long, the majority of students are supportive, banning them undermines free speech.

Questions: Did humans languish for millennia in their sexual development prior to the invention of the video? Who made HBO the moral or educational standard? Is a video made for “educational” purposes necessarily good education? If someone puts pedophilia on video, it may be “educational,” but should it be seen? Do gynecology students lack opportunities to gaze at vaginas, such that those who haven’t seen videos will lag terribly behind their voyeuristic counterparts?

What is the point about the small percentage of class time videos take up? If they are perfectly acceptable, why is there a need to assure us that they don’t take up much time? Does the fact that a majority of peeping Toms enjoys their peeping justify it? Should taxpayers be required to subsidize “academic” porn just because the professor and students enjoy it? Is sodomy a good thing to watch because it is done in a “tender” way?

Is free speech an absolute right that trumps all other rights? Does someone’s right to be a pervert trump the rights of those of us who don’t like vomiting? Do the prurient daydreams of men and women veto God’s right to be honored in his creation? Where is that written?

Curtis Knapp,

Lawrence