Instapundit beats me to this commentary from the Weekly Standard on the Sexuality Class. Bockhorn has obviously not been reading Calstuff; he asserts that

Last semester's "Male Sexuality" course featured an orgy; a party game involving matching anonymous Polaroid shots of students' genitalia with the correct student; and a field trip to a gay strip club to watch course instructors strip and have sex.

despite reasonable proof that these activities were done outside of class.

Doesn't really matter, since he just wants the opportunity to rail against Sexuality classes in general, under the idea that 'Do today's college kids really need help talking about sex?' Of course they don't: they talk about and have sex all the time! No need for a class. You'd almost expect him to go on to complain about English classes, since Kids These Days talk in English all the time. It's obvious why he doesn't: English classes at Cal take a kid reasonably exposed to literature and expand on that. Well, same goes for the Sexuality Class. If he wants to argue that expanding Sexual knowledge is a bad thing, fine. But don't make lame arguments like that one.

His 'putting in perspective' paragraph is spot on, though.

Every year or two, courses like this appear on the national media's radar screen, and the inevitable Kabuki dance begins: Conservatives display the requisite outrage, university administrators stammer in defense of "academic freedom," and eventually the whole mess blows over. Depending on how extreme the content is, the course either disappears forever, or returns a year or two later in barely modified form, sans outrage. (The Wesleyan course was killed by embarrassed administrators; the Michigan course, however, returned intact last fall, with much less hullabaloo.)

Email This Post!