from www.dailyprincetonian.com – The student group Let’s Talk Sex (LeTS) plans to hold an event that will include screening clips from pornographic films and a discussion with a porn industry director or actor sometime this semester, LeTS president Amelia Thomson-DeVeaux ’11 said. During its meeting on Feb. 21, the USG Senate voted to grant $1,500 to LeTS to fund the event.

“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,” Thomson-DeVeaux added, noting that the group plans to hold a second event this semester considering a critique of porn as anti-sex.

USG president Michael Yaroshefsky ’12 said in an e-mail that “there is nothing unusual about this approval.”

“Any time the Projects Board approves a disbursement of over $1,000 it must also be approved by a majority vote of the USG Senate,” he explained. “Before coming before the Senate, this funding was vetted by the Projects Board and found to be eligible for funding.”

While Projects Board co-chairs Shawn Kothari ’11, John Monagle ’12 and Kelley Taylor ’11 said in a joint e-mail that it is the Project Board’s policy to focus on the “fiscal viability of an event rather than the content of the program itself” when making funding decisions, they also lauded the screening as an event that “contributes to the diversity of intellectual discourse at Princeton.”

But news of the funding allocation has sparked a spirited reaction among students.

Anscombe Society president Shivani Radhakrishnan ’11 said that the Anscombe Society does not object to discussion about pornography, but “screening pornography … is a relevantly different situation.” Radhakrishnan is also a member of The Daily Princetonian Editorial Board.

“Pornography portrays women as objects of sexual desire and normalizes this objectification,” she explained. “In addition to these social costs, there are health costs [like] addiction.”

Other students held mixed views about the value of the event and the USG’s funding decision.

“I’m glad that the University is trying to bring diversity to campus, but it should be spending money on events that add to, rather than detract from, campus virtues and high standards,” Amy Olivero ’13 said.

Though the idea initially caught Natasha Phidd ’13 off guard, she said that “if the USG is involved, I would assume it would be serious, or at least for a purpose.”

Some students said they felt that the LeTS event fulfilled these requirements, noting that it would present a unique opportunity to understand the film director’s intentions and encourage an open dialogue about sexual behavior at the University, something that the group works to promote.

“It seems like it will get people talking,” said Katelyn Gostic ’13. “At the same time, I don’t see how they are going to hold an objective discussion, because the only people that will attend will be the ones that are comfortable watching pornography.”

Gostic added that she believed there were weightier issues on campus that were worthy of USG funding.

“I don’t think that it’s something that causes students here a lot of emotional distress, as opposed to other issues that might” and may deserve funding, she said.

Charles Fox ’13 echoed her response.

“They are spending the money on this instead of something more important,” he said.