Multiple comments:

It’s hard to believe the introductory anecdote; it seems to have been at the least embellished for the sake of opening a discussion.

This piece includes a lot of detail into this guys personal beliefs that he then presents as fact.

The piece exploits risk of STDs for the sake of promoting a christian agenda.

“For men, it is difficult, though not impossible, not to have any overt sexual release. But from a spiritual, emotional and physical perspective, masturbation is a far better choice than having sexual relationships with other people.”

Women are people too. We have sexual needs. I’m kind of offended by this statement.

huge shocker that a physics professor thinks masturbating and avoiding sexual contact is a viable, fulfilling lifestyle

Hi Steve. The incident did happen. I asked my wife about this again and she said perhaps “joked about” would be a better description than “bragged about”. The article does contain opinion, but everything stated as a fact is fact as best as I know. I’d be glad to give you references. They were in the original copy but got taken out for the sake of making the article flow smoother. Richard

This article is literally absurd. Thanks to the D for publishing this and giving me a good laugh

Where to start?! People of all ages should be educated about STDs and diseases in general. We need to be informed, practice open communication, be disciplined, smart, and get tested. “We might as well call that marriage?” We might as well not call that marriage. Marriage has nothing to do with it. Equating sex to marriage doesn’t prevent people from having sex or contracting STDs! Does having multiple partners increase your chances of getting an STD? Probably! But walking outside increases the chances of being hit by a car, and eating increases the chances of contracting a food-borne illness. Rather than becoming an anorexic hermit, I will look both ways before I cross the street and be smart about what I eat—hmmm, but that still doesn’t reduce the risk to 0%…I think I’ll take my chances.

While I don’t agree with Professor Denton’s views on sex, I think his column is an interesting look at how professors view our social and non-academic lives. Obviously not all professors believe casual sex is detrimental to our well-being, but I really do appreciate Professor Denton’s concern for us, even if I disagree with his philosophy on sex. It’s good to have our morals questioned occasionally so we can evaluate how we’re living our lives and decide if we want to make changes or adjustment.

Thank you for writing this, even if students aren’t as appreciative of your perspective as they should be!

I could rant through each paragraph, but I’ll spare you all the spiel and merely point out a couple of sentences:

“For men, it is difficult, though not impossible, not to have any overt sexual release. But from a spiritual, emotional and physical perspective, masturbation is a far better choice than having sexual relationships with other people.” Women have sexual needs just as much as men do, and men are not animals who cannot control their sexual needs. To the first anonymous – I am also offended, for both men and women.

“Why not make changes that are likely to lead to long-term health and happiness? How about considering delaying, limiting or even refraining from sex and aiming for a lifelong relationship that has the potential to contribute toward genuine happiness?” I am offended by the implication that I am not intelligent enough to consider the consequences of my actions and make an informed decision about my own health and happiness, and I am offended by the implication that my personal definition of happiness is judged as being not “genuine.”

To be clear – there is absolutely nothing wrong with abstinence, and I absolutely agree that his point that we as students – as people! – should be well educated about the symptoms of STIs, methods of prevention, physical and emotional consequences of any kind of sexual relations – essentially, how to choose and have whatever safe consensual sex in which one wishes to engage.

But that he does not give me the liberty to make those decisions for myself? That he assumes he knows what will define my health and happiness better than I do? I find that rude, presumptuous, and belittling.

From the author’s webpage:

“But now there is a new view of tolerance – that we must accept all belief systems and lifestyles as equally valid, and furthermore, that we must embrace and celebrate them. I don’t agree with that. Of course there is value in getting to know people with different backgrounds and experiences. They enrich our lives. But my sincere desire is that people at Dartmouth, students, faculty, and staff, will examine the life of Jesus Christ and come to experience his love as I have, not because I’m better than anyone else, but just because I’ve met him and come to know him.”

If that little snippet and this article say anything, it’s that this is absolutely, 100% proselytizing rather than “concern for our well-being.”

I heard that had Santorum been elected as presidential candidate for GOP ticket, upon approaching the moderator at the last debate, he would have at the very least tough, and more likely proclaimed, in the presence of the Hofstra student body “I smell sex and candy, here” with appropriate intonation and pause

So if they were joking about it did they even have the STDs?

If anyone ever had concern for our well-being it was our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Regardless of this article being written by a Christian or by a non-Christian or whatever, it is a very well written article, telling us the facts about sexual behaviour and the consequences.

Thankyou so much to professor Richard Denton.

I abstain from sex (for personal, not moral or religious reasons) and even I dislike this article. Sex does not automatically lead to an STD, and marriage is not the only way to avoid STDs. Please don’t oversimplify the situation just to proselytize, Prof. Denton. If you were really just concerned about students' well-being, you’d advocate safe sex, condom use, and testing along with marriage and abstinence. Saying that marriage and abstinence is the only solution is just ridiculous.

There is something to be said about reforming hook-up culture, but I wish that Professor Denton would not try to project his own experiences onto everyone else’s. Not everyone finds sex to be an incredible spiritual and emotional experience, and there are many more ways than just monogamous married relationships by which one can relate to others sexually and, yes, remain healthy and STI-free. As such, there are many ways to make responsible choices than abstinence until marriage. And let’s not forget that women have sexualities too.

The 2000 year old zombie that gives me all my morals says I can have all the sex I want.

I am a student who agrees with the main idea of this article.

My colleague Prof. Denton writes: “Casual sex trivializes what is meant to be a deeply spiritual experience.”

I have to take issue with his use of passive voice. Meant by whom? Moreover, what kind of “spiritual experience” does this unnamed individual have in mind? Whose spirituality? What about those who reject the concept of spirituality — if sex was “meant to be a deeply spiritual experience,” are they excluded?

There’s nothing wrong with making an argument based on a particular religious worldview. But it’ll be a better argument — that is, a clearer one — if that worldview is acknowledged.

“Don’t have sex. You will get pregnant. And die.”

He misses the mark, but I appreciate the effort. The commenter who pointed out that caring professors are a plus deserves a repeat. You do want people who ostensibly play a formative role in your lives to have some concern for you even after you leave the classroom, yes? I grant that being ministered to when you don’t care for it is annoying at best. However, as someone who now teaches a college class myself, I would definitely be upset if I felt that my students were making stupid decisions right in front of me and I did not even suggest to them that they could do otherwise.

As to the views actually expressed in this article, let me preface this by saying I am a die-hard atheist. Nevertheless, there are certain aspects of the religious perspective on sex that may be valuable. Obviously the idea that sex is harmful or shameful in general needs to go. But the opinion that you should share your sexuality only with people for whom you care deeply, perhaps even love, can come directly from a view of sex that regards it as extremely positive and fulfilling. Is sex always meaningful? Clearly not. But should it be? It does not make one “uncool” to believe that.

Lastly, this statement may get some brickbats thrown in my direction, but I think that the biggest dangers surrounding sex both in general and at Dartmouth in particular all concern alcohol. If you think casual sex is so great, see if you think it’s great stone-cold sober. Some people do enjoy that, but I think that most of the heartache, drama, and yes dangerous situations come out of the partying hook-up culture. If you can’t relate to other people without getting hammered first you have serious issues and need to grow up. Get alcohol out of your dating and mating decisions. This might also be a good time to throw in a reminder that your intoxicated would-be partner can’t consent anyhow. Clearly no one wants to engage in sexual acts without consent…RIGHT?

So much to respond to…

First of all, a number of people complained about the paternalistic attitude. I understand that as an issue. Believe it or not, I tried to tone it down. But I probably could do more.

On the other hand, I don’t think it’s wrong to have a strong view about things and say it. I said on my webpage that I don’t think that every idea is as good as every other idea. A number of people seem to be saying that it’s wrong to say so. But if everything is equally okay, my ideas are okay. Over the 22 years that I have been at Dartmouth, I have read numerous articles in The Dartmouth promoting the idea that casual sex is okay. What about hearing a different perspective?

Secondly, I don’t mean to say that women don’t have sexual feelings, desires, or drive, and I’m sorry if that was implied. A friend of mine pointed out the juxtaposition of the sentence about men and masturbation and the one about the development of a woman’s cervix. That was accidental.

I do care about women. It broke my heart recently when I saw a male walking steadily while he led a staggering female into the fraternity across the street from our building. Yes, women have their own desires and make their own decisions. But a lot of the sexual culture is not in women’s or men’s interest, especially the association with alcohol as one alum pointed out.

About statements like “sex does not automatically lead to a STD”, I certainly did not say that. I gave probabilities that came from studies (Cates et al., “Our Voices, Our Lives, Our Futures: Youth and Sexually Transmitted Diseases”, 2004). And the probabilities suggest that there is a huge difference between the probability of getting hit by a car if you cross the street and that of getting and STD if you have sex with multiple partners.

Concerning condoms, I said “if unmarried students are involved in sexual relationships, they ought to be using condoms”. I did refer to the limitations of condoms. When HIV first came out, they talked about “safe sex”. That phrase has now been changed to “safer sex” because it’s clear that condoms alone do not make it safe. But yes, like I said, if people are sexually active they ought to be using condoms.

Finally I did not refer to Jesus Christ; I did not appeal to religion or politics, and it wasn’t my intent to promote either. Furthermore I see very little evangelistic value to encouraging people to limit their sexual activity. And whether I’m a Christian, a Muslim, a Buddhist, or an atheist is irrelevant to evaluating the arguments.

My intent was to encourage people to make healthy decisions, and that included the multiple possibilities of delaying, limiting, or refraining from sexual activity. I’m sorry if some people were turned off by the article. But my intent was to help people to live healthier and happier lives, and I think the hookup culture is a disaster for society, and for individuals. I hope the column will cause people to consider more carefully the decisions they are making.