College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students Jobs and internships for students -

OPINION: Live group sex therapy creates division on campus

Published: Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Updated: Friday, March 12, 2010

Whitworth welcomed self-proclaimed comedian therapist Dan Packard on Monday Feb. 22. Packard has been named National College Speaker of the year and is known for his "Live Group Sex Therapy" act. However, more than therapy, Packard doled out hypocritical advice to an audience of students he knew very little about.

Packard was brought to Whitworth by cultural events coordinator, Jaquette Easterlin. Easterlin went to a campus activities leadership fair called National Association for Campus Activities (NACA). There, she saw various speakers and artists give short previews. Easterlin was impressed with Packard’s presentation.

“He used real life situations and comedy to capture the audience,” Easterlin said. “I nodded the whole time because I agreed a lot with what he said, and it’s funny.”

Students received a questionnaire as they entered the room. It asked for their name, a cool talent, a problem with relationships, why it was a problem and how it could be fixed.

“I hope people are able to take in his real life scenarios and learn from them,” Easterlin said. “His question and answer session should be really helpful.”

Freshman Katie Traylor was excited for the show to begin.

“I’m just hoping it will make people more comfortable with sex and sexuality since it’s such a touchy subject here at Whitworth,” Traylor said.

Packard may have helped Traylor’s hopes come true, but be careful what you wish for. It seemed that Packard was able to encourage those in the audience who have had sex, while discriminating against those who have not.

Packard addressed a list of disclaimers at the start of the show. He admitted he was not worried with political correctness, that his humor would be crude, and his advice was just his opinion. He also admitted to using gross generalizations and stereotypes to make some points, while not believing in them all. Immediately following this, Packard started throwing out statements of jaw-dropping bad advice.

“Guys like easy girls,” Packard said. “We like easy.”

Along with this was the idea that the word "sluts" is only something jealous women call other women. Packard said that men never call girls sluts, so really it is something a woman should never be worried about. This, from a man who has been recorded calling himself "The Whore Whisperer."

During the question-and-answer portion of the evening, Packard became excessively more invasive than would be expected in a large crowd setting. He only ended up answering three questions.

Fear was a major theme of Packard’s act. It seemed that anyone and everyone in the audience was battling fear of some sort. Whether he was discussing casual drinking, judging others or sex, everyone was apparently fearful of something.

Moments of interesting ideas or snippets of good advice did flare up in his act. He asked the audience to always be sure and be themeselves, noting that they should never change for someone else.

Packard encouraged the women in the audience to welcome that life is unpredictable, make the first move in a relationship and don't just believe you're entitled to love. He referred to it as killing the princess and raising the queen.

At the end of the two and a half hour show, the crowd seemed to be at odds on their view of the performance.

"I thought he was funny,” said sophomore Michael Taylor. “But, there was stuff I definitely didn’t agree with. He definitely didn’t change my worldview.”

When I went to interview Packard about the show, I ended up being the one in the hot seat. He asked what I had learned. I said I learned to consider why I do the things I do and see who I make my choices for.

I did not know when I came to the show that I would need a problem to discuss. I’m in a very healthy, happy, two and a half year relationship that really needs no psychoanalysis. Packard still tried to figure me out and pretend that he knew everything about me.

When Packard I didn’t like about the show, I said I initially felt like he was telling the audience to go out and be promiscuous. While I admitted that I recognized that was not his intention, he paused.

“Why would that be a bad thing?” Packard asked.

I explained I've chosen to not have sex, so it made me uncomfortable. However, if anyone else has different lifestyle choices in that area, I don’t judge them differently. It is just my personal preference.

His response floored me to a point where I had to end the interview.

“So you’re a liar,” Packard said.

This is where I felt Packard went too far, both in our interview, and while he was on stage. He assumes he is able to delve instantaneously into anyone’s psyche and know them as though they were best friends. He knows nothing of me and assumes I’m another of the two-sided personality women he talks about on stage.

While many in the audience enjoyed his show, anyone who raised their hands with questions that did not agree with Packard’s teaching were immediately shut down, spun into a tangled web of questions or made to start crying in front of an audience of 100 people.

When one woman in the audience asked about values in sex, or waiting until marriage, Packard quickly wore her down.

“Do you have friends?” Packard said. “Do you hug your friends?...Then what makes that any different than sex?”

After the show, when a group of the audience stayed behind to ask him questions, many praised Packard for freeing them and making them feel enlightened.

“I have had sex and I just feel so much freer; I don’t care what anyone else thinks now, I shouldn’t hide it,” said a woman in the group.

Packard congratulated her on her journey of self-discovery.

“Watch out for those virgins though, they’ll try and bring you down in any way they can,” Packard said.

Congratulations to all who enjoyed Packard’s show; I know it was split for those who did and did not. I did not and would not recommend him to anyone just hoping for a night of laughs.

Contact Sophie Sestero at sophie.sestero@whitworthian.com.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

27 comments

Anonymous
Thu Apr 1 2010 02:29
Has anyone been able to see what Packard thought about this story?
freind
Tue Mar 30 2010 23:18
Nonono! That can't be right. I'm soph's friend. I've had sex and she treats me the same as anyone else. I think she's saying its the right decision for her to make. she doesnt judge those who have sex and say you're wrong. she just doesnt want to make that choice herself.
Anonymous
Tue Mar 30 2010 04:21
So let me get this strait because I'm a little confused... Sophie, are you saying anyone who has sex is bad? I know you say you don't care what other people do as long as you make the right choice, but are you saying everyone who has sex is making the wrong choice?
Anonymous
Mon Mar 29 2010 16:19
Two comments? Weren't there 23 comments a couple days ago?
Whitworthian Admin
Fri Mar 26 2010 03:08
Anonymous,

It wasn't Whitworth Administration; it was Whitworthian admin. The Whitworthian is entirely student run - Whitworth administration doesn't have a say it what we do or do not publish. The online team reserves the right to delete comments deemed offensive or not conducive to healthy discussion.

-Whitworthian Online Team

Anonymous
Thu Mar 25 2010 03:26
I think it's simply rediculous the "Whitworth Administration" has stepped in to remove all these comments. I mean, oviously there wasnt a lot of say when this guy was coming to speak at whitworth, but now they have to overshadow the comments that are being made? it sounds like a conspiracy to me.
kk
Tue Mar 23 2010 16:43
Let's go make that comment where pre-marital sex is more acceptable, Jeffery, and see how everyone takes it. I don't think it's going to have AS BIG of an effect as it does at Whitworth. For me, the comment would make me laugh and has truth to it. You don't see the not so easy girls hooking up with all the dudes, now do you? Guys who want to have sex with everything that has a v. and two legs will bring around anything that will say yes...It's reality. Go to a party, go to the bar, ...anywhere, people watch, you'll see it.
Jeffery G.
Mon Mar 22 2010 23:44
I think you could have the same reaction, KK. Just because someone is non-religious doesn't mean they don't have beliefs and values they still stick to. I mean..."guys liking easy girls" is a pretty out-there statement that can cause dropped jaws no matter where you are. I don't think it's just whitworth
kk
Sun Mar 21 2010 03:36
Jerod,

Mine is based out of observation from what I have seen from the Whitworth culture and what I see from outside the pine cone curtain that we live in...yes, it does exist. There are many things that the guy said that many people wouldn't be shocked by...take this to a public, non-religious university and we'd have a completely different story.

Jerod Jarvis
Sat Mar 20 2010 02:40
kk and D. Wallace,

Both of you seem to assume that there is an inherent connection between being conservative and being sheltered. As if being liberal is equal to being enlightened. I would be interested to see the logic behind that assumption.

Shock and shame are not emotions from the dark ages or things to be inherently avoided. There are a great many things in our world that we are right to be shocked over and ashamed of: murder, rape and scandal, just to name a few examples. Our culture has slowly become less and less sensitive to such things - but to automatically assume that just because we no longer think that way means we are now more enlightened is logically unsound at best.

Many of our world's great thinkers were and are conservatives; many of them would have been shocked at by some of the things Packard had to say. Does that automatically mean that they were sheltered and naive? I suggest that it does not, and I also suggest that you hesitate before immediately writing off conservatives in the same way.

kk
Fri Mar 19 2010 20:43
D. Wallace I would have to agree with you; good points!

I feel like those at Whitworth who are super conservative are always the first to jump at these kind of things. I'm not that conservative and I know others who are not and they are all okay with this sort of thing...being sheltered can servely taint your idea of reality.

D. Wallace
Fri Mar 19 2010 15:53
One thing people failed to realize, which I think is funny, is that this man was not judging anyone or refusing to open up to others opinions. He was simply asking questions as to why you made the decisions that you did whether that is having sex or not. Why are you doing it? Those who choose not to have sex usually have no clue as to why theyve chosen that option for themselves and usually tend to view others with disgust because they live their lives according to what and how they feel. Let's face it, young adults at Whitworth are sheltered and listen to mommy and daddy or Pastor whoever and never try to learn the world for themselves. Then they follow God knows how many rules as to how to live their lives without understanding why they are doing it. That was Daniel's point. Not to pick on anyone or make them cry. Grow up people. Seriously, I enjoyed every bit of his show because it was honest and realistic about life and love. Love is not a fairytale and if you believe it is, then sweetheart, you got another thing coming. Since the show I have had a different outlook on love and relationships and I appreciate another person's POV on the situation. If you're too sensitive to listen to someone's ideas without judgement or bias then you might as well stay behind the pine cone curtain because just like Daniel did the world is going to screw all of your ideals up and you probably wont know how to handle it. Thanks
Gabrielle M. Vaughn
Thu Mar 18 2010 22:52
I did not attend the event and have not personally discussed it with anyone who did attend, but, from what I'm hearing third-hand, the guy was a jerk. Supporting diversity of opinion is awesome, but not when the supposedly 'diverse' person is refusing to be open-minded himself! To all of you who are making critical, ANONYMOUS comments, step up and include your real name already. Jeez.
Jeffery G.
Thu Mar 18 2010 22:31
I don't understand why this story has so many comments. I'm confused how there have been some removed. I think schools really should monitor who is brought in to speak. No matter how old you are it will be representin you and your organization. I think this story just shows you people should really consider who is talking to their kids each day. I'm not at whitworth and I didn't see this Packer guy, but he sounds like a jerk who shouldn't be able to speak anywhere.
Whitworthian Admin
Fri Mar 12 2010 15:33
Due to the aggressive and offensive nature of several comments on this article, this thread has been edited and some comments have been removed. The deleted comments were those that did not address the subject matter in the article, but instead centered around the character of the author. Any further comments that do not address the topic of the article, for or against, will be deleted.

Thank you,

-Whitworthian Online Team

Sophie Sestero: Proud Writer
Fri Mar 12 2010 02:25
I'd like to clear up a few things.

First, I want to let anyone know, I'm not recommending Whitworth limits their speakers, or censor what is said. I agree that we're adults and can make up our own minds on who to go see and what to listen to without adults spoon feeding values into our lives. We're in our 20s now; it's time we head out on our own and choose the paths in our own lives.

No matter which path you are on in this life, I won't judge you. I pride myself in not shunning people for being different than myself. I know sex is a part of our every day lives, and that is fine. I myself don't choose to include it. Packard said I lied because I told him I didn't judge others for having sex or making choices that I wouldn't make. That is why I was so offended. Not because of his language, or his crudeness, but because he was not accepting of those in his audience who tried to be different.

I would have been writing the same article, with a twist, if he'd been attacking anyone who'd ever had sex. If he had stood on the stage and said anyone who had had premarital sex would be damned, I would have had something to say too!

Probably though, the most important thing I'd like to add, again, is that this is an opinions piece. Please do not condemn me for my thoughts. I'm not a poor writer or journalist for coloring this article with personal feelings since it's an opinions story. So please take your own advice; If you don't like it... you don't have to read it.

kk
Thu Mar 11 2010 21:44
I think a lot of this has to do with your acceptance of things...for me, something like this is completely okay...but for others...it's not. Everyone has a different level of acceptance. I have read this article a few times now and at first was extremely upset and had a lot to say but decided to hold back to think about it. Now, I don't think Whitworth should have to censor people who come because some people are upset with it. I am sorry, but you are NOT going to please everyone. Sex is a part of life even if it happens before or after marriage. I'm not your traditional Whitworth student, I drink, I've had sex...big deal? I still love God and answer to Him.

Sophie is going to have to have thick skin and deal with this kind of stuff if she is going to be a writer. People are always going to be trying to nail her some how for things that are said...it's just how things go but it's too bad that Whitworth students have to do it.

Anonymous
Tue Mar 9 2010 18:49
To No A Packard Fan,
I was not addressing my judgement statement to Sophie directly, I was however addressing it to anyone who judges others on campus. Just like Ms. Maguire stated, Whitworth seems to pride itself on an open mind and heart and yet it feels awful close mided to those who don't fit (or don't want to fit in) the exact Whitworth mold. Sophie did a good job of expressing her opinions and I am terribly sorry he called her a liar. That was completly innapropriate and ignorant of him. But I 100% believe that censorship is something that needs to be backed off around here. We're adults and should be able to handle adult situations. We all have the free will to go to the show or not. It sounds like you're basing your judgement off of heresay but perhaps you should attend the show before you make comments about what took place and how people felt about it. From what I could tell and from the very loud applause at the end, Daniel was received well even if the students didn't agree with everything that was said.
Sophie Sestero
Tue Mar 9 2010 17:18
Thank you, Jacquie. I appreciate your thoughts. Thank you all for taking the time to read my story and leave a comment. Please do remember thought that is simply is my opinion. Some of these comments are very hurtful, and I ask that you all consider what Jacquie is saying; your responses do have an impact.
Jacquelyn Wheeler
Tue Mar 9 2010 00:55
This is super good, Sophie. Thanks for your vulnerability.

It's good that we are discussing what should and shouldn't be allowed on campus and where the line is between funny and offensive. I am not sure how I feel about shows like this. It's good to know what's out there, but sometimes it can do more harm than good (basically I'll think more about this because I don't know).

Anyway, while the discussion is productive please don't make this about Sophie. She certainly doesn't sound bitter or judgmental. That last comment was pretty cruel. You are talking to a human being! Personal comments can hurt way more than people imagine. Especially when you get to be anonymous.

Let's me more thoughtful than hurtful, because I think this is an important issue.







log out