Not exactly positive

[Fundamental Law 2,885]

It seems that even University Chancellors who are transparent about what they and their spouse do for fun are vulnerable. See this story for details:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/28/us/wisconsin-la-crosse-joe-gow-porn.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Jk0.nc-3.BNyGwS9bfgsT&smid=url-share

 

 

 

[William2001 53]

So free speech and freedom of expression, is no longer as free as it might be...Sad...

Amazing how the rights and freedoms in the USA are perceived in private and public life...

Perhaps the social and legal systems are at odds with the bill of rights and freedom of speech and expression. 🤔

[TeamCalgary 168]

This part may be for the university, the bone of contention for them:

 

"In an interview on Thursday, Mr. Gow and Ms. Wilson said that they believe they were fired over the videos, which included sex scenes together and with others under the username Sexy Happy Couple. Both said they felt it was wrong for the university to punish them over the videos, arguing that doing so infringes on their free speech rights."

 

Many academic institutions have "morality clauses" for their more significant employees; perhaps that came into play here?

 

My wife and I are very cognizant of the view mainstream society has of "swingers" and govern our actions accordingly. I feel for these folks. 

[PeterJ 940]

The mind boggles. WTF were these folks even thinking? Being a public figure while enjoying a discrete non-convential erotic life is one thing. Deciding to publish it all over the internet is another thing.
 

My late father-in-law was a university chancellor. I’m highly confident he and his wife never made and/or distributed porn videos. Of course his career in academic administration pre-dated the ability to produce do-it-yourself porn. But even if it hadn’t…🙄

 

now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to start searching for those videos. 😉

[bbarnsworth 2,637]

It doesn't matter if their first amendment rights were infringed. It's likely something they signed away in being hired. As TeamCalgary notes, many academic institutions (and, really, businesses too) have morality clauses. I seriously doubt the University of Wisconsin didn't have him sign something like that. Even if he hadn't, being such a highly visible individual effectively means the same thing. He fucked up, literally and figuratively. It was a seriously stupid move on his part, assuming he wanted to keep the job.

 

My wife and I once played with a couple where the husband was the provost of a major university. I don't know which university it was, though I could have found out if I'd dug deep enough. I respected their privacy. They took significant precautions to maintain their privacy. They played it smart. Even so, it was risky for them.

 

My wife and I are discreet, and will remain so at least until we retire. Both of our jobs could end instantly if our lifestyle choices were common knowledge.

[hunterdonNJcpl 1,383]

and that is why we blur/crop faces... and don't post videos.

[Fundamental Law 2,885]

It will be interesting to see how all of this evolves.

 

Apparently five years earlier (pre-pandemic) the chancellor invited Nina Hartley to lecture on campus. Hartley, who described herself as a nurse who happens to be a porn star, is not only among the most prolific stars, but one its best public-facing representatives. The chancellor received some mild rebuke. 

 

The more recent series, "Healthy Sexy Cooking" (with porn stars) is easily findable on YouTube, at least in G-rated versions with pointers to paywall-protected (and some free) versions that are presumably more ... adult. The couple made no attempt to conceal their identities. See https://www.pornhub.com/video/search?search=sexyhappycouple if you must...(and yes, we did). 

 

The couple has a couple of books easily findable on Amazon with their photo on the jacket. https://www.amazon.com/Monogamy-Benefits-Porn-Enriches-Relationship-ebook/ and others. 

 

They really do appear to be a "sexy happy couple". 

 

Three months ago, the chancellor announced that he had decided to step down from the role and return to the faculty. (We have been in similar leadership situations in academia, albeit not at the chancellor level, and fully understand the decision to relinquish administrative roles to go back to why one goes into academe in the first place--to teach and to learn (research)). 

 

Now, three months later, there is this kerfuffle. The University Board is channeling Claude Rains ( from Casablanca: "I'm shocked, SHOCKED to find gambling going on in this establishment!) while the chancellor is going on about First Amendment rights. This sounds like a win-win: the University Board gets to show that they are "tough on these pornographers!"--the actual quote from the Board being “We are alarmed, and disgusted, by his actions, which were wholly and undeniably inconsistent with his role as chancellor.”  Meanwhile, the ex-chancellor and his wife , that sexy happy couple who were never particularly secretive about this side gig, have publicity that they could neither have imagined nor readily paid for. They will have speaking engagements and surely their OnlyFans  business will increase as will their book sales. Perhaps there will be additional merch. 

 

 Stay tuned and pass the popcorn, please. 

 

 

 

 

[bbarnsworth 2,637]

Somehow I don't think this chancellor was trying out for Claude Rains' Invisible Man role. 😆😅

[Numex 2,409]

These were people engaging in legal, normal, consensual activities.  I hope that the day comes when everyone says either "So what," or "Let me see."

[BiloxiBiMaleMMF 63]

I thought the SAME Casablanca quote: "Shocked"......gimme a break.

 

The popularity of porn is WELL KNOWN.

 

The HISTORY of "screwing around" is WELL KNOWN.

 

The REPORTED reactions are a bit Shakespearean, IMHO:  "me thinks the lady doth protest too much."

 

I recall cumming back from my first  WESPAC deployment in 1971 and getting discount tickets ($2 for 2) to visit Disney World.  Pirates of the Carribean had pirates chasing damsels in tattered clothes with another hiding in  barrel and I said to my, "THIS is JUST LIKE Liberty in WESPAC!"

 

Later (circa 1986) "Top Gun" has a bar scene "OK, the bet is, you have to carnal knowledge OF A LADY, ON THE PREMISES, with 30 minures" and CLINK. Mav meets Goose' long neck and swigs down his beer as I goes INTO the Lady's room to hit on a woman who turns out to be "Charlie."

 

EVERY WW2 movie, especially about pilots, involves SEX.

 

Butt THEN...circa 1993, we have TAIL HOOK!  And here we go again!  "I am SHOCKED!  Military pilots are CHASING PUSSY!  Did you KNOW that the female LT had just had her pussy shaved in the "Pussy Shaving Room" and was NOT wearing panties beneath her SKIRT!  Oh yea, SHE WAS "shocked" when she ventured to the ENTRANCE of the "gauntlet."

 

I hasten to add, that ANY WOMAN can say "No" or "stop" at ANY MOMENT....butt some pilots reported that "she was smiling."

 

I wasn't there....at Tail Hook....butt I have always been "interested" in recreational sex bi consenting adults.

 

Sure wish ANY of my teachers had "tried to hit on me"...just saying      and I was in HS & college in the 60's!!!

 

I think a man's "biggest fear" (especially nowadays) is that a woman will claim "me too"  and they must be believed ....UNLESS YOU'RE???? ......just WHAT are the "rules" for being in a "protested class?"

 

THIS IS WHY....I would NEVER be with a "wife" WITHOUT HUBBY THERE!  AND....that BOTH are NOT HIGH or even "been drinking!"  It's JUST NOT FUN UNLESS EACH PERSON "REALLY wants it!"

 

ALAS...SOLO masturbation is the ultimate "safe sex" AND it's EFFICIENT....AND it's SATISFYING knowing that SOME OF YOU actually still "DO IT" IRL and allow we voyeurs to watch or read about it! 

 

IT JUST SHOWS to GO YOU...you GOTTA BE DISCREET!

 

 

[bbarnsworth 2,637]

If you deployed on a westpac cruise and are subsequently shocked by something, you're lying...either about the cruise or being shocked

 

(...and that, from a sixth fleet sailor. The tales are infamous!)

[NWAtlSwing 522]

The couple has a right to have sex with whomever they want and even make porn. No one is trying to put them in jail for it.

 

Their employer has a right to decide they don't want open pornographers working for them.

 

Free speech means the government does not put you in jail. It does not mean you are free from the consequences of your actions.

[TeamCalgary 168]

Well said NWAtlSwing!

[let's do it again 414]

I believe that I saw one of their videos on Pornhub yesterday and all I could think about was how good the camera work was. I was wondering if a student was behind the camera!

[PeterJ 940]

5 hours ago, let's do it again said:

. I was wondering if a student was behind the camera!

I hope not! If so, he’s in way deeper shit than if it was someone unaffiliated with his university.

[hunguyet 28]

13 hours ago, let's do it again said:

I believe that I saw one of their videos on Pornhub yesterday and all I could think about was how good the camera work was. I was wondering if a student was behind the camera!

The videos have been removed from Pornhub today. 

Edited January 2 by hunguyet

[oldswinger64 111]

As a resident of Wisconsin, I would like to thank Happy Sexy Couple for the stand they took.  Things change when people take risks and stand up for what they feel is important.  Vanilla people are now discussing consenting extra marital relations. That is a good thing.  It has opened the discussion a bit more, and it is hoped will lead to society being slightly more accepting of different sexual choices.

 

I believe they were planning to do this for a while.  He had already resigned his position, will have a very nice State of Wisconsin Pension, and now can continue to speak of how their sexual activities has benefited their marriage.  It is a win for them, and a win for society.  And it is much more honorable than engaging in gay bashing for profit and then being caught in a three way with husband.

[couplers 4,614]

10 minutes ago, oldswinger64 said:

Vanilla people are now discussing consenting extra marital relations. That is a good thing.  It has opened the discussion a bit more, and it is hoped will lead to society being slightly more accepting of different sexual choices.

Great observations and points.

 

As with many things, people often react the way that they think their tribe expects them to react.  In large part it's what keeps racism alive.  I saw a recently divorced woman get crap from her friends for being civil to her ex and his new woman. "Are you going to let her get away with that?!" they said.

 

Jesus himself told the mob to put down their stones.

[Fundamental Law 2,885]

The back-and-forth between the deposed chancellor and the board continues.  From a Milwaukee newspaper, 

 

UW President Jay Rothman then messaged (Joe Gow)  Wednesday night saying he was out as chancellor. Part of the message reads, "The board's basis for termination includes but is not limited to your failure to obtain consent before engaging in any other occupation."

 

Per Gow's contract, "The chancellor shall not engage in any other occupation which requires his personal attention without prior consent of the university."

 

Gow responded...but...it wasn't an occupation...

 

"From the questions I was asked, I think they were under the impression that my wife and I were paid to be in the videos. If that were the case, then we would've had to report that with my outside activities reporting that I do every year. But that was not the case. We paid the studio," Gow told News 8 Now over the phone.

 

Gow said he's paid about $80,000 over the last decade to have the videos made, calling it not a job but an expensive "hobby."

 

The board then goes back to the "role model" defense:

 

Rothman said, "Good judgment requires that there are and must be limits on what is said or done by the individuals entrusted to lead our universities. We expect our chancellors, as the leaders of these great institutions, to be role models for our students, staff, and faculty as well for the communities we are privileged to serve."

 

The Board is certainly entitled to choose leaders based on personality traits and actions that best represent their institution, and one can well appreciate that "adult film star and porn advocate" is not the image they had in mind. What's interesting, though, is that all of this is coming to light long after the Chancellor announced his plan to to step down from that role and return to the faculty, capping a 23 year career as an apparently successful administrator at three institutions of higher learning. No one seems to be challenging his service and his record of achievements. The Board is not going to be successful on the technicality of outside employment because his work was voluntary, and getting into what is and is not acceptable voluntary work (provided it does not involve the University) will disadvantage the University in a first amendment lawsuit. 

 

What will be interesting to see is whether further attempts will be made to remove Mr. Gow from the faculty. His university is a public university, accountable to the taxpayers in that state. That said, he is also a tenured professor, and firing a tenured professor is something that is not undertaken lightly. The American Association of University Professors 1940 statement https://www.aaup.org/report/1940-statement-principles-academic-freedom-and-tenure is worth a read. If the University seeks to fire Gow, it will almost certainly have to establish moral turpitude. In 2023, making sex tapes with one's spouse is hardly unusual, although having three-ways with (other) porn stars is a stretch, as is posting to PornHub. Still, if it didn't involve the university and its students or staff or facilities, and all of the activity was among consenting adults, it will be a stretch to make the moral turpitude charge stick. 

[lovefest04 697]

God help us. I'm very concerned that a man who has a healthy sexual relationship with his wife might actually come into contact with students.

 

Morality my ass.

How about universities charging $50k per student, saddling students with debt all with the 'hope' of getting a good job.

Let's talk about Jim Jordan.....

Let's talk about the ass kissing and deal making universities do to gather donor assets and develop massive endowments.

Let's talk about women being raped on campus and universities sweeping it under the rug.

etc etc.

 

Morality police always come up against reality and problems with WHO'S MORALITY.

 

Leave the dude and his wife alone. Maybe students would see what a healthy sexual relationship can be. Not for everyone, but better than most of what we see in advertisements and on instagram.

 

My two cents..