Though I sometimes laughed with the rest of the audience and first thought the performance to be helpful and instructive, I’ve come to re-evaluate orientation week’s Sex Signals show. The aim of this performance is certainly noble; it aimed at educating college students about consent and how to recognize and prevent rape. Because of this group’s intentions, I have no desire to write anything so damaging as to impede them from speaking at other universities. However, they should reconsider the means by which they convey their “good word.” It seems an almost delirious oversight to tour nationwide performing a rape prevention talk without ever once mentioning what sort of damaging effect rape has on a victim and to go off on lengthy comedic tangents about a topic so grave as rape.
Here is what I mean: no one, I think, should leave an instructive lecture on one of humanity’s most heinous evils and feel good about themselves. And no one should question whether the instructors believe in their gospel or not. Yet, at the end of the performance, as I waited to speak with our two Sex Signals comedians, I heard a boy in front of me ask: “That was a great show guys, and I loved it. But really, do you believe in what you are doing? Do you believe in this message?” They of course answered with an emphatic “yes,” but if this question lingers in anyone’s mind, then the performers have failed. Unfortunately, due to the nature of this show, I am sure that many of us doubted their belief in this message.
Much of the Sex Signals show is spent setting up elaborate comedic scenarios. These included a long aside about a porn-displaying penis-shaped LCD football and a lengthy audience participation pledge about some sort of assault preventing mascot known as “The Blocktopus.” This jocular tone cast a bright hazy light on what is one of the darkest subjects. They had reason to be comedic. Talking openly about rape is so awful that it often produces a “shutting down” effect in listeners; instead of considering such an abrasive topic, many people will effectively check out. Therefore, it is reasonable when doing this sort of thing to establish a rapport with an audience and not immediately dive into this dark, uncomfortable subject.
Indeed, there were some parts of the performance where joking around made sense. Establishing a light tone on the matter of healthy gender dynamics and sex is wise. The actors’ comedic treatment of an imbalanced couple allowed them to diffuse nervousness around matters of intimacy. Their jokes allowed us freshmen to feel more comfortable about what is needlessly considered a taboo subject.
But I question the need for all-out clowning on matters like rape. No matter how good the advice that Sex Signals gives, the tone in which it is presented prevents us from understanding the true gravity of these matters. When a laugh track is added to clips from Kubrick’s The Shining, the gross actions of Jack — breaking into the bathroom door with a knife, screaming at his frightened wife and threatening to kill her — actually become funny. Look it up on Youtube, and see for yourself. Likewise, when a talk about rape is cloaked in laughter, I cannot help but wonder if it is possible to really understand its serious message.
In addition to this tonal failure, there was a serious omission from the Sex Signals message. Not once in their presentation — in which we are instructed not to rape other people — do we hear from the actual rape victim.
In one of their scenarios, we witness a theatrical rape. A college “dude” defined by the audience rapes a female on stage and is then placed on a talk show. Then, he tries to make a case for how he didn’t really rape this woman. The next part is a healthy debunking of every excuse a rapist might provide for his deed and then ... that’s it. We never hear from the victim, and the only real reason provided for not raping someone is “You will get punished for it. We will debunk your excuses.” The other reason, namely, that raping someone potentially strips the victim of their sense of agency, and provides them with emotional bruises THAT WILL LAST A LIFETIME” is never mentioned.
Everyone should be made to understand this part of the crime — that aside from a legal punishment, which may or may not come, rape inflicts awful permanent wounds. The Sex Signals performers never included this information nor did our staff speaker think to mention it.
I went up to the performers after the show and asked them about this omission. I said that we never heard from the victim — only from the perpetrator — and shouldn’t the victim’s perspective be factored into our evaluation of this crime? To this, the performer replied, “Yeah, well we only have a limited amount of time. And this is a pretty progressive school, and, to an extent, we have to tell people what they want to hear.”
I replied, “Isn’t the point of this show to tell people what they don’t want to hear?” to which I got a confused muddled reply and a gentle “thank you” for my coming by.
So, Johns Hopkins, I would like to propose that you find a different Sex Signals talk for the coming years, a performance that does not omit vital information and cloak dark rape in the light air of comedy. Let us never forget that tone is important, Johns Hopkins, and that it is harmful to ignore the way we say things.
