There has been much speculation and controversy concerning Womyn's Concerns' most recent event, the Sex Faire. Much of this has taken place in the absence of complete information, often among people who neither attended the Sex Faire nor spoke to those who organized it. On behalf of Womyn's Concerns, we would like to provide some information regarding the event.

Womyn's Concerns organizes several events annually, including Take Back the Night marches and other sexual assault awareness programs. When we began planning for our first Sex Faire, we envisioned an event that focused on healthy sexual relations while promoting gender equity. The first Sex Faire, in December 1999, was covered in several news media without stirring controversy or attracting undue notice.

On Saturday, Womyn's Concerns hosted its second annual Sex Faire in the Pollock Rec Room. We had originally planned to incorporate the Sex Faire into HUB Late Night activities, but were told that our program was "too educational" for that setting. During the course of the night, approximately five to six hundred people attended.

This year's Sex Faire received no university funds and cost around $50, including publicity, which came out of organizers' pockets and private donations. Most of the materials were donated and no special facilities were made available.

The sign on the door outside the event read: "Attention: Sexually Explicit Materials Inside. Enter At Your Own Discretion." Those who attended the Sex Faire did so by their own choice -- a distinction which some have failed to make.

Our information tables carried diagrams of female and male anatomy, information on sex and disabilities, catalogues donated by Good Vibrations, and brochures from Women's Health Services. At other tables, people could make arts and crafts, read books (lent by organizers), play games, or pick up information and safer sex materials provided by the AIDS Project of Central Pennsylvania.

Games were also available, including Twister, "Pin the Clitoris on the Vulva," and "Orgasm Bingo." "Pin the Clitoris" is similar to "Pin the Tail on the Donkey," but with the added bonus of teaching players about female anatomy. Orgasm Bingo was one of our more popular activities. To play, one needed a card similar to a bingo card onto which players placed heart-shaped candies. The spaces were filled with words that played with notions of sexual propriety. Although designed primarily for entertainment purposes, the game also provoked discussions about what words we consider "appropriate" and the origin of sexual slang. Winners were awarded prizes donated by Player's after announcing their win through orgasmic noises or by simply exclaiming "orgasm."

The Sex Faire also featured four workshops. They included: Healthworks' "Sex Jeopardy"; a presentation about alternative methods of birth control; a presentation and slide show on cervical self-examinations; and a panel discussion aimed at dispelling myths about gay, lesbian and bisexual sex.

One of our most innovative events, the Tent of Consent, also became the most controversial. The Tent of Consent was closed by Penn State and remained closed for the duration of the fair. The Tent of Consent was actually the final step in a process known as the Trail of Consent — a three-step interactive experience. The first step defined consent, both in terms of legal issues and moral soundness. In order to be considered consensual, activities must conform to a certain number of guidelines. Persons under a certain age, under the influence of drugs or alcohol, or unsound in mind are considered by law to be incapable of giving consent. In order to give consent, a person must understand, in detail, what they are consenting to. In order for consent to be given, a clear "yes" must be received.

The second and third steps of the trail gave guidelines for asking and giving consent. Misunderstandings about the nature of consent lead to the high numbers of rape and sexual assaults at universities such as Penn State. Clear guidelines help to prevent such situations. Those running the trail ensured that each person was given individual explanation of consent, and only when one had successfully passed all three stations did one receive "certification."

People who adequately understood consent received a stamp on their hand. Had the Tent of Consent remained open, that stamp would have been half of what was needed to obtain entry. The other half consisted of putting the three-part lesson into action. Those desiring entry had to negotiate with others to agree on a consensual activity that could take place within the tent. Organizers requested that safety and cleanliness be preserved (no food in the tent!). Once everyone had assured the two people monitoring the door of the tent that consent had been given, they would be permitted two minutes inside the tent. We considered the tent to be the tool with which those who had navigated the trail would get to put what they had learned into practice. Putting lessons into practice, even in such a limited manner, is the most effective part of the learning process. The tent was never the glamorous area of permissiveness that sensationalist media and reactionary or misinformed people made it out to be.

We feel that the purpose and nature of the Sex Faire have been misrepresented and obscured in the uproar surrounding it. The event itself was a small one, the furor much larger. Most of those who attended the fair had a good time, and those who didn't were free to leave. We thank those who attended and those who have contributed to the ongoing discussion of this event in a constructive manner.