What So Bad About Sex on TV?
Here's another disturbing sex
story the mainstream media
refuses to cover: There's
fucking and sucking on TV. Lots
of it. So much so that The Henry
J. Kaiser Family Foundation -
one of the few nonprofit
organizations that signals its
tyrannical aspirations in its
very name - recently issued a
"scientific" report entitled Sex on
TV. "Across all programs on
television that contain sexual
content, an average of 3.2
scenes per hour present messages
involving sex," conclude the
researchers, who leaven that
happy finding with this
sprinkling of cautionary
saltpeter: "When television
presents sexual content, there
is scant attention devoted to
sexual health issues that are
essential considerations in
weighing one's options for
sexual activity today."
In case you're wondering
precisely how "scientific" the
survey was, let's just say that
if the Manhattan Project had
possessed this level of rigor,
dedication, and brainpower, the
Japanese never would have
survived World War II to make films
such as Godzilla, King of the
Monsters; Godzilla vs.
Mechagodzilla; Godzilla's Revenge; and
Godzilla 1985, much less buy
Rockefeller Center back in the
go-go '80s: "This study
identifies and analyzes the
messages involving sex and
sexuality … [in] … [a]
large, representative sample of
programming totaling 1,351 shows
… aired between October 1997
and March 1998…. Programs were
… systematically evaluated
using scientific content
analysis procedures applied by
trained coders." The researchers
didn't just pick these "trained
coders" off the beach like so
many washed-ashore tampon
applicators, either: We're
talking "Twenty-seven
undergraduate students at the
University of California, Santa
Barbara," who willfully
interrupted their own Harrad
Experiment-by-the-sea in order
to watch actors and cartoon
characters schtup on the small
screen.
Nor are we talking only about
the obvious, in-your-face dirty
talk that goes on every morning,
noon, and night - you know, fare
like the NAMBLA-underwritten PBS
show in which Tinky Winky struts
around the Teletubbies set like
it's his own beachfront property
at Fire Island, or the 20/20
interview with Monica Lewinsky
that garnered Who Shot J.
R.?-level ratings as the
gigglesome ex-public servant
recounted how she "very subtly"
presented herself rearward like
a cow in estrus to the nation's
top law enforcement officer and
unconvincingly claimed her
childhood motto had been,
"You're not the boss of me"
(which, besides being a
signature line for Boogie
Nights' Dirk Diggler, is a
passing strange slogan for the
gal best known as presidential
ashtray and autosuck device).
That's not to say Sex on TV
isn't as sweaty with such
moments as the local Pink
Pussycat Parlor - or, for that
matter, the latest promo for
Dawson's Creek. It is, of
course. In fact, it has to be to
do its job (though it's not
quite clear what that job is,
other than to provide a
supplemental revenue stream for
the professors who put it
together).
While perhaps not quite the
one-handed read one might have hoped
for (there's always George
Stephanopoulos' upcoming memoir
to look forward to), the report
does offer more than a few
useful pickup tips for those of
us stranded on the dry side of
the glass teat. Remember, the
authors counsel, it is always
easier to get laid in some sort
of alternate universe,
especially if you are involved
in struggles with the forces of
Good vs. Evil (something that
did come through loud and clear
during the Lewinsky interview).
To wit, this recitation of a
panty-moistening tryst from
Buffy, the Vampire Slayer: "Buffy
and Angel both appear to be
normal teenagers, but in fact,
Angel is an immortal who is
hundreds of years old. The two
have a romantic interest, and
she tries to impress him by
dressing up in 18th-century
attire for Halloween. Later, in
a quiet moment in Buffy's
bedroom, Angel asks her why she
chose that costume. He tells her
she doesn't need to try to
impress him and that he's been
looking to meet someone
'exciting … interesting.' The
moment grows more intimate as
Buffy advances her face very
near to his, asking 'Really,
interesting, how?' He responds
by moving his face closer to
hers and the two begin to touch
their faces together sensuously
before proceeding to a deep,
passionate kiss."
A similar set of simple truths
also pervades this example drawn
from USA Network's cartoon
Savage Dragon (a show that
redefines niche marketing, as
its only known viewers are in
fact Sex on TV's 27 UCSB
undergraduate coders): "The
title character is a part-human,
part-animal superhero who works
as a uniformed police officer.
Dragon, as he is called, is hurt
in the line of duty and returns
to the station. After reporting
the incident, he encounters
Rita, an attractive young female
officer. Rita fawns over Dragon,
commenting, 'You should be in
bed with someone taking care of
you. Someone like me.' Dragon
responds awkwardly, apparently
wishing to avoid her, but she
grabs him by his tie and pulls
him toward her, asking
seductively, 'Where does it
hurt?' Dragon says that he is
getting better quickly, but Rita
persists, saying 'Good, I
wouldn't want you to miss the
ball. So are you taking anyone?'
Dragon replies, 'Oh … well …
I … haven't actually asked
anyone.' Sensing her chance,
Rita says assertively, 'Then we
can go together. You won't
regret this, Dragon.' Rita rubs
his chest and says seductively,
'You know I could be pretty
savage myself!'"
To its credit - unlike NBC's Tom
Brokaw or ABC's Peter Jennings,
both of whom have eschewed any
mention of Juanita Broaddrick -
Sex on TV doesn't shirk from
offering tales ripped straight
from the trenches of the sexual
revolution. Consider this
cautionary Looney Toon: "The
Bear family returns home to find
Bugs eating their porridge. The
bears are on the verge of
physically attacking the
intruder, when Bugs invents a
ruse to save himself. He begins
to flirt seductively with the
Mama Bear, who quickly falls for
his charms. Bugs croons to her,
'Your eyes, your lips … why,
you're beautiful!' and he kisses
her long and hard on the lips,
ending with a big 'Smack!' Mama
Bear is so smitten with Bugs
that she protects him from the
other bears, and then pursues
him relentlessly, wanting more
of Bugs' attention. She pleads,
'Tell me more about my eyes,' as
she caresses his face and tries
to embrace Bugs, who wants no
part of her affection. He races
into his rabbit hole but she
follows and he soon emerges
covered with lipstick all over
his body."
So what have we learned after
80-plus pages of such sexual
McCarthyism (not to be confused
with the far more dangerous
sexual McCartneyism,
manifestations of which include
the writing of silly love songs
and the inclusion of talentless
wives in bands)? That vampires
make good kissers; that
part-human, part-animal
superheroes in uniform are chick
magnets; that even Bugs Bunny
gets screwed on occasion. But of
course we knew all that going
in, just as we knew the ending
would go something like this:
"By providing more balance in
addressing these concerns,"
intone the folks behind Sex on
TV, rehashing the tired adage
that inevitably infects all
writing about the boob tube
(including this piece),
"television could be helping
young people make more informed
- perhaps even lifesaving -
decisions about sex in their own
lives." In moments such as this,
we realize our pity for Bugs
Bunny is fundamentally
misplaced. Even as the rascally
rabbit is being mauled
relentlessly by Mama Bear, he is
at least wondrously free from
interminable discussions that
simultaneously posit television
as our corrupter and savior.
Somehow, the high price he pays
seems much lower than the cost
we bear to watch TV for free.
Nick Gillespie is editor-in-chief of reason. This story originally appeared in Suck, and can be viewed in that format here.
Show Comments (0)