The Sex Education Show.

[slemslempike]

Last night Jen and I watched The Sex Education Show, mostly because it was there. As a result I've just emailed a complaint in to Channel 4, because the show featured a panellist saying that a young woman was "laying herself open to sexual assault" because she had multiple partners*. And no-one challenged it, in fact it was presented as known fact that this was some sort of side-effect that naturally arose from sexual contact. I hate making comments/complaints about sexual assault to programmes because every time I've done it so far I get a response saying that I am clearly over-reacting. Which I am not. I had half thought that I might avoid this by just mentioning it on the TV questionnaire thing I do for GfK, but they didn't give me a write-in box.

Other things that were bad:
The presenter was unbelievably annoying. I realise that she's attempting to go for the pal-y, everywoman thing and is therefore asking questions of the family planning nurses etc that she knows are obvious, but she sounded like an absolute moron. SHE PRETENDED NEVER TO HAVE HEARD OF KEGEL EXERCISES. And then she tested them by wearing high heels for a few days and claiming that it was a lie because she hadn't noticed any benefits. Even I know that exercise doesn't work that quickly.

When they did a run-down of contraceptive options for women, they said that there were 13 (? can't remember the exact number) possibilities, but only told us about the top five (by usage), which were implant, injection, coil, condoms, and pill. Then the presenter idiot said that because the vast majority of women used the pill and condoms, they clearly didn't know about things like the diaphragm, rather than, say, HAVING MADE AN INFORMED CHOICE NOT TO USE IT. Also - condoms are likely to be so high because they prevent STIs. They also didn't discuss any of the side effects and problems of hormonal contraception even a little bit.

When the aforementioned young woman was talking about her sexual history, they never once asked her if she'd enjoyed herself. Because that's IMMATERIAL. They did, however, bring in a friend of hers to judge her on television, and the friend bought along a boy who explained to us that obviously men would sleep with a woman who was promiscuous, but they'd never go out with her, because those are the unassailable, unchangeable, FACTS. The best way to stop girls being called slags is by them not being sexually active, not by changing attitudes.

It was, predictably, incredibly heteronormative. Still, next week they apparently have a young woman discussing her bisexuality. Unfortunately, I suspect the presenter may well use it for a discussion about "ooh, do you think you really can like boys and girls".

Things that were good:
There was a woman from the family planning association who was quite great about abortion. THAT WAS IT. THE REST OF IT WAS TERRIBLE.


*The young woman herself was not happy about her sexual history, and I am not saying that she should have been fine about it. But the whole discussion around it centred on multiple partners as the problem, rather than her emotional issues or lack of condom use. As we all know, only having sex with one man is a sure-fire route to emotional security and sexual well-being!

Comments

[ankaret.livejournal.com]

I didn't watch it because I saw a piece in a newspaper or the Radio Times or something with the presenter going on about how proud she was of being involved with the Gillian McKeith show, and I thought fuck that noise, and it sounds like my lazy and ill-informed instincts were in this case quite right. I can't believe no one challenged that remark about the woman with multiple partners - that's revolting.

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

I had assumed from the various bumpf that it would be fairly excruciatingly "yay, aren't we young and hip, not like BORING school and BORING parents". I had thought I would find it dull and embarrassing rather than actively objectionable though.

It was from a woman who was there as an expert of some sort, not just someone proffering an opinion. We shouted quite a lot at the television in shock. I think the phrasing "laying herself open" (that might not be exact, but it's pretty close) was horrible too.

[whatsagirlgotta.livejournal.com]

yuck yuck yuck. I am becoming increasingly glad I record all my telly and missed that, because last night was not good for ire.

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

We do quite often watch things that we don't think we'll like in order to work out what's wrong with it, and also because we record telly but aren't always all around to watch it so have to resort to what's being aired at the time quite often.

[whatsagirlgotta.livejournal.com]

I think if I had telly watching company who would indulge me in this then I would, however my flat mate would rather watch Friends in her room than watch any of my weird telly! I suffer the same thing, loads of backed up TV I'm not necessarily in the mood for when I am in, ah the curses of modern technology!

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

Our DVR mostly has Project Catwalk on it at the moment. Alice and Jen watch it together and make informed remarks. I sit on the other settee and occasionally talk over it and annoy them.

[whatsagirlgotta.livejournal.com]

Mine is more a reflection of things I ought to watch...late night foreign films about depressing subjects and documentaries. I am rectifying this by programming trash in. I like Project Catwalk, but only if I have someone to listen to my bitching/over talking, otherwise its just not as fun.

[jekesta]

I didn't send my complaint last night becasue I wanted to check that they really had drawn a straight line and marked it as an angle. But THEY SO COMPLETELY DID. I am looking at it right now. IN COMPLETE FLABBERGHASTATION. My complaint focuses almost equally on that and the whole women being responsible for their own rape thing and it makes me feel a bit guilty. Also I said that we had confused them with channel 5. Because I thought that might just hurt them.

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

I forgot to mention the angle in my post. I am very amused that you emailed about it, and I hope that they sit up and take notice. I think that maybe they will realise that they can't argue with SCIENCE and apologise for the angle, and then because you have SCIENTIFIC weight behind your complaint, also accept that they are wrong about women being responsible for their own rape.

I hope it does hurt them. I once emailed channel 5 to say that I didn't think it was appropriate to refer to imprisoned men (most of whom were black) as "caged animals", and nor was it a good idea to interview two young children about witnessing a murder just for a bit of local colour.

[jekesta]

I pretended to be from Nottinghamshire so they wouldn't know we had watched it together.

I spent most of my email going "I'm not disgusted that you talked about sex on television, I'm disgusted that you did it in such a small minded pathetic way without questioning ANYTHING YOU WERE SAYING". I'm still not sure they're going to understand that.

OH GOD I HATE TELEVISION.

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

Ooh, that's good. Maybe they'll just think I'm a prude. I did say that I was especially upset that a programme under the auspices of providing facts about sex was promoting this misinformation. Because as well all know, rape in sitcoms is HILARIOUS.

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

I saw a tiny bit with her walking around with a tray full of contraceptives, and thought "Yeah, that's informative."

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

That was probably the most well-researched part of the ENTIRE PROGRAMME. I am exaggerating slightly, but it wasn't in any way a helpful programme.

[slightlyfoxed.livejournal.com]

We had a tray of contraceptives at school for educational purposes, and someone nicked the coil; as the teacher pointed out, it was the only one you couldn't really use yourself.

[huskyteer.livejournal.com]

(actually I just had to look up Kegel exercises on Wikipedia)

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

I'm not very judgy on people not knowing them in general, probably. But she's very much the kind of "reading women's magazines" person that will have been reading about "how to WOW your man in bed!!!!" and should therefore know Kegel exercises. I thought she could have pretended to be substantially less ignorant.

[huskyteer.livejournal.com]

Oh good, I thought they must be an 'as any fule kno' thing.

I'll be interested to learn what response you get - hope they don't fob you off with a form letter.

[cellardor.livejournal.com]

Well that sounds terrible. My mouth dropped open a little when I read what you complained about. I hope you don't get the standard response.

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

I imagine I will get the usual brush-off. I would almost rather get no response at all, because it's somehow less awful than having them pretend that they've thought about it and decided that it's fine to blame women for being raped.

[cellardor.livejournal.com]

ARGH! For some reason I wouldn't expect this of Channel 4. I do not know why.

[nineveh-uk.livejournal.com]

I once complained about a Thought for the Day speaker calling women genocidal whores (it was a blatantly political piece on abortion) and was told it was OK, because it fit the guidelines by being grounded in scripture. Alas, it wasn't until considerably later that I realised I should have emailed back and said, "If a speaker made an argument that all black people are inferior to white people, and grounded it in scripture as has been and is done, would you think that was OK too?"

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

I also emailed my MP (con) today about the Northern Ireland amendment to the abortion bill, and I'm wondering if he's going to come back with "oh, it's a religious thing, we shouldn't interfere".

[sabethea.livejournal.com]

As we all know, only having sex with one man is a sure-fire route to emotional security and sexual well-being!

Absolutely, indeed. Look at me - I'm the picture of mental stability and health...

Um. Yes, that program would have made me Very Very Very CROSS and do tell me if the usual thing about bisexuality comes up and they say "aren't you just using this as an excuse to cheat on your boyfriend with this girl" (or words to that effect suggesting that if you're bisexual, it really means you're sleeping with lots of people, and that this is [a] cause and effect and [b] not a true thing, just an 'excuse' to have lots of sex, and [c] sleeping with lots of people is a BAD thing invariably with no other options).

Oops, I think I am now ranting about something that HASN'T EVEN BEEN SAID by this program. Just, if it runs true to form, I anticipate it will be.

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

I have very little intention of watching the programme again, so I probably won't be able to tell you if the suspicions are true!

[sabethea.livejournal.com]

I shall JUST BELIEVE THEY ARE, in that case :)

And I think you are wise.

[irrtum.livejournal.com]

I am morally outraged, and viscerally excited that I can now stream the programme in my room tonight and follow it, and nod sagely with your post in mind. I might even email them a slightly different complaint.

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

Ooh, do! The more emails they get the more they'll take notice of it, perhaps.

I am very excited that you have the internet. I get to talk to you!

I have to proofread my children's lit article. It is a daunting task.

[sabethea.livejournal.com]

I have to proofread my children's lit article. It is a daunting task.


I doubt very much I could give any suggestions, but if you want another pair of eyes, I do at least have a CL background.

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

Oh, thanks for the offer! It's only typographical now though, so I think that I should get through it fairly easily. It's mostly daunting because I'm not allowed to change anything except spelling and punctuation, essentially, so if I spot egregious mistakes in the argument I'm stuck with it!

[hafren.livejournal.com]

because the show featured a panellist saying that a young woman was "laying herself open to sexual assault" because she had multiple partners

I wonder on what planet that counts as logic?

[sabethea.livejournal.com]

I wonder on what planet that counts as logic?

One run by rapists looking for a nice excuse?

[whatho.livejournal.com]

Oh my. Oh my. Oh, as I say, my.

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

Quite. Quite, quite.

[slightlyfoxed.livejournal.com]

Bah. I may watch the bisexuality one and foam on your behalf.

When the aforementioned young woman was talking about her sexual history, they never once asked her if she'd enjoyed herself. Because that's IMMATERIAL.

Wank on a fucking stick, that's annoying. I hate it when people assume mental state from behaviour.

If you assume that female promiscuity means the woman's mad or sad, you can pretend it's an act with no agency, unrelated to her overall makeup, and just tell women to stop it. Otherwise, the advice would be so much more complex - encouraging women to be aware of their desires, judge how to act on them responsibly, deal ethically with anyone else involved... I mean, it'd be more interesting, but it'd be a lot less snappy than 'keep your legs crossed and wait for Mr Right.'

[slemslempike.livejournal.com]

Oh, do. I want to know what happens with it, but I don't know if I want to know enough to watch it.

They had found a woman who was unhappy with the number of sexual partners she had had, and so she was talking about it like it was a bad thing, and the presenter was talking about it like it was a bad thing, and that she had somehow redeemed herself by deciding to stop. They talked a lot about doing it "for the wrong reasons", which is fair enough, but never said anything about if she had enjoyed herself, or if she enjoyed herself more now.

[slightlyfoxed.livejournal.com]

Bah - I mean, there have been times when I have done rude things For the Wrong Reasons. But I think those times are fairly evenly distributed between my 'monogamous' and my 'catting around' periods, and the latter definitely gave me some good stuff to be going on with as well.