It seems the latest in the list of “things to get fired up about” is the upcoming series on WeTV (which, I believe, was or is Women’s Entertainment Television, a cable channel here in the States) called “Sex Box.” The premise of the show, as I gather it, is ostensibly to help people who are having marital problems. The form of therapy is simple; the couple go into a soundproof, completely non-see-through box, have sexual intercourse, and then come out and talk to a panel of “experts” about whatever their troubles are. Again, per the press releases, the idea behind it is that because of the chemicals released after intercourse, it relaxes you and makes you more likely to be honest.
(I want to digress for a moment and tell you, from a personal standpoint, how absolutely ridiculous the premise of this show is, to me. If the box is soundproof, and you cannot see THROUGH it, then for all you know those people could be sitting in there, playing checkers and laughing at how stupid you all were to pay money to come stare at a box/pay the sponsors to watch the show at home. They go in clothed, they come out clothed. But, as I say, I digress, and so back to the blog post)
At this point, the usual suspects (including the Parents Television Council and Concerned Women For America) are up in arms, decrying the show for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is the ever-popular “for the children!!!” cry; namely that some innocent, wide-eyed youngster could come upon this dastardly show and be forever scarred by being exposed to talk of sex and sexual relations while they are young. Fair enough. That’s their opinion, and they are welcome to it. I, personally, find the show’s premise to be tasteless and crass. That being said, though, I would like to bring out a different point, and ask you all to ponder it. Ready?
Why is it their job to be guardians of what our children watch on TV? At its base, no matter how well meant the intention, doesn’t that continue to allow parents who take no active role in their children’s welfare to continue to do so? If it does, isn’t that what they call “enabling”? Televisions are built with V-chips (at least, most of them that I am aware of) and cable boxes come with the ability to block channels, programs and ratings – the catch being that the parent has to take the time to DO it. They have to be involved enough to DO so. If it’s not done, and the child sees the show, whose fault, really, IS it? The producer of the show, or the parent who fell down on the job?
When does a good intention becoming enabling? Not only enabling, but when does it become meddling? Even worse, when does it become yet another way to let people shift responsibility off themselves and put it in the hands of someone else?
In my opinion, right about now.
It’s something to ponder.
God bless today, my friend.