ISFD N°30 Lengua y Expresión Escrita IV Prof. Blas Bigatti
Pires, Aldana Assignment #4, Draft #1 2014
Skins TV series: controversy, adolescence sexuality, and the show’s potential to help young adults construct their sexuality. “Drunk sex, lesbian sex, casual sex, unprotected sex, sex where one character repeatedly shouts ‘grab my balls!’ - Skins has it all, and is considered ground-breaking for its explicit depiction of teenage sexuality. (…) Skins is (…) one of the few shows to depict teenagers working out their sexuality without criticism or judgment.” (Tseng, 2010)
Sexuality is just one of the many recurrent themes portrayed in Skins, a six-year-run British teen drama. The series, created by Bryan Elsley and Jamie Brittain for Company Pictures, has been premiered on E4, a British digital television channel, in January 2007. The show is set in Bristol, and the cast has been renewed every two seasons during its six years of life. Though the characters have changed, issues such as substance abuse, mental illnesses, adolescent sexuality, death, and homosexuality, among others, have remained constant in the three generations of characters. In January 2011, an American remake of the series has been premiered on MTV, a basic cable and satellite television channel. The TV Parental Guidelines, a television content rating system, has been announced and put into effect in 1997 to give parents more information about the content and age-appropriateness of TV programs. Skins has been rated TV-MA. This label indicates that Skins is specifically designed to be viewed by adults and that it therefore may be unsuitable for children under 17. Any program containing graphic violence, explicit sexual activity, or crude indecent language can fall into this category. The Parents Television Council (PTC) has sent an alert to parents claiming Skins to be “the most dangerous program ever” and has accused the program of urging “children to lie to and defy their parents, and engage in risky and dangerous behaviour” (2011). They have explained the series’ dangerousness commenting that “Skins is filled with graphic content involving high-school children, including depictions of teens drinking, smoking marijuana, and using massive quantities of drugs, engaging in violent acts, and having irresponsible sex with each other, with their schoolteachers, and with other adults.” The American show has been finally cancelled in June 2011. Most of the content portrayed in Skins can be considered taboo. According to the Cambridge Dictionaries Online, a taboo is an action (or word) that is avoided for religious or social reasons. Taking into account the alarm with which the PTC has addressed Skins’ sexual content, they may be considering adolescence sexuality a taboo, and watching sexual references in a TV series is something that teenagers should not do because “it fosters irresponsible behaviour” as expressed by the organization. From a critical perspective on adolescence sexuality, this paper will explore the extent up to which the sexual content in Skins could be considered constructive for young adults. Firstly, let us acknowledge what adolescence is. Sandrine Diringbi (2013) explains that this is a transitional period where physical, psychological, emotional and social adjustments occur in order to complete the subject’s construction of the personality. The young person tries to create his identity through the exploration of new territories, including the sexual domain. More importantly, the author considers teenagers as “sexual beings with rights”: 1
ISFD N°30 Lengua y Expresión Escrita IV Prof. Blas Bigatti
Pires, Aldana Assignment #4, Draft #1 2014
(…) [T]he 1989 UN Convention on the Rights of the Child recognises the underage of 18 the status of human beings with their own Human Rights. Furthermore, the International Conference on Population and Development (Cairo, 1994 and New York, 1998) as well as the Fourth World Conference on Women (Beijing, 1995), both coordinated by the UN, affirmed the sexual and reproductive rights of young people.
If young adults are human beings granted with sexual and reproductive rights, why has a show that portrays adolescent sexuality been cancelled? Does a TV series really have the power of influencing its audience in getting engaged in irresponsible behaviour? Teen sex exists. Skins depicts a reality that needs to be accepted and addressed by adults. In fact, the TV series’ portrayal of sexuality can be used as a bridge to communication between teenagers and their parents, who ultimately have more power of influence through their talk than the merely sexual depiction of a TV show. Lamentably, a recent study that has examined adolescents' and young adults' use of topic avoidance with their mothers, fathers, stepmothers, and stepfathers, has shown that the most frequently avoided topic is sex (Golish & Caughlin, 2011). Tiffany Field (2011) has written: According to several recent surveys, adolescents do not appear to learn about sex from their parents. And, in fact, parents are the least frequently listed sex educators and even when they are, their education is provided largely via books and videotapes. Peers are credited as being the most frequent sex educator, followed by the school system. (…)
The author continues explaining that the reason why parents are no longer providing sex education is not clear. The fact that adolescents spend little time with them can be an influential factor. For the 2008 winter issue of Healthy Children magazine, Keith Ferrell has interviewed specialists in pediatrics and adolescence Warren Seigel and Charles R. Wibbelsman in order to give suggestions to parents about addressing teen’s sexuality. Seigel says that the media inevitably talks about sex and it is hard to avoid it. However, the media may actually be offering an effective pathway to open an ongoing dialogue about sex and sexuality between parents and teenagers. The specialist expresses that these encounters with the media can be turned into teachable moments. Wibbelsman adds: “Seeing something in the media that is obviously sexually charged can be a springboard for conversation between adolescent and parent,” says Dr. Wibbelsman. “Is the ad bad or good? What’s the ad trying to say? Use this moment as an opportunity to teach and encourage, not to pronounce a harsh, dismissive judgment. By engaging the child and building his self-esteem and her confidence in her ability to make judgments, you’re showing him that you respect what he’s learning and how she’s growing in her decision-making.”
Cancelling a series like Skins does not prevent reckless behaviour. Actually, Skins has presented the chance to parents to watch the series, break the ice, and open an ongoing debate with their children about the series and about being sexually responsible. However, the PTC has dismissed the opportunity. The cancellation of the show has contributed to the concealing and misjudging of adolescent sexuality. As Dr. Wibbelsman remarks, parents have to respect their children, and trust 2
ISFD N°30 Pires, Aldana Lengua y Expresión Escrita IV Assignment #4, Draft #1 Prof. Blas Bigatti 2014 that they are capable of watching a TV series like Skins with a critical and constructive position, and of adopting responsible behaviours. Despite the fact that Skins can serve as a tool for parents to get closer to their children through the discussion of the program, the series per se does not provide morals about sexuality. More importantly, Skins shows that peers have respect to those who have sexual encounters, and they do not judge among themselves according to their sexual behaviour. Skins defies Sexual Double Standards (SDS), which, as Crawford & Popp (2003) explain, are the rules that guide sexual behaviour differently for women and men. These authors have exposed that traditionally, women who engaged in any sexual activity outside of heterosexual marriage were stigmatized, while men were expected and rewarded for the same behaviour. Hence, “women were faced with a Madonna-whore dichotomy: They were either pure and virginal or promiscuous and easy.” After reviewing 30 studies, the authors have proved evidence of the presently continued existence of SDS. Another recent study has shown that SDS, though the result varies by both gender and socioeconomic origins, notably exists among adolescents: “greater numbers of sexual partners are positively correlated with boys' peer acceptance, but negatively correlated with girls' peer acceptance” (Kreager & Staff, 2009). SDS practically being non-existent in Skins places teenagers’ sexual prejudices into a whole new perspective. In her article, Maya Dusenbery (2010) has described how Skins breaks with SDS: Some sex is between couples, some is between friends, [and] some is between strangers. Some is emotionally fulfilling, some isn’t. Some is physically satisfying, some isn’t. The girls are just as likely to have casual sex as the guys, and the guys are just as likely to want a relationship as the girls. (…) Perhaps even more importantly, in Skins, characters of both genders have both committed and casual sex at different times. (…) [N]either guys [n]or girls are defined by their sexual behaviour (…).
Skins presents an opportunity for adolescents to be critical about the prejudices that rule our society as regards sexual behaviours. Girls in Skins exercise their sexual rights without being stigmatized, just like boys do. There is no criticism and no judgement among peers. Everyone is free to have sex – or not – as they please without fearing the critical eye. Not judging people by their sexual activities is an attitude that needs to be understood and adopted in order to stop the reproduction of violent prejudices. Skins can make teenagers contemplate this idea through its depiction. Sexual content in Skins has the potential to make young adults think critically as regards their own sexuality. This is because Skins has presented an opportunity for parents to revive, maintain, or construct a communication pathway between them and their teen children through an ongoing debate of the show. Furthermore, the show portrays sexual behaviour without double standards. Both girls and boys are free and out of judgement, which can lead to unfold teenagers’ eyes and stand against unjust prejudices. In order for teenagers to be responsible in the exercise of their sexual rights, they need to receive respect and trust. The cancellation of the American series have negated these traits. Unfortunately, the PTC could not visualize Skins’ potential and contributed to the negation of adolescence sexuality. 3
ISFD N°30 Lengua y Expresión Escrita IV Prof. Blas Bigatti References
Pires, Aldana Assignment #4, Draft #1 2014
Crawford, Mary & Popp, Danielle (2003). “Sexual double standards: A review and methodological critique of two decades of research”, The Journal of Sex Research, 40:1, 13-26, DOI: 10.1080/00224490309552163 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224490309552163 Acessed 28/10/2014 Diringbin, Sandrine (2013). Translated by Lowe, Tara and reviewed by Cassol Etienne. “Adolescents Sexuality”. Humanium. http://www.humanium.org/en/adolescents-sexuality/ Accessed 27/10/2014 Dusenbery, Maya (2010). “7 feminist reasons to watch the British teen drama ‘Skins’ before American TV ruins it.” Feministing. http://feministing.com/2010/12/14/7-feminist-reasons-towatch-the-british-teen-drama-%E2%80%9Cskins%E2%80%9D-before-american-tv-ruins-it/ Accessed 24/10/2014. Feith, Kerrel (2008). “Talk the talk before they walk the walk.” Healthy Children. American academy of Pediatrics. Winter issue, p.25-26. http://www.healthychildren.org/Documents/Healthy-Children-Magazine/HealthyChildren08winter.pdf Accessed 27/10/2014 Field, Tiffany (2011). “Adolescents A to Z.” Xlibris Corporation. P. 204. http://books.google.com.ar/books?id=n4ZOfWP8ymYC&printsec=copyright&hl=es#v=onepage&q &f=false Accessed 24/10/2014 Golish, Tamara & Caughlin, John (2008). "’I'd rather not talk about it’: adolescents' and young adults' use of topic avoidance in stepfamilies” Journal of Applied Communication Research. Vol. 30, Iss. 1. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00909880216574#.VFBIF2d5PJa Accessed 24/10/2014 Kreager, Derek A. & Staff Jeremy (2009). “The Sexual Double Standard and Adolescent Peer Acceptance” Social Psychology Quarterly. Vol. 72 no. 2 143-164. http://spq.sagepub.com/content/72/2/143.abstract Accessed 27/10/2014 Parents Television Council e-mail alert (2011). “Mtv’s Skins: The most dangerous program ever?”Parents Television Council website. http://www.parentstv.org/ptc/publications/emailalerts/2011/0112.htm Accessed 24/10/2014 Tseng, Zing (2010). "Skins: It's Not Just about the Sex and Drugs." The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/tvandradioblog/2010/mar/18/skins-season-four Accessed 24/10/2014 TV parental Guidelines http://www.tvguidelines.org/ratings.htm Accessed 26/10/2014
Aldana, you proposed a very original discussion and you were able to carry out a utterly sound argumentation. Excellent paper. Consider my notes and send your final draft. 4