So my godmother wasn’t insane when she hoped my X-Files fandom would make me an FBI agent
Published by Kyso Kisaen May 21st, 2008 in For the ladies, Sex, Movies, Media hackery, HUH!?, CultureI’ve never seen Sex in the City. I’ve heard it’s good, but not brainwashing, sex-zombie-creating good.
I guess something in the ending credits reminds you not to talk about that bit. And it almost worked.
You can only watch Samantha Jones bed so many gorgeous guys before wondering if 4-inch heels and sky-high confidence would allow you to do the same.
At least that’s what happened to “Lisa” (not her real name). She got hooked on “Sex and the City” when she was a 14-year-old growing up on Long Island, N.Y. It was the same year she lost her virginity. She soon graduated to ordering cosmopolitans at bars she snuck into and cheating on her boyfriend with up to seven other guys — in one week.
Not that this article is saying that Sex in the City turned Little Lisa into a Teenage Sexbot in the City (”To be clear: “Sex and the City” can’t be blamed for creating a generation of sluts.”) but…
Lisa left her “Samantha” ways behind at 19, when she moved to Utah, became a Mormon, married a man within the church and gave birth to two children. For the first year of her marriage, her husband forbade her to watch “Sex and the City” for fear that it would lure her back to her habits of sex, drugs and one-too-many cosmos.
“I had to sell my DVDs on eBay,” she said. “But now it’s OK. It took a while to get here.”
Hmm, troubled teenager raises hell for five years, then in three years manages to find religion get married and have two kids. Well, I’m convinced. I’m ready to take her word on pretty much everything. Nothing fishy going on here. I suppose she could at least give SatC credit for teaching her efficient time-management skills, at least.
So is there really danger here? Let’s ask Perfectmatch.com’s Dr Needspublicity:
“It did have some impact given that it was a sea change in how women talked about sexuality and what was shown on a network — full frontal nudity, talking about affairs, vibrators, etc.,” said Pepper Schwartz, a University of Washington sociology professor and relationship expert for Perfectmatch.com. “If it’s not permission giving, it at least demystifies and normalizes what goes on in women’s lives in a more than snickering way.” (emphasis mine)
Ah, I see. Can’t have that now, because the day women learn to admit they cheat as much as men and vibrators are freely available in all 50 states is the day our society drowns in a sea of fuck-me pump wearing cosmo snorking child whores. Not that I’m saying this will happen if Sex and the City reaches number one in the box office, but basically we’re doomed. Doomed.
That’s what Angela Hwang, 24, found when she started watching the show in cable syndication, after it went off HBO. She and her girlfriends routinely compare their experiences to “Sex and the City” episodes.
“My girlfriends and I, every single guy we’ve been with we can relate to one of the guys on the show,” she said. “We’ve all had Samantha moments. We’ll say, ‘Remember the guy I saw last week? He was exactly like the guy in episode 15.’”
Oh, my God: women are identifying with the characters and situations of a well-written show. We’re all going to die. And since I’m not a SatC fan, maybe I’m unaware of this, but do these fabulous young fans of Samantha and Whatshername actually refer to the episodes by a single number? Is it possible someone’s making quotes up here?
But Dr. David Greenfield, assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Connecticut’s School of Medicine, believes there’s danger in taking “Sex and the City’s” so-called lessons off the small screen and applying them in the real world.
“With teenagers and young adults, there’s a certain degree of role modeling that goes on. There’s a certain ‘if it’s done on the screen then it’s OK, it’s normal,’” he said. “You watch ‘Sex and the City,’ you see these women go out for dinner, come back, and wake up in satin sheets with a gorgeous guy. Who wouldn’t like that? But it doesn’t show what goes on under the surface in real sexual relations. Sex is an extraordinarily complex, emotional process. No one wants to talk about that. They’re not going to see the reality.”
And the circle is complete: we are now back to the bullet theory of media consumption,meaning that Sarah Jessica Parker has actually torn the fabric of space and time, and the 1960’s are leaking into today, and soon we’ll all be burning cheap sweaters from Steve and Barry’s for warmth before death comes for us all. Great fucking job, Samantha.
I never liked Sex and the City, but that was because of the emotional neediness of all the characters except Samantha. She was about the only one I could stand, honestly.
but I looooooved the X-Files!!
The fact that this chick married a Mormon who forbade her from watching ANYTHING FOR ANY REASON and this article pretty much makes that sound quite all right, is really revolting. I still get shocked by the stuff that’s validated on major media networks sometimes.
“You watch ‘Sex and the City,’ you see these women go out for dinner, come back, and wake up in satin sheets with a gorgeous guy. Who wouldn’t like that? But it doesn’t show what goes on under the surface in real sexual relations. Sex is an extraordinarily complex, emotional process. No one wants to talk about that. They’re not going to see the reality.”
I’m guessing that this tool hasn’t actually seen the show. It is ALL ABOUT the complex emotional processes that go on under the surface of sexual relations.
Seriously, that is the entire point of the show. The main character, Carrie, makes her living writing about those complexities, using her friends’ stories as illustrative examples of the dilemnas of the dating scene; each episode represents another of her weekly columns on the subject- what do people want from each other, why, how do they get it, what do they do when it doesn’t work out, etc.
Um, I echo Lisa KS here with incredulity about how moving to Utah, becoming Mormon and having kids suddenly “saved” her from hedonism. I’m having even more trouble with the thought of being “forbidden” to watch one’s DVD collection. God help any guy who demands I throw out my seven seasons of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
It’s rather telling that the biggest concern seems to be with the fantasy vs. reality aspect of SatC. A show or movie does not have to be “realistic” to accurately convey sincerely moving emotional truths; in fact, an element of the fantastic makes these truths more accessible to some people (hey, you mentioned the X-Files, right?). Methinks some of the “experts” doth protest too much about reality/fantasy because their fears of how SatC “demystifies and normalizes what goes on in women’s lives in a more than snickering way” run far deeper than anyone wants to admit.