posted on Nov, 4 2011 @ 11:31 AM
How is it legal to represent or suggest teenagers engaging in sexually explicit activity on television? I bring this up because of an article I just
ran across about an up coming episode of that show Glee. Now, I don’t watch this show, never have, and never will, but apparently there are some
couples in love included with the plot which are going to have sex.
Finn and Rachel and…Kurt and Blaine! Yep, the couple — who was featured on the cover of EW’s Gay Teens on TV issue – finally decide to
take the next step in their relationship. It’s all handled very delicately and is incredibly moving. I can’t think of another network series
that’s taken a teenage gay relationship so far or been so progressive.
How can a situation, which is intended to suggest that underage children are having sex, be considered “incredibly moving” or "progressive"? No
matter how you slice it, it’s by law, child pornography.
Child pornography is the visual representation of minors under the age of 18 engaged in sexual activity or the visual representation of minors
engaging in lewd or erotic behavior designed to arouse the viewer's sexual interest.
Obviously, I haven’t seen the scene in question, and certainly this isn’t the first show or movie (American Pie comes to mind) to push this
boundary, and no, this has nothing to do with the fact one of the couples is gay, I am merely curious as to how TV execs are allowed to peddle child
pornography to the masses.
What are your thoughts and comments, please?
edit on 11/4/2011 by amaster because: spelling