"Choose or Lose," Win or Lose?  

MTV built a media empire by selling sex to teenagers, but in “Choose or Lose: Sex, Votes, and Higher Power,” it examines sexuality beyond the act, connecting the dots between politics and people’s intimate lives.

This isn’t MTV’s usual territory. While hit shows like “Road Rules,” “Laguna Beach,” and “Made” offer a voyeuristic peek into the inner world of teens, “Choose or Lose” challenges viewers to look at the big picture. How well does it succeed?

Professor Niels Teunis has some criticism about the show, but overall is impressed. “The main point is that the government has a lot of influence on your life, and if you don’t pay attention, they will decide for you,” he says. In fact, some 25 percent of eligible voters are between18 to 30, according to census statistics. Their voting power could change the political dialog, but in 2000 only 32.4 percent participated in the election process.

The show—which is part of MTV’s voting campaign to get younger Americans to the polls in November—is admirable in its mission, but perpetuates some of the same myths about sexuality that it tries to break down.

Pop diva Christina Aguilera travels back to her hometown of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania to interview young people whose lives have been impacted by government policies on sexuality education, reproductive rights, and access to women’s shelters.

The show’s coverage of abstinence-only sexuality education is misleading, agree professors Jessica Fields, Deborah Tolman, and Teunis. “Choose or Lose” hints that abstinence-only education doesn’t work, yet fails to mention that the vast majority of U.S. adults—80 percent according to a recent Kaiser study—are in favor of comprehensive sex education, Fields points out.

Teunis adds, “They seem to be kowtowing to the abstinence-only crowd. It’s a minority position in the United States, but the way it is presented suggests that more people are in favor of abstinence-only than actually are.”

Exploring the abortion debate, Aguilera interviews two women who got pregnant before they were adults. The one who chose to keep her child is portrayed as the “good girl,” say Tolman and Fields. She is shown saying grace with her son, Fields notes, and during an interview declares her belief that all babies have a purpose.

In contrast, the woman who had an abortion appears rebellious and selfish. She has tattoos and an edgy haircut, and during her interview, says matter-of-factly that had she kept the baby, her biggest problem would have been her loss of freedom. “This is the story of the ‘bad’ girl,” Tolman says. “She was asked only about regrets, not about what made her glad she had made this decision and the positive impact it had on her life.” In addition, Tolman says, the show fails to discuss the negative impact teen pregnancy has on both the young women’s health and the human development of the child.

“Choose or Lose” also gets low marks for its portrayal of domestic violence. Shaquia, a 19-year-old African American girl, escaped to a women’s shelter along with her son after she was battered by her boyfriend. “In the first sections about abortion and sexuality education everyone is white, but when it comes to domestic violence abuse we see a woman of color,” Teunis points out. “That’s plugging into the wrong stereotype. It is very disturbing.”

Feeding into such stereotypes, Tolman says, “makes it easy for people from other populations to say, ‘That’s not about me.’ They mention the pervasiveness of domestic violence; they say it but don’t show it, and MTV is about showing.”

While Aguilera states President Bush’s and John Kerry’s positions on sex education and abortion, the show doesn’t say how they stand on funding women's shelters. “Domestic violence is less clear because no one is going to say, ‘I’m for closing shelters.’ But you need to look into the policies that could strip shelters of money and who is behind those policies,” Teunis says.

Aguilera refrains from lecturing, and she appears to gain an understanding of the issues alongside the viewers. The 23-year-old admits that she has never voted before, much like the estimated 50 million women who failed to participate in the last presidential election. Such lethargy, she says, is disrespectful to history and the women who fought to vote.

Still, the show’s focus on women sends the false message that these issues are “girls’ problems,” say Tolman and Fields. In general, sexual education needs to bring more boys into the conversation. “Comprehensive sexuality education includes building empathy among boys, so that they understand they are not just voting for themselves, but also for their mother, sister, aunt, and other women they know. Their decisions impact the entire social structure.”

Overall, Tolman says, “Choose or Lose” appears fair but is subtly skewed. Taking a serious look at sexuality shouldn't mean focusing only on the problems associated with sex. “There was no discussion of sexuality as a normal part of human development. The girls who were interviewed had sex and got pregnant. No girl talked about having good, safe sex.”

“Choose or Lose: Sex, Votes, and Higher Power” airs Friday, Oct. 1, at 12:30 and 7:30 p.m.; Saturday, Oct. 2 at 11 a.m.; and Sunday, Oct. 3 at 6 p.m.

* Jessica Fields is an assistant professor in the sociology department at San Francisco State University, and a research associate at the Institute on Sexuality, Inequality, and Health. Her research focuses on sexuality education including abstinence-only education.

* Niels Teunis is an assistant professor of human sexuality studies at San Francisco State University. His research focuses on racism in the gay male community.

* Deborah Tolman is an author, professor and the director of the Center for Research on Gender and Sexuality. Her research focuses on adolescent sexuality, female sexuality, gender development, and feminist theory.