NSRC: National Sexuality Resource Center

Expressing Teen Sexuality One Episode at a Time

Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 06:46:34pm   ►by Jenna Wieden   ►

    Recently one of my friends suggested that I watch an episode of Glee, a new series about a high school teacher who attempts to bring some meaning into his life and the life of his students by restoring the status of the glee club. Although at times I got scared that Glee was just High School Musical but in series form, this show got my approval due to the discussions it contained surrounding sex, especially teenage sex. And because of the singing and dancing. Obviously.

     

    In the second episode, the female lead, Rachel, goes to a celibacy club meeting in an effort to spend more time with her boy crush, even though his abstinent cheerleader girlfriend is head of the club. They start doing an exercise meant to help them practice leaving space for Jesus in between themselves using a balloon to demonstrate the appropriate distance to stand apart. Irritated, Rachel vocalizes her objection to the club in a thoughtful diatribe. She explains how studies show that celibacy does not work in high schools and explains how bottling up emotions and hormonal urges has negative effects and causes teenagers to act out in unhealthy ways. I was stunned, especially since I feel like I’m always reminded of how talking about sexuality, especially teen sexuality, can negatively  affect of your reputation. However, Glee mentions this topic is many different ways, including demonstrating different reasons why teens have sex, talking about sexual urges that teens are feeling, sexual concerns of teens, and sexual orientation. Since I am a sexuality nerd, I got really excited that these topics were being discussed on television. Plus they were accompanied by renditions of Journey and Beyonce songs. Fantastic.

     

    During her rant, Rachel also suggests that the way to handle teen sexuality is to be prepared. However, there’s the question of what being prepared means. The Right’s definition would include something like, “preparing children for a life rich in Christ and grounded in morals” whereas the Left’s would be more focused on providing children with information to make informed decisions regarding their sexuality. As long as these definitions are different, the battle of sexual education will continue. And given the history of things, it’s going to be a long battle.

     

    Allowing teens to be prepared also means granting teens agency, which is something that would never happen. It’s just funny because it makes me reflect on my teenage years when I would have friends with ridiculous rules regarding sexuality, like no dating boys until graduation and no going over to a boy’s house unless the parents were going to be there. And there was always a phone call to make sure that the parents were indeed there. All of my friends who had dating rules enforced upon them were girls. These rules are just so crazy for me to comprehend but demonstrate the stifling of teenage sexuality and the idea the female sexuality is something to be protected and not discussed.

     

    Rachel also covers the topic of the missing discourse of female desire. She states that, “girls want sex just as much as guys do.” I was a little stunned when I heard these words shouted on a primetime show whose target audience extends to teens because of the lack of discourse on female desire in sexual education today. Much of sex education focuses on the anatomical aspects of women. Desire is never mentioned. Women are expected to be silent about sexual desires. The clitoris and all its pleasure holding capabilities are rarely discussed, and masturbation is not covered by most sex education programs. The fact that girls want sex just as much as guys do is a fact that has been kept silent for many years. However, once the secret’s out, maybe we can start moving towards a more comprehensive sexual education system. By having this line written into the script, Glee has gotten my attention.

     

    So if you’re not doing anything later and you like singing, dancing, and comical story lines surrounding teen sexuality, check out Glee. It’ll be good for at least one season before they start having to use far fetched story lines to keep it interesting.

    Comments

    Who's sexuality?

    I personally love 'Glee' and I thoroughly enjoyed your reading of Rachel as a sex positive and informed sexual agentive character. I am however slightly ambivalent about sexuality of all of the 'minority' characters or 'Sue's Kids' in the past episode who are presented as primarily non-sexual beings and most likely will never have any romantic or sexual relationships on the show. The hyberbolic effeminacy of the one gay character is slightly unnerving to me as well however his conversion of the football team to perform Beyonce's 'Single Ladies" dance won me over. But again, great media analysis!!!

    Michael McNamara on Oct 15, 2009 11:34am

    Hyperbolic effiminacy

    I actually really like his character. I like the idea of having an unapologetic queen who isn't worried about being 'straight acting'. Also, I thought his coming out scene with his dad was refreshingly drama/angst free. However,I do understand that the stereotype is often left undevelopved/unchallenged and without a sexuality, which is a problem of course. Spoiler alert! I have read that there will be some interesting things going on between Fin and Kurt in the future, so that might be something to watch for.

    Richard C Garcia on Oct 16, 2009 11:20am

    Queens rule

    I too admire Kurt for his confidence however I don't think this anything new in media presenting gay characters. Flaming queens on tv generally are unabashedly unapologetic. I'm thinking Jack on Will and Grace who provides a welcome contrast to the title character's assimilationist and asexual positioning. I'm unnerved because I wonder, is this the only way to present proud and outspoken gay characters on tv? and specifically for comic affect? I just wish there might be a little bit more creativity in presenting queer characters that's all.

    Michael McNamara on Oct 16, 2009 09:28pm

    old queens and old arguments

    I was quite hesitant to watch Glee, worried that it would be nothing more than mere fluff designed to irritate rather than create a moving story. I loved the pilot. Then I was let down by the first episode and figured I wouldn't watch anymore. Once almost everyone I knew told me they loved it, I had to give it a second chance. Now, I'm in love!!! When I've seen people's criticisms of the show, I cringe because they seem to be taking it a bit too seriously. Mostly, I view this show as a series of zany, over the top antics (come on, why would a Sheets 'n' Things employee hang out in the teacher's lounge? and why would Mrs. Schuester ever be hired as the school nurse). It's fantasy a la Ugly Betty set to a cheese-filled soundtrack. Oh and how the emotions flow! Kurt - I get both Michael and Richard's points here, but as an old(er) queen I have a slightly different perspective. This argument has been tossed around by the gays for decades - think Wayland Flowers or Dr. Bombay on Bewitched - and is even used in our own productions for comic relief. Although we should still strive for greater representation, particularly in pop culture, I think we have come a long way and have a wide variety of representations (not just characters but out actors as well...I'm thinking Neil Patrick Harris as an example). In the meantime, I think that Kurt serves a great purpose of being the big flaming queen that is most hated and feared, and I personally love the way this character is portrayed (and I would argue that he actually has some depth that we wouldn't experience were he just there for comic relief). Truthfully, I wish we would see more flaming queens who not only made us laugh but was smart, sassy, accomplished, and willing to take someone's ass out at a given moment - then we'd be seeing a REAL representation of most of the ladymen that I know!

    Christopher White on Oct 19, 2009 11:09am

    Add a comment


    CAPTCHA

    This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

    Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.