Indeed. A television show designed to entertain can also provide a basis for discussion of complex issues. In the case of Glee, the sexual escapades of the characters have in just about every instance led to pain and regret for those characters. That's what my kids are picking up, and as a family we'll sometimes talk about this stuff too. Sex is not to be used for manipulation, for revenge, for emotional blackmail, etc. Sex is serious business.
Here's what my parents told my siblings and I about sex:
The reason there's nothing there is because my parents could not bring themselves to use the word "sex" in our presence. It was understood that having sex was a one-way ticket to hell and eternal shame on our family, but it was never spoken of.
In contrast, my kids are getting a much more realistic education about sex. We've been clear with them that we don't want them engaging in sexual acts until they're old enough to deal with potential consequences. They know that if they ever decide to go against our wishes and have sex that we can't stop them from doing so, and that they dang well better use protection. They also know that sometimes people will show interest in having sex with them for reasons other than love and commitment. These are some pretty complicated issues for pre-teens - or anybody really - and Glee has, in part, opened the door to some of these conversations with our kids. It's not that we turn the TV on and tell our kids to do what the Glee kids do, it's that Glee has provided an impetus for us to talk to them about things we otherwise might not.
That said - yes, the shark was jumped shortly after Rory showed up (not his fault).
Alright, that's a much more reasonable and sadly rare use of the medium than I was willing to consider.
I'm still going to criticize the show for it's broken Aesops and for the storytelling techniques that leave some actions acceptable for the good guys while being used as evidence of villainy in the bad guys. I can guarantee that people take exactly the wrong message from such story lines as I've heard them do so. That's not the most fair criticism because people can and will take
everything wrong. Black and grey morality often causes such misunderstandings, but in a show as
goddamn goofy and lighthearted as Glee, it
feels shady.
Here is what I mean, I don't watch the show but let me guess how the trying to trick the boyfriend into believing he was the baby daddy worked out. The girl feels guilty about the cheating (she should) but not enough to come clean. Eventually something forces the information to come out against her wishes. It's either the guy she cheated with (while refusing to have sex with her boyfriend!) comes forward or one of the people helping her keep that secret comes forward. Or the guy realizes that he couldn't be the father without sex (I'm still confused on they are pulling this over on him, is he retarded?).
Either way it is played as a
betrayal of the cheating heroine. The boyfriend is destroyed and leaves her, but he's played as somewhat of a jerk for not being 'understanding' of her 'plight' as a pregnant teen. The actual baby daddy is probably useless, and won't be of help with the child so the boyfriend leaving is seen as a 'punishment' and problem for the heroine. She'll lose no friends besides her boyfriend over this. Was she punished for her cheating? Eventually she lost her boyfriend and she of course has to deal with the consequences of unprotected sex by having a child that she now has to raise by herself. But she doesn't have
any consequences of attempting to defraud a young man into suffering the consequences of actions
he did not take or even get the pleasure of having experienced. Outside of the relationship storyline, remorse will not be shown and things will move on like normal, status quo is king, with the ex boyfriend either being a friend again or become a villain for some contrived and out of character reason. Now this is wrong of course, as I don't actually watch the show, but I'd bet it's some variation of it. I've watched wrestling after all.
How many teens do such a deconstruction? I'd hope more than a few. All media of expression can inform our understanding of and work through problems in reality. It's an annoyance for me, and I'm of course reading too much into things. Just one of those things that gets to me.
None of this justifies what the college did. It's a derail on the nature of such shows.
