No matter where you are, or where you look, or listen, you are, in some way, exposed to sex, in one form or another.
In fashion, in shop windows, magazines and newspapers. Radio and TV couldn’t exist without it. How often do I hear someone saying: ‘Yes, it looks quite sexy.’ They may be looking at anything from a building to a bicycle, or a bunch of flowers.
Has the world gone mad? In its basic form sex is part of nature – without it we wouldn’t be here. But isn’t it meant to be private and personal? Doesn’t it require depth of feeling? I find the biggest culprit is TV. There’s barely a programme which doesn’t in some way allude to sex. Not to mention the most blatant displays of physical sex. Nothing is left to the viewer’s imagination, making the whole concept superficial.
My main concern, is how easily it is available to children. The producers tell us that these programmes only start at a later hour of the evening! How many children of a vulnerable age are already in bed at this ‘cut-off’ time? And can’t they download any TV programme, at any hour of the day, on their laptops? Many people will say,’ So what! They are not any better or worse children because of it.’ Well, I can only speak of the UK, which has the highest rate of teenage pregnancies and unmarried mothers in Europe. This represents the UK in the age of I.T., not before.
I’m sure that many of you have views on this subject which differ from mine. I’d certainly like to hear them. Put your points of view on our website.
Glossar
bunch - handful, vase full
mad - crazy
culprit - wrong doer
allude - suggest
blatant — open, nothing hidden
superficial - skin deep
available - to hand
vulnerable - exposed
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-15921903
Englisch