Parents Television Council Calls for Federal Investigation Into MTV's Skins - The Hollywood Reporter

Parents Television Council Calls for Federal Investigation Into MTV's Skins - The Hollywood Reporter

Boy, aren't we a bunch of puritanical hypocrites here in America.

MTV's "Skins" is a series featuring teenagers who indulge in sex and drugs on a regular basis. It is a version of a British TV series of the same name. Only Britain isn't going ape crazy over kids having sex and showing bare butts and/or genitalia.

One such episode, which may or may not have aired on January 31, featured a teenaged male running down the street with his bare buns. Viacom, the corporate parent of MTV, told MTV that the changes had to be made. But this didn't stop the Parents Television Council (PTC) from asking US attorney general Eric Holder to investigate for possible child pornography.

Will those meddling PTC types ever learn that Viacom- let alone MTV- is not in the business of playing parent? These people are supposed to be doing their jobs as parents- like telling their kids not to watch certain programs and the like. They're just wasting their breath on trying to lobby that MTV is made more "family friendly". Look, I don't mind if this group warns parents of sexual and drug content on the TV screen- hey, a lot of parents don't want their kids looking at this (I know I wouldn't want my kids to). But the way I see it, they need to just pick up the fucking remote and change the channel. Problem solved. But instead, they're not happy unless they find something to bitch about. And since "Skins" is a highly-rated program on MTV that attracts its main demographic...well, connect the dots here, folks.

The definition of child pornography, of course, is photographing and/or filming a child for sexual purposes. Now, I wholeheartedly understand that a 40-year-old man or woman filming him/herself having sex with a child, say, aged eight or ten is despicable. Yes, I would define that as child porn. But the actor, Jesse Carere, is 17, and here is where I see a gray area. Let's say that there is an episode or film where a man- or woman- my age (BTW, I'm 43) dates a 17 year old girl or boy. The two have sexual relations and are in degrees of groping and undress. There's nudity- partial, full, and perhaps even graphic nudity (which is showing said genitalia), along with some graphic sexuality. In the 50 states, there are age of consent laws, which mention the minimum age where a person can consent to sex. The age of consent in some states- Georgia, Alabama, Indiana, and the District of Columbia, among others, is 16. It's interesting that Georgia, Indiana, and Alabama are "red states, with Alabama and Georgia in the part of the US called the "Bible Belt". In Illinois, Colorado, and Louisiana, among others, it's 17. and in California and Oregon- considered "blue states", by the way- it's 18. So, given the fact that MTV airs in every state in the Union (and around the Globe for that matter), would showing the episode- and let's say that it airs unedited, bare ass and all- in question be considered child porn in the states where the age of consent is 16 or 17? I know many would say that federal law- specifically 18 USC (Chapter 18 of the United States Code)- trumps state law in this instance, but let's say that federal law doesn't apply (and given the fervor from quite a few happy Tea Party and militia types over the past couple of years, it probably doesn't to them). Then what?

Think about it.

I think the PTC just needs to stick to helping parents decide which programs they allow their children to watch- and butt out on telling the media companies how to run their programming.

Copyright 2011 by Darren W. Alexander.

All Rights Reserved.