Sleaze Television Harmless Compared To Action Heroes

Sun., Nov. 19, 1995

Jennifer James The Spokesman-Rev

‘Hating anything in the way of ill-natured gossip ourselves, we are always grateful for those who do it for us.” - Hector Munro, novelist 1904

I cannot resist jumping into the talk show sleaze debate. Why? Because it is another red herring thrown out to distract the public from what is truly dangerous to our society.

Sure, it’s stupid, it’s sordid, and most of the guests could not pass either an intelligence or a manners test. Yes, the hosts incite overwrought people, foment conflict and don’t have the skills to help anyone resolve anything.

But is it dangerous to American morals and values? No! We’ve always had freak shows at carnivals, we’ve still got boxing and wrestling, we’ve always had gossips, we’ve always had some form of witch trials, ostracism, excommunication and other social dramas.

However tacky or pervasive this social trash on television seems, it is neither new nor dangerous. Think of the guests as disturbed members of a village appearing before a tribal council (the audience), with the host as witch doctor. The guests expose themselves and the audience boos, thumbs down or cheers, thumbs up depending on the issue. The audiences tend to be moderate in their opinions. They don’t mind a transvestite having fun but they condemn racists, unfaithful spouses and promiscuous teenagers.

What is immoral on television is the violence that now easily passes as acceptable programming. Socializing young children to see violence as appropriate conflict resolution is dangerous. Dramatizing, with all the emotions engaged, a total lack of empathy for other humans by miscellaneous beatings and killings dehumanizes. If you think there is a moral enemy in the TV it is Arnold Schwarzenegger or Sly Stallone, not Ricki Lake and Geraldo Rivera. Violent heroes do more damage than strip show barkers.

Our children are far more confused about the models we offer them of attractive, intelligent, heroic bullies addicted to violence than some silly person engaged in a big breasts contest or part of a family from hell. Ask your children, how many of them admire the talk show guests versus how many admire the “action” heroes?

William Bennett is leading us away from the real issues of morality this time because he, too, sees violence as normal and sex as dangerous. In the real world more of us will be killed by someone who sees violence as an acceptable response to conflict, or even as an entitlement, than by an exhibitionist or a fool.

Dear Readers: I have received many letters on both sides of the “repressed memory” issues. One of the books that has helped me increase my understanding of the conflict between those who believe counselors are sowing memories into otherwise normal clients and those who believe all repressed memories are valid is “Memory and Abuse” by Charles Whitfield, M.D.

He effectively contrasts normal memory studies (eyewitness to crime, etc.) and abuse memories of children (incest, molestation, etc.). The mind or consciousness protects itself in a variety of ways and the demands are different if you are a victim than if you are not.

I do not think the accusations of abuse, whether accurate or not, can be resolved through litigation based on current research. What is obvious from this book and recent trials is that some of the expert witnesses in this field have a position they will defend regardless of the merits of the individual case. The fact that they are paid to take a position instead of maintaining scientific neutrality bothers me.

Much of the material I have received from the False Memory Syndrome Foundation scares me for two reasons. One, they are so sure they are right, always right, about what is a very complex element in human behavior and awareness. Two, some of the most highly paid expert witnesses in this field serve on the FMS board, a clear ethical conflict.

In all my work I have consistently found that offenders and other family members are far more skilled at repressing their memories than victims. If that is not true, if there is a high percentage of victims making up stories with the help of misguided or avaricious counselors, I would need far more sophisticated research results before I would consider it reasonable to bring such data into a courtroom. - Jennifer

xxxx

The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = Jennifer James The Spokesman-Review

Local journalism is essential.

Give directly to The Spokesman-Review's Northwest Passages community forums series -- which helps to offset the costs of several reporter and editor positions at the newspaper -- by using the easy options below. Gifts processed in this system are tax deductible.

Meet Our Journalists

Jesse Tinsley

Meet Jesse Tinsley. As a certified drone pilot, this veteran Spokesman-Review photographer often can be seen capturing beautiful aerial photographs of our region. Sometimes though, the job requires getting down with the dogs.
Jim Meehan

Jim Meehan is no stranger to Zag Nation. As the lead writer covering the Gonzaga men’s basketball team, he tells the stories behind the game and gets fans a bit closer to their favorite players.
Molly Quinn

There is no artist in Spokane like Molly Quinn. Her whimsical style is instantly recognizable to readers of The Spokesman-Review. She has painted gorgeous illustrations that instantly elevate the journalism accompanying it. She brings to life the stories that defy photography. She makes our pages better.
Rob Curley

Spokesman-Review editor Rob Curley loves to talk with people and learn about their lives, whether it's a best-selling author or a stranger he meets downtown on his walk to lunch. It's that inquisitive nature combined with a playful sense of storytelling that helps make our newspaper different than most.