Warning label on ‘Ellen’ should not be questioned
By Daily Bruin Staff
Nov. 30, 1997 9:00 p.m.
Monday, December 1, 1997
Warning label on ‘Ellen’ should not be questioned
HOMOPHOBIA: Children’s education on gays comes from parents in
due time
By Dianna Hole
I am writing in regards to Mike Hendrix’s article "Homophobia
was label’s basis." I find it interesting that Hendrix should
question the warning label on the "Ellen" show considering that the
show does contain adult content and the issue of sexual orientation
should not be introduced to children who do not even know what sex
is all about. Children should be protected from this type of
material, and I agree with Hendrix that it is absurd that shows
containing mature material should have warning labels, whether
dealing with homosexual or heterosexual relations. We should also
consider that "Ellen" airs during prime time, when many children
are watching, whereas shows with obvious sexual innuendos are shown
after children have gone to bed, which might explain why these
shows do not have a warning label.
On a personal note, I have to wonder why Ellen Degeneres decided
to take this "bold step" about addressing homosexuality on
television when her ratings were so low anyway, that it could only
help her with such an ingenious publicity attraction. I am left
asking whether she would have done the same thing had her show
already been in the top 10.
Hendrix decided to assume responsibility for everyone’s opinion,
stating, "The implication of the warning label is that homosexual
relationships are perverted." Funny, I didn’t get this impression
at all. I merely saw the label as the network’s way of trying to
protect children from watching unsuitable material, just as they
have through TV ratings of sitcoms and dramas. He also claims that
homophobia is a result of people’s ignorance about the "facts"
surrounding it. He goes on to explain these "facts" through studies
that supposedly show that homosexuality is not a choice, but
instead is due to biological factors.
These studies, such as the twin studies, are not fact; they are
just theories. There are too many variables to control and thus
they cannot prove these "facts." There are also counter-studies
that have failed to find a biological component or gene to
determine an individual’s sexual preference. One must also ask for
an explanation to homosexuals who claim to not have been "born with
it," and when some switch to heterosexuality after having
experienced homosexual relationships for a long period of time.
These phenomena would not occur if homosexuality was biologically
determined, considering one cannot change his or her genetic
makeup.
Hendrix talks about the fear that homosexuals are looking for
converts or that it’s seen as a contagious disease. This is
obviously absurd, but one must take into consideration a similar
problem: the effect of TV violence on children. Children are easily
manipulated and seek to imitate their heroes and favorite stars.
They model their behavior after them – this has been deeply
studied. These studies do show increased violent acts among
children who have just watched a violent show. So, when introducing
the subject of sexual orientation to children who are too young to
understand, they may be confused and model their behavior after
their heroes even before they know what it means. Just as we would
not introduce children to adult heterosexual issues, we should not
introduce homosexual issues to children, even at the expense of
biases which might come along with the warning label.
It is more important to protect children than a reputation which
may or may not even be created. It is not up to the media to
educate children on homosexual issues. It is the parents’ role to
teach children values and standards of society, and when children
are old enough, they can decide for themselves what to believe and
accept.
It was also interesting to see the careful quotation of the
Bible to lay blame of judgement on Christians. It is amazing that
in a growing, "politically correct" society, criticizing anyone’s
beliefs is shunned. However, when it comes to Christianity,
everyone is allowed to throw a stone. Why is that? Because
Christians don’t believe in doing whatever you want to? So? Is that
not their right to believe? Hendrix claims that the Bible
contradicts itself with the statement, "Thou shalt not judge,"
(Leviticus 18:22), but what I find interesting is that he did not
take the time to write out this verse: "Do not lie with a man as
one lies with a woman; that is detestable." I’m sorry, but it does
not say anything about judging homosexuals, only that according to
God, that type of lifestyle is wrong. Christians can disagree with
homosexuality without judging the individuals, yet many critics of
Christianity cannot separate these two different elements. So, they
immediately assume that if you don’t accept their sexual
orientation, you cannot accept the individuals, which is not
true.
I agree with Hendrix that people should not be judged, because
who are we to judge others? Something as personal and as mature as
homosexuality should not be dealt with lightly, and a warning label
is appropriate whenever children are involved. So, the warning
should not be questioned and blamed for homophobia, when homophobia
has been around long before the label itself.
