The Blowfish Blog

[Greta Christina] Gratitude for Small Favors: “Evolve: Sex”

I suppose I should be grateful.

And I am grateful.

But it’s a bit sad that I should be grateful about something that should be ridiculously obvious — and ridiculously common.

I’m grateful for this: On the History Channel’s series “Evolve,” on the episode about sex, they say the word “penis.”

Several times. Casually, matter- of- factly, as if they were saying the word “jaw” or “kidney.” When they say, “The penis is a good example of convergent evolution,” they could just as easily have been saying, “The eye is a good example of convergent evolution.”

Ditto with the words “intercourse,” “sperm,” “sex organs,” “climax,” “ejaculate,” and more.

And, of course, the word “sex” itself.

See, here’s the thing. I actually have some genuine complaints about this program and the way it handled sex. I’m very irritated, for instance, that the show’s sole mention of homosexuality was a snarky joke about how, if dinosaurs engaged in homosexual behavior, then maybe that’s why they died out.

I understand that evolutionary biologists often ignore homosexual behavior in animals — they’re primarily concerned with reproduction, for obvious reasons. But the question of homosexual behavior — and why it exists in so very many species — is, from an evolutionary perspective, a fascinating one. If you don’t have time in your one-hour program about 600 million years of the evolution of sex to discuss homosexuality in any depth, I certainly understand — but can you please refrain from having your one mention of it be a childish, hostile joke?

And I’m very irritated indeed by the fact that they spent five minutes (a fair amount of real estate in an “hour long minus commercials” program) on how human sexuality and human reproduction are beginning to be separated, and how humans are beginning to take conscious control of their reproduction . . . with almost the entire segment focusing on in vitro fertilization, and genetic screening, and potential cloning, and other forms of techno- reproduction.

Without once mentioning birth control.

Birth control is an ENORMOUSLY important means by which the human species is divorcing sex from reproduction. And it’s an equally enormous means by which we are turning reproduction into a conscious choice. Birth control doesn’t just mean that you can have sex without reproducing. It means that you can choose — consciously, deliberately — who, if anybody, you reproduce with. It means that you can reproduce with the great person you decided to settle down with after years of shopping around, instead of with the first person your hormones pushed you towards in your teens.

That’s huge. And it’s way more widespread — more widespread by several orders of magnitude — than in vitro fertilization. As methods of consciously controlling our reproduction go, in vitro fertilization is a drop in the bucket compared to condoms and diaphragms and birth control pills.

I could go on. (To get a more complete idea of the possible complaints about this program, check out the Pharyngula comment thread.)

Yet despite my complaints, I’m willing to cut the makers of this show an awful lot of slack. Because I keep coming back to this:

The show treats sex as if it were completely normal. It treats sex as a biological system, like vision and digestion, jaws and skin. An interesting one, to be sure, and one that we find unusually compelling . . . but a biological system nonetheless. One that can be discussed in straightforward language and illustrated with film and photos and clear diagrams. One that doesn’t call for either moralizing or childish jokes, any more than digestion does. (They did use some humor to lighten the tone of the program . . . but they did that with the episode on digestion, too.)

The show treats the existence of sex plainly, as a simple matter of fact. (Just as plainly as it treats the very existence of evolution as a simple matter of fact. But that’s a subject for when I’m wearing my atheist blogger hat, not my sex blogger hat.)

And for that, I’m happy, and grateful, and willing to cut them a fair amount of slack.

And how pathetic is that?

I do like this series, and despite my complaints about it, I overall liked the Sex episode. It had interesting information that I wasn’t familiar with (did you know that sharks were the first animals to have intercourse?), and its segment on Gibraltar macaques is commendable for its recognition that, even in non-human animals, sex can serve social purposes other than reproduction. But what does it say about sex on television that I should feel called upon to mention — and praise — the fact that a science show treats sex scientifically? How pathetic is it that this should be something special?

Good for “Evolve” for treating sex as if it were normal. Bad for most of the rest of television for treating it like a freak show or a dirty joke . . . and making me think there’s something special about acting like a grown-up about it.

“Evolve: Sex” can be downloaded from iTunes, and the series can be rented on DVD from Netflix or purchased from the History Channel.

Greta Christina, copyright © 2008. Be sure to check out Greta’s blog.

Share This

This entry was posted on Friday, 29 August 2008 at 5:06 pm and is filed under Culture. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.