I watched the first episode of Sex Box on Monday night; I felt compelled to because it was inevitable that a blog post would come from the viewing spectacle. And only in that regard wasn’t I disappointed!
In case you don’t know, the format is that couples have sex in a camera free, soundproofed box in a TV studio and then come out ready and willing to talk to the panel of sex experts about their experiences. Ostensibly the programme is part of Channel 4’s campaign against pornography, and an effort to portray sex in a more honest/realistic way.
If you haven’t watched it, don’t rush to catch up because the programme is truly dreadful. If you think for a minute, just what kinds of people are likely to agree to be a part of it? Surely anyone prepared to be on the programme has to be some kind of weird attention seeker, you know the “I’d do anything to be on television type”.
The programme featured three main couples, one young, one gay, one older – but in every instance these couples hadn’t been together for very long. All of these couples were in the honeymoon periods of their relationships; I’ll be intrigued to see if the programme can attract any couples that have been married for years, have got young children or have other marital stresses to deal with.
I asked Mrs Baldwin if she’d be prepared to take part – her response was "you have to be f**cking joking" – the perfect use of a sexual expletive!
I didn't understand how the women taking part could get their heads into the performance zone. I can get how a bloke could find the motivation to perform, but for a woman that needs to have the emotional boxes ticked as well, surely it’s a big ask. Where the hell is the romance in having a quick bonk in a studio and then being expected to talk about what you did with Mariella Frostrup? I’d have thought that would be a complete mood-killer. No doubt the main reason why the programme only featured new couples – at least the ‘horny’ balance (for want of a better term) is more likely to be level between the partners.
Of course every couple came out of the box and said they’d had a good time – my question is one word - really?
I’ll be intrigued to see if anyone ever comes out and says, “I couldn’t perform” or “it was just perfunctory”, or “that felt cheap and nasty”, or “it lasted less than five minutes”. That would contribute to the real sex debate!
An hour of viewing on Monday night was largely wasted, in fact only three comments added anything useful – these were:
Interestingly, at least for me, Mrs Baldwin and I are both in our forties and having been married for almost twelve years, we are in an ‘at risk group’.
And, to borrow an expression from Jeremy Clarkson:
On that bombshell!
Blog Home
Blog Library
Home
In case you don’t know, the format is that couples have sex in a camera free, soundproofed box in a TV studio and then come out ready and willing to talk to the panel of sex experts about their experiences. Ostensibly the programme is part of Channel 4’s campaign against pornography, and an effort to portray sex in a more honest/realistic way.
If you haven’t watched it, don’t rush to catch up because the programme is truly dreadful. If you think for a minute, just what kinds of people are likely to agree to be a part of it? Surely anyone prepared to be on the programme has to be some kind of weird attention seeker, you know the “I’d do anything to be on television type”.
The programme featured three main couples, one young, one gay, one older – but in every instance these couples hadn’t been together for very long. All of these couples were in the honeymoon periods of their relationships; I’ll be intrigued to see if the programme can attract any couples that have been married for years, have got young children or have other marital stresses to deal with.
I asked Mrs Baldwin if she’d be prepared to take part – her response was "you have to be f**cking joking" – the perfect use of a sexual expletive!
I didn't understand how the women taking part could get their heads into the performance zone. I can get how a bloke could find the motivation to perform, but for a woman that needs to have the emotional boxes ticked as well, surely it’s a big ask. Where the hell is the romance in having a quick bonk in a studio and then being expected to talk about what you did with Mariella Frostrup? I’d have thought that would be a complete mood-killer. No doubt the main reason why the programme only featured new couples – at least the ‘horny’ balance (for want of a better term) is more likely to be level between the partners.
Of course every couple came out of the box and said they’d had a good time – my question is one word - really?
I’ll be intrigued to see if anyone ever comes out and says, “I couldn’t perform” or “it was just perfunctory”, or “that felt cheap and nasty”, or “it lasted less than five minutes”. That would contribute to the real sex debate!
An hour of viewing on Monday night was largely wasted, in fact only three comments added anything useful – these were:
- Extra martial, sexual affairs are most common for people in their forties (no doubt caused by stagnating sex lives at home)
- Research has shown that women are much more likely than blokes to be turned on by the concept of sex with a stranger - and are arguably as likely as a male to start an affair as a result
- For long term couples, sex gets boring and the only way to improve it is to talk to each other (which isn’t necessarily as easy as it sounds, given the traditional British reserve). The advice - try just one new thing every time you make love, position, location, timing etcetera!
Interestingly, at least for me, Mrs Baldwin and I are both in our forties and having been married for almost twelve years, we are in an ‘at risk group’.
And, to borrow an expression from Jeremy Clarkson:
On that bombshell!
Blog Home
Blog Library
Home
RSS Feed
