Programme makers hit back at prudishness as Big Brother's Makosi defends her hot tub antics
Lorna Martin and James Robinson
Sunday August 28, 2005
The Observer
So now we know. Yes, she really thought she might have been pregnant. Yes, she really thought she was setting a good example to the nation by asking for the morning after pill. And yes, she'd probably do it again. 'It', of course, is having sex on national TV.
Makosi Musambasi, who glided into the International TV Festival in Edinburgh yesterday looking every bit the glamorous Bond girl, defended her decision, albeit a drunken one, to go all the way in front of an audience of millions.
'Having sex is what people do. When you put young, attractive, drunk people together, whether in a bar in Soho or in the Big Brother house, it's going to happen. Those who have a problem with it - who would presumably prefer to watch us sitting around eating pesto pasta - are not living in the real world.
'My only regret with this whole thing was that I had unprotected sex. That was the only mistake. You eat. You sleep. You have sex. Who cares if people are watching you.'
Makosi, whose antics on Big Brother 6 have been described as one of the most disturbing broadcasting moments since David Icke confided to Terry Wogan that he was the Messiah, was speaking at a heated debate I Had Sex On TV, along with a couple who had appeared on the explicit Sex Inspectors
Interestingly, they said they had benefited hugely from the experience, but wouldn't opt for a repeat performance. Tracey Bye, who appeared with her husband John, said: 'It was great to get some free advice and I'm always up for trying something new. We got a buzz out of being on TV. But it was a bit embarrassing. You know my mum and dad and all our friends and relatives saw us having sex.'
The controversial issue is likely to be reignited next week with the transmission of a new Channel 4 programme, The Truth About Female Desire. Billed as a collaboration between science and the world renowned Kinsey Institute to create a groundbreaking investigation into female sexuality, it has already been described in some quarters as science masquerading as pornography.
The programme features eight 'inquisitive young women' from across Britain who embark on a journey of sexual self-discovery as their sex lives go under the microscope. In the first episode, the women are attached to an ultrasound probe in order to measure what happens to their clitorises when aroused. We learn that the clitoris is 'an astonishingly massive 9cm long'.
The details of this programme come after the BBC last week revealed its plans to broadcast the most violent and sexually explicit programme ever to be shown on British television. Rome, a drama set in the dying days of the Roman Empire, contains full frontal male and female nudity and depictions of violent sex.
It also coincides with the revelation yesterday that the producers of the Dutch Big Brother, whose new series starts tonight, has included a 27-year-old pregnant contestant who is due to give birth six weeks into the show.
Inevitably people are asking: Has TV become too sexually permissive? It was generally thought that after Rebecca Loos pleasured a pig in Five's The Farm, there were no moral barriers for TV left to cross.
This is not, it seems, the case. The attitude of television regulator Ofcom is that broadcasting decorum depends on 'labelling' and 'expectation'. Anyone tuning into a reality TV series - a genre predicated on causing shocks - is assumed to have forgiving ears and eyes.
Dawn Airey, managing director of Sky Networks and former chief executive of Five, who was the target of a highly personal campaign by the Daily Mail after the network broadcast Naked Jungle, a gameshow hosted by middle-aged presenter Keith Chegwin with no clothes on, defended the genre.
'There has always been a lot of discussion about sex and sexuality on TV. But sex is part of literature, always has been part of entertainment and part of the human condition. It is also an enjoyable activity.' She said in a world in which consumers were faced with a multiplicity of choices, she saw nothing wrong with showing the sex act on TV. The only caveat, she added, was the need to protect minors and that it shouldn't be 'depraved'.
'We are adults who can make choices about what to watch on TV. I do find it quite curious that we can be so prudish. We had a lot of stick when I was at Channel 5. The regulators did tell me to pull back a bit on the content. But sexually explicit shows formed only 2 per cent of the channel's output.'
Julian Bellamy, head of factual entertainment with Channel 4, who commissioned The Sex Inspectors and has worked on five of the six Big Brother series, also defended his channel's output.
'The truth is that any good and original programme which relates to people's lives will get watched. Sex is no different from property. Millions of people buy homes just as millions of people have sex.'
if I have sex then the only person present or 'watching' will be my partner. Sex should be between two people who devote their lives to each other not titillation for the masses and a way to get attention. I find this totally repulsive and immoral! 
)
I knew I'd seen you somewhere before! 
Actually pornography itself doesn't embarass, interest or bother me that much but to actually have sex in public? I'd be thinking - that's someones daughter! 
