Adam, Eve, or Both?

In recent years, the debate over what should and should not be shown on television has

sparked a lot of controversy. Profanity, drugs, violence, and sex are all commonly featured on

television, which can cause concern for parents who are worried about what their children are

exposed to on the screen. Throughout the history of television, many rules and regulations have

come and gone, tied closely to the rise of broadcast television, followed by its fall as cable and

streaming television took precedence (Halbrooks). Now, however, there are very few regulations

for broadcast networks such as ABC and NBC, and next to none for subscription-based networks

such as Fox and Netflix. According to the official Federal Communications Commissions

website, broadcast networks are mostly free from regulations because they generally make their

own selection of channels and programs to be distributed to subscribers in response to consumer

demands. This is an indication that the government is giving First Amendment freedom of

speech rights back to the networks, to allow them to better fit the needs of their viewers.

Subscription-based networks have almost no regulations as they are independent of traditional

broadcasting, and are accessed through the internet, which also has very few government

regulations, rather than the airwaves. As directors, producers, and actors have begun to

experiment with this new independence of expression, many people are concerned about the

content that they and their children could be exposed to: namely, members of the LGBTQIA+

community.

This paper will focus particularly on only the B in this acronym, which stands for

bisexual. This word refers to a person who is attracted to two or more genders, most

commonly male and female. As with homosexuality, there is a large discussion in scientific and

religious circles as to whether bisexuality exits, and if it does, whether it is something that a
person is born with, or whether it is a choice. It is estimated that 1.8% of Americans identify as

bisexual, which includes celebrities such as Angelina Jolie and Alan Cumming (Hakala). Even

though approximately two out of every one hundred Americans are bisexual, television

representation of this sexuality has been minimal. Those who are against bisexuality, especially

due to religious reasons, may celebrate this fact, but it is more damaging than may first meet the

eye. Even people who believe that bisexuality is wrong should advocate for more bisexual

representation on television.

As a person who is bisexual myself, I believe that bisexuality is something with which a

person is born. I feel that I had absolutely no choice in the matter, and though I am very

comfortable with who I am, it is not something that I decided to be. Some have looked further

than personal narratives, however, and attempted to use experimentation to prove or disprove the

existence of bisexuality and the extent to which the attraction exists in both men and women

(Denizet-Lewis). This has proved very difficult, however, and no definitive results have been

found. Those who look to the Bible for guidance will not find any passages dealing specifically

with bisexuality, only homosexuality. Many use these sections regarding homosexuality for

bisexuality as well, even though they are different sexualities entirely, and therefore view

bisexuality as sinful and morally wrong.

For the sake of argument, let us suppose that bisexuality is indeed a choice. Following

this logic, one could argue that representation on television could be harmful to viewers because

it may encourage them to also make the decision to be bisexual. However, if bisexuality is

simply a choice, showing bisexual characters on television would merely be showing people

making choices, something that is shown all the time on television. Whether or not a person

believes they are good choices, television would be boring without decisions and their
consequences. Breaking Bad, for instance, would be quite dull if Walter White simply continued

teaching chemistry instead of beginning a meth lab. Obviously the television show does not

encourage children to go out and begin their own drug cartel, but it shows the results of what

could happen if one does make those decisions.

Would it then not follow that showing bisexuality on television is essentially the same

thing? No matter what one's views are on those who are bisexual (that they are sinful, morally

wrong, making a choice, or something entirely different), representing bisexuality on television

is not a statement that one should become bisexual. It is merely presenting bisexual people

having relationships, going on adventures, and living their lives, without forcing the lifestyle

upon its viewers. In this same way, Law and Order depicts all sorts of terrible criminals and the

crimes that they commit, but does not broadcast the message that everyone should go out and rob

a bank. Though a television series may show an act or lifestyle which could be seen as sinful by

those who follow the teachings of the Bible, it leaves the decision of whether or not to replicate

that act to the viewer. As shown in the very first book of the Bible, Genesis, free will is

encouraged, no matter what the consequences may be. Adam and Eve made the decision to eat

the fruit from the tree of knowledge, which resulted in punishment; however, Abraham made the

decision to sacrifice his son for his god, and even though he did not have to complete the act, he

was rewarded for it (English Standard Version, Genesis). Each person has both the right to

interpret the Bible in whatever way they choose, and also act in a way that they choose, whether

it is sinful in their eyes or not.

On the other hand, many people believe that being bisexual is not a choice, but is rather

something that a person is born with and cannot help. If this is the case, then bisexuality is

simply like any other trait with which a person is born. Each person is born with hundreds of
traits, from large, visible ones such as hair color, all the way down to the genetic level.

Therefore, showing bisexuality on television is comparable to showing someone with blue eyes

or freckles.

Of course, one could argue that not all traits a person is born with are beneficial, such as a

genetic disease or permanent disability, but even with this logic, one still must admit that the

fault does not belong to the bisexual person. These two concepts are not equivalent, however,

since whereas diseases and illnesses cause harm to the person who has them, for most people

bisexuality does no harm. Those who believe that bisexuality is a sin would disagree with this,

quoting the biblical passage which says that You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a

woman; it is an abomination (English Standard Version, Lev. 18:22). This could be taken to

mean that if a bisexual person has sexual relations with a person of the same sex, they are

sinning. However, this sin would only extend to the two people directly involved, and does no

harm to any other people around them.

Whether bisexuality is a choice or not, representing it on television cannot do harm. It

can, however, do some good. Audiences are always learning from the television shows they

watch, even if they are unaware of it. From Sesame Street to Arrested Development to Fox News,

all programs are teaching their audiences in ways that many do not know are occurring. Shows

such as Sesame Street and Mr. Roger's Neighborhood are marketed as education tools, so it is

relatively easy to see they ways in which they educate. Programs that are advertised as mere

entertainment, nevertheless can have just as much - if not more - educating potential.

Groups from all different belief systems can benefit from seeing bisexuality represented

on television. People who are bisexual themselves feel validated and represented when they see

characters and celebrities who share their sexuality on the screen. People who are not bisexual,
but who are supportive of the LGBTQA+ community, can learn how to be a better ally to

bisexual people around them, and find out how to better assist the community. Finally, those who

believe that bisexuality is morally wrong can also benefit, but in a slightly more complicated

way. First, whether a person knows it or not, everyone will interact with a bisexual person at

some time or another. Seeing bisexuality represented on television would educate those who are

against bisexuality so that they are more prepared when they do encounter such a person. Though

one may still choose to react in a negative way, at least they will be coming from a place of

greater knowledge. Second, and perhaps most importantly, it could change their minds. Maybe

seeing bisexuality presented as simply another facet of human beings can show them a path to

understanding. Empathy and compassion are important for people of all backgrounds, ethnicities,

genders, sexualities, and faiths. The phrase, You shall love thy neighbor as yourself, should not

only apply to neighbors who are heterosexual Christians, but rather to all of humanity (English

Standard Version, Mark 12:31).

Whether we know it or not, television is always educating its audience. However, what

the audience decides to use this education for is a personal decision which each individual must

explore for his- or herself. While one person may view a bisexual character on television and

vow to never be bisexual personally, another may look at the character and realize that he or she

is in fact a bisexual. If we are not allowed to see different facets of human existence, how will we

ever know how we feel about it? Everyone deserves the right to decide whether or not they

support bisexuality, but the first step is to become better educated on it. Since television is such a

universally used and loved form of communication, it is an important resource for teaching

minds, both old and young, about people who are different from them or perhaps more alike

than they may think.

 Works Cited

The Bible. English Standard Version, The Journaling Edition. Good News Publishers, 2001.

Denizet-Lewis, Benoit. The Scientific Question to Prove Bisexuality Exists. New York Times,

20 March, 2014. Originally published as print article in New York Times Magazine,

republished online. Accessed 3 November 2016. <www.nytimes.com/section/magazine>

Gilligan, Vince, creator. Breaking Bad. High Bridge Entertainment, Gran Via Productions, Sony

Pictures Television, 2008-2013. Television series.

Hakala, Kate. A Look Back At Bisexual Studies And Their Weird, Troubling History.

Originally published on Nerve, republished on Huffington Post 25 September 2014. Web

article. Accessed 3 November 2016. <www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/09/25/bisexuality-

studies-history-_n_5876976.html>

Halbrooks, Glenn. Words You Cant Say on TV and Other FCC Rules. The Balance, 16

September 2016. Web article. Accessed 3 November 2016. <www.thebalance.com/fcc-

rules-for-television-2315405>

Program Content Regulations. Federal Communications Commission website. Updated 9

December 2015. Webpage. Accessed 25 November 2016. <www.fcc.gov/media/program-

content-regulations>

Wolf, Dick, creator. Law and Order. Wolf Films, Universal Television, Studios USA, NBC

Universal Studio, Universal Media Studios, 1990-2010. Television series.