The problematic message of Sex/Life

“This is a show about female desire - That’s the sentence I wrote at the top of everything - the first story document, the first outline, the first script for Sex/Life. It was an announcement. Because I knew, even then, that telling such a story would be daring, risky, controversial. Mostly because female desire has been seen for centuries - millennia, even - as one of the most dangerous forces in the universe.” - said the Sex/Life creator Stacy Rukeyser for Talkhouse.

I read that statement before I started to watch the show.

Two weeks ago, I wrote an article where I mentioned a 3 box theory. I talked about women coming out of this pandemic underestimating themselves, frantically going on dates, hoping to get picked, hoping the guy wants a relationship, without assessing if the guy in question is even what you’re looking for.

All I see around me, post-pandemic, is women using (or withholding) sex to strategize the relationship out of a guy. Not for enjoyment, but for strategy.

Sex is a big part of the 3 box theory.

The 3 box is a theory about men who, upon meeting a woman know instantly if they want to be just friends with her, if they want to date her, or just have sex with her.

1. Friendship

2. Relationship

3. Sex

In simpler terms, box theory is just - choices men allow themselves.

And women?

Instead of going on a date hoping “he likes you”, you should walk out of your doors, on the way to meet him, thinking - “I hope I like this guy”. And after that - “hope WE are good for each other”.

Your choice also extends to not wanting to date someone, if that’s how you feel. You can also choose you like someone for just sex, if he doesn’t fit your relationship criteria. It’s totally cool to feel physical attraction with someone that is not your life partner material. The reason why most women can’t even recognize or find great sex is that they spent years using sex (withholding sex) to scheme a guy into wanting a relationship.

If sex for you is a strategy and not enjoyment, your body won’t ever be skilled to recognize or find passion; the type of sex you are dying to find while watching Sex/Life.

Let’s deconstruct how the show relates to real life.

Firstly, Sex/Life is not what its creators think it is. It has great sex in it, but you should be having that kind of sex in real life. The show’s creators are on a clueless quest of trying to be revolutionary. I’ll repeat creator Stacy Rukeyser's quote from the beginning of this article:

“This is a show about female desire - That’s the sentence I wrote at the top of everything - the first story document, the first outline, the first script for Sex/Life. It was an announcement. Because I knew, even then, that telling such a story would be daring, risky, controversial. Mostly because female desire has been seen for centuries - millennia, even - as one of the most dangerous forces in the universe.”

The show is not about desire.

Telling a story about the type of sex everyone should have is not daring, risky, or controversial. And female desire is not a dangerous force, no matter how hard the creator wanted to start the uprising for a right to be fucked properly.

First of all, except for sex, the show’s premise is foolish. A book the show’s based on is excellent. If you didn’t read it, I highly recommend it. ‘44 Chapters About 4 Men’, by BB Easton is a memoir about a married woman who loves her husband but wants him to be “less cold” in bed. She starts writing about 4 men she dated in her past, not one, 4 men. Her husband finds the manuscript and starts implementing what he read into their sex life.

BB Easton, a psychologist, understood the behavior modification technique she stumbled upon and continued writing not what actually happened, but what she wanted her husband to read, and implement. Sort of directing him. She never actually meets anyone from her past. The psychological dance between her and her husband is brilliantly written.

The series, for a reason not clear to me, decided to make this show about a choice, instead. And the way the choice is presented is what’s problematic with this show. There is a stable guy who is boring in bed and there is a wild, unstable troublesome guy who is a great fuck; like women’s only choices in life are boring/good or fun/bad.

I don’t even have to try hard in pointing out all the missed targets, Stacy is doing a great job on her own:

“And she’s a mom who wants sex? Well, now you’re really pushing it - straight into the face of the lingering Madonna/whore complex of our patriarchy. Martyrdom is the ideal. Sacrifice, part of the gig. Gratitude, the only allowable emotion.”

You can’t even make this up.

“Patriarchy”.

“Whore complex”.

(Insert facepalm emoji).

Let me solve this wannabe revolutionary conundrum you developed into a series, Stacy, in one simple sentence: YOU CAN JUST MARRY SOMEONE THAT FUCKS GREAT.

And yet, she continues:

“And yet, here I was, giving voice to the secret truth that it is possible for a woman to be incredibly grateful for her many blessings, to adore her children, to love being a mom - and still want more. To yearn for something dreamy and steamy and romantic and titillating, something that will take you away - or, if you’re lucky, back - to a time and a place and a person you once were. To dream of being a wife and mother and ravenous sex goddess, all at the same time.”

“Dreamy & steamy”?

“Secret truth”?

“Ravenous sex goddess” ?

I swear I can not stop, Stacy:

“Turns out, creating a show about a woman who admits she’s had sex and wants more of it - better sex - without making her the villain or punishing her for her appetite is, in itself, a revolutionary act.”

“She tries for so long to be “good,” to forgive her husband’s shortcomings, to deny her appetite, and accept - as current feminist thinking tells us - that we can’t have it all, at least not all at the same time.”

And here we are:

A fake choice: “…telling us we can’t have it all, at least not at the same time.”

That right there is what’s so problematic with this show and what’s advertising to women. There is a stable boring guy, and there is an asshole who’s great in bed. You gotta choose. You can’t have it all.

Except this is all bullshit, and you absolutely can.

But you need to realize you already have that choice.

Stacy was too occupied with trying to create the post-pandemic zeitgeist of “female desire”, and forgot to develop her characters.

Adam Demos’ (Brad) character is developed somewhat properly. We start with this fuckboy and slowly understand how he got to where he arrived; he is the most complete and logical character.

Sarah Shahi’s (Billy) is laughably undeveloped and serves only as a vessel for seeing sex onscreen from a female gaze. The ending where she comes to his loft and says — “now fuck me”, is an insult to the viewer that watched his character become everything she needed and wanted in a guy, in the first place. You did not come to get fucked. You came for the whole deal.

Presenting a husband as a stable, boring, loving guy who wants to be with you, and you married him because the guy you actually wanted to marry had issues at the time, except the guy you actually wanted is now a decent, complete fella who dealt with his issues and wants to marry you — it’s a fake plot that makes no sense.

Exactly what is the choice here?

It scares me how many women I know don’t care about passion, lust, or great chemistry — they want to be with a certain type of guy; for lifestyle, status. And they endure lame sex for the price of it.

Those are the types that chose “stable men”, then come home and watch Sex/Life on a loop and ponder why they don’t “have it all”.

Except, you chose not to have it all.

Why aren’t you having it all?

I have a theory.

You need to start a relationship with amazing sex. In time, passion will die down. But imagine if you already start with terrible, dispassionate sex; what will that turn into, over the years? Into depression, unhappiness, and living vicariously through the great sex you see on Television.

How do you measure great sex?

I measure it like this: You want to have chemistry so intense with someone, that the actual act of having sex cools things off.

Reread that a few times.

The one thing the show did get right is, and this part is controversial — flip the script on gaze. In the words of the creator:

“An all-female directing team, guiding bodies in slow motion, under magical, jewel-toned lighting, the camera focused on our heroine Billie’s experience, lingering on the male bodies, if anything, for Billie’s (and our) pleasure, the female gaze.”

Throughout history, men are allowed the “male gaze”, to ogle women’s bodies like predators, expecting women to be beautiful, thin, with great tits and asses; and discarding them when their bodies are no longer “sexual”.

Lots of people found issues with episode 3 of Sex/Life, where the seemingly nice decent husband follows the ex-lover to the guy and sees his humongous penis. We all see it. Mind you, I watched episode 3 in a subway. The chatter after that episode was, mostly from straight men — “Well, what is a guy to do if he has a small dick, this is unfair, don’t show it like this, it’s damaging to men”.

You mean the same damage as you judging women for being too short, too fat, too flat, or too old?

Elisabeth Ovesen wrote an excellent study on this subject:

“Men are not accustomed to having their bodies judged or governed. Men’s egos could never withstand the daily assault women face for their sexual and bodily autonomy, much less being told their dicks are small.”

Again: CHOICE.

Men have been choosing young, sexy, beautiful women for their sexual partners. You also can choose to sleep with a young, fit, hot, sexy guy with whatever dick size you chose. A groundbreaking though- it goes both ways.

The only thing we as women truly need to understand — we also have the power of choice. The rigged society keeps us in check with false advertising making us doubt our looks, bodies, and age; making us just insecure enough to be happy someone picked us. A woman who understands she has the power of a choice is way too powerful and threatening to the norm.

Every time I talk to my male friends about what I physically like in a guy, they feel so offended. I like his hands to be a certain way, the skin, smell, shapes, or certain muscles, I have a specific type of body I like and when I talk about it, usually the reaction is — “Miranda, come on, you sound like a guy”.

So it’s ok for a guy to sound like a guy, and nit-pick every inch of a woman’s body, but women can’t? We can’t ogle men like men ogle women, and look for a specific thing we like?

Sorry, no.

But it’s up to you to be unapologetic about your choice.

Last summer I dated someone that was 20 years younger than me, and more interesting, smart, and inspiring than anyone I know. Of course, my friends got on my case about it — “Why would you be with him of all people?”. Because I can.

There’s one thing Sex/Life creator said I agreed with:

“It’s not what a woman is supposed to want. We’re supposed to wait. To accept. To allow. We are the receivers, after all. But we all want. Some of us take. And the rest of us just dream about taking.”

I’ll leave you with something important.

The choice is NEVER between stability and passion. If you never saw both in one person, keep looking. I’ve seen it in one person. And not just once. You shouldn’t let anyone convince you stability and passion don’t go together.

The choice is not in one or another. The choice is to keep going until you find it both in one person, instead of settling for what society is telling you - you just can’t have it all.