While it seems that there's a new sex scandal being discussed relentlessly on radio/television and in the paper, this week's has piqued my interest somewhat. I'm sure by now you've all heard about the Kyle Sandilands scandal. A fourteen year old girl was put on the show, hooked up to a lie detector and asked about her sexual experiences. Now, that in itself is fairly appalling. An underage girl, for whom it's technically illegal to have sex, being put on a radio show to talk about it. The word 'inappropriate' springs to mind. For this part of the story, i would blame the radio station for their poor judgment.
However, it was the girl's mother's idea to put her daughter on the show. In itself, that was foul. What kind of a mother is she?! But it gets worse. Over the course of the segment it came out that the girl had been raped at age twelve. And the mother knew - yet STILL put her daughter on the show! That's a disgusting show of 'parenting'. Though i don't know if you could even label it that. I'm disgusted by this side of the story more than any other side of it
However, the factor that's caused the media frenzy was Kyle's response to the revelation. I believe he said something along the lines of '...and was that your only sexual experience?'. Psychologists and all sorts of important people have decided that he was comparing rape to a pleasurable sexual experience. But put yourself in his position for a moment. You hear a shocking revelation and scramble for a response. I really don't think that Kyle was thinking 'oh, awesome, so this girl is just running around having all kinds of sex, good for her'. It sounds more like a knee-jerk reaction to me. An inappropriate one, sure. But males generally aren't known for their sensitivity.
Kyle has lost his position on Australian Idol and apparently his position as a radio host is also in question. The question i'm asking is whether we can really blame Kyle for this entire situation. Let's look at it this way... It was a team that came up with the idea to put a child hooked up to a lie detector on live radio. It was a mother who put her daughter on the show, knowing about the rape. It was Kyle who responded inappropriately seconds after hearing that a child had been raped.
Granted, a better man may have responded far better in the situation. But it seems to me that there's a whole team of people, not to mention an abominable excuse for a mother, who should also be facing the wrath of an extensive media frenzy. Keep in mind that i'm no great fan of Kyle Sandiland. He's rude and has a host of other poor qualities. However, in this situation, i'm really not sure he's the only one to blame... is this inappropriate reaction really worth ruining his career?
Just something to think about.
However, it was the girl's mother's idea to put her daughter on the show. In itself, that was foul. What kind of a mother is she?! But it gets worse. Over the course of the segment it came out that the girl had been raped at age twelve. And the mother knew - yet STILL put her daughter on the show! That's a disgusting show of 'parenting'. Though i don't know if you could even label it that. I'm disgusted by this side of the story more than any other side of it
However, the factor that's caused the media frenzy was Kyle's response to the revelation. I believe he said something along the lines of '...and was that your only sexual experience?'. Psychologists and all sorts of important people have decided that he was comparing rape to a pleasurable sexual experience. But put yourself in his position for a moment. You hear a shocking revelation and scramble for a response. I really don't think that Kyle was thinking 'oh, awesome, so this girl is just running around having all kinds of sex, good for her'. It sounds more like a knee-jerk reaction to me. An inappropriate one, sure. But males generally aren't known for their sensitivity.
Kyle has lost his position on Australian Idol and apparently his position as a radio host is also in question. The question i'm asking is whether we can really blame Kyle for this entire situation. Let's look at it this way... It was a team that came up with the idea to put a child hooked up to a lie detector on live radio. It was a mother who put her daughter on the show, knowing about the rape. It was Kyle who responded inappropriately seconds after hearing that a child had been raped.
Granted, a better man may have responded far better in the situation. But it seems to me that there's a whole team of people, not to mention an abominable excuse for a mother, who should also be facing the wrath of an extensive media frenzy. Keep in mind that i'm no great fan of Kyle Sandiland. He's rude and has a host of other poor qualities. However, in this situation, i'm really not sure he's the only one to blame... is this inappropriate reaction really worth ruining his career?
Just something to think about.
No comments:
Post a Comment