Great Wholesome Entertainment? Sharing Air-tight Evenings on 4

CHANNEL 4 'Open House' Sexploitation, Smut or The New Way of Living? 

 A Low Point for UKTV?

7 Min Read

Channel 4's 'Open House: The Great Sex Experiment' is pushing taboo boundaries again, probably because they squashed the last failed experiment 'Naked Attraction'. Clearly their unrelenting need to create smut will never be satisfied. The compelling characters in the show are the real-life couples who try the experience. 

The Knowledge Base: What Can People Actually Learn From Non-Manogamy?

Unfortunately, the pseudo-science they blart out in these shows can be laughable. We always hear a therapist, or an expert imparting 'sex knowledge' in these programs. It's merely the 'social experiment' pretence hoping to spruce up the flavour with a sprinkle of academic seasoning.

I'm unsure if the latest 'expert,' Effy Blue, holds any qualifications, because there aren't any in her credentials and her words hardly resonate with psychological wellbeing, philosophy of mind or spirituality. Why? Well, it's because the woman's a self-styled non-monogomy and polygamy coach, that's why! It's a tad biased and a somewhat vested interest, don't you agree?

Beyond Euphemisms: What's Really Happening? 

The show's promotion uses carefully crafted words—referring to 'consensual non-monogamy' rather than more everyday terms like a club sandwich, spit roast, a gang bang or cream team. According to one interview in 2022, a once 'in-house' resident known as Precious Muir, told The Sun newspaper she and other 'sexy singles' were hired to have three-somes and seduce couples for the show. 

The linguistic softening used by the Channel 4 team is quite clever. They did tread carefully through a legal minefield; what if they used honest words instead? How would the old vernacular go down?

Watch hired courtesans make sexy time happen with faltering couples televised in a big brother-like brothel for your entertainment? 

Let's Be Clear About What We Witness in Channel 4's Open House:

- Couples arriving at a sex retreat

- 'In-house residents' primed to engage in a little 'how’s your father?'

- The mojo of the guests or the lack of it is publicised on TV

- Experts with a vested interest in the show’s theme guide the process

- Channel 4 make money via sex

Interesting Distinctions in Words and Phrases:

Using words like consensual non-monogamy, counselling and expert advice, does suggest a remedial sexual retreat for couples with relationship issues.

Realistically, 'Open House' practices financial transaction for those sexual encounters, and, as we know, it is purely for entertainment purposes because it's a TV show. Fair enough, but what if some people have an invisible risk? Pre-existing emotional vulnerabilities like what we saw with Love Island or The Jeremy Kyle Show or even the other 35-40 individuals who all ended their lives after taking part in television shows? It can ruin people who survive.

Behind The Scenes: Things Unsaid

Not everyone's partner is certain about taking the polyamorous plunge; some question the process, others simply go along with it for their other half. l know the family of one of the show's couples, and sadly, their back story is much darker than what Channel 4 let on—that spoke to me.

Folks will agree to degrade themselves on this show to accommodate, win favour, maybe salvage something, but these couples, as well as the TV show producers only show you what they want you to see! 

Well-being really is not the highest priority here as you can deduce for yourself. Isn't the show all about experimenting with couples? How is that healthy? People evidently get hurt and tearful, if this isn't a liability, what is? 

The Legal Framework: More Problematic Than It Appears

An in-house resident told The Sun: 'The producers wanted us to hook up with the couples because that was what the TV show was about.' 

UK law has created a specific framework regarding things like prostitution and brothels which raises questions about 'Open House':

1. Prostitution Definition: 

The exchange of sexual services for payment or promise of payment. It's any kind of financial arrangement, as defined by the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and used by the Crown Prosecution Service.

2. Brothel Definition: 

Any building will do, and it doesn't have to directly charge money to be considered a brothel! The defining factor is whether or not people use the premises for the purpose of prostitution. If more than one person uses a building for prostitution, simultaneously or one at a time (even on alternate days or weeks), it can be classified as a brothel.

3. Legal Status: 

While individual prostitution isn't illegal, running a brothel is prohibited under the Sexual Offences Act 1956.
If Channel 4 Are Being Pimps Here, They Might Argue by Saying What They Do Falls Outside These Definitions, Because:

a) Participants are paid for 'appearing on television,' not explicitly for sexual acts

b) The purpose of the premises is televised entertainment

c) Sexual encounters occur within a 'social experiment' context. 

Not much of a defence really, but people like watching it and no one wants to be a party pooper!

The Exploitation Question: Following the Money! 

The crux of the legal question focuses on what exactly participants are being paid to do. This has been shared with the press more than once. 

Can a TV Show Legally Operate as a Brothel?

Some of us think that brothels can go and get planning permission and simply operate legally with regular inspections from the local council. This is totally wrong! Managing or keeping a brothel is illegal under UK law, and so, if we want to respect the law, 'Open House' shouldn't be on tv to undermine it. 

Questions Springing to Mind... 

By filming hired sex workers for Channel 4, are we providing a legal exemption from brothel laws? 

In the future, for example, might it be possible for Channel 4 to run a beastiality show, or a social parasexual fetish experiment for pet lovers? 

If the show is geared up to promote well-being, why is little attention paid to STI prevention, contraception?

Channel 4 produced a specific character prosecution against Russell Brand, so why have they fallen short by not promoting consent or highlighting the value of peoples emotional wellness in their own sex show?

What Makes Channel 4 Open-House Different To Pornography?

Pornography production, while controversial, can be more graphic, but still, it follows specific legal frameworks with established protections. 'Open House' is standing in a different field entirely:

- It is broadcasting on a public service television channel

- It's brand is a 'relationship experiment' instead of adult entertainment

- It blurs documentary and sexually explicit lines 

- Adult film production has health safeguards such as routine testing for STDs and training on blood pathogens and infection, PPE: dental dams and contraception, sex simulation for non-contact editing, important mental well-being and aftercare. 

In a nut shell, it's professionalism, as well as health and safety what makes the porn industry different to this show.

Regulatory Scrutiny: Where is Ofcom?

As a public service broadcaster, Channel 4 operates under obligations and oversight from Ofcom. 

It Makes You Wonder:

- Whether proper risk assessments are conducted

- If broadcasting standards are upheld

- Whether the show's branding as an 'experiment' has received appropriate ethical consideration

- Whether Ofcom considered the legal implications under UK brothel laws

- Is the UK happy?

Conclusion: Legal Fiction

Channel 4's 'Open House' seems to be operating on shaky legal ground. If multiple individuals are hired to use a premise to provide sexual services, and an organisation is managing this arrangement and profiting from it, how are Channel 4 and Ofcom not concerned about broadcasting sex in a brothel?

Taboos and kinky behaviours might escape scrutiny or criticism when it's packaged as a 'Channel 4 thing'. There is danger in accepting entertainment like this as legitimate; especially for those developing a conscience, none of us have mastered right and wrong—our standards can only fall if 'Open House' morality or 'Naked Attraction' hedonism push an alternative.

Only villains want family and friends to fall into a promiscuous lifestyle, given the risks. It's not right.