“You are unable of the slightest sense of emphaty!” was the stick o`words that slapped me across the face today. We were sitting in the class, discussing the phenomenon of soap operas. The statement was that for certain people, soap operas are the only form of entertainment and relaxation. I counter-stated that claim with a question, asking if people are so poor that they are unable to a) take a walk b) check into a library and rent a book or c) too poor to owe more than one TV channel. And they slapped me.
Again, I am facing a group of people that is trying to be rebellious. That is trying to save the world in one stroke. And on the other hand they are ignoring the basic facts, the simplest details that change everything. Statements a) People are poor and b) Because of being poor they are left with nothing else but TV do not bode well. Seriously. In my head that paints a photo of a woman who is sitting in a cold living room with nothing else but the TV blaring the choruses of Esmeralda. Is this a scene for a Monty Phyton˙s sketch or what?
Further more, they claimed that people are so stigmatized that they cannot go out and participate in a FREE FOR ALL activity. Be it a lecture, a show, a performance, there is hundred of things going out outside that are not going to cost you an arm and a leg AND are still BETTER than that fucking trash-TV. But no, because they are so poor that they reek of it, they cannot do it, because everybody will know and feel their poorness.
My sets of reasons why do people watch these shows: out of boredom, out of stupidity and out of laziness. And that is it. The economical status of the viewers does not even come into the account.
Now prove me wrong.