
A reality show sent 12 virgins to an island to learn how to have sex. The result was weirdly coy
Channel 4's latest attempt to straddle the line between televised humiliation and light titillation came to an end this week. Virgin Island documented a two-week bootcamp for 12 'courageous virgins', whisked off to Mamma Mia!-style surrounds and delivered into the hands of self-proclaimed experts with job titles such as 'emotional intimacy coach', 'surrogate partner therapist' and 'sexological bodyworker'. These professionals were meant to help them overcome physical and emotional hang-ups around sex, and offered a kind of hands-on, public therapy that for most of us previously existed only in nightmares.
Having watched the entire series across an especially sedentary weekend, I'm in no position to doubt that this sometimes made for maddeningly good TV. From tutorials in oral sex to animal role-play, the whole affair resembled a sun-kissed gameshow with a few premature ejaculations scattered in for good measure. At the end of the series, only one contestant had lost their virginal status, and it briefly seemed possible that the grinning individual in question might be presented with a Bullseye-style prize for doing so – a Nissan Micra for your victory in the boudoir, perhaps?
Miles from the mainland, with nothing but deep-rooted psychological trauma or diagnosable medical disorders to get in the way, Virgin Island positioned itself as a locus of pure fantasy. Unfortunately, this was also its downfall. Turning sex into a series of uncomfy routines to be memorised and performed (classes included practising ''smooth transitions' from one position to another, or learning exactly when during a dinner date to kiss your partner's hand in the manner of a serial killer), the show seemed unable to admit that sex is not only a physical challenge but a social phenomenon, one bound up with unpredictability, rejection and power.
Still, the oddly evacuated social politics of sex kept cropping up. Cast member Charlotte spoke about trying to work through issues with shame, but had few qualms about humiliating others, openly repulsed by the 'horrible stretch marks' of civil servant Ben. When anxious Emma, 23, was paired with confident, middle-aged 'sexological bodyworker' Thomas, she was visibly uncomfortable. The optics of their pairing – and how unlikely it was to help Emma – seemed not to matter.
Then there was Zac, the villain of the piece. In one scene, he dished out a range of objectifying compliments to the women of the show. These women had little interest in finding out whether they would be winners ('banging body') or losers ('good sense of humour') in Zac's personal hotness Olympics, but on he went regardless. Zac seemed to have almost no issues around sex, other than his lack of it. He described his intense impatience as his coach delayed penetrative sex, seemingly keen to race through the steadily paced structure of the programme in which individuals graduated through various sex acts only if and when the experts deemed them ready. His best explanation was, fascinatingly, that perhaps she was intimidated by him. Having said as much, Zac was kindly asked to put on his clothes, but beyond this, Virgin Island seemed totally uninterested in engaging with the behaviours and dynamics actually exhibited by the group.
Desire is complex, unpredictable and often indecipherable even by those experiencing it. Nothing about this could have been neatly resolved in six hours, but a gesture to the relationship between what happens in the bedroom and what happens beyond it might have helped. True to the neoliberal navel-gazing that so defines our times, Virgin Island invited its contestants to look only inwards, but more interesting lessons might have been learned if they had observed their relationships with one another, too.
They might have noticed a grimly gendered divide, in which many of the women were indeed intimidated by men, a situation unlikely to be helped by the 'up against the wall' practice session where nervous participants were made to forcefully push partners up against a pillar, with as much allegedly sexy conviction as they could muster. What are the connotations of a move like that? Why might some people, sometimes, like it, and some people, sometimes, not? TV producers, fearful of dull detail, might be sceptical, but for my money, those conversations would have produced the most revealing content yet.
From childhood trauma to fantasies of worship, it was clear that for absolutely everyone on the island, sex was inseparable from power. Why, then, couldn't the programme admit it? Maybe because to open up a conversation about power would risk admitting the odd imbalance at play as paid professionals take an ambiguous pleasure in laying hands on often vulnerable bodies, all while denying a transaction is taking place. The show had little choice but to remove power from the conversation lest it, ironically, expose itself. Perhaps most unexpectedly of all though, in doing so, Virgin Island often boxed itself into a dull little corner of denial. Pretending that sex is a matter for the bedroom alone? You don't get much more vanilla than that.
Jennifer Jasmine White is a writer and academic
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Reuters
35 minutes ago
- Reuters
UK faces choice next week between health and other spending, IFS think tank warns
LONDON, June 1 (Reuters) - British finance minister Rachel Reeves' key decision in next week's multi-year spending review will be how much to spend on healthcare versus other public services, the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank said on Sunday. Reeves is due to set out day-to-day spending limits for other government departments on June 11 which will run through to the end of March 2029 - almost until the end of the Labour government's expected term in office. Britain has held periodic government spending reviews since 1998, but this is the first since 2015 to cover multiple years, other than one in 2021 focused on the COVID pandemic. The non-partisan IFS said this spending review could prove to be "one of the most significant domestic policy events" for the current Labour government. Prime Minister Keir Starmer's announcement in February that defence spending would reach 2.5% of national income by 2027 had already used the room for further growth in public investment created in Reeves' October budget, it said. "Simultaneously prioritising additional investments in public services, net zero and growth-friendly areas ... will be impossible," said Bee Boileau, a research economist at the IFS. Non-investment public spending is intended to rise by 1.2% a year on top of inflation between 2026-27 and 2028-29, according to budget plans which Reeves set out in October - half the pace of spending growth in the current and previous financial year. The IFS sees no scope for this to be topped up, as Reeves' budget rules leave almost no room for extra borrowing and tax rises are now limited to her annual budget statement. This forces Reeves and Starmer to choose between the demands of the public healthcare system - plagued by long waiting times and a slump in productivity since the COVID-19 pandemic - and other stretched areas. In past spending reviews, annual health care spending has typically risen 2 percentage points faster than total spending. If that happened this time - equivalent to an annual increase of 3.4% - spending in other departments would have to fall by 1% a year in real terms, the IFS forecast. Raising healthcare spending at roughly the same pace as other areas - a 1.2% rise - would only just keep pace with an ageing population and not allow any reversal of recent years' deterioration in service quality, the IFS said. Spending cuts could be achieved by scaling back services provided by the state, reducing public-sector employment or real-terms cuts in public-sector pay, it added. But it warned the government needed to be specific about how it planned to make cuts, or risk financial markets losing confidence in its ability to keep borrowing under control. The review does not cover spending on pensions or other benefits, which the government is tackling separately.


BBC News
36 minutes ago
- BBC News
Disposable vapes ban begins but will teens quit?
The ban on the sale of single-use disposable vapes will come into force on Sunday across the UK, aimed at protecting children's health and the environment. It means shops and supermarkets will no longer be able to stock them - but they can still sell rechargeable or refillable devices. Disposable vapes have been cited as a key driver in the rise in youth vaping, while every year five million vapes are thrown predict it will have a significant impact but health experts say further regulation is needed to tackle youth vaping. Retailers in England and Wales breaching the ban face a £200 fine for the first offence with potentially unlimited fines or jail for those who repeatedly ban was first announced for England and Wales by the previous Conservative government but the law was not enacted before last summer's general then pushed ahead with it. Scotland and Northern Ireland have introduced their own bans, timed to coincide with the one in England and Wales. Less harmful Vape use has risen rapidly over the last decade with 9% of the British public now buying and using figures suggest about one in four vapers use the disposable versions, although that proportion has fallen since the ban was while it is illegal to sell vapes to anyone under 18, disposable vapes, often sold in smaller, more colourful packaging than refillable ones, have been cited as an important factor in the rise of youth one in seven 18 to 24-year-olds vape but have never is substantially less harmful than smoking but it has not been around for long enough for its long-term risks to be known, according to the NHS. The environmental impact is considerable. Single-use vapes are difficult to recycle and typically end up in landfill where their batteries can leak harmful chemicals like battery acid, lithium, and mercury into the environment, the government thrown into household waste also cause hundreds of fires in bin lorries and waste-processing centres every Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs estimates almost five million single-use vapes were either littered or thrown into general waste each week last minister Mary Creagh said: "For too long, single-use vapes have blighted our streets as litter and hooked our children on nicotine. That ends today."The government calls time on these nasty devices."But Action on Smoking and Health chief executive Hazel Cheeseman questioned what impact the ban would have, pointing out new refillable vape kits were coming on to the market that look and cost similar to the single-use said it would not be until the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, which includes powers to regulate marketing, branding and advertising, came into power that the issue of youth vaping could be truly tackled."Their appeal is driven by bright colours, wide availability and cheap prices," she said."The new regulations will hopefully help to address the environmental impact, but government will need further regulations to address the appeal of products to teenagers."She said this was very much a balancing act as vapes were an important tool to help people quit."Vaping is very much less harmful than smoking and is the most popular aid to quitting in the UK," she added. John Dunne, of the UK Vaping Industry Association, said bans were "not the answer".He said he was concerned that a black market in single-use vapes could develop and some people may be tempted to return to smoking cigarettes."Disposables have played a huge role in reducing smoking levels amongst adults to record low levels. It's why we are seeing stockpiling in the lead up to the ban," he Butler, executive director of Material Focus, an independent not-for-profit organisation, said that he was still concerned that vapes are still difficult to recycle and reuse. He said customers and businesses should demand sustainable options. "Given the rampant binning and littering that we already see, will we see any behaviour change? Only if producers, importers and retailers step up and meet their long existing legal obligations to provide and pay for takeback and recycling," he said.


Times
36 minutes ago
- Times
One Club Row review — ‘Nowhere on earth could possibly be more fun'
The other day I received a message: 'I beg you not to review One Club Row.' Already, barely a week into service, my friend — who follows restaurant trends the way most men follow their football club —could tell this was going to be the most fashionable place in town. 'I know I'll get sick of hearing about it,' he explained. So I immediately booked a table. What a place. Enjoy this review now because in, ooh, about two weeks' time you really will be sick of hearing about it. What a joy to walk into a little restaurant above a pub, at 6pm on a Wednesday, and instantly feel there's nowhere on earth that could possibly be more fun at this precise moment. Oh, and they have a taxi light outside to show if there are tables available for walk-ins. I love it. I shouldn't have been surprised. James Dye, one of the proprietors, also co-owns the Camberwell Arms — among the best restaurants in south London and the social hub of all those young parents who move to that postcode for a bigger house and a better life, because once you're in Camberwell it's impossible to get out again. The other owner, Benji Liebowitz, used to be the maître d' at NoMad, one of New York's most glamorous cocktail bars. It's the type of pedigree that would have you betting the house on a racehorse. Inside One Club Row We're in east London, of course. But there's something here that feels a little New York. Perhaps it's the seats at the bar kept for walk-ins, or the martinis. There's something of the Jeremy King grand café too: white tablecloths, schnitzel on the menu. But then there's also something new, captured by the stonewashed walls, original fireplaces and ceiling roses back from when this was just a boozer, and the bright, blocky modern art on the walls. It's a glorious mix of classic and modern. I feel a bit giddy — although maybe that's the martinis too. Because obviously we have a martini each. Our waitress makes it clear this is kind of the point. Josh has one with olive oil; I have the house: gin, with the tiniest, delightful hint of sweetness from a dash of Italicus liqueur and a sultry maraschino cherry lounging at the bottom of the glass. We snack on a lobster and ham croquette — perfectly decent. But then come pickled jalapeño cheesy gougères. I gasp as I bite into one. There's mustard in there, lemon too. A sharp sweetness to the chillies. Next, the starters: fat, flavoursome tomatoes on a thin film of stracciatella. Barbecued asparagus on labneh with hazelnut and lemon, the best thing we eat. Oh go on, let's get the tuna crudo. It looks so good on the next table and there's something about this place that urges you to empty your bank account. For mains, pork schnitzel with mustard sauce and — this is inspired — blobs of tangy, salty gorgonzola. Then roasted cod on a thick, decadent buckwheat polenta. Less to write home about but still functional. Again, we start staring lasciviously at the next table. The two women there have a bowl of mussels, accompanied by a plate of something quite majestic-looking. 'Please can we have just one of whatever that is?' we ask. Lobster and ham croquettes JUSTIN DE SOUZA The longed-for item arrives. The industrial term would be 'reconstructed potato', but don't think of it like that. Think of it instead as an incredibly delicate hash brown, formed into a long, thin, crispy chip. Josh takes a bite and his eyes light up. 'I didn't think there was anything new to experience from the potato, but here I am.' Finally, though we definitely don't need it, a Dutch baby pancake — basically a sweet Yorkshire pudding with blueberries, Chantilly cream and smoked maple bacon. American indulgence, European chic. A Dutch baby pancake JUSTIN DE SOUZA It's not cheap. That said, you could pay a lot less than we did, if you don't order a nice bottle of wine in a fit of excitement-induced profligacy, and don't try to eat the whole menu. The problem is, I suspect you will. There's something ineffable about this place that just lends itself to abandon. It makes you want to flirt with strangers, stay for five hours, throw your life up in the air and move to New York. As I head home, I consider each of these options. Instead I book another table for next week, before everyone else does. ★★★★★ 1 Club Row, London E1 6JX;