The Complicated Truth About the Sexism on Channel 4’s ‘Eden’

From the beginning, Channel 4's 2016 series Eden sounded dramatic. Isolated on Scotland's Ardnamurchan peninsula, 23 people – each with requisite skills, from carpentry to foraging – were left to their own devices, to try to survive the wilderness for an entire year. It was pitched as a different sort of reality television; an objective experiment in human nature, a chance to see what people would do with the opportunity to start again and build a community from scratch.

Then, after four episodes – featuring a dead goat, some moonshine and the exit of one participant – everything went dark. Channel 4 stopped broadcasting the show, and the social media accounts stopped posting. Amid news of declining audiences there was no news of the show's future. Rumours began to circulate that it had been cancelled, but that the community was still continuing with the experiment, blissfully unaware.

It wasn't until recently that their fate became clear, when Channel 4 announced Eden: Paradise Lost, a five-part summary of the events that unfolded since the original series stopped airing. Hinted at by the title change, the programme would detail how badly the experiment had devolved. It was described by Channel 4's commissioning editor as "feral" and "dark". Ominous trailers and articles began to emerge, previewing a descent into tribalism, bullying and cliques.

In particular, media attention on the series has been focused on a culture of sexism that emerged in the community. Some of the series' major players have given interviews detailing how a group of boys began dominating activities, delegating jobs by gender and eventually forcing the group of girls out entirely.

"I live among crofters and I've worked with the military, but I've never been limited by gender, so it was a shock," 31-year old Katie told the Guardian. Others have discussed how systematic bullying turned certain members into scapegoats. "If you measure success by the number of friends you've got at the end, then it was crap," Anton told the Radio Times.

However, some of those involved argue that the current storm surrounding the show is unfair. Far from falling apart, they feel the experience was a year of ups and downs that should be remembered as much for its successes as its difficulties. For them, Paradise Lost is a hurtful, sensationalised version of events they "don't recognise", edited to save an otherwise unsuccessful TV show.

When Stephen, the community's chef, first speaks to VICE, he is audibly worked up. He makes it clear how disappointed he is with how the show has turned out. He thought he was getting involved with "high-brow entertainment" that would mainly be focused on survival and agriculture, and feels he's been dragged into "sensationalist bullshit" against his will. "Watching the press right now is just like, 'Are you serious?'" he says, laughing. "It's like watching Richard Burton do Hamlet. 'Oh my god, isolation turned these people feral!' Nah mate, we were just having an argument, chill out."

As a member of the clique accused of sexism, Stephen feels personally aggrieved by the final programme. He maintains that the deeply uncomfortable atmosphere depicted is the product of an intense edit, consolidating every moment of disagreement over a long stretch of time. He also claims that the edit has changed the order of events, making it appear that female members of the group were forced out by the boys. He feels that, along with a couple of others, he has been vilified unfairly. "It's just escalating into something it wasn't, and obviously Channel 4 are licking their lips because [sexism] is such a big social issue," he continues. "People are thinking, 'I wanna see those sexist arseholes.'"

Jenna, one of the community's on-site medics, feels similarly disillusioned with the finished product. She left the show four months in, after the production team began allowing people to leave the site and return – something she felt compromised the entire premise.

"I don't know if I'm going to watch it tonight," she tells VICE on the phone after the first episode. "It's not the experience I had – they're just using our faces and making up stories." She feels that the direction the producers have taken gives no weight to the daily triumphs experienced on the peninsula. "We had so much fun, and so many amazing things happened, but they aren't showing any of it," she continues. "The houses, for example, have just become the backdrop to this reality TV show, but a lot of effort went into building them. We didn't just sit around arguing."

As for the accusations of sexism, she is equally dismissive. "That isn't true," she states confidently. "There was a divide between two friendship groups, and one of the groups was all men, but the other group was completely mixed. Nobody in there was sexist. That's just been made up."

Stephen and Jenna also feel that recent media appearances have been dominated by two participants, Katie and Anton. They feel that these high-profile opportunities to speak about the show – interviews which have almost entirely focused on the alleged culture of bullying and sexism – have allowed two personal perspectives to define the entire experience. "It's like they've been brainwashed," Jenna says. "They are talking like they were in that TV show, whereas that wasn't the experience we had."

When we posed these claims to Channel 4, they strongly refuted any suggestion that the show is not a fair and accurate account of what actually occurred. In a statement to VICE, they maintained that:

"The series follows actual events and we are satisfied that they are fair and accurate, in compliance with the Ofcom broadcasting code. Any claim that we have falsely constructed scenes or events is strongly denied; the different dynamics and attitudes between the contributors speak for themselves in the series." In response to the claim that media appearances have been unbalanced, Channel 4 say they "understand that some are disappointed not to do more".

Watching Eden – in particular episode two, which aired last night – it's clear that Stephen and a number of other male participants have questions to answer about their behaviour. No amount of editing can conjure comments about "girl jobs" and "boy jobs" into being, nor is it possible to ignore the incidents of dismissive and patronising attitudes towards female community members. While editing may have distorted the regularity of this behaviour, it doesn't provide an excuse for it.

When I ask Stephen if he feels he ever did overstep the line, he's adamant that he and many of the boys absolutely did. "One hundred percent," he admits. "I think anybody would find themselves in that situation, saying something and then thinking, 'That was a bit much, thank fuck I wasn't on television' – but I didn't have that last year. Sometimes your mouth moves quicker than your head."

That said, he strongly denies the suggestion that these episodes are an accurate portrayal of what happened. As he sees it, poor viewing figures forced the producers to manufacture drama in order to sell the programme back to Channel 4. "They turned it into wanky sensationalist crap because that's what people want to watch on television, apparently. I thought it was gonna be part of something special," he concludes.

Clearly hurtful comments were made, but what seems unclear is whether or not the experiment was defined by a climate of toxic masculinity in the way the final programme and promotional material suggests. Maybe, then, at best, Eden: Paradise Lost has proven an experiment in perspectives, and the limits of reality television. The contours of group dynamics are varied, and shift over time. In attempting to condense a year into nine episodes, and sell the experience to the public, the minutiae was always going to be over-simplified.

The "truth" will never be agreed on, but it's fair to say many of the most interesting lessons to come from Eden will have been provided long after filming ended. That a hidden-camera experiment has been dominated by social politics and fallouts rather than wilderness survival perhaps tells us as much about the nature and desires of audiences than it does about any of the people involved.

@a_n_g_u_s