Porn Generation - Ben Shapiro

Here is a summary of the table of contents:

• Title Page
• Dedication

Chapter 1: A Generation Lost

• Discusses the moral decay of the younger generation and the rise of moral relativism
• Uses the example of Charlotte Simmons to show how college campuses promote casual sex and hedonism
• Explains how society has redefined deviancy and stigmatized traditional morality

Chapter 2: Fun with Bananas

• Critiques the presentation of sex in the classroom and the promotion of abstinence
• Discusses the acceptance of sexual taboos like oral sex in popular culture
• Blames parents for failing to instill proper values in children

Chapter 3: Campus Carnality

• Depicts college life as focused on partying, drugs, alcohol and casual sex
• Says professors fail to provide moral guidance to students
• Notes that college has become a “strange new world” detached from ethical values

[Summaries of remaining chapters…]

Chapter 12: Roundtable

• Different voices discuss the issue of moral decline among youth and solutions to the problem

Acknowledgments Notes Index

The central arguments of the book appear to be:

1. Youth today have lost traditional moral and spiritual values, instead embracing moral relativism, radical feminism and “generational nihilism.”

2. Popular culture, media, and education promote sexuality and hedonism while stigmatizing traditional values.

3. Casual and promiscuous sex is common and even expected, especially on college campuses. This contributes to “moral decay.”

4. Parents and authority figures have failed to instill proper values in the younger generation.

5. Solutions to this “moral decline” include promoting abstinence, tradition morality and stronger authority.

• The author argues that abandoning traditional morality and standards in society has negative consequences. Promoting tolerance of immoral behavior as the norm is damaging.

• Subjectivism, nihilism, and hedonism have become common as a result of rejecting traditional morality. Life seems meaningless and purposeless without moral standards, so people turn to escapism and pleasure-seeking.

• There are high rates of drug use, social media/technology overuse, and casual sex among youth today. The media has promoted immorality but is now shocked by the consequences like rising teen promiscuity.

• Casual sex and loss of meaning in relationships leads to higher depression and suicide rates, especially among teenage girls. Both boys and girls suffer emotional damage from desensitization to sex in society.

• The author argues tolerance is a weak virtue that excuses immorality. Respect and empathy are better values. Promoting tolerance of immoral behavior is demeaning and damaging to society.

• In summary, the author believes abandoning traditional moral standards has had serious negative social consequences, though advocates of social liberalism claim immoral acts only impact individuals. The author argues immorality shapes society for the worse, even if impacts are not immediately obvious. Tolerance of immorality is not a virtue and should not be used to justify rejecting moral standards.

Here is a summary of the argument:

• The author argues that exposing children to explicit sex education and an oversexualized culture at a young age leads to the premature sexualization of children. Children are not capable of making fully rational and informed decisions about sex, even if they are given a lot of information about it.

• The author cites the example of “Katie,” a 22-year-old woman who received comprehensive sex education starting in 4th grade. While Katie feels she benefited from the education and supports premarital sex, the author argues that this kind of early and explicit education encourages children to become sexually active at younger ages in order to seem mature and socially accepted.

• The author argues that children lack the maturity and judgment to make good decisions about sex, even if they know a lot about it. Knowledge is not enough. Treating children as small adults and giving them information without the wisdom or maturity to use it properly does them a disservice.

• The author accuses “anticulturalists” and social liberals of overestimating children’s ability to make their own choices about sex. Children are not as rational, self-aware or autonomous as liberals suggest. While children today may know a lot about sex, they lack real knowledge and maturity.

• The author argues against comprehensive sex education, saying that it amounts to little more than “techno-fantasy.” Attempts to “deprogram” children of traditional values about sexuality and give them information alone does not lead to healthy outcomes. It leads to children who are unprepared to deal with real human relationships.

• In summary, the author argues for more traditional values and against the premature sexualization of children through early, explicit and comprehensive sex education and an oversexualized culture. The author believes this trend is damaging to children and society.

• Using fear and shame to convince young people to change their behavior is wrong and ineffective according to experts. However, for young children and teens who cannot fully comprehend the consequences of their actions, fear of negative outcomes can be an appropriate deterrent.

• Social liberals argue that teens will have sex eventually, so it’s better to educate them about it while they’re young. However, liberals avoid determinism in other areas like smoking, gun use, and other topics they morally oppose. They prefer that kids be sexualized younger so they become more tolerant of non-traditional lifestyles.

• Modern sex education aims to develop teen values and self-esteem but forces them into difficult choices before they are ready. Teens today face more choices and pressures than in the past. Some view abstinence itself as intolerant.

• Anecdotes show some sex ed programs promote risky behaviors, but the broader trend is that sex ed has shifted from teaching morality and public health to developing teen values and self-esteem. Early sex ed arose to curb STDs and teach morality but led to declining morality. Kinsey’s false reports of widespread deviancy and Planned Parenthood’s goal of helping teens achieve “sex satisfaction” before marriage contributed to this shift.

• By the 1960s, teen sex and pregnancies rose, leading to more public support for sex ed. But sex ed had become more about freeing teens of guilt over sex than curbing risks. Values and restraint were sidelined for a “vital life force.”

In summary, while some degree of fear may be appropriate for deterring very young individuals, modern sex education has moved too far toward value-neutrality and risk-acceptance in a misguided effort to alleviate guilt over teen sex. Teens are being given more choices before they can handle them and are taught to see sex as self-fulfillment rather than a serious decision requiring values and restraint.

• There has been a vast increase in unwed teenage pregnancy since the 1948 publication of Alfred Kinsey’s work on human sexuality. This coincided with the rise of “comprehensive” sex education that promoted permissiveness and denied traditional morality.

• Groups like SIECUS and Planned Parenthood promote radical notions of sexuality as a “fundamental right” and push for graphic sex education for children. They attack abstinence education as “repressive.”

• However, comprehensive sex education has failed to reduce rates of teen pregnancy, STDs, and promiscuity. Rates of all these have skyrocketed even as the government has spent billions promoting comprehensive sex ed. In contrast, abstinence education shows some promise in studies, but needs more research.

• Despite the failure of comprehensive sex ed, liberals continue to push for it while misleadingly rebranding it as “abstinence-plus.” Some like Hillary Clinton pay lip service to abstinence but still want to promote comprehensive sex ed.

• Bill Clinton’s impeachment scandal had a damaging impact on youth. His actions seemed to validate lying to get sexual favors and oral sex. A 2005 poll showed how these attitudes were affecting teens.

• In summary, comprehensive sex education and liberal notions of sexuality have corresponded with social decline. Abstinence education deserves a chance as an alternative, but faces an uphill battle against an entrenched liberal establishment.

The key ideas here are that comprehensive sex education and permissive attitudes have failed, abstinence education shows promise but needs support, and Bill Clinton’s actions contributed to the moral decline of youth. The author argues for a return to traditional morality to address issues like teen pregnancy and STDs.

• 17% of guys have lied to a friend about going further with a girl than they really did.
• 17% of guys have lied to a girl about being a virgin when they weren’t, so she wouldn’t worry about STDs.
• Bill Clinton contributed to the idea that oral sex isn’t “real” sex during the Lewinsky scandal. He claimed his statements that he didn’t have “sex” with Lewinsky were true based on his definition.
• Many in the media and public accepted this argument. This belief became popular, especially among youth.
• Experts argue this belief has led to an increase in oral sex, especially among teens, who don’t see it as “real” sex and so engage in it more casually.
• This is damaging because STDs can be transmitted through oral sex and teens feel pressured into acts they don’t want. It also undermines the morality of waiting for marriage.
• Surveys show many teens have engaged in oral sex, even some who pledge abstinence from “sex.” Parents are often unaware of their teens’ sexual activity.
• Social liberals and comprehensive sex ed aimed to take power from parents to teach values. They see it as promoting “tolerance.” Critics argue it sacrifices kids’ well-being for a utopian vision.

The key arguments are:

1. Bill Clinton’s arguments during the Lewinsky scandal helped popularize the belief that oral sex isn’t “real” sex.
2. This belief has led to negative consequences like higher STD rates, more casual sexual activity among teens, and the undermining of abstinence.
3. Comprehensive sex ed takes power from parents to instill values in favor of “tolerance.” Critics say this does more harm than good.

The key points in the summary are:

1. College campuses promote a culture of “tolerance” and moral relativism that leads students to believe “whatever feels good, do it.” This creates a “values vacuum” that is filled by the universities’ promotion of narcissism and hedonism.

2. Parents are cut out of the guidance process, leaving students to rely on administrators, professors, and peers for values and life lessons. These sources often promote risky and irresponsible behavior.

3. Casual, emotionless, and risky sex is common and even celebrated on college campuses. Students frequently engage in anonymous sex and share stories of sexual escapades without moral judgment.

4. The culture of permissiveness is not limited to stereotypically “liberal” campuses or students. Even at elite, prestigious schools and among students of various political persuasions, the hookup culture reigns supreme.

5. Universities undermine traditional sources of authority and guidance, like parents and religion, leaving students adrift in a sea of moral relativism where any behavior can be justified. This contributes to poor life choices and a lack of personal responsibility or consequences.

In summary, the author argues that colleges promote a hyper-tolerant culture where any and all sexual behavior is accepted and even encouraged. By undermining traditional morality and sources of guidance, universities leave students without a moral compass, often leading to risky, irresponsible, and unhealthy life choices centered around casual and emotionless sex.

• The article describes the hookup culture prevalent in college dorms today. Students frequently have casual sexual encounters and relationships with dorm-mates, a practice known as “dormcest.”

• Coed dorms and shared bathrooms reduce privacy and facilitate these encounters. Condoms and contraceptives are readily available in dorms. Some dorms even have coed rooms where students of opposite genders share living space.

• The article argues that universities have abdicated their responsibility to provide moral guidance to students. Instead, universities claim they are simply responding to student demands for more sexual freedom and “tolerance.” However, this tolerance does not seem to extend to traditional moral views.

• Universities have instituted vague speech codes that can be used to restrict speech that offends certain groups. They seem to promote a “right not to be offended.” The article suggests these speech codes are a way for universities to replace parental authority and impose their own values on students.

• In summary, the article portrays colleges as facilitating a hypersexualized culture while restricting free expression and moral views that contradict their own social liberalism. The universities have taken over parental roles but promote moral relativism rather than objective values.

• College administrators and professors today actively promote sexual experimentation and licentious behavior. They have fully embraced the radical student movements of the 1960s that rebelled against rules and authority.

• Many college professors and administrators today were themselves part of those radical student movements in the 1960s. They have not moderated their views. Their goal, like the Students for a Democratic Society in 1962, is for students to find personal meaning and authenticity, which translates into irresponsible behavior with no rules or limits.

• Colleges introduce students to this culture of sexual license immediately during freshman orientation. They promote resources for “safe sex” and make light of sexual experimentation.

• Many colleges offer courses on pornography and radical theories like queer theory, postmodernism, and radical feminism. These courses are meant to breakdown traditional morality and values. They treat pornography and deviant sexual behaviors as normal and acceptable.

• The university environment, including dorm life, campus life, and the classroom, constantly exposes students to sex and pressure them into the culture of casual sex and hookups. This is very damaging, especially for young women, but for young men as well.

• For young men, college becomes all about taking advantage of the availability of casual sex. They view women primarily as sex objects. Relationships are secondary to the pursuit of physical pleasures.

• For young women, the pressure to fit in and go along with this culture often comes at the expense of their emotional and psychological well-being. While some claim to support sexual experimentation, they also recognize how damaging it can be.

• This culture substitutes casual physical intimacy for real emotional and intellectual relationships. It leads to a lack of commitment and using others merely for selfish pleasure and gain.

• The long-term consequences of this culture are disturbing for relationships and society. But colleges continue to actively promote this culture without limits.

• The 2003 MTV Video Music Awards featured a raunchy performance by Madonna, Britney Spears, and Christina Aguilera that promoted lesbian themes and behavior to young audiences.

• The performance was a “passing of the torch” from Madonna, who pioneered a hyper-sexualized pop persona, to younger pop stars like Spears and Aguilera.

• Madonna has been a controversial figure but is viewed as a feminist icon and trailblazer by some. She rejects traditional morality and promotes sexual liberation and amorality.

• Madonna’s 1984 performance at the MTV VMAs, where she sang “Like a Virgin” while dressed provocatively, launched her to stardom. Her message was that women could be openly sexual and still be empowered.

• The pop music industry now routinely sexualizes teenage girl performers, starting them out as innocent and then transitioning them to highly sexualized images to match their fan base. This teaches young girls that their worth and identity are tied to their sexuality.

• Events like the 2003 VMA performance have a huge influence on the behaviors and identities of teenage girls who look up to pop stars as role models. The constant promotion of promiscuity and bisexuality in pop culture is detrimental to young women.

• The author argues this amounts to a form of “spiritual and emotional child sacrifice” that creates “countless and very real Charlotte Simmons clones.” The permissive attitudes of the 1960s generation have allowed this to happen.

The key arguments and assertions in the passage are that pop culture, especially the music industry, routinely promotes unhealthy attitudes about sex, relationships, and identity to young audiences, and this has particularly damaging effects on teenage girls. The tolerance of permissive and amoral values by older generations has enabled this.

• Madonna popularized the virgin/whore dichotomy in pop music and shaped the careers of many artists after her, including Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera.

• Madonna used religious and moral imagery to contrast with her open sexuality. She promoted moral relativism and a “live and let live” philosophy where each person determines their own morality.

• Christina Aguilera followed a similar path as Madonna, initially presenting herself as a wholesome role model but then exploiting her sexuality to gain fame and sell records.

• Aguilera’s hit song “Genie in a Bottle” was controversial for its sexual themes but Aguilera defended it as being about female empowerment. She accused critics of having a double standard compared to male artists like *NSYNC.

• Aguilera fully shed her wholesome image with her album Stripped and songs like “Dirrty.” The music video for “Dirrty” was banned in some countries for being too raunchy.

• Aguilera descended into a philosophy of hedonism and narcissism, saying she preferred pain over prettiness and wanted to show her “true colors.” Her words reflect inner turmoil and depression.

• In summary, Aguilera followed the model of Madonna by initially marketing a virginal image and then dramatically flipping to a hyper-sexualized one to gain fame and push moral relativism. But this philosophy seemed to leave her unfulfilled and struggling inwardly.

Moral freedom and “empowerment”:

• Pop stars like Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera pushed the boundaries of sexuality and morality in their music, performances, and public images. They transitioned quickly from portraying a “virginal” image to a highly sexualized one, following in the footsteps of Madonna.

• Their lyrics, music videos, and public statements promoted a message of moral relativism, “empowerment” through sexuality, and rejection of traditional values. They suggested that empowerment means doing “whatever you want” without regard for consequences or morality.

• Their large teen girl fanbases were strongly influenced by this message. The pop stars were role models who shaped fashion, behavior, and attitudes of young fans. However, Spears and Aguilera later disavowed being role models even as they continued to heavily influence youth culture.

• Alternative rock, targeting older teens and young adults, promoted an even more jaded and nihilistic message. Bands like Nirvana glorified apathy, despair, moral relativism, and the rejection of meaning or purpose. Their music suggested life has no meaning, morality is subjective, and the past is a “record of failure.”

• The pop and rock music of the era promoted the idea that “empowerment” means complete moral and existential freedom without responsibility. This message had a major influence on youth culture and attitudes.

The summary outlines how certain music genres and stars promoted a morally relativistic message of “empowerment” that actually meant freedom from moral constraints or responsibility. This message was highly influential, especially on youth, though the musicians themselves often disavowed being role models. The end result was the promotion of more jaded, nihilistic, and amoral attitudes, especially among younger audiences.

• Kurt Cobain was disillusioned with his generation’s apathy and nihilism. He committed suicide in 1994.

• Nirvana and similar grunge bands promoted a dark, angsty tone that became mainstream. Heavy metal and goth bands took this further, promoting satanic and immoral themes.

• Ozzy Osbourne and similar rock stars promoted immorality and paganism. Osbourne became mainstream and even appeared at the White House.

• Marilyn Manson is openly satanic and immoral. His music promotes sex, drugs, and degradation.

• The average teen listens to thousands of hours of this music, contributing to their feelings of abandonment and meaninglessness.

• The music industry, especially pop music, relies heavily on sex to sell. This exploits both audiences and sometimes the artists themselves.

• The Russian pop group t.A.T.u pretended to be lesbian teens to gain fame, then later regretted it. They promoted immorality to young girls.

• Pop stars like Britney Spears acknowledge they promote a “fantasy world.” Parents should guide their children to understand this.

• John Kerry and others take a politically correct view that rap music should not be censored, even when it promotes immorality. Kerry tried to pander to black voters by expressing interest in rap.

• Rap music frequently promotes “depravity,” violence, drugs, and the degradation of women.

The summary presents the author’s view that much popular music today, especially genres like rock, metal, goth, and rap, promote immorality, nihilism, and the degradation of society. The author argues this music has negatively influenced youth and culture.

The author argues that rap music, especially gangsta rap, has little artistic merit and a predominantly negative social influence. The author criticizes Senator John Kerry and others for portraying rap as an important contribution of black culture to society. The author says this view implicitly accepts the stereotype that violence and misogyny are integral parts of black culture.

The author argues that the bulk of rap music promotes negative values, demeaning women, glorifying criminal behavior, and contributing to the negative stereotyping of black males. The author cites vulgar and misogynistic lyrics from popular rap songs as evidence. The author argues that the rap culture has been adopted by youth of all races and has become a corrupting influence.

The author notes that many key figures in rap have connections to criminal behavior, violence, gangs, and the drug culture. The author argues that rap celebrates negative stereotypes of black males as thugs and criminals. The author says rap is more suited to prison culture than youth culture. The author criticizes public figures like Snoop Dogg, Tupac Shakur, Notorious B.I.G., Suge Knight, and Sean Combs for their connections to violence, crime, drugs, and the degradation of women.

In summary, the author’s central arguments are that rap music generally has little artistic value, it promotes negative values and stereotypes, it celebrates criminality, and it has become a corrupting influence on youth. The author argues against portraying rap as an important or positive contribution of black culture. The author says rap’s negative qualities outweigh any possible benefits.

.26

• Popular dead rappers like Tupac are often glorified and celebrated, despite their criminal histories and thug personas. Their popularity shows the degradation of culture.

• Rap music is inextricably linked to criminal violence and thuggery. Rappers promote a thug lifestyle and image to youth.

• Rap music is deeply misogynistic, promoting the degradation and objectification of women. Women are portrayed as sex objects and prostitutes. The most popular rappers are misogynists.

• The misogyny and thuggery of rap music has severely damaging effects on youth culture. It teaches boys to mistreat women and girls to see themselves as sex objects.

• The rap industry claims the market demands such content, but that does not absolve them of moral responsibility. They could choose to promote more positive messages.

• White suburban youth, known as “wiggers,” have adopted the gangsta lifestyle and culture promoted by rap music. They imitate rap styles and lingo to seem cool, despite having no real connection to that culture.

• White kids are drawn to rap because they see black culture as “cool” and want to rebel against their parents’ culture. Rap serves as a rejection of traditional white middle class values.

• Multiculturalism, unlike the melting pot, promotes maintaining separate cultural identities rather than blending into a common culture. This has allowed “wiggers” to embrace rap culture as their own.

In summary, the passage argues that rap music promotes a degenerate culture focused on thuggery, misogyny, and rebellion against traditional values. This culture has spread beyond the black community into white suburban youth, who adopt an inauthentic “gangsta” persona to seem rebellious and multicultural. The effects of this trend are seen as highly damaging to society.

Here are the summaries of the responses:

1. The girl who submitted this question seems to be quite young, maybe in her early teens. The most appropriate response would be for her to speak with her parents and consider ending this unhealthy relationship. A healthy relationship at that age should involve showing basic signs of affection.

2. This girl seems to also be quite young, likely in her teens. The most appropriate response would be for her to speak to her parents, a counselor, or a support group about her feelings. Her sexuality and relationships at that age should be guided and discussed with responsible adults. Encouraging her to pursue a romantic relationship with her friend could be inappropriate and confusing for both of them.

3. This girl seems quite young, probably in her early teens. The most appropriate response would be for her parents to closely monitor her internet usage and set strict limits. Viewing pornography at that age can be very damaging to healthy psychological and social development. Her internet usage and relationships should be guided by her parents.

In summary, the most appropriate responses for these young girls would be to recommend speaking with and seeking guidance from responsible adults like parents, counselors and support groups. At their age, sexuality, relationships and internet usage should be monitored and discussed with adults to promote healthy development. Simply encouraging the behaviors or not providing guidance could be irresponsible and in some cases illegal.

The key factor in all these scenarios is the age and maturity level of the girls. Responsible guidance from adults is critical for teens and young girls to develop in a healthy way.

The passage discusses how popular teen magazines targeted at young girls contain a lot of sexual content and advice, essentially functioning as “training manuals for sex.” These magazines receive many letters from readers as young as 14 asking questions about sex, relationships, birth control, and related topics. In response, the magazines provide information about sexuality, relationships, and promote the idea that “everyone else is doing it.”

The author provides many examples from teen magazines like YM, Seventeen, Cosmo Girl, and others. These magazines frequently have cover stories and articles about kissing, having sex for the first time, birth control options, and “hooking up.” They also contain very graphic images, articles promoting vaginal self-love or naming genitalia, and sections where teen boys are rated and objectified based on their looks.

The author argues these magazines encourage young girls to focus on their appearance and sexuality to attract boys, rather than other aspects of their development. They portray sex and relationships as very casual, and cut parents out of discussions about these topics with their kids. Overall, the passage is very critical of teen magazines and their sexualized content aimed at minors.

The optional responses summarize this perspective in different ways:

A) Focuses on the need for girls to focus on their studies and activities rather than boys, according to the author. B) Notes that while feelings are natural, we should aim to control inappropriate thoughts and actions. C) Disagrees with the author and suggests such thoughts are normal and harmless. D) Is strongly critical, suggesting the sexual content in these magazines is highly inappropriate and the parents who buy them for their kids share blame.

So in summary, the key perspectives are: these magazines sexualize teens, encourage casual sex, cut out parents, and urge changes are needed; or that sexuality in media aimed at teens is normal and harmless. The optional responses reflect these differing views.

• Teen magazines promote dating and sexuality to teenagers by undermining parental authority and encouraging risky behavior. They give advice to teenagers on how to manipulate their parents into allowing them to date and be more physically intimate.

• Teen magazines promote celebrity worship and objectification. They portray celebrities, especially young female celebrities, as role models for teens. However, these celebrities often promote unhealthy values and behaviors. The magazines also frequently publish revealing photos of male celebrities, objectifying them. They also spread gossip and drama about celebrities’ personal lives, even though celebrities often complain about lack of privacy.

• Teen magazines promote liberal social values by downplaying or distorting religious and traditional values. They present a variety of secular, pagan and non-traditional values as equally valid as mainstream religious values. They also frequently promote political causes like environmentalism, diversity and feminism. However, their version of “girl power” often just means being sexually attractive and appealing to boys.

• In general, teen magazines supplant the role of parents and promote values and behaviors that are not necessarily healthy or age-appropriate for teenagers. Although they claim to empower girls, they often just push unrealistic beauty standards, focus on relationships and dating, and present celebrities as role models. They encourage teens to grow up too quickly in terms of relationships and sexuality.

The key points are that teen magazines undermine parents, push unhealthy values, promote risky behaviors, objectify celebrities, and present a distorted view of empowerment for teen girls. Although they claim to be harmless entertainment, the messages they send to impressionable teenagers can be problematic.

Here is a summary of the advice given in teen magazines and advice columns:

• Teen magazines promote moral relativism by presenting many different, and often contradictory, belief systems as equally valid. They normalize fringe belief systems like Wicca while portraying mainstream religions like Christianity in a negative light.

• Teen magazines give inappropriate advice about sexuality, relationships and social activism. They encourage minor girls to access birth control and abortion without parental consent. They promote fringe causes like radical environmentalism, gay activism and “hip hop activism.”

• Advice columns like Dear Abby promote sexual liberalism and give simplistic advice. They frequently refer readers to liberal advocacy groups and counseling. They normalize deviant behaviors and fringe lifestyles.

• The advice given in these publications is inappropriate for children and can be actively harmful. Parents should supervise what their kids read and provide guidance to counteract harmful messages.

In summary, teen magazines and advice columns promote moral relativism, sexual liberalism and fringe ideologies that are inappropriate and potentially harmful for children and teenagers. Parents need to pay close attention to the messages their kids receive from media and offer guidance to help them develop healthy values.

• Janet Jackson’s breast exposure at the Super Bowl caused outrage and led the FCC to crack down on TV indecency.
• However, the Super Bowl also featured highly sexualized commercials, including a raunchy Budweiser ad about a dog biting a man’s genitals.
• While social conservatives were angered by Jackson’s nudity, raunchy commercials and general oversexualization in media often go unnoticed or unprotested.
• The author argues this is because oversexualization, especially the objectification and commodification of sex, has become so normalized and mainstreamed that most don’t even recognize it.

The key points are:

1. There are double standards in how we react to sexuality in media, with more outrage over female nudity than over the general raunchy and crude sexualization that pervades media.

2. Oversexualization and the objectification of sex have become so mainstream and normalized that they often go unnoticed or unchallenged.

3. This is problematic because it contributes to the commodification of sex and the objectification of bodies, especially women’s bodies.

The author’s main argument seems to be that we need to pay more attention to the rampant oversexualization in our culture, not just occasional incidents of nudity or indecency. Simply put, crude objectification and the treatment of sex as a commodity have become far too mainstream and normalized.

• Sex in advertising has been present for decades but has escalated in explicitness over time. In the early 20th century, it was more subtle but increased after the sexual revolution of the 1960s. Studies show a significant increase in sexual content in ads from the mid-1980s to 1990s.

• Sexual advertising overwhelmingly targets youth and has for decades. An early example was Brooke Shields in Calvin Klein jeans ads in 1981. Brands like Abercrombie & Fitch are notorious for their sexually explicit marketing to teens and young adults. Their catalogues and ads have featured nudity, pornography, and inappropriate content. They aim for an “edgy” image that pushes taboos.

• A&F in particular has been repeatedly criticized for their sexually charged marketing to minors. Their catalogues have included nudity, advice about breaking religious vows and pursuing casual sex, and interviews with porn stars. Politicians and advocacy groups have objected to their tactics, but A&F has largely refused to change. They also market a gay lifestyle and sexuality to appeal to some young customers.

• Other brands like FCUK (French Connection UK) have used gimmicks implying obscene words to market an edgy image to young people. This strategy led to big profits for the company.

• In summary, many fashion and apparel brands have relied on shock value and taboo content, especially related to sexuality, to market to youth and cultivate an edgy image. Critics argue this goes too far, especially when marketing to minors, but companies are reluctant to change tactics that have proven profitable.

• Clever marketing executives came up with provocative slogans and ads for French Connection UK (FCUK) to garner attention, like “Fcuk like a bunny” and “Fcuk for England.”

• FCUK ran ads in Times Square with mixed up phrases like “i you want” and “night all long” to match their brand name.

• FCUK ran controversial ads targeting different groups, including one insulting the U.S. that said “brave but not free.”

• A columnist encouraged readers to boycott FCUK for ads implying their clothes would help you “get laid.” FCUK responded with ads specifically promoting that message.

• FCUK’s goal was to get noticed and have a single message. Their ads successfully garnered attention, though the content was considered obscene 30 years ago.

• Marketers target youth because they spend a lot of money, especially “guilt money” from parents, totaling over $100 billion in 2002. Youth marketing focuses on sexuality and persuading spending.

• Fast food chain Hardee’s ran provocative ads for their “Monster Thickburger” featuring models in sexual positions and acts to equate their product with sex.

• Marketers sell perceptions of sex and products through provocative ads, often just associating the two. Victoria’s Secret sells their models and brand, not just the lingerie.

• Some ads, like Herbal Essences shampoo, equate using a product with a sexual experience or orgasm to sell it.

• Miller Lite and Coors ran ads featuring fighting or flirting lesbian twins or sisters to appeal to male fantasies and sell their beer. The ads were very popular, especially among young men.

• The summary shows examples of how sex is used in marketing and advertising to sell products by creating associations, perceptions, and experiences. The ads prey on fantasies and push the envelope of appropriateness to garner attention and drive sales.

• Advertising that overly sexualizes women can have damaging psychological and cultural effects, especially on young girls. It promotes unrealistic body image ideals and contributes to low self-esteem.

• The “pornification” of culture and advertising has also changed male beauty standards to emphasize qualities like six-pack abs, hairlessness, and youth. This can damage men’s self-image as well.

• The use of overtly sexual images in advertising demeans and trivializes human sexuality by treating it as merely a tool for selling products. It reduces meaningful human relationships to fleeting physical or material connections.

• Celebrities like Paris Hilton and Jenna Jameson who are famous primarily for their sexuality and promiscuity are employed in major advertising campaigns to sell products, further mainstreaming pornography and “porn culture.”

• Advertising works by selling consumers aspirational lifestyle fantasies and connecting products to those fantasies. The sexy, promiscuous lifestyles portrayed in much modern advertising have had damaging unintended consequences.

• Popular media, especially MTV’s risque programming, has strongly influenced youth culture by glorifying partying, casual sex, and material excess. Many young people model their behavior after what they see on shows like Jersey Shore.

• In summary, the increasing sexualization of media and culture, especially advertising, risks compromising timeless values surrounding love, relationships, self-worth, and human dignity. Meaningful connections are replaced with superficial titillation and instant gratification.

• MTV targets teenagers and shapes their values and behavior. Studies show most teens watch MTV.

• MTV glorifies stupid, vulgar, and immoral behavior. Shows like Beavis and Butthead and The Real World promote these values.

• MTV pushes a materialistic and physical-focused worldview. Shows like My Super Sweet 16, MTV Cribs, and Pimp My Ride promote this.

• MTV’s programming has become increasingly sexualized over time. Studies found nearly 20 sexual references per hour on average. Shows like The Real World and Wanna Come In? aim to glorify and encourage casual sex.

• MTV’s values spread to other channels under the same company like MTV2, Comedy Central, TV Land, VH1, Spike TV, and Nickelodeon. These channels target various demographics but promote similar values.

• Nickelodeon targets children and teens and features edgy shows and teen stars to make kids into cultural icons. Kids today watch lots of TV, allowing these messages to strongly influence them.

• Campaigns like P. Diddy’s “Vote or Die” use extreme measures to reach apathetic teens. Producers claim they have to be edgy to reach today’s “smarter” teens, but really teens today are more jaded due to these messages.

• Pay cable channels like HBO and Showtime are even more extreme. Shows like Sex and the City have shaped young women’s values.

In summary, MTV and related media target impressionable youth and spread a toxic set of values focused on sex, drugs, partying, and materialism. They make teens into cultural icons to further spread these values and make them seem cool and rebellious. The result is a generation disconnected from stable values and focused on mindless self-indulgence.

• The sitcom Friends, which aired for 10 seasons between 1994 and 2004, promoted a liberal agenda regarding sex and relationships.

• The show depicted casual sex with no consequences and implied that promiscuity was normal and acceptable. Over the course of the show, the character Rachel had 20 sexual partners.

• The show normalized single motherhood. When Rachel got pregnant after a one-night stand, it was portrayed as uncontroversial. The babies born on the show, including Ross’s baby and Phoebe’s triplets, were largely ignored and disappeared from the show so as not to slow down the plot.

• The show glorified homosexuality. Ross’s ex-wife left him for another woman, and the show featured the first lesbian “wedding” in a primetime sitcom. Characters spoke positively about same-sex relationships and parenting.

• Despite the show’s mature content, it was immensely popular among teenagers and young adults, who saw the characters as role models. Critics argued the show promoted “empty-headedness” and was a bad influence, especially on youth.

• The show reflected the increasing sexualization and social liberalization of culture in the 1990s. Along with shows like Sex and the City, it pushed the boundaries of explicit content on television and shaped social attitudes.

In summary, Friends was a pop cultural phenomenon that promoted a permissive and liberal vision of sex, relationships and society. It reflected and influenced broader social changes in how sexuality and social issues were portrayed and perceived.

• Friends became enormously popular and influential, attracting young viewers coveted by advertisers. It promoted an extended adolescence and carefree lifestyle.

• Will & Grace was also very popular and pushed social liberalism even further, featuring openly gay main characters and storylines promoting gay relationships and parenting. Critics saw it as propaganda promoting non-traditional values.

• Most major networks now air sitcoms and dramas filled with sexual innuendo and content, and some openly mock traditional values and standards of decency. Vulgarity and racy content are used to gain ratings and push boundaries.

• Teen dramas like Beverly Hills, 90210 and The O.C. have been major hits, filled with depictions of teen sex, partying and angst. They’ve been criticized for their risque content and values. Producers will often increase sexual or taboo content to boost sagging ratings.

• There is a reluctance to criticize popular shows and characters, even when they promote questionable values or behavior. If a character is funny and likable, their behavior is harder to condemn. This makes it difficult for parents to set standards.

• Studies show significant increases in sexual content on television, especially during early primetime hours once designated as “family viewing.” Networks compete to push boundaries and gain ratings.

• Television’s increasing vulgarity and relativism have been major influences on the “porn generation” and the mainstreaming of more permissive attitudes. There are rarely consequences shown for risque behavior on TV, and traditional values are frequently mocked.

That covers the key points and arguments the author is making about the influence of suggestive and morally relativistic television content on culture and values. Please let me know if you would like me to explain or expand on any part of the summary.

• The proliferation of cable channels has made it difficult for parents to monitor what their teens are watching. Many teens now have TVs in their bedrooms and watch shows with lots of sex and sexuality like 90210, Dawson’s Creek, and The O.C.

• These shows promote the idea that virginity is for “losers,” glorify casual sex, and normalize homosexuality and experimentation. They depict an unrealistic version of teen life where there are no consequences for one’s actions.

• In 1992, Vice President Dan Quayle criticized the show Murphy Brown for promoting single motherhood and the idea that fathers are unimportant. He was roundly criticized for this view, even though surveys showed Hollywood was out of step with mainstream American values on issues like adultery, religion, and homosexuality.

• Even Murphy Brown’s actress Candice Bergen later admitted Quayle had a point about the importance of family values. TV has only gotten more sexualized since then in a “race to the bottom for ratings.”

• Research shows teens who watch more sex on TV are more likely to start having sex earlier and engage in riskier sexual behavior. TV promotes the idea that casual sex has no consequences. Although some shows depict safe sex, most don’t—only 15% show negative consequences of sex or promote abstinence or safe sex.

• With hundreds of channels, teens feel obligated to be constantly watching TV and see the unrealistic lives of TV characters as more fulfilling than their own. Two-thirds of teens have a TV in their bedroom, promoting constant viewing.

• In summary, the proliferation of risque teen TV shows is having a damaging impact on teens by promoting risky sexual behavior and a nihilistic worldview. Although cultural critics argue restricting such shows inhibits free speech, such shows are not socially responsible. Parents struggle to monitor teen TV viewing and counteract its negative influences.

• Anne Hathaway started out starring in family-friendly films but wanted to shed her wholesome image, so she did a film called Havoc that included nudity and sex scenes.

• There has been an explosion of overly sexual content in Hollywood films over the past decade. This content often also promotes moral relativism.

• Classic Hollywood films were made under the restrictive Hays Code, which banned explicit sexual content and profanity. The code encouraged subtlety and upheld moral standards.

• The Hays Code was imposed voluntarily by film studios in response to public outcry. It was implemented in 1934 after Mae West’s racy films caused controversy. It helped revive the struggling film industry during the Great Depression.

• Many modern critics argue that the Hays Code forced filmmakers to be more artistic and subtle. Films today would benefit from more restrictions.

• The current MPAA rating system is very loose. The PG and PG-13 ratings allow a lot of inappropriate content. The ratings are decided by a secret panel with no qualifications. The system is subjective and too permissive.

• There are calls to bring back an updated version of the Hays Code to encourage more morality and subtlety in films. The current system promotes moral relativism, especially in films targeting youth.

The Hays Code was introduced in 1930 to regulate moral standards for motion pictures in the U.S. film industry. It prohibited profanity, nudity, drug use, sexual perversion, white slavery, miscegenation, sex hygiene and venereal diseases. After several decades, the standards of the MPAA rating system have declined, allowing more profanity, violence and sexuality in films.

A 1997 study found objectionable content increased in movies from 1992 to 2003. Movies were more likely to get lower age ratings if they contained innuendo and sensuality rather than outright sex and nudity. Film critics argue the rating system is oppressive but admit it allows vulgar and tawdry content.

Hollywood uses sex and nudity to sell tickets, not for artistic merit. Many actresses use nudity to advance their careers, like Halle Berry. Her career took off after she did a gratuitous topless scene in the 2001 flop “Swordfish.” The producer and others involved did not think the scene was necessary but Berry agreed to do it for a salary bump. She claimed it was to show she was a serious actress, not just a pretty face.

Berry’s first nude scene led to more, like an oral sex scene in “Monster’s Ball” (2001) which critics called “brave.” Her performance earned acclaim and she won an Oscar. The example shows how actresses today think they must do nude and sex scenes to be taken seriously and advance their careers. The acceptability of nudity and sexuality in films has clearly declined since the adoption of the Hays Code.

In summary, the Hays Code established moral guidelines for movies that have eroded over time. Today, gratuitous nudity, profanity and sex are commonly used in films and even earn actresses critical acclaim and career success. The example of Halle Berry’s career shows how standards have declined in just a few decades.

• Halle Berry’s Oscar win in 2002 was seen as long overdue by many, given her previous mediocre roles. In her acceptance speech, she claimed she had overcome huge obstacles as a “woman of color” to reach that point. Some criticized this as an overstatement.

• Many actresses have gone from more wholesome roles to much racier, nude ones in an attempt to be seen as more serious, “artistic” performers. Examples include Jamie Lee Curtis, Kim Basinger, Gwyneth Paltrow, and Jennifer Connelly. Liv Tyler and others promoted more risque films in a sexually suggestive way.

• Major actresses like Nicole Kidman, Julianne Moore, Kate Winslet, and Chloe Sevigny frequently appear nude or in sex scenes in their films. Some see this as necessary for their art; others see it as a way for directors and actresses to make money and gain critical acclaim. There is little distinction now between mainstream actresses and softcore pornography.

• Former Hollywood power broker Michael Ovitz claimed there was a “gay mafia” in Hollywood that orchestrated his downfall. Though he quickly retracted this, many believed there was truth to the idea of a powerful group of gay executives and allies. The term “gay mafia” or “velvet mafia” was already in use.

• While there may not be an organized “gay mafia,” Hollywood is disproportionately run by gay executives and promotes a liberal, pro-gay agenda. This explains why Hollywood has been at the forefront of promoting gay normalization and acceptance.

The summary outlines the major ideas and examples discussed in the passage on actresses using sexuality and nudity to gain power and acclaim in Hollywood, the notion of a “gay mafia” controlling Hollywood, and the promotion of liberal values by the entertainment industry. The key people, events, and concepts are captured for a high-level sense of the themes.

• Hollywood has increasingly promoted a “metrosexual” and feminized standard of male attractiveness and sexuality. Traditional masculinity is viewed as outdated.

• Gay actors and directors have strongly influenced Hollywood’s standards of male beauty and sexuality. Mainstream films increasingly feature homosexual content and relationships. Many major actors play homosexual roles to advance their careers.

• Films frequently portray homosexual relationships and behavior in a normalized and positive light. This has the effect of desensitizing audiences and promoting an amoral perspective.

• Lesbian content and relationships have become extremely popular in mainstream films. This is largely aimed at titillating male audiences, though some films promote the normalization of lesbianism.

• A variety of films feature lesbian relationships, sex, and experimentation. This includes “soft-core pornography” films, films portraying lesbian experimentation among young women, and films normalizing lesbian relationships.

• Hollywood has enormous influence as a propaganda medium. It can effectively promote certain social causes and shape attitudes even when those causes lack widespread public support. Promoting homosexuality and amorality are examples.

• In summary, Hollywood has been instrumental in promoting changing social values regarding sexuality, masculinity, femininity, and morality. It has sought to normalize homosexuality and depict traditional values as intolerant or close-minded. Its influence in this regard is far-reaching.

• Many popular mainstream movies from the late 1990s and early 2000s featured gay and lesbian characters or themes, and these films were frequently nominated for or won major awards like the Oscars. The author sees this as evidence that Hollywood is actively promoting homosexuality and legitimizing it.

• The author believes that actresses in particular often portray bisexuality or lesbianism, not because they are actually bisexual or lesbian but because it helps advance their careers. The author sees this as Hollywood pushing an agenda of sexual promiscuity and moral relativism.

• The author argues that while these types of movies are not usually commercially successful, Hollywood continues making them to please critics and to gradually influence audiences, especially younger audiences, to become more accepting of homosexuality. The author sees this as undermining traditional Judeo-Christian moral values.

• The author believes that exposure to sexuality and homosexuality in movies and TV has a direct influence on the sexual experimentation and activity of teenagers. The author sees a correlation between the increase in gay characters and themes in entertainment media and the increase in support for gay rights among younger generations.

• The author argues that by depicting homosexuality as normal and morally equivalent to heterosexuality, Hollywood is attempting to force society to accept homosexuality. The author sees this as particularly damaging to the development of sexuality in teenagers who are first exploring relationships and attraction.

• The author believes that around 1968, moral standards disappeared from Hollywood films. Where films used to portray clear good and evil and celebrate virtue, now moral relativism and amorality rule Hollywood. The author sees this as leading to the mainstreaming of ideas and behaviors that undermine traditional values.

• In summary, the author has a strongly negative view of how homosexuality and sexuality are depicted in mainstream Hollywood films, especially those aimed at younger audiences. The author believes this is part of a deliberate agenda to spread moral relativism and normalize homosexuality, which the author sees as damaging to society and family values.

• The film industry once aimed to uphold moral standards and enrich society through movies. This goal was sacrificed in favor of catering to audiences’ baser interests.

• Ted Bundy claimed that exposure to pornography as a child fueled his later crimes. He described becoming addicted to increasingly graphic and violent pornography, which eventually led him to act out violent sexual fantasies.

• Pornography advocates argue that censorship threatens civil liberties and that pornography prevents sex crimes. However, studies show links between pornography and criminal behavior. Exposure to pornography is addictive and can desensitize people to violence and harm others.

• Pornography addiction works similarly to drug addiction by releasing chemicals in the brain that change its structure. With repeated use, viewers come to need more extreme content to achieve the same effect.

• While occasional viewing of soft-core pornography is unlikely to lead to criminal behavior, the addictive nature of pornography means that for some, it can be a gateway to increasingly deviant and dangerous content and behavior.

The key points are that pornography can be addictive and fuel unhealthy interests and behavior, particularly when viewers become desensitized and seek out increasingly extreme content. However, not all viewers will progress to this level or act violently. Moderation and the type of content are factors in the effect pornography has on individuals and society.

• The author discusses the views of talk show host Jaz McKay, who advocates for pornography and worked in the adult entertainment industry for years.

• McKay believes pornography is harmless. He cites studies showing no proven harm and says sexual experimentation can be good. He claims swinging and pornography did not lead to the end of his first marriage.

• McKay owns hundreds of pornographic films and once produced his own amateur pornography. He does not believe pornography exploits women, citing statistics showing many women rent or view pornography. He dismisses the idea that pornography promotes a skewed male patriarchal view.

• The author notes the feminist movement has conflicting views on pornography. Some see it as pure exploitation of women while others view the rise of pornography made for and by women as women embracing their sexuality. The author believes pornography is exploitative for other reasons.

• Overall, the summary conveys McKay’s libertarian views in support of pornography and his claims that it is a victimless activity, as well as the author’s suggestion that pornography can still be exploitative. The summary touches on conflicting feminist perspectives on pornography and women’s participation in the adult entertainment industry.

• Sarah, a former University of Washington student, worked as a stripper. She felt objectified in her work but justified it by getting paid. Her boyfriend appreciated watching her strip but also found it dehumanizing.

• Jaz, who has worked in the adult entertainment industry, believes that exposure to pornography in moderation is not damaging, especially for youth who are already curious. However, he acknowledges the internet needs more regulation.

• Jaz says most women in the adult entertainment industry are drawn by the money and see it as a job. Porn actors enjoy their work. The industry targets college-aged individuals, as older actors are seen as unattractive.

• The internet has enabled the proliferation of pornography. There are millions of pornographic websites and billions of daily pornographic emails. The internet also makes pornography easily accessible, even to children.

• “Mousetrapping” refers to the practice of bombarding people with popup ads for porn sites once they click into a porn site, making it difficult to exit.

• The porn industry generates billions of dollars in revenue, more than major sports leagues and TV networks. Online pornography alone generates over $1 billion. The child pornography industry generates $3 billion.

• Popular genres of internet pornography include “teen,” “schoolgirl,” “college roommate,” “virgin,” and “incestuous” pornography. This shows the industry pushes the sexualization of teens and young women.

• In summary, the internet has enabled a massive porn industry that targets youth and profits from the dehumanization and objectification of women. Regulations are needed to curb these predatory practices.

• Pornography has become widely accessible and accepted in mainstream culture. 72% of visitors to porn sites are male and 20% of men access porn at work. Many people, including religious individuals, struggle with pornography addiction.

• Kids are frequently exposed to pornography, often accidentally, and are at risk of online sexual solicitation. Most kids do not tell their parents about these experiences.

• Pornography magnates like Hugh Hefner and Larry Flynt have been hailed as champions of free speech and accepted into popular culture. Porn stars like Jenna Jameson have become mainstream celebrities.

• The courts have upheld the rights of pornographers, striking down laws aimed at limiting the exposure of minors to pornography. Pornography is seen as a free speech issue by many.

• Pornography presents an unrealistic portrayal of sex that can damage relationships and expectations. It treats sex as merely physical rather than intimate. Porn addiction can interfere with arousal and satisfaction from real sexual relationships.

• In summary, pornography has become integrated into mainstream culture in the U.S. despite concerns about its effects, especially on children and relationships. It is protected legally as free speech, and porn magnates and stars have achieved celebrity status. Pornography presents an exaggerated and unhealthy view of sexuality that can be addictive and damaging.

• Years ago, masturbation and pornography were taboo topics, but now they are openly discussed and even praised in mainstream media. As examples, the author cites Jenna Jameson, a former adult film star turned mainstream celebrity, and recent popular books on topics like the history of orgasms, pornography, and prostitution.

• The author argues this represents a new wave of pornography becoming mainstream and accepted in popular culture, which he calls “Generation Porn.” He says this desensitizes people to sex, separates sex from love and spirituality, and has become normalized for today’s generation.

• The author argues this is problematic, but many who oppose it remain silent out of fear of backlash or because morality has become “passé.” He says his own generation grew up with highly sexualized media and pornography easily available, so they don’t see it as wrong. But he argues it should be condemned, and compares it to the views of moral leaders like Hugh Hefner versus serial killers like Ted Bundy.

• The author argues the tide needs to be reversed through strengthening individuals, families, and children with morality and ethics. Parents need to pay attention to culture, equip their kids with strong values, and set good examples. Young people also need to stand up to cultural pressures that promote oversexualization.

• By rebuilding a moral culture from within, the “porn generation” can be healed. Ultimately, the generation will be led by those who choose to reject oversexualization and return to more traditional moral values.

• Laws alone cannot fix the problem. Personal morality and virtue need to be built from within society. Parents must teach kids values and model them. “Tolerance of all behavior” and societal approval of immorality have consequences. Just as pollution affects the environment, moral pollution spreads through culture.

• The author argues libertarians and “social liberals” are wrong to say that as long as some adhere to virtue, others can behave immorally without consequence. Immoral social actions spread and affect the whole of society. So while individuals can choose, society has a right to promote virtue. Parents should fight back against polluters of culture and morality.

That covers the key highlights and arguments presented in the selected passages regarding the spread of pornography in culture, why the author sees it as problematic, and his proposals for how to strengthen morality in society. Please let me know if you would like me to explain or expand on any part of the summary.

Here is a summary of the main points:

• Protecting culture is important. Some suggestions offered include:

• Abstinence-only education and faith-based initiatives to promote traditional values

• School vouchers and parent choice in education

• Dress codes, single-sex dorms and living at home for college to limit permissiveness

• Boycotting and defunding universities and media that promote immorality

• Using government institutions like the FCC to censor obscenity and indecency

• Limiting the power of the judiciary

• Non-governmental boycotts and pressure, like the Hays Code, to censor immoral media

• Cleaning up music by pressuring companies and boycotting explicit content

• Boycotting companies that use sexually explicit advertising

• The authors argue this is necessary to save society from “nihilism, narcissism, and hedonism” and prevent moral decline. They cite John Winthrop’s vision of America as a “city upon a hill” as inspiration.

• There is faith that despite temptation, society will stand up for traditional values and pass them onto future generations.

The summary outlines a number of recommendations from the authors focused on government intervention and collective action to promote traditional morality and values in society. The authors argue this is necessary to counter the perceived moral decline of younger generations and protect American culture.

Malkin blames the cultural institutions like Hollywood, academia and media for promoting moral relativism and corrupting the young generation. She thinks the sexual revolution and lack of moral restraints led to the decline of traditional values. Dreher agrees that the popular culture has led to despair and rootlessness. He blames materialism, lust, greed and lack of virtue. McCloskey blames affluence, lack of hardship and commitment to religion for moral decline. He thinks only natural law and orthodox religion can provide moral guidance. Limbaugh says the coarsening of culture through various institutions has promoted narcissism and hedonism. He blames the education system for promoting moral relativism, socialism and hostility towards American values.

In short, all four commentators blame the cultural institutions and promotion of moral relativism for the decline of Judeo-Christian values and jadedness of the youth. They think only a return to tradition, religion and virtue can reverse this trend.

• There is peer pressure on university campuses that makes it uncomfortable for students with traditional moral views to express them. However, traditional moral values are still held by many Americans, though their views may be confused or diluted by secular influences.

• Social conservatives are fighting to restore traditional values. If they opt out, traditional values will decline even faster given the determination of secular forces to replace them. Traditionalists should engage in the culture war to preserve a morally healthy and free society for future generations.

• Parents can limit exposure to media and say “no” to shield children. They should support educational choice, defend groups like the Boy Scouts, volunteer at crisis pregnancy centers, and vote out lawmakers who won’t restrain the judiciary. Ultimately, they cannot rely on government and must lead by example.

• Government has a role in upholding moral standards, regulating obscenity and protecting institutions like traditional marriage. However, government overreach is a risk, and the judiciary should not legislate from the bench. Conservatives should push for leaders who will appoint constitutionalist judges and a Senate that will confirm them.

• Changing hearts and minds requires a religious renewal, as with early Christianity. Only a society respecting marriage, women, and children can have a proper view of sexuality.

• While parents cannot shield children entirely, private schools, homeschooling, and monitoring public schools can help. Steps like participating in the PTA and demanding accountability can make a difference. Supporting school choice and homeschooling also forces public schools to improve.

• Legislation reflects morality, despite claims to the contrary. Laws against behaviors or enabling lawsuits demonstrate this. Government sanctions certain behaviors and relationships, like traditional marriage, to support social stability. Those arguing against “legislating morality” often just oppose the type of morality, as with recognizing same-sex marriage or hate crime laws.

The minority party in the Senate lacks the power to thwart the president’s constitutional authority to nominate judges. The Senate’s role is limited to providing advice and consent, not veto power over nominations. The Senate should evaluate nominees based on competence and character, but beyond that should recognize the president’s power, as the elected representative of the people, to choose judges. Congress has other means to check an abusive judiciary, like limiting court jurisdiction.

While government has contributed to moral decay, culture has been the primary driver. To reverse this, traditionalists must engage in the culture war and promote their values in society and government. Christians should reform their churches. All who want to restore decency must positively shape culture by raising children and advocating values in public, and electing officials who share those values.

Here is a summary of the points from The Washington Times article:

• Teenage sexual activity and sexually transmitted diseases are on the rise according to a US study, undermining the argument for abstinence-only sex education.

• The Heritage Foundation argues that the government spends more on contraceptives and safe sex education compared to abstinence education. However, critics argue abstinence education is ineffective.

• There are concerns over increasing obesity, loneliness and risk-taking behaviors in teenagers due to less parental involvement and supervision. However, a study found similar rates of bad behavior among urban and suburban teens.

• Some argue American culture has become too permissive and hypersexualized. There are calls to promote abstinence before marriage and stronger marriages.

• Oral sex has become more common among teenagers, with some not viewing it as “real sex”. This trend worries some parents and abstinence advocates.

• There is debate over parental involvement in teen access to contraceptives, with some arguing parents have a right to know and others arguing teens may avoid safe sex practices if parents are overly involved.

• College campuses have become centers of “hooking up” and casual sex due to co-ed dorms, binge drinking and a hypersexualized culture. However, others argue college students are exploring their sexuality in a normal way.

• Pop stars like Madonna, Christina Aguilera and Britney Spears promoted a highly-sexualized image at a young age. Some argue this has negatively influenced teen girls, while others see it as empowering.

That covers the key highlights and arguments around sexuality, abstinence and culture discussed in the article. Please let me know if you would like me to clarify or expand on any part of the summary.