Like many of us, I’ve become increasingly discriminating in my patronage of the entertainment industry over time. I know that those in the arts have always (and historically-speaking, I mean always) had a reputation for being freaky, but the debasement of our culture to which this industry is contributing mightily is occurring by design; it’s part of the social engineering calculated to distract us to the extent that the average citizen will not even consider how he is being abused, let alone grasp the dynamic of how it is taking place.
As someone who is mired in sociopolitical issues, I can’t help but notice that apart from the websites of a few watchdog groups, the increasing level of moral ambivalence and outright deviance purveyed by the entertainment industry is not really being addressed in a manner that befits its influence on our society.
As much as there was to complain about with regard to television in 1970, this medium has since become a vast sewer. Not only does it unapologetically and aggressively advance the moral putrefaction typical of the political left, but does so in an increasingly uncouth manner. Even in the land of Hulu and Netflix, it is inescapable. Occasionally, it’s even worse than prime time on the networks.
For one thing, it’s nearly impossible to find recently-produced shows of any genre on TV that don’t contain gratuitous homoerotica. I’m not talking about programs which showcase they joys of the homosexual lifestyle, I’m talking about fare in which sexuality of the characters is not only incidental – it’s entirely irrelevant. Occasionally the gratuitousness is literally laughable – like scenes in TV dramas when some bit player shuffles onscreen to engage a character for the sole purpose of referencing their same-sex partner – then shuffles off and is never seen nor heard from again.
The imperative in media for advertising the sexual proclivities of celebrities is another indicator of this calculation in promoting deviance. If deviant sexual practices are really as incidental as the left and the industry would have us believe they are, then no one should care who does what with whom in Hollywood – but we do, because they say we should.
And it isn’t just homoerotica; I can’t count the times I’ve previewed a TV show in recent years, only to move on in disgust after being assailed with an effluvia of profanity, homoerotica, superfluous nudity, or a fairly graphic depiction of a couple going at it five minutes into the episode.
Particularly pernicious are the television networks that cater specifically to children, and I find it astounding that this is not a major topic of discussion in most American households. Outfits like Nickelodeon and Disney have become expert groomers for children and pre-teens who are then funneled into the MTV culture, which glorifies promiscuity, teen pregnancy, bisexuality, homosexuality, and drug use. There are more flagrant offenders than others with regard to media companies and their penchant for producing rot. Viacom, which owns Nickelodeon however, also owns BET, Comedy Central, MTV and VH1. Need I say more?
In the realm of comedy, of course there are few prominent stand up comedians who do not swear profusely and include the obligatory barbs directed at whites, evangelical Christians, Republicans, and conservatives during their routines. Comedians who happen to be ethnic minorities liberally mock whites while the reverse (a white comedian mocking blacks or Latinos) would be considered sacrilege. Sex is a common topic of fixation.
Discussing the scourge of rap music and the self-destructive, misogynistic, racist culture it promotes (rather than reflects) would be belaboring the obvious, so I’ll skip addressing it here. The music industry factored prominently in promoting the “Sexual Revolution” of the 1960s and radical tendencies during that period; in general, it has done more than its part in subverting America’s moral sensibilities since then.
So why are the deleterious effects of entertainment media not a more front-and-center issue in America? I believe there are several reasons. One is that so many of us grew up when families were spending an increasing amount of time converged around a television set, and such habituations can be hard to overcome. Another reason – perhaps driven by the previous one – is that markets have not yet gotten around to sufficiently addressing the deficiency. A few satellite and streaming providers have offered “family-friendly” programming, but for those who don’t want religious messages in every program they watch any more than they want political messages in every program they watch, this is not a discretionary expenditure they elect to make.
Then, there is the unique attachment to our media icons. We do so love our media icons, don’t we? This can make it that much more difficult to abandon media offerings just because deviants or political activists are involved. People didn’t stop watching Rock Hudson because he was a homosexual, so why would they boycott Neil Patrick Harris or Elton John?
Of course, Rock Hudson lived back in the day when consumers didn’t care because it wasn’t relevant to his work, and no one insisted that it was…
Lastly, I think that a lot of the well-intentioned simply don’t believe that those who are continually bombarded with certain behaviors or ideas in media run the risk of becoming what they behold. They don’t realize that human beings are more impressionable than we like to think we are. I would point out that it’s not a great leap from a person succumbing to peer pressure to emulating that which they observe while consuming dizzying amounts of entertainment media.
Now, I’m not suggesting that everyone shoot their television, but individually, we can moderate our media consumption habits without going into anaphylactic shock. Ultimately however, there’s only one thing that will motivate those in the entertainment industry to temper their behavior – and that’s to refrain from patronizing them.