A few years ago I remember a casual night of family TV viewing that became not so ‘family friendly’.
…And that’s putting it lightly.
The Voice’s usual balance between talent and cringe worthy performances were eclipsed by a monstrous moral horror parading itself in lipstick and high heels.
Now you might initially laugh at what I’m about to point out.
You might blush and skip the rest of the article or vilify me for ‘overreacting’. You might even leap to defend this ‘innocent’ woman’s behaviour as a product of society and a TV show just wanting to grab a headline.
Before you leap to a defensive position keep three things in mind: what this means for the future of fashion, impressionable kids, and what defines normal relationships.
So on a night that revealed a corruption that’s even now eroding an ever shifting societal ‘norm’, out walked a girl in a black dress, in black high heels and a ‘barely-there’ black bra worn more as outer wear than underwear. Yes, a bra and breasts for the whole of Australia to see, kids included.
What once would’ve been a moral no-brainer and an implied rule of decency and common sense was blown out of the water on national television. With that prime-time appearance, nudity was given a PG rating, bras were made public-wear, and the line between decent and whorish torn up and thrown out.
At the time this happened, a simultaneously frightening and bewildering event took place—the people I spoke to didn’t care, even worse, they became offended at me for pointing it out! They responded as if I was the one who had let a wild cat out of the bag and just patting the feral thing would put it back and make it go to sleep.
These were the type of responses:
“Leave her alone, you can’t blame her, it’s the shows fault.”
“Don’t be so insensitive, she probably had a traumatic childhood.”
“You can’t see that much. I’m not even sure it’s a bra.”
“That’s not nudity: you can’t see her nipples.”
Problem is, no matter what way you spun it, she was wearing the same thing as a bra in public. What’s worse, in front of thousands and thousands of Australian families and their children.
Now celebrities, musicians, fashion ‘icons’ and Kardashian types front for events and pose for photos in the kind of see-through tops that would make prostitutes blush. ‘Barely-there’ has become ‘nothing-there’, and we haven’t even talked about how many women ‘icons’ are starting to spread that trend to their lower region!
So that feral cat ‘nudity’ didn’t go to sleep and three years later there’s barely a bag left to put it back in.
And now the cat’s coming for your kids.
Maybe I’m naïve. Maybe that cat’s been stalking us for years with ‘barely-there’ bikinis and strip clubs. Either way, now we face a generation of youngsters whose ‘idols’ think nothing of selling their bodies for popularity, promotion and sexual attraction.
What will be the result?
Well don’t be surprised when in a few years your teenage daughter walks in the house sporting nothing but a bra from her waist up.
Don’t be shocked in ten years your when your aunt decides a see-through fabric mesh is fitting Christmas wear, or be stunned when your cousin decides her nipples are more fashionable than her tank top.
Think I’m being crass? I apologise, but please think far worse of the travesty of moral relativism now unfolding.
Shocked at my predictions? So were many people three years ago after one night of The Voice. But judging by where we now find ourselves, not nearly shocked enough, and not anywhere close to the right reasons.
The push for public nudity
Nude beaches used to be bad enough, but at least there was enough societal conscience and shame to hide the practice from public view. Now nudity is making a real push for mainstream acceptance. The international clothing store Honey Birdette features near naked assistants, nude restaurants operate in England, Paris and Australia, and a nude gym opened in New York early this year.
Besides what this means for the concept of decency and distinctions between public and private, normal relationships are also in danger of total redefinition. Non-sexual or familial relations could soon feature a sexual component. How else would we categorise a relationship where one person relates to another while exposing their private parts?
I don’t think anyone on the planet wants to relate to friends or plutonic family members on sexual grounds. This wouldn’t just be weird and disgusting, it would be wrong plain and simple.
A healthy society is built on a family structure and friendships that clearly distinguish between sexual and non-sexual relationships and ways of relating. Blurring those lines will confuse the definition of love and produce incestuous relationships and sexualised youngsters.
So what can we do?
Wherever we are, take a stand against this moral monster threatening our loved ones and the future of our children and lawful societies.
Turn off that TV show, petition against public nudity and refuse to cave to your teenager wanting to imitate their naked idol’s fashion ‘choice’. Speak out on social media, vote for the politicians who share your ideals, and be willing to be a lone voice of reason in an increasingly conscience-seared society.
You are The Voice we desperately need now.
Speak out for the type of morality fashion should never be allowed to dictate.
Tim lives in Minnesota, America. He has a Graduate Associate of Theology degree, partially completed a Masters of Divinity in Theology, and over six years teaching experience in Christian Education. He enjoys being a youth pastor, Christian writing, and the warmer months in Minnesota.
Tim Price’s previous articles may be viewed at http://www.pressserviceinternational.org/tim-price.html