This item comes from the NMV list. It is summarized here to respect the copyright convention.
m e d i a . w a t c h =====================
The Economist recently carried an editorial about the American preoccupation with children and sex. It mentions the Contract on America and its anti-pornography stance, the "Innocent Images" sting, the busts of several parents who took nude photographs of their children, and censorship of scenes in several European movies. It also pointed out the hypocrisy in considering it perfectly acceptable for girls to dress up as cheerleaders, but being shocked by the sexual innuendo in the recent controversial Calvin Klein jeans ads.
The tone of the editorial is that there is much more fuss made about children being exposed to sex than is warranted. It says, "Americans are not quite normal when it comes to children and their bodies," especially when compared to Europeans.
The editorial concludes by saying that exposure to violence is a far greater problem for children than exposure to sex, yet television feeds children a "relentless diet of combat." Also, they point out that public protection, including undercover operations and new laws, are just not effective, and that the real problem is one of private responsibility. They call on religious conservatives to recognize that American children need better parents more than they need more intrusive laws. [source: The Economist, 23 Sep 1995, p. 24]