JESSE POWELL writes:

I see that bringing to attention the harmful pornographic imagery Lady Gaga has produced in her music videos and public persona has started a vigorous and much needed discussion of the harms that pornography, which is titillation of the senses without regard to the moral content of the message and the imagery, does to our culture. 

It’s important to emphasize here how clueless most people are as to the harms and dangers that Lady Gaga represents, and how the press has treated Lady Gaga with deference, approval and affection. Youngfogey has made comments about how it is at least redeeming that Lady Gaga is showing the dead-end of sexual liberation. Evan talked about the need to expose teenagers to cultural icons such as Lady Gaga so that they will be prepared to deal with the “real world” once they are no longer under the supervision of their parents. When Youngfogey and Evan made their comments, they were operating under the assumption and common understanding that the messages that Lady Gaga sends in her videos are actually bad, that they represent either the failings of and false promise of sexual liberation or they represent a danger that children need inoculation against through limited exposure combined with moral teaching as to why the messages embodied in Lady Gaga are bad. 

The wider culture, the response of the average person who imbibes of the cultural environment around them, does not have this fundamental understanding that what Lady Gaga represents is bad or morally dangerous at all. Now true, there is a feeling that Lady Gaga is often “naughty” and occasionally someone will describe the imagery she uses as “disturbing” but overall the cultural response to Lady Gaga is positive, affirming, and without a sense that what she is doing is wrong. 

The criticism of Lady Gaga, in the wider cultural realm, has mainly focused on practical matters.  There is some danger posed to the vision of those who use circle contact lenses, therefore people were able to identify a practical harm caused by the “Bad Romance” video, that teenage girls might harm their vision trying to emulate the look used by Lady Gaga in the video. I have also seen Lady Gaga criticized for smoking in her videos; that it is bad for her to glamorize smoking or treat smoking as acceptable or fashionable, because we don’t want more people to take up smoking, with all the health problems that smoking causes.  

The wider culture is able to criticize Lady Gaga if it can point to a practical harm that Lady Gaga or her videos might cause, but when it comes to the spiritual harm caused by her pornographic violence themed videos there seems to be a blindness and an incapacity to respond in a way that protects cultural values and the healthy emotional development of young people.

 To illustrate my point I want to highlight a short Wall Street Journal critique of Lady Gaga’s “Bad Romance” video published in their Speakeasy section, in which the final scene of Lady Gaga laying next to the burnt-out corpse is lauded as being “brilliantly twisted”.

A Huffington Post article on the “Bad Romance” video highlights the offensive parts of the video in the title of the article and in big still shot pictures taken from the video. Readers are invited to post their comments, and more than 500 comments are made, but barely a peep of criticism is heard in regards to the moral degeneracy that is so clearly on display, that is indeed openly flouted in the content of the article itself! 

In interviews by the mainstream cultural outlets – the Jay Leno show, the Today show, and Good Morning America –  no criticism or challenging questions are directed towards her. All the interviewers show their admiration, approval, and affection. The closest thing to criticism comes when Lady Gaga makes a reference to the nuns from her Catholic high school not approving of her during the Jay Leno interview.

Laura writes:

These interviews are repulsive. Lady Gaga would not be where she is without this outright sycophancy. I stand by my earlier point. Every journalist who writes about Lady Gaga or interviews Lady Gaga and does not point to the grave dangers she represents is participating in evil. 

By the way, Lady Gaga has played for Queen Elizabeth, at the queen’s request.

                                                                   — Comments —

Charles writes:

Jesse Powell wrote, The wider culture is able to criticize Lady Gaga if it can point to a practical harm that Lady Gaga or her videos might cause, but when it comes to the spiritual harm caused by her pornographic violence themed videos there seems to be a blindness and an incapacity to respond in a way that protects cultural values and the healthy emotional development of young people. 

This a very accurate, disturbing observation. The reason that much of America has a blindness and incapacity to evaluate Lady Gaga on a spiritual or moral basis is because much of America, and almost all of our elites, are spiritually dead to Christianity or to any type of traditionalist ethic. It is heartbreaking, because our adolescents and teenagers, the future of our nation, are like sheep without a shepherd. Unfortunately, most parents have checked out on the spiritual formation of their children. Our entertainers today are shepherds; however, the path they are leading our young people on is the way of physical and spiritual death. This does not bode well for the future of our nation.

Randy B. writes:

“At least she’s a spiritual person.”

I can’t image a more destructive influence on America than Oprah, but a warping sensibility from women in “music” seems to be covering anything leftover or neglected from Oprah’s version of Maoist Christian hate. The media’s accepted best of modern pop comes from the female stalwarts; Brittany, Miley and Lady Gaga. Subsequently we are forced to revise our beliefs in the limits of man (woman), especially when we watch our daughters (in general) adopt the behaviors and demeanors of these distorted modern influences.

Please follow and like us: