The Eck’s Factor: From lap dances to sports and everything in between, what does “protecting the children” really mean?

Today, I want to talk about the gravest threat to the children. I don’t mean the crisis at the border, or the school shootings or the rising concerns around mental health. I mean the rise of Satanic propaganda in pop culture. That’s right, I am talking about Lil Nas X dancing on the devil’s lap.

Now, just imagine if this was an actual argument put forth by this column. But if you actually wanted to hear this sort of argument, you would need to look no further than the backlash against Lil Nas X since the release of his “MONTERO (Call Me by Your Name)” music video a few weeks ago. 

In the video, Lil Nas X slides down to hell on a pole and gives the devil a lap dance. As you could imagine, conservatives were enraged. They deemed the video sacrilegious and  inappropriate for children. One Twitter user even tweeted, “The system is targeting kids.” Simply put, they want to protect the children from it.

But this backlash isn’t about protecting the children. For instance, radio stations frequently broadcast songs about having sex like animals and snorting cocaine. As a concept, “children” easily default as an emotionally-charged and nearly indisputable political maneuver for the right. Whether the controversy be over homoeroticism, coronavirus restrictions or women’s bodies, children are just the most convenient scapegoat for bigotry.

Unsurprisingly, the right still has a problem with homosexuality and sexual liberation. Just as with Lil Nas X, Cardi B and Megan Thee Stallion experienced this same outcry after the release of “WAP,” because how dare they release a hypersexual anthem after women’s bodies have been historically hypersexualized? How dare Lil Nas X turn the condemnation of homosexuality by religious groups into art? 

To contextualize this paradigm, it also occurs with Black men who embrace “gangsta culture.” Black men are stereotyped as criminals so they eventually start to possess these stereotypes as a coping mechanism. In fact, psychologists posit that embracing one’s stigmatized identity is a powerful coping strategy when they feel hopelessly isolated. The n-word was used as a slur by the dominant caste, but Black people took it back; similarly, gay people took back “faggot.” 

So, when Lil Nas X slid down the pole to hell, he possessed the religious persecution of his identity and made a statement against this power hierarchy that pits homosexuality below the Christian majority. It’s a means of empowerment and coping against repression and stigma. But it seems as if marginalized communities can never win — they hate us on Earth and they hate us when we, literally, go to hell. 

Meanwhile, Rep. Matt Gaetz, who voted against a revenge porn bill in Florida that would prevent people from sharing explicit photos of ex-lovers, is currently being investigated for having a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old and sharing photos of nude women with fellow lawmakers. Protecting the children would involve actually holding rapists and child predators, such as Gaetz, accountable. 

It would also involve removing politicians, such as those who believe that rape and incest are “God’s will,” from office. Should I even mention the Roman Catholic Church’s mishandling of the child sex abuse scandal? I hate that it needs to be said, but predators and rapists — not homosexuality and women’s bodies — harm children. 

Naturally, bigotry seeps into harmful policies that — you guessed it — harm the children. “Protecting the children” obviously only applies to those who are straight, cisgender and white because the Arkansas legislature passed a bill to prohibit gender-confirming treatments or surgery for transgender children. 

The religious right continually seeks to prohibit gay couples from adopting children, despite the foster system being overcrowded and thousands of children aging out of it before being adopted. And the border crisis, which is by no means a sole result of Republican policies, separates children from their parents and houses them in detention centers — as of Mar. 21, there are more than 15,500 unaccompanied children in Customs and Border Patrol custody. 

The right also weaponizes “protecting the children” to protest coronavirus safety restrictions — ironically, the same ones that are in place to protect their children, especially the ones who are immunocompromised. Nationwide, protestors advocate that children need to be back in school because of education inequality and mental health challenges without sports and activities. However, as I have mentioned in previous columns, the solution isn’t compromising coronavirus safety protocols. 

Because the pandemic simply exposed the education system’s structural flaws, the solution would involve addressing the reasons why students have inadequate access to resources at home and why their parents and teachers are struggling to support them. As long as teachers remain underpaid and underappreciated, they should not have to compromise their safety to teach before they are vaccinated. Protecting the children means supporting the environment that educates them — that means advocating for teachers as well as students. 

Ultimately, “protecting the children” will remain an empty, age-old adage unless people relinquish their embedded prejudice. If they want the kids to have their sports seasons, maybe they should support their teachers in efforts for pay raises. If they really have a problem with Lil Nas X giving the devil a lap dance, maybe they shouldn’t have told the kids that gay people are going to hell. If they really have a problem with WAP, maybe they should’ve taught their sons to not objectify women’s bodies in the first place. 

Instead of focusing on how we need to protect the children, it’s time to focus on how we endangered them in the first place. 

Matthew Eck is a junior writing about hot-button social issues. His column, “The Eck’s Factor,” runs every other Wednesday.