The white supremacist who murdered all those Muslims in New Zealand said he did it to defend Western civilization. Well, guess what? Muslims aren’t responsible for a new reality show in which mothers make pornography for their children to watch — this for the sake of fighting “toxic masculinity.”  A state broadcaster in Great Britain is. More:

A group of five mothers were so disgusted by porn they found online they decided to make their own X-rated film that they would be happy to show their children.

The women made their adult movie as part of a Channel 4 TV show called Mums Make Porn.

Although they didn’t star in the video themselves, they helped direct and produce it in a bid to create porn that is realistic and promotes positive attitudes towards sex.

The three-part series follows their journey into the adult entertainment industry, which sees one mother so distressed by internet porn she quits the project altogether.

One mother is reduced to tears by the violent, rape-based content they find and another throws up.

At the end of the programme the women show the video to their children.

To be clear, the mums didn’t star in the film. That’s one taboo they didn’t break. Give it another year or two, though, and somebody will make that movie.

Here’s an interview with Emma Morgan, the show’s executive producer. Excerpt:

What is your response to anybody who doesn’t agree with why you have made the series?

EM: We were shocked by the stats about the impact of free mainstream porn online on the younger generation. It was clear that a lot of young people were accessing porn and were being influenced by it.

We felt it has real purpose to do something meaningful to provoke debate and encourage responsible conversations between parents and their children and draw attention to the issue. Sometimes actions speak louder than words, and we are very proud of the mums and the film that they made and the messages it conveys.

Here’s an interview with the four mums who made the porn film (again, they were producing and directing, not starring in it). Excerpt:

What was your goal making the film?

Sarah-Louise: My daughter said that if her boyfriend saw porn, he might look at an actress and compare. For me, it was about body size and body image. It was very important we showed different body types, diversity and also that there wasn’t a type. You could have different sized breasts, penis and vaginas. They all look different. I wanted to show there was diversity in appearance.

Sarah: For me, it was about communication and consent. I wanted connection.

Emma: I wanted it to be an educational purpose. I wanted to show you could have intimacy and a connection in porn. I wanted them to enjoy each other but have communication with each other. I wanted to demonstrate that in our film as well as consent and body image. I wanted to make porn that we will all get stimulated by and serve everyone.

Anita: Like everyone else, it was about showing young people that it was ok to try things and experiment but to always be aware. I wanted to show reality and show what sex is really like and how you get from A to B. I did not want people to feel ashamed.

How many people have you got in your film?

Sarah-Louise: Four. We have got girl on girl and a boy/girl. We had one chance at this. We wanted to make it good. We wanted to show as much as we could in one film. We have gone for something a little bit different as normally you pick an audience and you pick your film. For instance, if you were a lesbian, you would make a lesbian film. It’s unusual in the porn world, as you don’t normally combine them. We wanted to show you could have the same chemistry with different couples. We try to mirror it as much as possible. No matter what you are into, there are important messages we wanted to get across. The big message is we have communication in our porn film. They ask for things.

Emma: It’s two separate sex scenes but they mirror sexual positions. One is daytime; one is at night. They interlink within the edit. It is all about the build up and exploration of the body and asking.

Sarah: It doesn’t matter about your sexuality. The fundamental thing is consent.

This is not a fringe thing. This is mainstream now. It wasn’t too long ago that parents introducing their children to pornography would have drawn the attention of the police. Now parents make it for them as an enlightened act of liberal charity, and get a celebrated television show about it, broadcast on a BBC state-supported British television channel.

Think about that. Seriously, think about it. Raise yourself out of the boiling pot, frog, for just one minute, and think about what this means.

There is no saving a culture as degenerate as this one, only withdrawing from it, and building up small communities within which to live out the faith (and moral sanity) while it destroys itself. I’m telling you, get started on this right now. Something big is coming. You feel it as well as I do. It is a Weimar Republic feeling. Here’s a passage from a Salon review (2000) of a then-new history of Weimar Berlin’s sex culture:

Whether or not Berlin’s unique brand of decadence was “in the air,” there apparently was the feeling in Weimar culture that anything goes. A quote from Luigi Barzini’s social memoir, “The Europeans,” used by Gordon in the book, illustrates this point particularly well:

“I saw pimps offering anything to anybody, little boys, little girls, robust young men, libidinous women, animals. The story went around that a male goose of which one cut the neck at the ecstatic moment would give you the most delicious, economical, and time-saving frisson of all, as it allowed you to enjoy sodomy, bestiality, homosexuality, necrophilia and sadism at one stroke. Gastronomy too, as one could eat the goose afterwards.”

When this happens here, you may be certain that some liberals will chastise the disapprovers, reminding them that in the 1950s, prudes looked down on Elvis too.

UPDATE: I wasn’t clear that Channel 4, though state-backed, is not technically the BBC. Thanks, British readers, for the correction. I’ve changed this post to reflect that.