Our court system is responsible, over a period of many years, for tearing down restrictions on such material. Also, our 'liberal' entertainment industry ridicules anyone who opposes this material, calling them repressed and Puritan, while raking in the profit from producing it. Fortunately, there are some organizations such as Walmart and a chain called 7-11 who refuse to sell magazines which are at the 2 year old's level.
However, I suspect that the US is not alone as a purveyer of this material, and those who see nothing wrong with a simulated sexual assault (Janet Jackson) surely share the responsibility.
My sons' school complained about my refusing my children access to the Internet.
I refused the access until I'd gotten tools and controls in place, and an email ISP, that would stop the presentation of vaginas from unsolicited emails from the pornographers of USA.
Its taken well over 2 years to establish the needed systems to meet my criteria of protecting my youngsters, whilst they still had the ability to research sexuality etc.
I just cannot comprehend how its OK for porno magazines to be at a 2 year old's eye level in the local newsagent, yet Janet Jackson displaying a teat (or six, if she'd had them) has created such a storm of protest.
Ian

Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic