The Hooters restaurant chain has been an iconic, albeit much-reviled, symbol of American overindulgence and overt sexualization to many Christians since its founding in 1983. And as news breaks of its late-March bankruptcy filing, while some feel a celebration of sorts is in order, others are noting that it didn’t fail because society moved on from busty, scantily-clad waitress; instead, it needed more.
Such was the perspective of writer Russell Moore, who recently lamented in an opinion piece for Christianity Today, who said that the Christian community “should be glad if the restaurant chain closes” while somberly pointing out that “these places are dying in a culture that now finds them too tame.”
Moore’s point is inescapably hard to argue. When Hooters first appeared in Clearwater, Florida over four decades ago, there was nothing quite like it. It broke the rules of dining. It broke the rules of polite society. And now, in 2025, you can basically walk around any town and see women in yoga pants, low-cut shirts, or find whatever you want on social media or the internet. Without a doubt, Hooters model is only failing because the thing that made it special now makes it insipid.
“Those of us who are traditionalist Christians have long said that the Hooters restaurant chain is morally bankrupt, but the time has come for it to be financially bankrupt too. Before we “family values” types take a victory lap,” Moore cautioned in his piece, “we should recognize that the chain—known for its scantily clad female servers and their wink and nod to male sexual appetites—is in trouble not because it’s too edgy but because it is not edgy enough. And that ought to tell us something about the future of American culture and the future of the church.
And, of course, as the writer further points out, Hooters’ Chapter 11 filing on March 31st can likewise be attributed to the larger problem in the dining space. Red Lobster is another notable franchise succumbing to American’s changing appetites. Eating out is time consuming and expensive, and the food isn’t particularly good to justify the rising costs. There are other factors at play, no doubt.
Still, Moore’s thesis can’t help but be ignored. It’s not as if Americans stopped eating everywhere all at once, and the reality is the things you can see at the restaurant pale in comparison to what you can see elsewhere. “Hooters is losing ground for being too tame for an American culture acclimated to online pornography and OnlyFans,” he said.
Emphasizing this point further, Moore wrote that “Hooters can hardly stay in business by being just ‘naughty enough.’ Indeed, for many people, any moral objections to Hooters have become as quaint as television audiences’ shock at Elvis Presley’s gyrations or The Beatles’ long hair.”
Punctuating what can only be considered a tragic acceptance of defeat, Moore finished his dirge by reiterating the point again that ‘We should take no solace in how these places are dying.” He declared with finality that “the chain is not closing because a superior view of marriage and family and sexuality won the argument. In a real sense, Hooters is gone because the argument was so decisively lost.”