No new definitions are required. Nothing new is being proposed. The description of "Rightism" is the description of common sense. I do agree that it is rising over the globe though, we are finally feeling the effects of previous mistakes with stark urgency; it has become easier to argue for societal degradation. Plus I don't like the name.
As for the article; the idea is sensible, the action is inconsequential. I think it will be little more than a joke, these kids still live in a society that glorifies sexual "freedom", they are surrounded by sex positive memes that don't really make any sense when you try to follow them through to their overall effect. It's a Guardian article so naturally there's a lot of rah-rah-ing egality/equality talking heads, but theirs is a response that would be mirrored even by more reasonable people. Whether the complaint is of a "nanny state" interfering where they have no place, of stifling the natural growth of their daughters or not giving equal attention to sons, the effect is the same. It is good that it has been brought up though, that is a positive sign.
"So now we try the traditional way: keep it in your pants until it counts. In other words, don't hand it away -- keep your future in mind."
What does this mean? What traditional way? What allowed that traditional way to exist, what enforced it? What "counts"? What future should one keep in mind? The very values this statement is based on have been lost. Not irrevocably, but the decay is advanced. As a litmus test, what visceral reaction does the phrase "Do not have sex before marriage" evoke?