Cuties Film - Netflix Endorsing Pedophilia - Discuss

[rocket]

"Yes. Your retarted"

It's an ironic statement that had a little more weight about 15 years ago, when I used to read that a lot from people on this board.  These days, it seems to be something less misspelled (retarded).  "Your" still reigns supreme, though.

[rocket]

Whenever I see men obsessed with children, especially single men, my red flag goes up.  Single men with no children usually don't want to be anywhere around them.

Yeah, that's just one archetype and it might not even be the most prevalent.

Both pedophiles I've been unfortunately exposed to were hiding that shit behind having their own children and keeping it all very compartmentalised, so we never found out.  I spent 5 years of highschool with a guy who was getting done by his father and not a fucking word did he speak to anybody. 

The amount of sexual abuse that people I've known have told me about in the last few years is nuts - one thing is very clear to me, if it happens to someone, I feel like not that many of the actual acts are being spoken about to anybody. 

[Matt]

I think that it's more that you're not really getting me.   I'm tired of being clickbaited into shit.  Everywhere I look now, titles are downright bullshit.  Everybody has figured out that sort of 20% lying gets you more views, these days - and it's hard to read anything that is balanced.  When I read your name on the thread, I click on it because I'm not expecting that.

Netflix aren't endorsing pedophilia.  Endorsing means you actively support and encourage the practice.  They aren't endorsing anything on their service. 

They might be showing something that depicts it (in this case, they aren't) - or is a bit too borderline close to it (they are), but they aren't actually endorsing it.

As far as being against having that stuff, you be you.  I've got no complaints. 

I think you're preaching to the choir when you talk about being against pedophilia (a friend of mine's father is in jail for possession of material of that nature, AND the friend believes there may have been instances with young relatives.  This was a guy who was beating his wife, his kids throughout the time I knew him and meanwhile masquerading as a quirky cool guy when anybody like I was around, some evil shit).  Another friend's Dad is jail for raping him as a kid.  All this shit happening and I had no idea.  Neither of these guys gave any indication it was happening.  It's almost a fairytale to me. 

As for that article - I got suspicious by the wording because it is a paper on scientific american.  When I couldn't find it at all on google, I thought "was that so inflammatory, they deleted it?".  On a whim, I decided to search the author's name - and low and behold, the true one appeared.  It was a genius move by the troll who made that image, though.  It is certainly the type of shit that people would share first and ask questions.. well mostly never.

And I respect your choice to not watch it - the only reason I watched the trailer was because I wanted to make sure they weren't endorsing it.  As I said, it appears to be a kids move that looks to go too far with some of the dancing.  But really, the issue is that it is named ab-so-fucking-lutely heinously, ensuring that everybody who watches it has already basically been led down the sexualisation path.  Trust me, the person who named that and made the posters started this shit.   They might as well have called it "sluts".  I haven't seen really any dancing movies, so I don't know what the line is, but my guess is, if you call something "cuties" and then have young girls doing crotch thrusts, you're fucked

I agree with you about Clickbait titles, rocket.  But you know me - If I have a few friends over and need to excuse myself to take a piss, I literally spend 10 minutes justifying why I have to use my own bathroom in my own house, while my friends on my couches drunk watching a UFC pay-per-view.

So because I write SO MUCH, I decided that I need to write less in general - including shorter titles.

So...I decided to go with this title because I felt it was an appropriate title.  I figured, we could be more nuanced in the thread - and we have been.  But I do think it's safe to say that Netflix is promoting pedophilia - if not the act itself, the normalization of pedophiles, even if by "pedophile", they would say they are only referring to "Adults who are attracted to prepubescent children, but who do not act on their urges."

I don't want to throw people in prison for THOUGHT CRIMES.  If there are people who are attracted to children, but they manage those urges by not putting themselves in places where children are present in large numbers [in Thunder Bay - that would be The Canada Games Complex, in the bleachers, watching children swim], and if they make it a point to never be alone with children...then I can't say they committed a crime.

But I STILL don't want their sexual urges to be normalized in any way, or pushed on people [ONLY White people, and maybe Asians] to feel sorry for people who have these urges.

And that's the sense I'm getting here - Netflix is producing a documentary that is subtly [or maybe not so subtly, based on this potentially being the worst ranked {most Dislikes/Thumbs downed} video in YouTube's HISTORY] normalizing pedophilia here.

Does the video end by giving people the impression that pedophilia is WRONG?  Or do people who watch it end the video STILL thinking pedophilia is wrong, but only because they always felt that way?  My impression is that the latter is happening.

If there is anything you think I'm missing here, rocket, let me know.  I realize you have the contrarian [I would even say the UNDERDOG] position here, and I respect people who have the balls to play devil's advocate when it comes to unpopular topics.

I just think...this movie seems to be attempting to make the commercial exploitation of children look hip and cool.  And I don't like that at all.

And since I didn't watch this movie, I hold out the possibility that I may be wrong.

[Chidoman]

[Kwon]

I agree with you about Clickbait titles, rocket.  But you know me - If I have a few friends over and need to excuse myself to take a piss, I literally spend 10 minutes justifying why I have to use my own bathroom in my own house, while my friends on my couches drunk watching a UFC pay-per-view.

So because I write SO MUCH, I decided that I need to write less in general - including shorter titles.

So...I decided to go with this title because I felt it was an appropriate title.  I figured, we could be more nuanced in the thread - and we have been.  But I do think it's safe to say that Netflix is promoting pedophilia - if not the act itself, the normalization of pedophiles, even if by "pedophile", they would say they are only referring to "Adults who are attracted to prepubescent children, but who do not act on their urges."

I don't want to throw people in prison for THOUGHT CRIMES.  If there are people who are attracted to children, but they manage those urges by not putting themselves in places where children are present in large numbers [in Thunder Bay - that would be The Canada Games Complex, in the bleachers, watching children swim], and if they make it a point to never be alone with children...then I can't say they committed a crime.

But I STILL don't want their sexual urges to be normalized in any way, or pushed on people [ONLY White people, and maybe Asians] to feel sorry for people who have these urges.

And that's the sense I'm getting here - Netflix is producing a documentary that is subtly [or maybe not so subtly, based on this potentially being the worst ranked {most Dislikes/Thumbs downed} video in YouTube's HISTORY] normalizing pedophilia here.

Does the video end by giving people the impression that pedophilia is WRONG?  Or do people who watch it end the video STILL thinking pedophilia is wrong, but only because they always felt that way?  My impression is that the latter is happening.

If there is anything you think I'm missing here, rocket, let me know.  I realize you have the contrarian [I would even say the UNDERDOG] position here, and I respect people who have the balls to play devil's advocate when it comes to unpopular topics.

I just think...this movie seems to be attempting to make the commercial exploitation of children look hip and cool.  And I don't like that at all.

And since I didn't watch this movie, I hold out the possibility that I may be wrong.

Fully agree Matty

[rocket]

If there is anything you think I'm missing here, rocket, let me know.  I realize you have the contrarian [I would even say the UNDERDOG] position here, and I respect people who have the balls to play devil's advocate when it comes to unpopular topics.

I'm all for the witch hunt.  I just want it to be righteous.  I want my good and evil clearly defined.

I would have not posted much if you'd have said "promoting", I still find that to be opinion based, but it does "promote" thoughts of that nature  in individuals, so I'm okay with that.

I think we're all suffering from bullshit witch hunts, thesedays.  A lot of people on this board complain about all sorts of things being pushed on them (same sex preference, tolerance etc) and over inflated - yet the moment someone says something contrary to what they want to believe, they bitch up and pull the same shit that is being pulled on them to bully them into other people's agendas. 

And it's mostly this insidious facebook image shit that is often made up or exaggerated.

I'm not in any way a contrarian - I'm a refereearian.  Give me your best arguments and I'll listen. 

As for the movie, the wiki page is a little more enlightening: 

She penned the script for her debut feature film Cuties in early 2017 taking her life experience as a refugee girl into account. The script eventually won the Sundance's Global Filmmaking Award in 2017.[6] The film is based on a traditional Senegalese Muslim girl who is caught and torn between two contrasting fortunes, traditional values and internet culture while also speaking about hyper sexualization of pre-adolescent girls.[7][8] It premiered in the World Cinema Dramatic Competition sector of 2020 Sundance Film Festival on 23 January 2020 and won the Directing Jury Award praising the script of the film.[9][10]

Pretty sure it isn't going to be normalising pedophiles or not speaking out about it.  If I were netflix, I'd have probably just not gone there.  I see now that the title is ironic, but really, that's still a bit too far.

[Matt]

Well...lol...I actually DID try reading that, especially when I noticed some keywords ["Venus", as in The Venus Project, "Jacque", as in Jacque Fresco, who was involved in the creation of the movement, and "Zeitgeist", which referred to the moronic "Zeitgeist" serious of movies from the late 2000's up to the 2010's, which basically attempted to re-brand communism as communism with robots, and didn't expect anyone to point out that the moronic Italian Peter Joseph Merola, who changed his name to Peter Joseph {sort of how Jews change their names when they endorse ideas that are murderous or otherwise destroy White societies} was simply trying to reintroduce communism].

I think it's safe to say that he got enough death threats over that one to remove the Zeitgeist movies from the internet to a pretty large extent.  He doesn't have the presence he once did, and I think he voluntarily removed his own work, because it is much harder to find than it was 7-10 years ago.

I would have read that whole body of text, if it wasn't so small that it was hard to read!  Lol!

But point taken - I NEED to stop typing so much. 

[Matt]

Fully agree Matty

Thanks Kwon!  As a fellow racist, Islamophobic, Neo-Nazi, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, I can always expect you to stand up for certain principles that I can't expect my liberal and leftist friends to stand up for.

Like, you know, FUCKING CHILDREN.

So thank you for that.  There are days where I feel like I am the insane one for being against pedophilia or the normalization of pedophilia.

Also, check out the updated Like to Dislike ratio on YouTube for the trailer of the Netflix Cuties movie, LOL!!!!

[Matt]

I'm all for the witch hunt.  I just want it to be righteous.  I want my good and evil clearly defined.

I would have not posted much if you'd have said "promoting", I still find that to be opinion based, but it does "promote" thoughts of that nature  in individuals, so I'm okay with that.

I think we're all suffering from bullshit witch hunts, thesedays.  A lot of people on this board complain about all sorts of things being pushed on them (same sex preference, tolerance etc) and over inflated - yet the moment someone says something contrary to what they want to believe, they bitch up and pull the same shit that is being pulled on them to bully them into other people's agendas. 

And it's mostly this insidious facebook image shit that is often made up or exaggerated.

I'm not in any way a contrarian - I'm a refereearian.  Give me your best arguments and I'll listen. 

As for the movie, the wiki page is a little more enlightening: 

She penned the script for her debut feature film Cuties in early 2017 taking her life experience as a refugee girl into account. The script eventually won the Sundance's Global Filmmaking Award in 2017.[6] The film is based on a traditional Senegalese Muslim girl who is caught and torn between two contrasting fortunes, traditional values and internet culture while also speaking about hyper sexualization of pre-adolescent girls.[7][8] It premiered in the World Cinema Dramatic Competition sector of 2020 Sundance Film Festival on 23 January 2020 and won the Directing Jury Award praising the script of the film.[9][10]

Pretty sure it isn't going to be normalising pedophiles or not speaking out about it.  If I were netflix, I'd have probably just not gone there.  I see now that the title is ironic, but really, that's still a bit too far.

Yes rocket...yes, they do.  But...

I think there is a difference between Roseanne being canceled for making a joke on Tweet deemed by a minority of social justice freaks when the premiere episode of her series reboot had 18 MILLION viewers [I think 27 MILLION if you include those who watched repeats on streaming services].

Cancel Culture people are cancelling things on the basis of ideology that 90% of people WANT to see, and operating based on cancel ideologies that the average person DESPISES.

Boycotts are another matter, as boycotts are voluntarily.  It doesn't stop the producer from producing anything unless ACTUAL DEMAND for that product or service drops.

Roseanne's reboot was the most popular show on TV in the SIX YEARS prior to it being rebooted.  People WANTED to see it.  But I think when corporations realized that a show supporting Trump was going to become the most popular show on the internet, they wanted a way to cancel her that some - dumb or naive - people may think is justifiable.

But it's pushing cancel culture to joke levels like that, that is ultimately backfiring on these assholes.

I am perfectly ok with a voluntary boycott against Netflix for the three freakshow documentaries/movies they have produced so far that made me sick [the disgusting Rocci Siffredi documentary, glorifying that pervert, the documentary on the Peeping Tom who ran a motel, with NO ONE taking a strong stance against what he did, and that made sure to let viewers know that it is hard to charge Peeping Toms, due to statutes of limitations, and lastly - this "Cuties" movie, that features 11-year-old girls being sexually exploited, but can only be watched by viewers age 17 and older].

Voluntary boycotts and cancel culture minorities cancelling shows and products that were commercially viable that the overwhelming MAJORITY of people had no problem with are not the same thing.

Netflix will carry on, despite my never giving them any money ever again...and these boycotts will only work if enough people agree that Netflix is disgusting, and worthy of a boycott.

rocket, I think YOU are smart enough to know the difference between voluntary cooperation between adults and sexual matters reserved for consenting adults versus issues involving children.  Along the same line, I think you also understand the difference between public lynchings that represent the interests of only a minority of frustrated people who push their ideology and morals on the majority of the people who have no issues with what the minority of complainers take issue with.

Don't get me wrong - I see your points.  But I just think if we add just a wee bit more nuance to the nuance you have already applied to your thought process, that maybe there is yet another line to be drawn in the sand here.

I mean...a movie about sexuality or even just modeling that involves 11-year-old girls, but is restricted viewing to anyone under the age of 17?  It just seems strange to me.

Britney Spears' Instagram posts also seem strange to me, and - off-topic here - but I would like to get your views on that, at some point. 

[Megalodon]

The "concession" Netflix made to its detractors was changing the movie's description on Netflix. Netflix 'strawmanned' the outrage to be about the description blurb. They changed it, "problem solved".

On the left of the image below is the original Cuties description. On the right, its revision.

The description originally said: "Amy, 11, becomes fascinated with a twerking dance crew. Hoping to join them, she starts to explore her femininity, defying her family's traditions.

Everyone knows what twerking represents. Here is Merriam-Webster's definition:

Definition of twerking:
 sexually suggestive dancing characterized by rapid, repeated hip thrusts and shaking of the buttocks especially while squatting

… twerking has become a catch-all for an overtly sexualized style of dancing wherein one manipulates the hips and posterior in an often hypnotic and physics-defying bounce.

Keep in mind they are 11 year olds.

"Cuties" is nowhere near the only show in the entertainment industry's sexualization of children trend.

[Chidoman]

The "concession" Netflix made to its detractors was changing the movie's description on Netflix. Netflix 'strawmanned' the outrage to be about the description blurb. They changed it, "problem solved".

On the left of the image below is the original Cuties description. On the right, its revision.

The description originally said: "Amy, 11, becomes fascinated with a twerking dance crew. Hoping to join them, she starts to explore her femininity, defying her family's traditions.

Everyone knows what twerking represents. Here is Merriam-Webster's definition:

Definition of twerking:
 sexually suggestive dancing characterized by rapid, repeated hip thrusts and shaking of the buttocks especially while squatting

… twerking has become a catch-all for an overtly sexualized style of dancing wherein one manipulates the hips and posterior in an often hypnotic and physics-defying bounce.

Keep in mind they are 11 year olds.

"Cuties" is nowhere near the only show in the entertainment industry's sexualization of children trend.

^^This pretty much sums up this shitshow....enough said!...

 

[Matt]

^^This pretty much sums up this shitshow....enough said!...

 

[1] It's not over until the fat lady sings, AND:
[2] It's not over until I see the YouTube trailer for this shitshow hit a 30K Like to 1M Dislike ratio.

 

[Kwon]

The "concession" Netflix made to its detractors was changing the movie's description on Netflix. Netflix 'strawmanned' the outrage to be about the description blurb. They changed it, "problem solved".

On the left of the image below is the original Cuties description. On the right, its revision.

The description originally said: "Amy, 11, becomes fascinated with a twerking dance crew. Hoping to join them, she starts to explore her femininity, defying her family's traditions.

Everyone knows what twerking represents. Here is Merriam-Webster's definition:

Definition of twerking:
 sexually suggestive dancing characterized by rapid, repeated hip thrusts and shaking of the buttocks especially while squatting

… twerking has become a catch-all for an overtly sexualized style of dancing wherein one manipulates the hips and posterior in an often hypnotic and physics-defying bounce.

Keep in mind they are 11 year olds.

"Cuties" is nowhere near the only show in the entertainment industry's sexualization of children trend.

They're also trying to paint conservative familyvalues badly.


Such turds they are, liberal filt.

[rocket]

Don't get me wrong - I see your points.  But I just think if we add just a wee bit more nuance to the nuance you have already applied to your thought process, that maybe there is yet another line to be drawn in the sand here.

Britney Spears' Instagram posts also seem strange to me, and - off-topic here - but I would like to get your views on that, at some point. 

She looks to be struggling quite a bit with now unfulfilled self worth.  Add in a bit of mania due to covid quarantine.  I feel sorry for her.

It is never a good idea for a woman to use very heavy eyeliner and have messy hair.  You look batshit crazy.  She would be better off with no makeup if she is going to do that but the self worth thing kicks in.

[Humble Narcissist]

They're also trying to paint conservative familyvalues badly.


Such turds they are, liberal filt.

They always portray the nuclear family as dysfunctional.  Almost every movie I've seen recently has subtle and not so subtle images of conservatives, Christians, or just normal people as messed up and hiding it.  Example: a serial killer with a crucifix on his wall, or a rapist who goes to church right afterwards.  The truth is that the left is projecting.  Example: Weinstein and Epstein.

[LurkerNoMore]

That's a very persuasive retort.  I'll need some time to really digest it and sort through the nuance and complexity of it all.

It's strange, but I feel like I've heard that argument before somewhere.  Hmmm.  Oh yeah, in third grade.

I  kept it short just for you.  Didn't want you to strain yourself.

[LurkerNoMore]

I hope you’re joking.  If not then you might be suffering from mental illness.  Look at the most conservative groups in this country. The Church.  They are a treasure trove of pedophiles.

Yep, but let's all ignore that little fact ok?

[Matt]

Yep, but let's all ignore that little fact ok?

Yeah, it's not like we've been talking about pedophilia in The Catholic Church incessantly for at least 30 years now or anything like that.

[Pray_4_War]

I  kept it short just for you.  Didn't want you to strain yourself.

You kept it short.......like your cock.

[LurkerNoMore]

You kept it short.......like your cock.

So you are letting us know you are just a size queen?  Ok.  Being queer isn't a stigma like it used to be.

[Pray_4_War]

So you are letting us know you are just a size queen?  Ok.  Being queer isn't a stigma like it used to be.

Unfortunately for you, there still is a stigma around guys with tiny dicks.

Don't worry, you can just tell everyone that you are a lesbian with an enlarged clit.

[Kwon]

[Griffith]

Agenda of peace.

[LurkerNoMore]

Unfortunately for you, there still is a stigma around guys with tiny dicks.

Don't worry, you can just tell everyone that you are a lesbian with an enlarged clit.

And with your continued interest, you can just tell everyone you are a fag.  Though they probably already know.

I'd rather be straight with a little dick than a cock sucking queer lusting after big ones.

[Megalodon]

[1] It's not over until the fat lady sings, AND:
[2] It's not over until I see the YouTube trailer for this shitshow hit a 30K Like to 1M Dislike ratio.

 

Here's the ratio part: