Netflix Cuties becomes the next piece in an ever more idiotic culture war

Netflix's Cuties

  • Creative freedom should be fully free

    Votes: 6 23.1%
  • I believe in creative freedom but this isn't the hill to die on

    Votes: 19 73.1%
  • Ban this sick filth

    Votes: 1 3.8%

  • Total voters
    26
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Dwarvenhobble

Elite Member
May 26, 2020
946
102
48
Country
United Kingdom




So

the two sides


Side 1:

Youtube videos of kids in the past had literal pedophiles commenting and noting timecodes to allow other pedophiles to check certain places in the video where the children were stretching or doing other such things. Pedophiles were literally fapping to videos of kids on youtube and sharing links to what would be ordinary videos of kids doing kid stuff and nothing that unusual but turning this into material to help them Fap.

Into this environment comes Cuties which features (allegedly I've not watched it nor will I): Shots of a bare chested 13 year old. An 11 year old doing a striptease and posting nudes and young girls Twerking and probably other material of that kind of nature too. Even if the film was meant to be a criticism of the overtly sexualised culture of the world that pushes young girls to be sexual earlier it goes too far with depictions of things such that it could literally be used as masturbation material for pedophiles and be more extreme than the issue youtube had and had to crack down on.


Side 2:

It's all a rightwing conspiracy to attack Netflix because it's progressive and makes progressive shows.

Cuties is meant to be a criticism of the overtly sexualised culture of the world and feeling uncomfortable is the point and it doesn't go too far or cross some line

(Presumably) There are no secret pedophiles out there fapping to this kind of thing ignore that it actually did happen on youtube with far less extreme stuff.

They're being critical of people who are critical of films and that's not fair.

There should be no limits on cinema and to object to this film is calling for creative freedom to be curtailed and that's censorship


Pick you side ladies, Gentlemen and other.
 

Terminal Blue

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 20, 2020
227
192
48
Country
United Kingdom
I haven't seen the film so I don't feel entitled to give a really informed opinion. Personally, I think it sounds interesting, and even if it's problematic I can't really bring myself to get up in arms about a black woman's directoral debut authentically representing her own experience and perspective. Not when there's so much awful shit out there already.

However, if you're going to use the defence that representation is not endorsement, you can't also can't claim that representation is automatically criticism. The problem with child sexualization isn't that it's gross, children are allowed to be a bit gross, it's that it makes children vulnerable to the same people who are going to be wanking off to this film.

Thus, for me, the real problem isn't "free speech", it's that the actors in this film are actual children. Deliberately putting those children into a situation where paedophiles will use their images for sexual purposes, particularly if you are profiting or deriving career benefits from doing so, strikes me as a line far more worthy of consideration than the abstract question of censorship.

And bear in mind, this isn't me coming down on the side of censorship. The concept of the film does not shock me, and it sounds like the "campaign" is mostly just a bunch of right wing trolls Q-anon weirdos and gullible liberals, but I would also not be surprised if in ten years these actors are coming forward with some real horror stories about the experiences they have had because of appearing in this film, and I think any film with child actors needs to consider what that experience is going to mean for them as people.
 
Last edited:

Dreiko

Elite Member
Legacy
May 1, 2020
802
180
48
CT
Country
usa
Gender
male, pronouns: your majesty/my lord/daddy
What I find curious here is that the people defending this movie are the people who complain about anime characters and fictional drawings not based on real people being too sexy or too youthful and the people against it are the people who defend anime characters and drawings and videogame characters and so on.

I'm consistent with this, so while I have no issue with the subject matter, having a real living, breathing, corporeal 11 year old child actres' tits on display is a bit iffy in a vacuum, I'm sure you can make this film without showing nude kids being sexual. But we're not in a vacuum, and it is insanely hypocritical in our current context where people call you a pedo for liking Uzaki chan but have nothing to say about this movie and we're supposed to take those people seriously.

Fix your netflix and then you can begin talking about my anime lol.

I haven't seen the film so I don't feel entitled to give a really informed opinion. Personally, I think it sounds interesting, and even if it's problematic I can't really bring myself to get up in arms about a black woman's directoral debut authentically representing her own experience and perspective. Not when there's so much awful shit out there already.

However, if you're going to use the defence that representation is not endorsement, you can't also can't claim that representation is automatically criticism. The problem with child sexualization isn't that it's gross, children are allowed to be a bit gross, it's that it makes children vulnerable to the same people who are going to be wanking off to this film.

Thus, for me, the real problem isn't "free speech", it's that the actors in this film are actual children. Deliberately putting those children into a situation where paedophiles will use their images for sexual purposes, particularly if you are profiting or deriving career benefits from doing so, strikes me as a line far more worthy of consideration than the abstract question of censorship.

And bear in mind, this isn't me coming down on the side of censorship. The concept of the film does not shock me, and it sounds like the "campaign" is mostly just a bunch of right wing trolls Q-anon weirdos and gullible liberals, but I would also not be surprised if in ten years these actors are coming forward with some real horror stories about the experiences they have had because of appearing in this film, and I think any film with child actors needs to consider what that experience is going to mean for them as people.
I fail to see the director being black or a woman as having anything to do with whether depicting naked kids and having kids twerk is ok or not.


But yeah the issue here is that they're exploiting the child actresses. This is why anime is superior for exploring this sort of thematic content. There's no human being harmed and you can step over the lines all you want.
 
Last edited:

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
486
301
68
I'm not a fan of kids in entertainment in general, since the entertainment industry is horribly exploitative and kids should be kept away from that. It also incentivises gulible parents to use their kids to make money. So there's that already. But if you put real-life kids into sexualized situations it adds another layer of exploitation on top of that.

I'm not saying kids in movies should only be depicted as sweet and innocent, but no matter what the responsibility of dealing with a real-life child should always take presedence over artistic expression/freedom of speech.
 

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
2,995
938
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
I haven't seen it to comment on it. I like the idea of showing a more realistic POV of what girls actually live through growing up, which is not a Disney version of childhood, but I have my concerns if it involves nudity or exploits the child actors. I cannot comment on that further until I have actually viewed it.

A kid twerking however is not what I would consider exploitative as that is pretty normal behavior for girls of all ages. Kids have been shaking their booties since long before the 1970's "shake your booty song". Hell some of my gymnastics moves were likely worse and we did that competitively as well in front of huge audiences and on TV. where the whole damn world might get a look at our hoo hoos. We had to wear paper thin leotards while doing splits repeatedly in the air in different positions for everyone to get a good look. I don't think they should ban gymnastics either.

I also do not see this as even being a free speech issue to begin with. Our gymnastics performances were not banned from television either, nor should they be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tireseas

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
895
267
68
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
I really don't get how it came to this.

Look at the trailer. The core point of the film is clearly "immigrant girl is torn between her home country's conservative culture and the more open culture of her new country, cue attempts to fit in with the latter, and tensions with her family. This isn't a new idea. But somehow the Internet's become fixated on what appears to be a small segment of said movie. "Oh no, girls can dance, how horrible."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jarrito3002

Houseman

The horse. The house. The man.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,623
413
88
Hollywoo, LA
But somehow the Internet's become fixated on what appears to be a small segment of said movie. "Oh no, girls can dance, how horrible."
That was before they saw the movie.
It's apparently much worse than just dirty dancing. OP already mentioned some of it.
- 11-year old striptease
- underage girls posting nudes
- a girl blows up a used condom like a balloon
- girl fights with panty shots
- girls lie about their ages to talk dirty with older guys on Omegle
- actual boob flash during a dirty dancing segment (not featuring the protagonists, they're watching videos of a cheerleader or something. Was this particular actress an adult? I dunno.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dwarvenhobble

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
2,995
938
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
That was before they saw the movie.
It's apparently much worse than just dirty dancing. OP already mentioned some of it.
- 11-year old striptease
- underage girls posting nudes
- a girl blows up a used condom like a balloon
- girl fights with panty shots
- girls lie about their ages to talk dirty with older guys on Omegle
- actual boob flash during a dirty dancing segment (not featuring the protagonists, they're watching videos of a cheerleader or something. Was this particular actress an adult? I dunno.)
Have you seen it yet?
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
1,351
454
88
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
I literally couldnt care less about this movie. Im not the target audience.
That was before they saw the movie.
It's apparently much worse than just dirty dancing. OP already mentioned some of it.
- 11-year old striptease
- underage girls posting nudes
- a girl blows up a used condom like a balloon
- girl fights with panty shots
- girls lie about their ages to talk dirty with older guys on Omegle
- actual boob flash during a dirty dancing segment (not featuring the protagonists, they're watching videos of a cheerleader or something. Was this particular actress an adult? I dunno.)
Some of those seem bad. Probably the posting nudes is the biggest red flag for me. But it might be just people talking about how they post nudes or its impacts. Which is different and a really important conversation. But I'm not willing to do any of the research required on this one

What I find curious here is that the people defending this movie are the people who complain about anime characters and fictional drawings not based on real people being too sexy or too youthful and the people against it are the people who defend anime characters and drawings and videogame characters and so on.
There is a big difference being provocative to shock or titillate and having an actual reason to have a scene in a movie/show. Like The Boys has a lot of gratuitous violence, most of it utterly pointless. In fact, if its just for shock value, leave it out. It detracts from the story or message. But Huey and his GF moment was necessarily horrific. That's important to the story

I don't know if this Cuties stuff is a step to far and/or hasn't made any case for it being in there. The twitter post from thatstarwarsgirl just makes good case for it not being made. I would have to see it to make such an assertion.
 

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
2,995
938
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
I literally couldnt care less about this movie. Im not the target audience.

Some of those seem bad. Probably the posting nudes is the biggest red flag for me. But it might be just people talking about how they post nudes or its impacts. Which is different and a really important conversation. But I'm not willing to do any of the research required on this one
I will hold off until I actually see it. Having them act like posting nudes happened and not actually having them do it is okay, but I would think they cross the line if they actually had them do it.

I think the conversation about it is one we need to have. SO many girls are doing this and sexting and if we just pretend it isn't happening, it only causes more problems rather than actually addressing it in media.
 
Last edited:

Houseman

The horse. The house. The man.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,623
413
88
Hollywoo, LA
Some of those seem bad. Probably the posting nudes is the biggest red flag for me. But it might be just people talking about how they post nudes or its impacts.
She does it on screen. We don't see her exposed parts, but it's definitely more than just talking about it.


Judging by all the summaries I've read so far, it seems like this movie is Requiem for a Dream, except with sexuality instead of drugs. She tries it, and gets deeper and deeper into that world and ends up hurting herself and everyone around her, and at the end she rejects it and learns to embrace her own culture.
 

Houseman

The horse. The house. The man.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
1,623
413
88
Hollywoo, LA
So you don't have an opinion either until you actually see it t be able to assess that as well?
I would think that reading a synopsis of the plot and hearing details about the "worst parts" is sufficient to form an opinion about whether the depictions are justified by the message, if that's what people are supposed to be having opinions about.

Personally, I can't bring myself to care about forming an opinion about it.
 

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
2,995
938
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
She does it on screen. We don't see her exposed parts, but it's definitely more than just talking about it.


Judging by all the summaries I've read so far, it seems like this movie is Requiem for a Dream, except with sexuality instead of drugs. She tries it, and gets deeper and deeper into that world and ends up hurting herself and everyone around her, and at the end she rejects it and learns to embrace her own culture.
So in reality they could have had her exposed parts actually covered? That was more than they did for us when we had to change for gymnastics with the guys walking up and down the halls with no door to the girls locker room and showers. Our leotards came with panty liners built in so you don't wear undies under those things so when you take them off you have to take it all off. I don't think there was ever a time where we DIDN'T hear/see the guys snickering in the halls.
 

Dreiko

Elite Member
Legacy
May 1, 2020
802
180
48
CT
Country
usa
Gender
male, pronouns: your majesty/my lord/daddy
There is a big difference being provocative to shock or titillate and having an actual reason to have a scene in a movie/show. Like The Boys has a lot of gratuitous violence, most of it utterly pointless. In fact, if its just for shock value, leave it out. It detracts from the story or message. But Huey and his GF moment was necessarily horrific. That's important to the story

I don't know if this Cuties stuff is a step to far and/or hasn't made any case for it being in there. The twitter post from thatstarwarsgirl just makes good case for it not being made. I would have to see it to make such an assertion.
You're making an arbitrary distinction here. You're choosing to define one thing as having more of a "reason" than another, for no reason. Just because someone claims something, that's not the same as it being a fact. Either we agree to accept all claims of intention irrespective of how they manifest, or we agree that there's no standard and nobody gets to judge anything.

Again, I am the one who is consistent here, I am in support of freedom of expression. My point is that the others are the hypocrites, because this film is made by a black woman or something.


She does it on screen. We don't see her exposed parts, but it's definitely more than just talking about it.


Judging by all the summaries I've read so far, it seems like this movie is Requiem for a Dream, except with sexuality instead of drugs. She tries it, and gets deeper and deeper into that world and ends up hurting herself and everyone around her, and at the end she rejects it and learns to embrace her own culture.
From what I heard, there's two moments with kid tits, one of them is the one you reference, another one is in a bathroom or something supposedly. I am not sure whether the viewer sees it or not but from what I read it sounded like it is visible, yes. I have not looked deeper into it for obvious reasons but if someone has seen this they can clarify.

Also apparently there's other scenes where they act as stripper camgirls and mimic lesbian sex acts and a whole bunch of wowe stuff in this film lol. It's not just the nudity and twerking.
 

Terminal Blue

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 20, 2020
227
192
48
Country
United Kingdom
What I find curious here is that the people defending this movie are the people who complain about anime characters and fictional drawings not based on real people being too sexy or too youthful and the people against it are the people who defend anime characters and drawings and videogame characters and so on.
There's a scene in the film Taken where Liam Neeson's character tortures one of the baddies by electrocuting him repeatedly, before finally leaving him to die from continuous electrocution. It's an incredibly graphic scene which strongly emphasises how much pain this character is in. In a different film, the depiction of these same events could easily be a horror scene, but it's not. Why not?

The trick is perspective.

Film is not the neutral depiction of events, it is created for an audience who is being lead (through film language) to understand the events on screen in a particular way and from a particular perspective, carried within the film itself. Now, that's not perfect, and I actually have a lot of sympathy for the argument that directors should sometimes predict or consider the potential misuse of their films. But there is still a big difference between a film about children made for the sexual enjoyment of paedophiles and a film about a child's experience of sexualization, and that difference is going to be very obvious when you watch that film.

I fail to see the director being black or a woman as having anything to do with whether depicting naked kids and having kids twerk is ok or not.
To a certain extent, yes. Generally though, when someone is channelling an experience they have had or to which they can relate, it normally imbues their art with a different perspective. It can be tremendously useful for those who experience something unpleasant to encounter art which recognizes or reflects those experience. It is generally far less helpful to encounter art which merely references their experience as a distant fantasy.

More importantly, however, those things have a huge impact on whether someone is likely to be the subject of a malicious cancellation campaign or internet dogpiling to try and hurt their career, because when you already have to fight much harder to get executives, investors and (to a certain extent) audiences to recognise the value of your perspective or vision, you're far more vulnerable to that kind of campaign.
 
Last edited:

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
2,995
938
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
Also apparently there's other scenes where they act as stripper camgirls and mimic lesbian sex acts and a whole bunch of wowe stuff in this film lol. It's not just the nudity and twerking.
So in other words what girls actually do in real life? AT one of our girls slumber parties at my house Truth or dare resulted in a girl standing butt arse naked on our roof singing the star spangled banner holding a teddy bear for cover. That is just pretty normal for girls growing up.

Of course that still isn't as bad as the boys playing the " punch the other guy in the nuts game" or " throw things at the other guys nuts games" they seemed to think were so entertaining.
 
Last edited:

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
2,995
938
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
Does anyone remember this one? Why didn't we hear similar complaints?

Don't worry the kid wasn't really hurt and she really didn't rip out his hair, that was fake.
 
Last edited:

Dreiko

Elite Member
Legacy
May 1, 2020
802
180
48
CT
Country
usa
Gender
male, pronouns: your majesty/my lord/daddy
So in other words what girls actually do in real life? AT one of our girls slumber parties at my house Truth or dare resulted in a girl standing butt arse naked on our roof singing the star spangled banner holding a teddy bear for cover. That is just pretty normal for girls growing up.

Of course that still isn't as bad as the boys playing the " punch the other guy in the nuts game" or " throw things at the other guys nuts games" they seemed to think were so entertaining.
Never played any of those games growing up so not sure what you're on about lol. When I was 11 I was playing with pokemon cards and tekken 3 and stuff.


But yeah again, I am the one who is for free speech, it's just interesting that when you have such matters presented in the same fashion in anime, the whole "glimpse at the world of girls" thing, people call it creepy and voyeuristic. The hypocrisy is the issue here. People are being more tolerant of this movie than they'd be of a million other much more harmless stuff because it fits with their politics in regards to gender roles more.

But yeah, if ultimately now everyone can stop judging the other things too, that's good I guess.

To a certain extent, yes. Generally though, when someone is channelling an experience they have had or to which they can relate, it normally imbues their art with a different perspective. It can be tremendously useful for those who experience something unpleasant to encounter art which recognizes or reflects those experience. It is generally far less helpful to encounter art which merely references their experience as a distant fantasy.

More importantly, however, those things have a huge impact on whether someone is likely to be the subject of a malicious cancellation campaign or internet dogpiling to try and hurt their career, because when you already have to fight much harder to get executives, investors and (to a certain extent) audiences to recognise the value of your personal perspective or vision, you're far more vulnerable to that kind of campaign.
Based on what I read, the director didn't grow up with these issues, she just was present as an adult at some event in france where she saw kids twerking and the audience were muslim women in their full ninja gear and she was disturbed by the girls dancing. So it's less that she was a kid with these feelings growing up and more that she wanted to explore that contrast of girls growing up with bronze age morality at home and wanting to rebel and going overbroad but I am pretty sure there were no topless 11 year olds in the event she observed lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Specter Von Baren
Status
Not open for further replies.