Netflix Defends ‘Cuties’ Movie Accused Of Sexualizing Children, Calling It ‘A Powerful Story’

[Teh One Who Knocks]

By Ryan Saavedra - The Daily Wire


https://i.imgur.com/C4LVBs8l.jpg

Netflix defended their “Cuties” movie, which has been widely accused of sexualizing children, saying that the movie is “a powerful story.”

“Cuties is a social commentary against the sexualization of young children,” Netflix said in a statement. “It’s an award winning film and a powerful story about the pressure young girls face on social media and from society more generally growing up – and we’d encourage anyone who cares about these important issues to watch the movie.”

Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) responded to Netflix’s statement by suggesting that it was perhaps time for the video streaming service to testify in front of the U.S. Senate.

“Maybe @Netflix would like to come talk this over before Congress,” Hawley wrote.
1304242446856081409
“The movie focuses on a group of 11-year-old girls who form a twerking dance group, much to the chagrin of one character’s very conservative Senegalese family,” Fox News reported. “Netflix previously apologized after the poster for the French film showed the underage cast posing in a sexual manner. Now, there’s renewed criticism over the movie, which premiered at Sundance.”

Netflix is a strongly left-leaning company whose employees donate 98% of the time to Democratic political candidates.

Daily Wire columnist Matt Walsh wrote:


Several weeks ago, Netflix began promoting a new film from French director Maimouna Doucoure called “Cuties.” The poster, featuring scantily clad children posing suggestively, caused well-deserved outrage. The Sundance Film Festival — which honored the film with a directing award — provided a synopsis that didn’t do much to quell the anger. According to Sundance, “Cuties” tells the story of an 11-year-old girl named Amy who, “through an ignited awareness of her burgeoning femininity, propels the group to enthusiastically embrace an increasingly sensual dance routine, sparking the girls’ hope to twerk their way to stardom at a local dance contest.” It is perhaps worth mentioning that Sundance was co-founded by a man who is now in prison for child sexual abuse. The film’s official description from Netflix was only slightly less grotesque-sounding: “Amy, 11, becomes fascinated with a twerking dance crew. Hoping to join them, she starts to explore her femininity, defying her family’s traditions.”

After the backlash, Netflix apologized — not for the film itself, but simply for the “inappropriate artwork.” The streaming service also changed the synopsis, getting rid of any mention of “twerking” and instead calling it a “free-spirited dance crew.” Netflix did not bother to explain why they used that “inappropriate artwork” in their promotional materials in the first place. If it doesn’t actually reflect the content of the film, and if they are not trying to attract an audience of pedophiles who wish to see pubescent girls gyrate on camera, then what was the thought process behind the way it was originally marketed? We were never told.

The website Bustle said that the poster was simply “botched.” Well, I can understand “botching” a poster with a typo or some other error due to carelessness, but how do you “botch” something by accidentally turning it into softcore child porn? Many other media outlets rushed to the defense of the twerking children’s movie. An article by Anna Menta on The Decider scolded the film’s detractors, baselessly linking the criticism to the QAnon conspiracy theory, and insisting that we detractors owe the director an apology.

[FBD]

powerful is a woak code word these days

[DemonGeminiX]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asxBUrx-Wfg

[deebakes]

gross

[FBD]

ok, this now legitimately classifies this as child pornography


“During one of the many highly sexualized and erotic dance scenes that purposefully exploit and objectify numerous scantily clad under age girls, one of the female child dancers lifts up her cropped top to fully display her bare breast. This is lawfully defined as pedophilia and can be extremely distressing to many viewers,” the IMDB user guide declares.





A curious riddle, my dear Batman,
that'll send you into a fit of rage.

Who watches children twerking
and then calls it "coming of age"?

[FBD]

This guy Max (((Karson))) makes a youtube video literally saying shit like

>"watching 11 yr old girls dance was sexually arousing"
> "the blonde one was sexy"
>"they did a good job making 11 yr olds sexually appealing"



>California passes a law literally legalizing pedophilia
> cuties comes out
>This guy is talking about ejaculating to 11 yr olds.

Seriously enough is enough.

Vidya here: https://youtu.be/Y9CQxIu9_cw [Embed]
Tweet here: https://twitter.com/mrgirlyoutube/status/1304161552065388544?s=19


https://i.imgur.com/NdfZC9D.jpg

[Pony]

Logged into Netflix this morning and this film is in the "Top 10".

So is it any worse than some of the child beauty contests or shows like Dance Moms? Dunno, haven't watched it.

[lost in melb.]

ok, this now legitimately classifies this as child pornography



Actually it's not. But anyhows...lol

[DemonGeminiX]

Logged into Netflix this morning and this film is in the "Top 10".

So is it any worse than some of the child beauty contests or shows like Dance Moms? Dunno, haven't watched it.

I had to actually perform a search for it. It doesn't appear anywhere on any of my account lists. I guess I don't watch very much outside of comics, comedy, action, horror, and scifi... with an emphasis on the horror and scifi.

I'm not gonna bother with it. I watched Ben Shapiro's take on it, and that's enough to let me know that I'd be disgusted by it. There are some places even I won't go (still haven't watched any of the Human Centipede movies, nor A Serbian Film). I suspect Netflix will be forced to take it down, at least in the USA, either by loss of subscribers or by legal action. From Shapiro's description of several scenes, it qualifies as child porn by US federal statute. The French, and that director, should be ashamed of themselves. There are ways to get the point across without going where they've gone.

[deebakes]

human centipede is hilarious, 2 was okay, but the third one you can definitely skip :lol:

[Griffin]

:-s but #3 had Bree Olson in it

[Hugh_Janus]

well, I won't be watching it, not only because shit like this doesn't interest me but I also don't want to endup on any lists :lol:

[deebakes]

:-s but #3 had Bree Olson in it

she didn't even show her tits

[Hugh_Janus]

pointless watching it if a porn tar doesn't even get her jubblies out

anyway, HS1 :tup: HS2 :-s HS3 :shrug:because after the wtf-nes at the end of hs2, I dont even want to attempt #3

[Griffin]

like I've never seen them before...

[Hugh_Janus]

they might look different on a mainstream movie :shrug:

[Griffin]

i'm seeing Bree's twins right now


.... i may need a towell

[FBD]

Actually it's not. But anyhows...lol

So nudity of an 11 year old isnt breaking any laws :lol: think ya need to get your head checked brotha

https://qanon.pub/data/media/c6a7578cc8c4b0b8cab6f636cda704854d1ae041797f8e7382 abbd10fbf9e6f7.png

[FBD]

they know they are getting busted and are trying to normalize so as to prepare for a softer landing

https://i.imgur.com/zsvIt9c.png

pedos still get the rope

[lost in melb.]

So nudity of an 11 year old isnt breaking any laws :lol: think ya need to get your head checked brotha

https://qanon.pub/data/media/c6a7578cc8c4b0b8cab6f636cda704854d1ae041797f8e7382 abbd10fbf9e6f7.png

It's not necessarily ...voyage forth and discover why, lol.

[Pony]

So nudity of an 11 year old isnt breaking any laws :lol: think ya need to get your head checked brotha

Where did you see there's a nude 11YO? From my understanding the only nudity is a tit flash on a music/dance video the girls are watching on their phone.

[FBD]

Where did you see there's a nude 11YO? From my understanding the only nudity is a tit flash on a music/dance video the girls are watching on their phone.

news flash, an 11 year old's tits on film qualifies as child pornography

[FBD]

https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1305488429745139713

[PorkChopSandwiches]

https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1305488429745139713

Even though I dont like Newsome, that's not what he did. He made it so the addition to the sex offender registry would be up to the judge to decide in the case of anal or oral sex (this was already the case with vaginal sex) So the idea would be that if one person was over 18 and the other wasnt its not auto sex offender. The laws that are in place are still in place, statutory rape of a girl 17 and a guy thats 20 (if both sides consented) would not put the adult on the registry by default.

[FBD]

Even though I dont like Newsome, that's not what he did. He made it so the addition to the sex offender registry would be up to the judge to decide in the case of anal or oral sex (this was already the case with vaginal sex) So the idea would be that if one person was over 18 and the other wasnt its not auto sex offender. The laws that are in place are still in place, statutory rape of a girl 17 and a guy thats 20 (if both sides consented) would not put the adult on the registry by default.

So in other words, made the case for gays entirely up to whatever corrupt judge that gets assigned to the case, no more gays on the sex offender registry list for you guys...but they've been telegraphing for long enough that they want all whites to degenerate as quickly as possible, stop reproducing except where its racemixing, have as many gays and trannies as possible. DNA not separated enough yet for the denver int'l culling.

[Pony]

news flash, an 11 year old's tits on film qualifies as child pornography


Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Tex., became the latest Republican politician to criticize Netflix for streaming the French film “Cuties,” calling on the Justice Department to investigate whether the film violated child pornography laws by exposing “a minor’s bare breast”—but that allegation is not true, and appears based on a false rumor.

The rumor originated from IMDB’s “Parent’s Guide” for the independent French film, which initially said “Cuties” shows "female breast nudity of a minor during an erotic dance scene," according to screenshots circulating widely online.

The guide has since been changed to accurately describe the movie, which only briefly shows the bare breast of a woman, who is not underage, dancing in a video, according to a Forbes viewing of the movie. (IMDB did not immediately respond to a request for comment, and a Netflix spokesperson confirmed the film does not contain any underage nudity).

Not trying to defend the film here, from the pics I've seen it seems way across the line. I've no interest in watching it, just trying to clear up the rumors about it. Even without "an 11 year old's tit" it's still exploiting children.

[FBD]

Why'd imdb have a warning saying it was underage tit, then....now that there's outrage, oh its not underage, dont worry?

https://www.cleveland.com/open/2020/09/ohio-ag-dave-yost-asks-netflix-to-remove-cuties.html

Ohio AG Dave Yost asks Netflix to remove ‘Cuties’

COLUMBUS, Ohio—Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost on Monday joined three other state attorneys general in asking Netflix to take down the movie “Cuties,” arguing that it sexualizes children in a way that is “counterproductive” in the fight against human trafficking.

Yost and the AGs of Louisiana, Texas, and Florida are the latest politicians to condemn the movie, whose plot centers on an 11-year-old Senegalese immigrant in France who joins a twerking-heavy dance troupe.

In a letter to Netflix CEO Reed Hastings, Yost wrote that although the director of “Cuties,” Maïmouna Doucouré, has stated the film is meant to fight the hypersexualization of young girls, “the manner in which the film attempts to do so is misguided and does more harm than good.”

Yost stated the movie at one point shows a young girl’s breast, portrays “children using their bodies in a sexual manner to get themselves out of trouble,” graphically “focuses on the clothed genitalia of children,” and “shows the creation and publication of child pornography.”

Such images, Yost writes, serve “as fodder for those with criminal imaginations, serving to normalize the view that children are sexual beings. It whets the appetites of those who wish to harm our children in the most unimaginable ways—ways I have had to prosecute.”

“Cuties” was uncontroversial when it was first released in France, and the film won Doucouré a directing award at this year’s Sundance film festival.

However, when Netflix began streaming the movie, the poster it released to advertise it stirred up major criticism for sexualizing young girls. Netflix apologized and removed the artwork, but soon afterward a second wave of criticism began to grow about the film itself, including from several members of Congress and proponents of the QAnon conspiracy theory.

Supporters of “Cuties” say critics' narrative about the film is inaccurate or distorted, noting that many prominent detractors haven’t actually seen it.

Yost spokesman Steve Irwin said he didn’t know whether the Ohio AG has seen “Cuties,” though he said “at least one if not multiple staffers” in Yost’s office reviewed the film.

Read Yost’s letter here:


Administration
Office 614-728-5458
Fax 614-466-5087

September 14, 2020
Reed Hastings
Netflix
100 Winchester Circle
Los Gatos, CA 95032
Mr. Hastings,
I vehemently oppose the continued streaming of the movie “Cuties” on Netflix, and request that
you voluntarily remove it from your service due to the great harm it causes to our children.
While the filmmaker’s asserted desire to fight the hypersexualization of young girls is admirable,
the manner in which the film attempts to do so is misguided and does more harm than good.
This film contains the gratuitous exposure of a young girl’s breast; it repeatedly shows children
using their bodies in a sexual manner to get themselves out of trouble; it graphically focuses on
the clothed genitalia of children; and it shows the creation and publication of child pornography.
Repeated images of eleven-year old children gyrating, “twerking,” and simulating sex in tight,
skimpy clothes simply serves as fodder for those with criminal imaginations, serving to
normalize the view that children are sexual beings. It whets the appetites of those who wish to
harm our children in the most unimaginable ways—ways I have had to prosecute.
In this era where we are fighting a seemingly never-ending battle against human trafficking, this
film is counterproductive. The sexualization of our children leads traffickers to view them as
commodities that can be sold, over and over again. Traffickers often step in when children face
vulnerabilities similar to those of the protagonist in “Cuties.” We should be teaching our
children about healthy conversations and safe spaces to deal with their vulnerabilities, not
normalizing hypersexualization as a way to become “popular” and a means to work through the
issues they might face in their everyday lives.
In short, this film does immeasurable damage to all of us fighting to keep our children safe.
Sincerely,

Dave Yost
Ohio Attorney General

Jeff Landry
Louisiana Attorney General

Ken Paxton
Texas Attorney General

Ashley Moody
Florida Attorney General

30 E. Broad St., 17th Floor Columbus, OH 43215
www.OhioAttorneyGeneral.gov









:-k

Maïmouna Doucouré, has stated the film is meant to fight the hypersexualization of young girls,
So we're going to fight the hypersexualization of young girls, by hypersexualizing them, and having many many scenes with the camera pointed directly at their genitals.

Is anyone actually dumb enough to fall for excuses like this from sick fkn peodphiles? These people need to be dangling from the end of a rope.

[Pony]

The #1 song by an artist young girls idolize.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsm4poTWjMs

[lost in melb.]

news flash, an 11 year old's tits on film qualifies as child pornography

Just because you want something to be so, doesn't make it so

[FBD]

Just because you want something to be so, doesn't make it so

Maybe down under it doesnt qualify as kiddie porn, but it does here

[lost in melb.]

Maybe down under it doesnt qualify as kiddie porn, but it does here

Again, you're wrong. Doesn't matter how many times you wanted to be it's not the case. The movie has an MA rating, distasteful though you may consider it.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

https://i.imgur.com/qfvNp1L.png

https://www.justice.gov/criminal-ceos/child-pornography

The flash of a bare breast (or butt for that matter) is not 'sexually explicit' and would not be considered child pornography under US law. Distasteful yes, but not CP.

[FBD]

:hand: pedos get the rope [-(

[FBD]

https://i.imgur.com/fuHYWzL.jpg

[lost in melb.]

What a joke :lol: