Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 35

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

  1. #16
    Shelter Dweller Hugh_Janus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Riding this motherfucking beat like a tractor
    Posts
    12,602
    vCash
    3000
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1,582 Times in 1,192 Posts
    they might look different on a mainstream movie

  2. #17
    aka TheInvisibleMan Griffin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    9,477
    vCash
    1000
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Thanks
    4,213
    Thanked 7,023 Times in 3,854 Posts
    i'm seeing Bree's twins right now


    .... i may need a towell

  3. #18
    unedited FBD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    26,000LYR out, paying taxes to pedophiles
    Posts
    24,602
    vCash
    1000
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Thanks
    15,855
    Thanked 5,822 Times in 3,934 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by lost in melb. View Post
    Actually it's not. But anyhows...lol
    So nudity of an 11 year old isnt breaking any laws think ya need to get your head checked brotha


  4. #19
    unedited FBD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    26,000LYR out, paying taxes to pedophiles
    Posts
    24,602
    vCash
    1000
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Thanks
    15,855
    Thanked 5,822 Times in 3,934 Posts
    they know they are getting busted and are trying to normalize so as to prepare for a softer landing



    pedos still get the rope

  5. #20
    Shelter Dweller lost in melb.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Down Under
    Posts
    23,764
    vCash
    7596
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Thanks
    18,672
    Thanked 7,553 Times in 5,206 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FBD View Post
    So nudity of an 11 year old isnt breaking any laws think ya need to get your head checked brotha

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

  6. #21
    Hal killed Tormund! Pony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Borneo
    Posts
    17,294
    vCash
    2000
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Thanks
    7,292
    Thanked 7,740 Times in 4,205 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FBD View Post
    So nudity of an 11 year old isnt breaking any laws 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.

  7. #22
    unedited FBD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    26,000LYR out, paying taxes to pedophiles
    Posts
    24,602
    vCash
    1000
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Thanks
    15,855
    Thanked 5,822 Times in 3,934 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Pony View Post
    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

  8. #23
    unedited FBD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    26,000LYR out, paying taxes to pedophiles
    Posts
    24,602
    vCash
    1000
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Thanks
    15,855
    Thanked 5,822 Times in 3,934 Posts

  9. #24
    Shelter Dweller PorkChopSandwiches's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    77,135
    vCash
    5000
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Thanks
    47,197
    Thanked 29,254 Times in 16,488 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FBD View Post
    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.






  10. The Following User Says Thank You to PorkChopSandwiches For This Useful Post:

    KevinD (09-14-2020)

  11. #25
    unedited FBD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    26,000LYR out, paying taxes to pedophiles
    Posts
    24,602
    vCash
    1000
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Thanks
    15,855
    Thanked 5,822 Times in 3,934 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by PorkChopSandwiches View Post
    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.

  12. #26
    Hal killed Tormund! Pony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Borneo
    Posts
    17,294
    vCash
    2000
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Thanks
    7,292
    Thanked 7,740 Times in 4,205 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FBD View Post
    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.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Pony For This Useful Post:

    FBD (09-15-2020), lost in melb. (09-20-2020)

  14. #27
    unedited FBD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    26,000LYR out, paying taxes to pedophiles
    Posts
    24,602
    vCash
    1000
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Thanks
    15,855
    Thanked 5,822 Times in 3,934 Posts
    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/...ve-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







    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.

  15. #28
    Hal killed Tormund! Pony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Borneo
    Posts
    17,294
    vCash
    2000
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Thanks
    7,292
    Thanked 7,740 Times in 4,205 Posts
    The #1 song by an artist young girls idolize.


  16. The Following User Says Thank You to Pony For This Useful Post:

    lost in melb. (09-20-2020)

  17. #29
    Shelter Dweller lost in melb.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Down Under
    Posts
    23,764
    vCash
    7596
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Thanks
    18,672
    Thanked 7,553 Times in 5,206 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by FBD View Post
    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

  18. #30
    unedited FBD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    26,000LYR out, paying taxes to pedophiles
    Posts
    24,602
    vCash
    1000
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Thanks
    15,855
    Thanked 5,822 Times in 3,934 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by lost in melb. View Post
    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

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •