Netflix just released a movie that involves 11 year old girls twerking in a highly sexualized manner; and that's not the worst of it
So, I thought the Cuties/Netflix thing was being sensationalized... but the IMDB trigger warning literally describes "female breast nudity of a minor(!!!)"
— Cabot Phillips (@cabot_phillips) September 10, 2020
If you had that on your computer, you're going to jail. If it's on Netflix, it's art??? pic.twitter.com/0eu8dZDX5j
But the left is defending the film
But don’t worry guys, child porn is fine as long as it’s in the name of fighting the patriarchy. pic.twitter.com/mEyUXBPq9s
— Cabot Phillips (@cabot_phillips) September 10, 2020
People are tweeting that child nudity, erotic dancing by 11 year olds, and 11 year olds grabbing their crotches while wearing suggestive outfits are all ok because the movie's message is to condemn such sexual exploitation.
The first obvious point is that having 11 year old actresses do things that are supposedly being condemned proves that those things aren't really being condemned because if they were no one would force little girls to do them.
The second obvious point is that it's the patriarchy that wants child porn and pornography in general. There's not a whole lot of little girls who want to be sexually exploited by adults. And women are rarely enthused about pornography because they tend to be into love not lust.
The third obvious point is that if the people who made this film weren't trying to make child porn they could have shown the girls in the outfits and then instead of showing the girls exposing themselves and twerking panned over the audience showing the sleaze that were attending the show. But no the people behind this film had to show little girls being sexually exploited.
This isn't the first time Netflix has stood behind child porn. A few years ago a movie had a 10 year old girl masturbating and Netflix refused to remove it.
I'm not that familiar with QAnon but when we see things like leftists defending this movie while simultaneously attacking QAnon for claiming there is a cabal of pedophiles it makes one wonder.
No decent parent would have allowed their little daughter to "perform" in this film. But then child molesters apparently often get kids because the parents are willing to sell their kids so it's not surprising that Netflix could find parents who would debase their kids for a few bucks.
I dropped my Netflix subscription after the first child porn issue.
If you have a Netflix subscription and you don't cancel it you're supporting pedophilia.
It's really that simple.
No one needs Netflix but if you keep giving them your money you're part of the problem.
Posts
2 comments:
> The first obvious point is that having 11 year old actresses do things that are supposedly being condemned proves that those things aren't really being condemned because if they were no one would force little girls to do them.
who says they were forced? further it's often reasonable to reenact terrible things for the purposes of condemning it. For example, plenty of films reenact war and have an anti-war message. The re-enactment is done in a safe manner so that nobody is hurt (or feels exploited).
> The second obvious point is that it's the patriarchy that wants child porn and pornography in general.
This point is a non-sequitur? Ok, so even if it's the patriarchy that wants porn what does that have to do with the film? The tweet says it's an anti-patriarchy film and the film's message is opposition to sexualization of children. Everything matches up. I mean the director/writer is a woman.
> And women are rarely enthused about pornography because they tend to be into love not lust.
Oh, my sweet summer child. If only you were more worldly (or knew how to look up statistics) you would know how wrong you are. Pornography consumption amongst women is not "rare".
> The third obvious point is that if the people who made this film weren't trying to make child porn they could have ...
I like how you are giving notes to the creators of the film on how best to convey their message without having seen the film (or having a background in filmmaking).
> panned over the audience showing the sleaze that were attending the show
Maybe the director was trying to make a more subtle point... or just knows how to make an impactful film. Either way you won't know since you won't even see the thing.
> People are tweeting that child nudity, erotic dancing by 11 year olds, and 11 year olds grabbing their crotches while wearing suggestive outfits are all ok because the movie's message is to condemn such sexual exploitation.
Correct. Not all nudity is pornography. Not all "erotic dancing" is designed to titillate. Do you also think nudity in classical paintings is pornography? Is the Pulitzer Prize winning photo of naked Phan Thi Kim Phuc "child pornography" to you?Context matters and you, having not even seen the film, totally lack context. And yet you still feel qualified to comment.
I'm leaving this comment up because it shows just how depraved leftists are.
This guy is defending child porn.
That says it all.
Post a Comment