# Netflix comes under fire for sexualising teens in new film 'Cuties



## CrownedEagle (Aug 22, 2020)

Breaking the barriers for young black women, the movie is about the coming of age of an 11-year-old French girl and her friends caught between traditionalist immigrant families and hypersexualised pop culture.

French screenwriter Maïmouna Doucouré made her directorial debut with the new film that bagged the best director award at the Sundance film festival earlier this year.

While fans were upset that the poster was promoting paedophilia, exploitation and Islamophobia, some fans accused Netflix of destroying the career of the French-Senegalese film-maker, and risked her safety in its portrayal of the film.


The now-deleted film poster showed these teens taking part in a dance competition, and showing off suggestive poses triggered the social media frenzy.

The US-based video streaming platform soon realised its mistake, deleted the older post, and issued an apology on Twitter on Thursday



Read more at:


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 22, 2020)

This was already posted.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 22, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> This was already posted.



Where ? i can't find the thread


----------



## T-Bag (Aug 22, 2020)

Trying to normalize pedophilia. Nasty.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 22, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> Where ? i can't find the thread



@Le Male Absolu brought it up in the convo thread. Hasn't been a thread-thread yet.


----------



## Nemesis (Aug 22, 2020)

T-Bag said:


> Trying to normalize pedophilia. Nasty.



It's the opposite.  The movie is about how sexualising preteens is gross.


----------



## Canute87 (Aug 22, 2020)

T-Bag said:


> Trying to normalize pedophilia. Nasty.



Isn't the first.

They tried this shit with "pretty baby"


----------



## makeoutparadise (Aug 22, 2020)

Someone tried to make the actress who played 11 from stranger things “one of the hottest celebrities of 2016” if I recall 

really guys wtf?


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 22, 2020)

makeoutparadise said:


> Someone tried to make the actress who played 11 from stranger things “one of the hottest celebrities of 2016” if I recall
> 
> really guys wtf?



Cosigned, don't normalize girls shaving their heads.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)

Netflix poster mislead many people included me. It attracted attention in a very bad manner. Hopefully the clarification about the attempt of the movie might turn this bad advertisement into an interest for the topic in question.


----------



## Sequester (Aug 23, 2020)

Nemesis said:


> It's the opposite.  The movie is about how sexualising preteens is gross.



they have an odd way of showing that


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

Sequester said:


> they have an odd way of showing that



It's not,
You have a song like WAP trending on Tiktok.
Then you have Biden doing an interview with Cardi B.
The Netflix department just trying to target their demos for this movie.
Probably the same people listening to Cardi B.
Young teens.

Its filth.
This degeneracy has been going on for a while but this was too blatant.
If the movie is about calling this out then good.


----------



## Sequester (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> It's not,
> You have a song like WAP trending on Tiktok.
> Then you have Biden doing an interview with Cardi B.
> The Netflix department just trying to target their demos for this movie.
> ...



i am not with that poster.

haven't seen the movie but looking at the synopsis i am not getting these call to arms against degeneracy vibes you are talking about


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

Sequester said:


> i am not with that poster.
> 
> haven't seen the movie but looking at the synopsis i am not getting these call to arms against degeneracy vibes you are talking about




Maïmouna Doucouré’s _Cuties_, available on Netflix from September 9, has been met with   of , as well as a wider online public that believes that the film sexualizes children. To be fair, the poster Netflix initially chose to promote the French film, which won the World Cinema Directing Award at Sundance in 2019, was a grossly inappropriate choice—one that decontextualized a scene from the film in order to promote a movie about the complexities of growing up in both modest and modern cultures at once. Netflix has taken the image down but, despite outcry, is continuing with the release of the film. 

People across the political spectrum have expressed rightful concern about the streaming giant’s choice of a photo of twerking pre-teen girls in revealing outfits as a way to garner interest in the film, and Netflix has accepted responsibility for the misstep. But calls for the film’s release to be canceled altogether are deeply misguided and reactionary. _Cuties_ is precisely about the too-easy ways we choose to condemn and isolate children as they take risks and make mistakes growing up, no matter their cultural backgrounds. And the film has a major lesson for religious conservatives and moral panickers about what fear, condemnation, and emotional neglect can do to the young people who turn to us for guidance in the midst of turbulent personal awakenings.

In _Cuties_, Aminata, or Amy, is a 14-year-old French-Senegalese girl of Muslim faith. Her family has just moved to Paris, but her father, still in Senegal, has decided to take on a new wife. Amy sees her mother visibly shaken by the development, and secretly witnesses her hit herself in response to her pain about the marriage and her obligation to pretend she welcomes it. As the family prepares for the wedding, Amy begins to cross over from a period of childhood innocence within her Muslim community to the demands of becoming a woman, both in the religious context, in which teens marry, as well as in modern Paris, where teens post flirtatiously on social media and wear crop tops and short-shorts. 

At her new school, Amy sees a group of audacious girls stage a flash mob during which all the kids in the schoolyard suddenly freeze into various poses. The principal is visibly shaken by the benign action, as well as the girls’ coquettish outfits including form-fitting dresses and flashy purses. As she drags them to class they scream at her, “What about freedom of expression?!” Indeed. 

Amy, for her part, boldly seeks acceptance into the group after she sees them practicing a dance routine at an abandoned railway track. The Cuties, as they call their dance group, reject and bully Amy before embracing her dance skills. They’re not the kindest or most tolerant bunch, but they offer Amy a dose of an imaginative, risk-taking life; one that does not shirk from curiosity and connection, but runs after it, no matter the price. The most emotionally caring of the girls, Angelica, lives in Amy’s building, and they bond over the isolation they feel in their families, as well as their growing estrangement from their parents, who seem too busy and too disapproving to engage their interests. Instead, these girls must navigate their love of expression alone; of course, in a world marked by the exploitation of women of all ages and within all cultures, they stumble. 

*Doucouré’s film rigorously examines the ways teen girls mimic the images they see on social media, the ones that tell them their bodies are all wrong, their presentation too childish, their lives unremarkable. *But instead of preaching to children on the basis of fear, Doucouré is willing to look frankly at what is so appealing about lascivious dancing to girls too young to understand sex even on a very fundamental level. The Cuties find a kind of power in their movement and have very little insight into the wider context of their self-sexualization. Yet, instead of listening and speaking to these young girls, asking them about their interests and figuring out how to support them in ways that don’t threaten their ability to be children, the adults around them mostly respond with shame and rejection. 

Only one elder within Amy’s community is able to see through her transgressions initially—not only the sexualized dancing and dressing, but also a violent act she commits at school against a student who harasses her—and addresses the root of the rebellion. This elder connects Amy’s pain to her mother’s pain, her lashing out to her mother’s inability to continue to shoulder the burden of what seems to be a deeply one-sided marriage. He looks at Amy, spends time with her, and concludes that “there is no evil or devil” within the child, but perhaps a need for Amy’s mother to know that she can liberate herself from a marriage that does not offer her love or freedom. 
...
The fear-based response to Doucouré’s film, based in Netflix’s major marketing gaffe, speaks to a culture-crossing desire for absolute goodness—one that we often transpose onto our children. As a girl (or any child for that matter), you don’t have to grow up in a modest or deeply religious community to be on the receiving end of shaming or even violence for trying to express your femininity or independence and perhaps going too far in the process. There’s always someone to call you out rather than bring you in; even strangers seem more concerned with how you look or dress than in what’s going on with you internally. Many girls grow up into women who find creative ways to rebel against these standards, using their own forms of expression to devise the terms of their liberation; other women, still, spend their lives turning their own experiences of oppression back on others. Walden explains, “To love other people fully and truly is to say that there is no need for the strong to impose their will on the weak; it is to show by example that the whole apparatus of domination has no reason for being except sin and evil.”
Doucouré’s _Cuties_ takes this doctrine to heart, criticizing the multiple layers of societal exploitation and coercion that impose surveillance on girls rather than meet them with the compassion and openness that could actually extinguish such exploitation. To refuse the opportunity to hear this message is only to perpetuate the problems all the outrage around the film claims to reject.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

I dont trust daily beast 100% but if the movie bringing attention to the issue then good.
Very silly mistake by netflix to market the movie like that tho lol


----------



## Sequester (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> Maïmouna Doucouré’s _Cuties_, available on Netflix from September 9, has been met with   of , as well as a wider online public that believes that the film sexualizes children. To be fair, the poster Netflix initially chose to promote the French film, which won the World Cinema Directing Award at Sundance in 2019, was a grossly inappropriate choice—one that decontextualized a scene from the film in order to promote a movie about the complexities of growing up in both modest and modern cultures at once. Netflix has taken the image down but, despite outcry, is continuing with the release of the film.
> 
> People across the political spectrum have expressed rightful concern about the streaming giant’s choice of a photo of twerking pre-teen girls in revealing outfits as a way to garner interest in the film, and Netflix has accepted responsibility for the misstep. But calls for the film’s release to be canceled altogether are deeply misguided and reactionary. _Cuties_ is precisely about the too-easy ways we choose to condemn and isolate children as they take risks and make mistakes growing up, no matter their cultural backgrounds. And the film has a major lesson for religious conservatives and moral panickers about what fear, condemnation, and emotional neglect can do to the young people who turn to us for guidance in the midst of turbulent personal awakenings.
> 
> ...



so a self expression movie about little girls dancing and dressing provocatively will somehow not attract weirdos who want to see little girls dance and dress provocatively?


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

Sequester said:


> so a self expression movie about little girls dancing and dressing provocatively will somehow not attract weirdos who want to see little girls dance and dress provocatively?


That's not the attention of the movie.


----------



## Sequester (Aug 23, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> That's not the attention of the movie.



well i don't think a pedo will look at this movie's intention and respect the premise of a little girl self defining and owning her feminity 

i think its much more likely they'll do some creepy pedo shit


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

Sequester said:


> well i don't think a pedo will look at this movie's intention and respect the premise of a little girl self defining and owning her feminity
> 
> i think its much more likely they'll do some creepy pedo shit



Agree,
But I haven't seen the movie nor I ever so who knows....


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 23, 2020)




----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

nice try fed.
not gonna play it,
don't wanna be on no watch-lists thanks


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

Sequester said:


> well i don't think a pedo will look at this movie's intention and respect the premise of a little girl self defining and owning her feminity
> 
> i think its much more likely they'll do some creepy pedo shit


Right because this movie would be a catalyst to enable them to do something they wouldn't have done before.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

Imagine getting Tucker to curse? smh


"Promoting kid hugging,  normalizing kid hugging,  providing fresh content for kid huggers; reprehensible. "
Netflix is deeply sorry they got caught, nothing else.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)

Sequester said:


> they have an odd way of showing that


The Netflix poster completely mislead the intention of the movie.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 23, 2020)

Like I said in the convo, it looks like a preteen dance movie and they're trying to attract a preteen audience by marketing it like a cool dance movie and then give the message. Do I trust the french to handle this tastefully? No, they're french. But the director's an immigrant so


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> Like I said in the convo, it looks like a preteen dance movie and they're trying to attract a preteen audience by marketing it like a cool dance movie and then give the message. Do I trust the french to handle this tastefully? No, they're french. But the director's an immigrant so



yeah we get it,
Just like sequester said tho,
this movie is literally showing young girls twerking in small outfits
Who you think gonna watch this?
its trash.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 23, 2020)

I'll give this much to conservative islam.

Some of our western liberation is just degeneracy and hedonism.

Not all of it


But some of it.


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> Imagine getting Tucker to curse? smh
> 
> 
> "Promoting kid hugging,  normalizing kid hugging,  providing fresh content for kid huggers; reprehensible. "
> Netflix is deeply sorry they got caught, nothing else.


I'm not sure 8f that guy knows Hollywood had nothing to do with it since its origins are French.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> Like I said in the convo, it looks like a preteen dance movie and they're trying to attract a preteen audience by marketing it like a cool dance movie and then give the message. Do I trust the french to handle this tastefully? No, they're french. But the director's an immigrant so


Before Netflix started the disastrous promotion of this movie, it was acclaimed by reviewers. The movie was already released in France and didn’t catch any attention because the communication was completely different. The communication in France was probably more orientated to what the movie want to says. 
It’s funny that I can see now the US far right keep saying it’s a pedo movie while some Muslims in France see it as Islamophobic. The main character is lost between pressure of the Muslim traditions from her family and her desire to do like her friends at school.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> I'm not sure 8f that guy knows Hollywood had nothing to do with it since its origins are French.



don't worry about the title some youtuber chose for the video
worry about the content.
Protect young girls.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Before Netflix started the disastrous promotion of this movie, it was acclaimed by reviewers. The movie was already released in France and didn’t catch any attention because the communication was completely different. The communication in France was probably more orientated to what the movie want to says.
> It’s funny that I can see now the US far right keep saying it’s a pedo movie while some Muslims in France see it as Islamophobic. The main character is lost between pressure of the Muslim traditions from her family and her desire to do like her friends at school.



I think we just dont want to see little girls shaking their whatevers in skimpy outfits...
Netflix probably got all promotional material from the filmmakers


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 23, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Before Netflix started the disastrous promotion of this movie, it was acclaimed by reviewers. The movie was already released in France and didn’t catch any attention because the communication was completely different. The communication in France was probably more orientated to what the movie want to says.



So basically,


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> I think we just dont want to see little girls shaking their whatevers in skimpy outfits...
> Netflix probably got all promotional material from the filmmakers


No, they made it themselves. The French movie look more what we call a “film d’auteur “. These kind of film doesn’t do this kind of images for promotion.
I don’t think the girls posed for this poster. It’s look like it was massively edited. You can even see on the girl the left a weird deformation on her hand (probably related to the edition).


For what you said, I’m not even sure you’ll any shocking dance in this movie since the goal is to criticise both the pressure of Islamic traditions and the influence of social media that push for the sexualisation of little girl. The topic is interesting actually.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)




----------



## Nep Nep (Aug 23, 2020)

Jesus Christ that cover is MAXIMUM uncomfortable. 

Help me out here brave browser....


----------



## stream (Aug 23, 2020)

It seems a pretty good movie, it won a lot of acclaim. But yeah, that image is trash


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> don't worry about the title some youtuber chose for the video
> worry about the content.
> Protect young girls.


You didn’t bother watching the video did you?


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 23, 2020)

Sequester said:


> well i don't think a pedo will look at this movie's intention and respect the premise of a little girl self defining and owning her feminity
> 
> i think its much more likely they'll do some creepy pedo shit



This film denounces the hypersexualization of little girls at an increasingly younger age, the author speaks about this subject after having observed this in her own neighborhood. It is primarily addressed to parents so that they pay attention to their kids more. Pedophiles are not the target, they can also find better content on the internet by ljust ooking a little starting with the anime promotes this phenomenon sometime in a good light.

I also the selective outrage of Americans on twitter regarding this movie very ironic when I remember that this hypersexualization started with their shitty reality TV like Toodler and Tiara or Dance Mom which popularized this phenomenon and which still continues until today. 


*Spoiler*: __ 











But let focus our energy on this show instead of fighting the real problem

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Sequester (Aug 23, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> Right because this movie would be a catalyst to enable them to do something they wouldn't have done before.





CrownedEagle said:


> This film denounces the hypersexualization of little girls at an increasingly younger age, the author speaks about this subject after having observed this in her own neighborhood. It is primarily addressed to parents so that they pay attention to their kids more. Pedophiles are not the target, they can also find better content on the internet by ljust ooking a little starting with the anime promotes this phenomenon sometime in a good light.



i didn't think they were the target audience
or saying it would be the catalyst toward pedophilia

what i don't agree with is having children in provocative imagery where they can be exploited.

if the poster i have seen isn't indicative of the content within the movie then i don't have a problem

i just don't like shirley temple/nabokov type shit


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 23, 2020)

Sequester said:


> i didn't think they were the target audience
> or saying it would be the catalyst toward pedophilia
> 
> what i don't agree with is having children in provocative imagery where they can be exploited.
> ...



Seem difficult to me for seriously speak about the hypersexualization of young girls without showing it but i can understand why people won't like seeing this kind of thing. But saying this movie promote pedophilia like i seen on twitter go too far.


----------



## San Juan Wolf (Aug 23, 2020)

Nemesis said:


> It's the opposite.  The movie is about how sexualising preteens is gross.



Someone demanded these pre teens dress in revealing outfits and pose for the poster so....you know, excuses.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 23, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Before Netflix started the disastrous promotion of this movie, it was acclaimed by reviewers. The movie was already released in France and didn’t catch any attention because the communication was completely different. The communication in France was probably more orientated to what the movie want to says.
> It’s funny that I can see now the US far right keep saying it’s a pedo movie while some Muslims in France see it as Islamophobic. The main character is lost between pressure of the Muslim traditions from her family and her desire to do like her friends at school.



The SJW and the FR incel were totaly lost on this one, a movie who denounce peophilia by showing girl tweerking and emanciped them from their religion filmed and realized by a black immigrant woman. Their brains wasn't able to proceed so much contraditory information at the same time.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)

I really felt some people want to convince themselves that it’s a pedo movie even if the information reveal that it’s not just to not face the fact that their first impression was wrong. Come on guys, it’s ok, we all be fooled by Netflix poster. 
The conservatives should actually feel fine with a movie that criticise hyper sexualisation of young girls. Netflix poster is shot in the back of those who criticise this hyper sexualisation.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)

San Juan Wolf said:


> Someone demanded these pre teens dress in revealing outfits and pose for the poster so....you know, excuses.


Not sure they posed for that. The poster look edited, especially the hand of the girl in the left.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> The SJW and the FR invel were totaly lost on this one, a movie who denounce peophilia by showing girl tweerking and emanciped them from their religion filmed and realized by a black immigrant woman. The brains were on a deep trial.


At least the outrage stopped very quickly in France when it was reveal what the movie really denouncing....or I should says the outrage changed because now the movie is Islamophobic.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

imagine defending a child hugging movie?


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> imagine defending a child hugging movie?



Imagine judging and know everything abou this movie with a poster and a trailer.......


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> Imagine judging a movie with a poster and a traiter.......



its a degenerate movie,
showing me more denegerate images and shows doesn't make it any better.
whataboutism is dumb.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> imagine defending a child hugging movie?


Imagine attack a movie that denounce hyper sexualisation of girls and call yourself “conservative”.


----------



## Sherlōck (Aug 23, 2020)

One thing I hate about West is the hyper sexualisation of anything and everything. 

I am a liberal guy but I prefer modesty to bikini while I am outside.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)

Sherlōck said:


> One thing I hate about West is the hyper sexualisation of anything and everything.
> 
> I am a liberal guy but I prefer modesty to bikini while I am outside.


You used to have sexy avatar man. Can you elaborate what exactly you hate ?


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> its a degenerate movie,
> showing me more denegerate images and shows doesn't make it any better.
> whataboutism is dumb.





CrownedEagle said:


> Imagine judging and know everything abou this movie with a poster and a trailer.......



You don't even know what is whattaboutism when you just do this in your previous quote.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 23, 2020)

The movie might shock some people tho even if we know the message of this movie. Some scene might be embarrassing.


----------



## Ultra Instinct Vegito (Aug 23, 2020)

That's disturbing


----------



## Ruthless Tsuchikage (Aug 23, 2020)

Oh look, its anime loli pandering but without the anime.


----------



## Nep Nep (Aug 23, 2020)

Sherlōck said:


> One thing I hate about *West is the hyper sexualisation of anything* and everything.
> 
> I am a liberal guy but I prefer modesty to bikini while I am outside.



Europe is significantly more sexually liberated than the West. We are still very much tied to our puritanical roots.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

Nep Nep said:


> Europe is significantly more sexually liberated than the West. We are still very much tied to our puritanical roots.



Don't Asians say west to mean "white people"?


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> Don't Asians say west to mean "white people"?



Yeah, The West includes all of us european folk. 

But just the same america has a different tone than the rest of europe. As with everything.


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

Sherlōck said:


> One thing I hate about West is the hyper sexualisation of anything and everything.
> 
> I am a liberal guy but I prefer modesty to bikini while I am outside.


The East is any better.


----------



## Fel1x (Aug 23, 2020)

ehm
there are many shows on netflix with all kinds of straight, gay or lesbian sex involved with school kids
what is the difference? I mean why only now it is under fire?


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Aug 23, 2020)

TV-MA is suspect as fuck.


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

Fel1x said:


> ehm
> there are many shows on netflix with all kinds of straight, gay or lesbian sex involved with school kids
> what is the difference? I mean why only now it is under fire?


Because these are actual children and not adult playing high school children.  Are you not paying the fuck attention to what's going on in this thread?


----------



## Fel1x (Aug 23, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> Because these are actual children and not adult playing high school children.  Are you not paying the fuck attention to what's going on in this thread?


relax, man. why even be so aggressive? am i defending pedophilia or what?

even with adult actors this can be viewed as early sex propaganda


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

Fel1x said:


> relax, man. why even be so aggressive? am i defending pedophilia or what?
> 
> even with adult actors this can be viewed as early sex propaganda


I'm aggressive because I'm the poster this forum deserves, but not necessarily need right now.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 23, 2020)

I wonder if that poster is a real shoot or a mockup.


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> I wonder if that poster is a real shoot or a mockup.


It's from a scene in the movie


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 23, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> It's from a scene in the movie



Yikes.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> TV-MA is suspect as fuck.





Fel1x said:


> am i defending pedophilia or what?



It's a movie about very young girls in skimpy outfits doing "twerk" dance and aimed at older audiences....

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Fel1x (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> It's a movie about very young girls in skimpy outfits doing "twerk" dance and aimed at older audiences....


seems like it
but I would like to know opinion of @DemonDragonJ first, before making any strong conclusions

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

Fel1x said:


> seems like it
> but I would like to know opinion of @DemonDragonJ first, before making any strong conclusions


Are you not an adult?


----------



## Fel1x (Aug 23, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> Are you not an adult?


you gotta respect his opinion


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

Fel1x said:


> seems like it
> but I would like to know opinion of @DemonDragonJ first, before making any strong conclusions



Good point,
Well see what he says.
He is usually right down the middle of things.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Aug 23, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> It's a movie about very young girls in skimpy outfits doing "twerk" dance and aimed at older audiences....


Unless your reason for watching it is "just inspecting it" of course.


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

Fel1x said:


> you gotta respect his opinion


Do you need him to blow your food if it's too hot?


----------



## Fel1x (Aug 23, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> Do you need him to blow your food if it's too hot?


do you have something against it?


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 23, 2020)

Fel1x said:


> do you have something against it?



Don't call DDJ an it.


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 23, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> Don't call DDJ an it.


Might as well be.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 23, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> Don't call DDJ an it.



Yeah he has to be more careful but I understood he was talking about the situation.
Others might not.


----------



## DemonDragonJ (Aug 24, 2020)

Fel1x said:


> seems like it
> but I would like to know opinion of @DemonDragonJ first, before making any strong conclusions



Adolescence is a time in which a person transitions from childhood to adulthood, and the most significant part of that transition is becoming able to reproduce and, by extension, developing an interest in sexuality to facilitate reproduction. Therefore, I feel that it is perfectly acceptable to portray adolescent characters in a sexual manner, because doing so will help them to be confident in their own bodies and not be ashamed of their own developing feelings of sexuality. If the characters had not yet started to go through puberty, I would agree that it would be very disturbing to sexualize then, but, since they have, it is not.

As a side note, some people may not like this comparison, but it took a great amount of time and effort for homosexuality to gain widespread acceptance in mass media; compare portrayals of homosexual characters from thirty, or even twenty. years ago, to portrays, today, and one can clearly see how significantly those portrayals have improved. Similarly, it will be a long and difficult struggle, but, eventually and gradually, audiences will accept that people begin to develop feelings of sexuality as soon as they begin to go through puberty, not after puberty is finished.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 24, 2020)

DemonDragonJ said:


> Adolescence is a time in which a person transitions from childhood to adulthood, and the most significant part of that transition is becoming able to reproduce and, by extension, developing an interest in sexuality to facilitate reproduction. Therefore, I feel that it is perfectly acceptable to portray adolescent characters in a sexual manner, because doing so will help them to be confident in their own bodies and not be ashamed of their own developing feelings of sexuality. If the characters had not yet started to go through puberty, I would agree that it would be very disturbing to sexualize then, but, since they have, it is not.
> 
> As a side note, some people may not like this comparison, but it took a great amount of time and effort for homosexuality to gain widespread acceptance in mass media; compare portrayals of homosexual characters from thirty, or even twenty. years ago, to portrays, today, and one can clearly see how significantly those portrayals have improved. Similarly, it will be a long and difficult struggle, but, eventually and gradually, audiences will accept that people begin to develop feelings of sexuality as soon as they begin to go through puberty, not after puberty is finished.



Hey you probably missed this,
I respect your opinion obviously.
But these girls are like 11 or 12
Isnt it a little too early?


----------



## DemonDragonJ (Aug 24, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> Hey you probably missed this,
> I respect your opinion obviously.
> But these girls are like 11 or 12
> Isnt it a little too early?



Yes, I suppose that it is; if they were 13 or 14, it would be better, but, sometimes, shock value is very effective. By having them be that young, the creators can then increase their age by several years if anyone complains, a tactic that is known as a "." As another example, the creators of _Team America; World Police_ deliberately had a scene of one character urinating on another, knowing that the censors would ask it to be removed, and they complied with that, which allowed them to retain all the other controversial content in that movie.


----------



## Chelydra (Aug 24, 2020)

Nemesis said:


> It's the opposite.  The movie is about how sexualising preteens is gross.



So a movie calling out the sexualization of children by sexualizing children?


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 24, 2020)

I feel like this is gonna be needed soon for some of y'all.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Aug 25, 2020)

Chelydra said:


> So a movie calling out the sexualization of children by sexualizing children?



That's all I'm getting out of the trailer and clips I've seen.

Yea, Netflix' movie poster for it was grossly inappropriate, but the movie as a whole is grossly inappropriate. It's not like the poster depicted something that isn't actually in the movie (it's indeed the focus of the movie).

I might have been interested based on the original movie poster (which is cute and unassuming), but now that Netflix' advertisement showed it for what it is, I know up front what it's about and I'm saved the time of clicking.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 25, 2020)

The level of outrage that this movie made confirms the intellectual regression and the advance of the cancel culture in this society which prevents any debate, people have reached a point where they doesn't understand subtlety or even irony, movies like American History X or The Great Dictator would be crucified by the social media moob if they were released today.

Ironically, they never have the same energy to denounce the abuses in the reality shows, anime or social networks industries like Tik Tok who sexualizes little girls in a postiive way.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 25, 2020)

Just cool it,
Regular people know this is degenerate.
If it shows the scenes it's not cool,
Simple as that.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 25, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> Just cool it,
> Regular people know this is degenerate.
> If it shows the scenes it's not cool,
> Simple as that.



Yike regular people use Tik Tok and watch anime that sexualize little girls every single days and sleep well every nights. That doesn't mean jack shit... You using this argument about what "regular people do" is fuck'in ironic since you're on the front to denounce them when they don't go in your sense.


----------



## Solar (Aug 25, 2020)

The trailer didn't look so bad. I can see why the promotion poster from Netflix would ruffle some people the wrong way though. 

I wouldn't be surprised if the people complaining are intellectually lacking, possibly without having even watched it.


----------



## Subarashii (Aug 25, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> It's a movie about very young girls in skimpy outfits doing "twerk" dance and aimed at older audiences....





Fel1x said:


> seems like it
> but I would like to know opinion of @DemonDragonJ first, before making any strong conclusions



_*Cuties*_ (: _*Mignonnes*_) is a 2020 French   film written and directed by  in her feature directorial debut. The film stars Fathia Youssouf, Médina El Aidi-Azouni, Esther Gohourou, Ilanah Cami-Goursolas and Maïmouna Gueye. The plot revolves around a traditional Senegalese  girl who is caught and torn between two contrasting sides, traditional values and Internet culture, while also discussing hypersexualization of pre-adolescent girls.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 25, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> The level of outrage that this movie made confirms the intellectual regression and the advance of the cancel culture in this society which prevents any debate, people have reached a point where they doesn't understand subtlety or even irony, movies like American History X or The Great Dictator would be crucified by the social media moob if they were released today.
> 
> Ironically, they never have the same energy to denounce the abuses in the reality shows, anime or social networks industries like Tik Tok who sexualizes little girls in a postiive way.


This movie should lead us to interrogate girls role models like Beyoncé, Nicky Minaj or Miley Cyrus but not only.


This is our future


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 25, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> This movie should lead us to interrogate girls role models like Beyoncé, Nicky Minaj or Miley Cyrus but not only.
> 
> 
> This is our future



I Swear ! people only wake up for insignifant shit when the problem has been there for years and is now everywhere in our society.

Of course, we don't like to have harsh realities fed to us. And it's easy to point a finger at the director and say that she's gross and vile to portray young girls in such a manner, but if you ever actually happened to observe how kids that age act today, you would see that this movie is incredibly true to life.


I mean, come on. What do you expect young girls of today to aspire towards, when you have videos like "WAP" being promoted as hashtag goals and female empowerment ? Who is the true villain here? The person who is shining a light on the truth or the corrupt media which feeds our broken society this mess 24/7?

You'all need to be more upset at your local middle school dance teams than this film. Y'all think there arent girls lying about their age for attention? Or being influenced by the oversexualized images on social media every day? Who are reading its okay to be 'sex positive' but have no idea what that means? Who are receiving absolutely _no actual guidance_ at home about why they are expected to be conservative, by parents who think they can just beat the thot out of them ? It's easy to ignore if we refuse to humanize the real victims of this isn't it? Banning this movie isn't going to make any of that shit go away. This is the world we've created and we are culpable whether we want to pretend it doesnt exist or not.

People are shocked to see eleven year old girls twerking in a movie when their sexualization in our society begins long before with popular endorsement this time.




In Ten year, these girls who watch who watch Keep up with Kardashian, Love Island, Jersey Shore who listen to Nicki Minaj or Cardi B, follow these pseudo influencers on their instagram accounts will one day give birth to other little girls who will follow their track and go always futher and at this time mark my words this poster will seem for you very innocent


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 25, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> I Swear ! people only wake up for insignifant shit when the problem has been there for years and is now everywhere in our society.
> 
> Of course, we don't like to have harsh realities fed to us. And it's easy to point a finger at the director and say that she's gross and vile to portray young girls in such a manner, *but if you ever actually happened to observe how kids that age act today, you would see that this movie is incredibly true to life.*


I was shocked by this. I have no knowledge about how teenagers dress nowadays. When I saw the movie trailer, I didn’t  know if the direction exaggerate it or it reflects the reality.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Aug 25, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> The level of outrage that this movie made confirms the intellectual regression and the advance of the cancel culture in this society which prevents any debate, people have reached a point where they doesn't understand subtlety or even irony, movies like American History X or The Great Dictator would be crucified by the social media moob if they were released today.
> 
> Ironically, they never have the same energy to denounce the abuses in the reality shows, *anime *or social networks industries like Tik Tok who sexualizes little girls in a postiive way.



You almost had something going there but then you lumped anime in there with social network industries that encourage children to prostitute themselves.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 25, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> You almost had something going there but then you lumped anime in there with social network industries that encourage children to prostitute themselves.



of course let pretend that there is no problem with pedophilia in anime, that the numerous scandal concerning mangaka and schoolgirls and child pornography videos like with Tatsuya Matsuki or Watsuki doesn't exist, that a lof of anime sexualize underage girls in the worst ways possible.


*Spoiler*: __ 











 that many anime involve relationships between grown ass adults and child looking characters like it was nothing because she past 18 despite looking like 9. 



*Spoiler*: __ 









/SPOILER]





Weebs should be absolved from the judgment of ordinary people anyways. Nothing wrong here.


----------



## TYPE-Rey (Aug 25, 2020)

Several high profile cases in an industry of thousands and perhaps tens of thousands of people if we include the doujin industry do not constitute anything close to "numerous" .

Let's be fair here.

And yeah, i don't agree with lumping anime together with the others for what should be obvious reasons.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 25, 2020)

TYPE-Rey said:


> Several high profile cases in an industry of thousands and perhaps tens of thousands of people if we include the doujin industry do not constitute anything close to "numerous" .
> 
> Let's be fair here.
> 
> And yeah, i don't agree with lumping anime together with the others for what should be obvious reasons.



These cases are one thing but the popularization of loli and their sexualization is very old and has never been condemned or even actively denounced by the anime industry.  They're not on the radar  of twitter morality court's yet because a good chunk of active SJWs are often anime fans but believe me when ordinary people start digging a bit they'll will call for cancel and boyscott anime the same way they do for this movie.

I also can easily say that the whole reality TV and social media industry doesn't sexualize little girls and show several examples where they have had a use and purpose, but this doesn't prevent this problem from being particularly present in these industries.


----------



## TYPE-Rey (Aug 25, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> These cases are one thing but the popularization of loli and their sexualization is very old


Correct , pretty sure that started in the shift of drawing styles from the quasi realistic style  to what we know today as "bishoujo" in the late 70's to early 80's tho i might be wrong.


CrownedEagle said:


> has never been condemned or even actively denounced by the anime industry


Because they do not see it as a problem ?
There's not a metric or data available that leads to the conclusion that it's a problem.
I seem to remember hearing about a study or studies  that were done finding no correlation between the two.
 Maybe it is a problem  ...but people need to look closer into it order  to find out .


CrownedEagle said:


> They're not on the radar of twitter


That is not true.
You have recent cases like Uzaki causing Twitter to have a collective brain aneurysm and to cancel a fucking blood campaign donation from Red Cross Japan because they used Uzaki as a mascot.Thankfully, Japan realized that they don't have to listen to Twitter and resumed the campaign with a great turnout.  Another popular recent example includes BNHA.


CrownedEagle said:


> cancel and boyscott anime they way they do for this movie.


Yes but unfortunately for Twitter, Japan doesn't really give a crap.
If the UN couldn't get them to ban that shit in 2015 or whenever that took place. , Twitter sure as shit ain't gonna cut it.
If that's a good or not..you decide.



CrownedEagle said:


> I also can easily say that the whole reality TV and social media industry doesn't sexualize little girls


That's because they don't... It's important to find those who do and kick them out , not bastardize the whole industry because some fucked up people gain access to it.


CrownedEagle said:


> but this doesn't prevent this problem from being particularly present in these industries.


Maybe..i'm really not in the position to say anything whichever way.
The thing is that if there is a problem, we need to find to root causes of that problem and treat the symptoms so that the problem won't come back in the future.
People need to look into this in depth.

It's an interesting and complex discussion and i absolutely agree with you (if you were the one that said that)  the simplification and reductionism of solutions to only  binary choices brought upon by moral posturing and indignation and the refusal to not sit down and talk and analyze  does not help .


----------



## PikaCheeka (Aug 25, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> of course let pretend that there is no problem with pedophilia in anime, that the numerous scandal concerning mangaka and schoolgirls and child pornography videos like with Tatsuya Matsuki or Watsuki doesn't exist, that a lof of anime sexualize underage girls in the worst ways possible.
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...



Justify it all you want but lolicon cartoons do not belong in the same category as live action movies with real children, and neither belong in the same category as the social media industry.

I don't know if you legitimately think those are all the same thing or not, but I have to hope that you don't if you're going to run around bashing other peoples' intelligence.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Aug 25, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> I was shocked by this. I have no knowledge about how teenagers dress nowadays. When I saw the movie trailer, I didn’t  know if the direction exaggerate it or it reflects the reality.


Don't you see people in public dressed like this. 

I don't know what kind of celibate monk stuff y'all are on. I see girls in skimpy clothes all of the time and it doesn't offend me or make me think of them sexually or anything. I think there should be some decency, like I don't want to see the veins of some dudes cock through his jeans, but I think we need to walk a line between just being downright pornographic and letting young women decide for themselves to a degree what to do with their bodies. 

Should parents strive to keep their daughters safe? For sure, they should do that with all of their kids. But my brother treats his son like his daughters and they all turned out fine. The two of them are kind of assholes, but that runs in the family so it couldn't be helped. But like my nieces dress themselves how they want and because they were taught to have respect for themselves they don't let anyone disrespect them. 

It is an age thing though and we have to find a balance for this stuff.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Aug 25, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Justify it all you want but lolicon cartoons do not belong in the same category as live action movies with real children, and neither belong in the same category as the social media industry.
> 
> I don't know if you legitimately think those are all the same thing or not, but I have to hope that you don't if you're going to run around bashing other peoples' intelligence.


They aren't. I think lolicon is a problem, but I don't know how anyone can treat it like it's someone having sex with real kids or whatever. 

it would be like claiming that violence in a cartoon is the same as real war or something.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Aug 25, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> They aren't. I think lolicon is a problem, but I don't know how anyone can treat it like it's someone having sex with real kids or whatever.
> 
> it would be like claiming that violence in a cartoon is the same as real war or something.



Yea, exactly. That's why I'm very confused about the direction CrownedEagle took. Mock people for being disgusted by this movie which sexualizes prepubescent actresses, then equate it with anime, and THEN go on a crazy rant about lolicon inciting crime. Do not follow.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Aug 25, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Yea, exactly. That's why I'm very confused about the direction CrownedEagle took. Mock people for being disgusted by this movie which sexualizes prepubescent actresses, then equate it with anime, and THEN go on a crazy rant about lolicon inciting crime. Do not follow.


"What was Netflix thinking! This is just like how people wanted to fuck Ed from Cowboy Bebop! And that's why Chicago had over one hundred murders in July." 

Yeah, it was almost that bad


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 25, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Don't you see people in public dressed like this.
> 
> I don't know what kind of celibate monk stuff y'all are on. I see girls in skimpy clothes all of the time and it doesn't offend me or make me think of them sexually or anything. I think there should be some decency, like I don't want to see the veins of some dudes cock through his jeans, but I think we need to walk a line between just being downright pornographic and letting young women decide for themselves to a degree what to do with their bodies.
> 
> ...


I’m not really around teenagers that much to have an idea how they dress nowadays. Also in the last three years, I lived in Malaysia so....

The topic is centred on girls like the ones in the movie. They are 11 years old and if you ask me I believe at this age, girls shouldn’t be free to decide for themselves to a degree what to do with their bodies.


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 25, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> Yike regular people use Tik Tok and watch anime that sexualize little girls every single days and sleep well every nights. That doesn't mean jack shit... You using this argument about what "regular people do" is fuck'in ironic since you're on the front to denounce them when they don't go in your sense.


Anime is not real. Believe it!


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 25, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Justify it all you want but lolicon cartoons do not belong in the same category as live action movies with real children, and neither belong in the same category as the social media industry.
> 
> I don't know if you legitimately think those are all the same thing or not, but I have to hope that you don't if you're going to run around bashing other peoples' intelligence.


Unlike this movie, Lolicon doesn’t have the goal to denounce a social reality which is, in the case of this movie the sexualisation of young girls influenced by social media and iconic celebrities.
Lolicon is made to please those who love young girls characters. This movie is made to expose social realities. The pressure from Muslim traditional families and the hyper sexualisation of girls in our society. If you are shocked by the movie, that’s a little bit the goal since it’s made to make you think about the world we live. Lolicon is designed to please a certain audience that love little girls characters....and I remember a time it was a issue in this forum btw.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Aug 25, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Unlike this movie, Lolicon doesn’t have the goal to denounce a social reality which is, in the case of this movie the sexualisation of young girls influenced by social media and iconic celebrities.
> Lolicon is made to please those who love young girls characters. This movie is made to expose a social realities. The pressure from Muslim traditional families and the hyper sexualisation of girls in our society.* If you are shocked by the movie, that’s a little bit the goal since it’s made to make you think about the world we live.* Lolicon is designed to please a certain audience that love little girls characters....and I remember a time it was a issue in this forum btw.



I'm too old to buy into the idea that anything shocking and uncomfortable is telling some deep, socially important message that could not be told in any other way.

What I saw of this movie is unabashedly gross. I think lolicon is gross too, but it doesn't involve real live children being placed in sexual outfits and poses, so I don't really care much about authorial intent in this argument.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 25, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Justify it all you want but lolicon cartoons do not belong in the same category as live action movies with real children, and neither belong in the same category as the social media industry.
> 
> I don't know if you legitimately think those are all the same thing or not, but I have to hope that you don't if you're going to run around bashing other peoples' intelligence.



Same with this movie you cannot compare this to gross tv show or music clip just because they have little girls dressed in a sexy ways.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 25, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> I'm too old to buy into the idea that anything shocking and uncomfortable is telling some deep, socially important message that could not be told in any other way.


I think you try to find an excuse here. Unfortunately we are more revolted by a situation when we shocked and uncomfortable by what we see. The death of George Floyd without videos would not create the big protests we saw in the US and around the world. This 9 minutes videos was extremely shocking and uncomfortable for everyone and pushed people to demand to take measures against Police brutality and racism in the US. That’s unfortunately how we are. We need to be shocked to react.
This movie might shock (we need to see the movie to really judge) but it describes a reality. Something that happens under our nose on social media but we do not take it really seriously because we trend to be passive without a shock.




> What I saw of this movie is unabashedly gross. I think lolicon is gross too, but it doesn't involve real live children being placed in sexual outfits and poses, so I don't really care much about authorial intent in this argument.


So for you it’s ok if the author attempt is to trigger potential p*d*p**** with Lolicon compared to a movie that denounce something. You do not care about the author attempts at all. You only analyse what you see without thinking too much. This is what you telling me.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 25, 2020)

@CrownedEagle je pense que c’est un de ces débats où on ne pourra jamais être vraiment compris à cause de différences culturelles. 
Je constate que les nord américains ne cherchent pas toujours à comprendre au-delà de ce qu’ils voient. Ils sont choqués par Intouchables car ils voient un noir aider un blanc. Ça leur rappelle leur passé esclavagiste mais ils ne passe complètement à côté du contexte social français et des moments positifs du film.


----------



## Vermilion Kn (Aug 25, 2020)

Chris Hansen should be paying a visit to some people in here defensing this movie. 

Yikes.


----------



## Solar (Aug 25, 2020)

Hansen would probably get arrested for bad checks or stalking again before he could make it to anyone's door.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Aug 25, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> I think you try to find an excuse here. Unfortunately we are more revolted by a situation when we shocked and uncomfortable by what we see. The death of George Floyd without videos would not create the big protests we saw in the US and around the world. This 9 minutes videos was extremely shocking and uncomfortable for everyone and pushed people to demand to take measures against Police brutality and racism in the US. That’s unfortunately how we are. We need to be shocked to react.
> This movie might shock (we need to see the movie to really judge) but it describes a reality. Something that happens under our nose on social media but we do not take it really seriously because we trend to be passive without a shock.
> 
> So for you it’s ok if the author attempt is to trigger potential p*d*p**** with Lolicon compared to a movie that denounce something. You do not care about the author attempts at all. You only analyse* what you see *without thinking too much. This is what you telling me.



And what I see is.... a real, living, breathing human girl who is placed in disturbing poses and outfits by adults, annnnnnd a drawing.

When one involves real humans and the other does not, authorial intent is irrelevant.

Anyway you obviously don't give a shit about authorial intent yourself, considering the fact that you literally compared this movie to videos of George Floyd's death. Your whole post suggests that you have some kind of cognitive dissonance with reality.



CrownedEagle said:


> Same with this movie you cannot compare this to gross tv show or music clip just because they have little girls dressed in a sexy ways.



Except you compared it to reality shows, anime, and tiktok so !?

You yourself are the one who did that.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 25, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> And what I see is.... a real, living, breathing human girl who is placed in disturbing poses and outfits by adults, annnnnnd a drawing.


It’s acting by actors....to denounce what *actually happen in real life*. It’s not made to tease p*d*p**** unlike the Lolicon animated serie/movie you call a drawing. But the problem is that you see and only see. You refuse to think further.



> When one involves real humans and the other does not, authorial intent is irrelevant.


Of course it matters. With you argument. You can justify pedo hentai while denouncing real pedo video with children......”When one involves real humans and the other does not, authorial intent is irrelevant”.



> Anyway you obviously don't give a shit about authorial intent yourself, considering the fact that you literally compared this movie to videos of George Floyd's death. Your whole post suggests that you have some kind of cognitive dissonance with reality.


No, I explain the power of shocks made by something we see in mass and how it impact us much more than something we read for example.


----------



## Subarashii (Aug 25, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> of course let pretend that there is no problem with pedophilia in anime, that the numerous scandal concerning mangaka and schoolgirls and child pornography videos like with Tatsuya Matsuki or Watsuki doesn't exist, that a lof of anime sexualize underage girls in the worst ways possible.
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...


How dare you lump Boku no Pico in with these sick lolita paedos!


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 25, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Justify it all you want but lolicon cartoons do not belong in the same category as live action movies with real children, and neither belong in the same category as the social media industry.
> 
> I don't know if you legitimately think those are all the same thing or not, but I have to hope that you don't if you're going to run around bashing other peoples' intelligence.



I will take the time to answer because I was on my phone earlier and I did not have time to detail.

I know the difference between fiction and reality and I know that reality shows and Hollywood go much further than what we saw in anime (social media is another debate, I don't see them as inherently harmful) However, we cannot deny that a small% promotes and normalizes p*d*p**** relations like Sakura Card Captor for example or the many scandals in Japan committed by mangaka.

Are all anime bad? Not obviously but the fact that it is fiction or not doesn't change the problem honestly, an anime that promote racism or domestic abuse will be ban in the west, fiction or not,  an average person who is not Otaku and who does not know the Japanese culture won't make a difference between the two either.

My initial stand was that the fact that Twitter and co got mad for this film just by seeing a trailer and a poster is very ironic when we know that this society sexualizes children in the greatest silence via social media or reality TV. These phenomena are also much more accessible to young children unlike this film where people can choose or not to see it and which are aimed at an adult audience.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 25, 2020)

TYPE-Rey said:


> Because they do not see it as a problem ?
> There's not a metric or data available that leads to the conclusion that it's a problem.
> I seem to remember hearing about a study or studies  that were done finding no correlation between the two.
> Maybe it is a problem  ...but people need to look closer into it order  to find out .



The Japanese have cultural norms different from Westerners on the other hand I know a lot of Japanese among my acquaintances and even if they don't protest and make petition because this isn't heir culture, The Otaku who like anime and particularly the lolicons type are particularly despised in their society. They know it is wrong but decide to just ostracize the deviant phenomenon

And the west has made a lot of criticism on some anime content including E.U which has banned several recently because of it, they are definitely aware that there is an underlying problem but they are not taking action.



TYPE-Rey said:


> That is not true.
> You have recent cases like Uzaki causing Twitter to have a collective brain aneurysm and to cancel a fucking blood campaign donation from Red Cross Japan because they used Uzaki as a mascot.Thankfully, Japan realized that they don't have to listen to Twitter and resumed the campaign with a great turnout.  Another popular recent example includes BNHA.



It is only a small group of SJWs who go on a rant, Uzaki chan is not even a popular anime right now, it will be different when the anime industry will be normalized in the west (which shouldn't be long with Netflix) and big celebrities, conservatives and sjws find a topic in anime that will grab their attention like this movie.




TYPE-Rey said:


> Yes but unfortunately for Twitter, Japan doesn't really give a crap.
> If the UN couldn't get them to ban that shit in 2015 or whenever that took place. , Twitter sure as shit ain't gonna cut it.
> If that's a good or not..you decide.



For Japan no, but for the West I'm not so sure, if the outrage becomes really virulent, I don't see what would prevent them from banning anime for example, they have already deleted certain characters or even entire series after that, I don't see how it would be any different for animes, The West is an solid market for anime growing every day and isn't negligible.
I am sure that the leaders of these companies will think twice before doing anything that could make them lose a lot of money.





TYPE-Rey said:


> That's because they don't... It's important to find those who do and kick them out , not bastardize the whole industry because some fucked up people gain access to it.




I totally agree if I thought the whole anime industry was a p*d*p****'s nest I wouldn't be on this site anyways, I've seen a lot of anime that is actually condemned this phenomenon like Maidens in Your Savage Season ( which is very ironic because the 13-year-old girl who had a relationship with an adult who can be her grandfather wanted to lose her virginity with him and act like a woman before having a brutal awekening). This is why it is important to fully view a work to the end and listen to the author's point of view before judging it in order to understand.


----------



## TYPE-Rey (Aug 25, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> The Japanese have cultural norms different from Westerners


Obviously.


CrownedEagle said:


> I know a lot of Japanese among my acquaintances and even if they don't protest and make petition because this isn't heir culture, The Otaku who like anime and particularly the lolicons type are particularly despised in their society.



I won't deny this is this case with some people , however i find it hard to believe that the whole society hates them for a couple of reasons, one of them being that there are so many of them in Japan that it would be kinda hard to know where to start hating and second being the amounts of money that it makes.
Also i've seen politicians standing up to censorship attempts , so this shouldn't be generalized.



CrownedEagle said:


> And the west has made a lot of criticism on some anime content including E.U



I know, again, the  UN tried to have underage stuff banned in Japan. They got Japan to ban the real life stuff but they said no when it came to anime/manga.

A lot of things have been banned or at the very least, attemped to be banned in the West. It's nothing special.



CrownedEagle said:


> they are definitely aware that there is an underlying problem but they are not taking action



They can't be aware of a problem that does not officially exist since again, there's little to no data and from what i have heard the data actually points on the opposite.

Those who  want to ban it because it's sensible/moral according to Western/European sensitivities. Nothing more , nothing less.

I don't know if that should be condemned or supported, but that's all it is. 

The problem comes when you realize that the bad stuff existed long before anime and manga were a thing and will obviously exist long after it gets banned.

What are they going to do then ? Find another scapegoat instead of actually solving  the problem. Like always.



CrownedEagle said:


> It is only a small group of SJWs who go on a rant,



Yeah...no. You don't get to cancel an important event by ranting .



CrownedEagle said:


> chan is not even a popular anime right now


Which further strengthens my point then. If they started jumping on non popular anime it's obvious that they actually have a radar on twitter which is the opposite of what you are saying.



CrownedEagle said:


> it will be different when the anime industry will be normalized in the west


Pretty sure it's normalized already and has been for a while.
Netflix didn't start adding japanese shit to it yesterday. It started circa 2013-2014-ish  if not earlier.
You also don't get manga kicking comic ass in sales unless you have a somewhat normalized market of that stuff.



CrownedEagle said:


> For Japan no, but for the West I'm not so sure, if the outrage becomes really virulent, I don't see what would prevent them from banning anime for example,


They cannot ban anime because they don't produce it and they have no say in what Japan produces.
Worse they can do is to let only the really tame stuff came through and the rest will exist in Japan and in the markets that are more liberal with that stuff, the way things worked in the 90's and early 2000's


CrownedEagle said:


> The West is an solid market for anime growing every day and isn't negligible.


That's true but the internal market will always be the dominant one and since at the end of the day it;s all about the money, that shit will still get produced because it sells for better or for worse. It will still exist and people will still have access to it in Japan and outside Japan through non legal means. Again, just like shit was back in the 90's until the world calms down again. This shit is cyclical. In one decade, there was the concerned religious zealots about satanism and other crap, now it's the SJW sperging about things.



CrownedEagle said:


> I am sure that the leaders of these companies will think twice before doing anything that could make them lose a lot of money.


That's putting the horse before the cart because for a lot of those companies, that questionable content is what allowed them to make that much money and brought them that popularity in the first place.


----------



## Skaddix (Aug 25, 2020)

So from my research Netflix sent the exact opposite message of this film with their marketing lol.

Movie is suppose to be sexualization of young girls is bad and we got sex sales


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 25, 2020)

Skaddix said:


> So from my research Netflix sent the exact opposite message of this film with their marketing lol.
> 
> Movie is suppose to be sexualization of young girls is bad and we got sex sales



If true this is the most misleading marketing since Magic Mike, a pretty somber drama by steven soderbergh marketed as a cheesecake Thunder Down Under.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 25, 2020)

Yall supporting this film allready made it into some sort of list.
Just saying.
Not a good look


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 26, 2020)

Before questioning why such content are mainstream, we should consider have a stricter control on videos accessible for kids. These singers/artists are iconic models kids want to copy.




T-Pein™ said:


> Yall supporting this film allready made it into some sort of list.
> Just saying.
> Not a good look


You don’t realise you are the useful idiot of the nihilists. With people like you, we spend our time talking about if this movie is moral or not rather than elevating the debate to the issue this movie exposes. 
For someone who really support children sexualisation, they might be happy by the attacks against this movie because it lower the chance to see the society questioning the causes of this sexualisation.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Before questioning why such content are mainstream, we should consider have a stricter control on videos accessible for kids. These singers/artists are iconic models kids want to copy.
> 
> You don’t realise you are the useful idiot of the nihilists.



Fox News’ *Tucker Carlson* took a few minutes Tuesday night to go off on “WAP,” the new song from *Cardi B* and *Megan Thee Stallion*.

“WAP,” for the few of you who haven’t heard about the song yet, is an acronym for “wet-ass pussy.”

Carlson made a point of telling viewers he doesn’t generally talk about pop culture on the show but had to make an exception for this song.

“We can’t tell you what it stands for. We literally can’t tell you what the name of the song is, much less its lyrics,” he said, before encouraging viewers to look at the lyrics online and playing a video of Cardi B that he described as her “explaining to women how they can become more useful sex objects.”

After showing that video (which had to be bleeped quite a bit), Carlson said, “*That’s garbage. You don’t need to be a puritan to think so. It’s garbage. It’s aimed at young American girls — maybe your girls, your granddaughters and what is it doing to them? Can you imagine what it’s doing to them?”*

“People are getting rich pushing that crap on the country, and they should be ashamed of themselves, but they’re not ashamed of themselves.”

Carlson went on to slam *Joe Biden* for his recent interview with Cardi B and said, “We’re not being prudish here This is not James Brown being sexually suggestive on stage. Go online right now and look up the lyrics to this song. And then ask yourself if you were Joe Biden, would you suck up to the person who sang it and ask yourself above all, and ask it more than once, *what is this doing to our kids? The people pushing it clearly are trying to hurt your children. Why is nobody pushing back?”*

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 26, 2020)

yeah stop pretending everyone is a degenerate thnx.


----------



## Pliskin (Aug 26, 2020)

Is this Shapiro crusade against WAP still going on?

Thats cool, because this new Conservatism and Puritanism fascinates me and I want everybody to find it as hilarious as I do.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## PikaCheeka (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> It’s acting by actors....to denounce what *actually happen in real life*. It’s not made to tease p*d*p**** unlike the Lolicon animated serie/movie you call a drawing. But the problem is that you see and only see. You refuse to think further.
> 
> Of course it matters. With you argument. You can justify pedo hentai while denouncing real pedo video with children......”When one involves real humans and the other does not, authorial intent is irrelevant”
> 
> No, I explain the power of shocks made by something we see in mass and how it impact us much more than something we read for example.



Great, acting by actors. I didn't know children lost their rights to be protected from a predatory gaze just because they are actors that their parents make big bucks off of. They are still children aged 10-12 who are placed in sexualized clothing and positions for the purpose of adults to make money and view at their leisure.

That's why I don't give a darn about "authorial intent" in this instance, and it's why I don't give a darn about lolicon anime. Whatever the author's intent is, underage prepubescent girls are being pushed forward as sexual icons even if to "make a statement".

I don't understand how this can be such a difficult concept.


----------



## Parallax (Aug 26, 2020)

i read the last two pages and tpein is wylin

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## hammer (Aug 26, 2020)

calling otakus pedophiles is like calling gamer school shooters.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 26, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Great, acting by actors. I didn't know children lost their rights to be protected from a predatory gaze just because they are actors that their parents make big bucks off of. They are still children aged 10-12 who are placed in sexualized clothing and positions for the purpose of adults to make money and view at their leisure.


Predatory gaze? The movie is probably not a show to watch for perv unlike lolicon. Based on your logic, if you really want to protect children from predatory gaze, then you ban children to go in swimming pool or at the beach where they wear swimming suits. This is probably where the real perv go rather than watch such movie that will show probably not show lot of dance.
I cannot say more about the movie because neither you and me saw it but from the director perspective, her movie wasn’t designed to tease and will probably not tease anyone since it’s not it goal. I assume based on the fact that nobody was shocked by this movie until Netflix poster and description, that the movie show more about the trouble of the main character within her family and  how her friends and her try to be noticed by copying the most famous female icons than actual dance. 




> That's why I don't give a darn about "authorial intent" in this instance, and it's why I don't give a darn about lolicon anime. Whatever the author's intent is, underage prepubescent girls are being pushed forward as sexual icons even if to "make a statement".
> 
> I don't understand how this can be such a difficult concept.


The intent matter of course. I would be against this movie it was exactly like Netflix poster described. It would be a form of normalisation of children sexualisation but it seems the movie was designed to rather expose this sexualisation.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Predatory gaze? The movie is probably not a show to watch for perv unlike lolicon. Based on your logic, if you really want to protect children from predatory gaze, t*hen you ban children to go in swimming pool or at the beach where they wear swimming suits. *This is probably where the real perv go rather than watch such movie that will show probably not show lot of dance.
> I cannot say more about the movie because neither you and me saw it but from the director perspective, her movie *wasn’t designed to tease *and will probably not tease anyone since it’s not it goal. I assume based on the fact that nobody was shocked by this movie until Netflix poster and description, that the movie show more about the trouble of the main character within her family and  how her friends and her try to be noticed by copying the most famous female icons than actual dance.



Bruh,
you cannot Argue against what PikaCheeka said...
The little girls are literally Twerking in skimpy outfits.
It doesn't matter if it wasn't "designed to tease" because the kid huggers don't care.
Little girls are Literally getting abused imo...exploited at worst


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Predatory gaze? The movie is probably not a show to watch for perv unlike lolicon. Based on your logic, if you really want to protect children from predatory gaze, then you ban children to go in swimming pool or at the beach where they wear swimming suits. This is probably where the real perv go rather than watch such movie that will show probably not show lot of dance.
> I cannot say more about the movie because neither you and me saw it but from the director perspective, her movie wasn’t designed to tease and will probably not tease anyone since it’s not it goal. I assume based on the fact that nobody was shocked by this movie until Netflix poster and description, that the movie show more about the trouble of the main character within her family and  how her friends and her try to be noticed by copying the most famous female icons than actual dance.
> 
> 
> ...



p*d*p**** will sexualize little childs no matter what. Context is irrevelant here, they are just deviant. Emma Watson has a countdown on her majority since Harry Potter and she wasn't even portray in a vulgar way in these movies.

If you want to prevent "predatory gaze" the only way possible is to ban child actors in medias.


----------



## Subarashii (Aug 26, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> If true this is the most misleading marketing since Magic Mike, a pretty somber drama by steven soderbergh marketed as a cheesecake Thunder Down Under.


Wait a minute, you saw Magic Mike??



Le Male Absolu said:


> Before questioning why such content are mainstream, we should consider have a stricter control on videos accessible for kids. These singers/artists are iconic models kids want to copy.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





T-Pein™ said:


> Fox News’ *Tucker Carlson* took a few minutes Tuesday night to go off on “WAP,” the new song from *Cardi B* and *Megan Thee Stallion*.
> 
> “WAP,” for the few of you who haven’t heard about the song yet, is an acronym for “wet-ass pussy.”
> 
> ...





hammer said:


> calling otakus pedophiles is like calling gamer school shooters.


To both of you dumb dumbs who don't realize the blatant double standard here about women taking agency of their sexuality vs men doing it, I present: Songs of the past just as explicit as WAP, older songs just used a lot more euphemisms/innuendo


(note: "ball" means "fuck"



TBC


----------



## Subarashii (Aug 26, 2020)

Cont.

(note: "brown sugar" is a euphemism for black girl)

(note: "head games" means bjs)

(note: this song is about 'la petite mort' with Le Male should know what it means )


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 26, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> Bruh,
> you cannot Argue against what PikaCheeka said...
> The little girls are literally Twerking in skimpy outfits.
> It doesn't matter if it wasn't "designed to tease" because the kid huggers don't care.
> Little girls are Literally getting abused imo...exploited at worst


They acting. They play a role to expose a real issue in a story. It’s not like Desmond the dragkid that dance to entertain adults. Desmond is real, it’s his real life and that way much more shocking because unlike these girls that play a role in a movie, his situation is real and that’s only the tip of the iceberg. But no let’s raging about this movie nobody saw, that’s the real problem.
Once again if you want to protect children from weird eyes, you’ll decide to ban swimming activities.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 26, 2020)

Hmm,
One is a fun activity/sport and the other is legit sexual exploitation.
Arguing that 11 year old girls should be twerking around in movies is not OK.
Little girls should wear non sexi swimsuits obviously.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 26, 2020)

Subarashii said:


> To both of you dumb dumbs who don't realize the blatant double standard here about women taking agency of their sexuality vs men doing it, I present: Songs of the past just as explicit as WAP, older songs just used a lot more euphemisms/innuendo
> 
> 
> (note: "ball" means "fuck"
> ...


Before accusing anyone of double standards, do you know our opinions about these songs as well ?


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Before accusing anyone of double standards, do you know our opinions about these songs as well ?



Yeah why are you assuming stuff @Subarashii


----------



## Subarashii (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Before accusing anyone of double standards, do you know our opinions about these songs as well ?





T-Pein™ said:


> Yeah why are you assuming stuff @Subarashii


Because you're both attacking a song about women's sexuality, in a thread about a movie, written by a woman divided by tradition vs modernization in her adopted homeland. 
It's an unnecessary tangent.


----------



## Magic (Aug 26, 2020)

How did this end up on WAP song..... ~_~.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 26, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> Hmm,
> One is a fun activity/sport and the other is legit *acting*.
> Arguing that 11 year old girls should be twerking around in movies is not OK.
> Little girls should wear non sexi swimsuits obviously.


Fixed

It’s not that they “should” but the movie was made to expose a problem in our society. This movie might embarrass people and that’s the goal. To create a reaction of rejection against this reality for kids.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 26, 2020)

Subarashii said:


> Wait a minute, you saw Magic Mike??



That's nothing, I have Hairspray songs on my playlist.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 26, 2020)

Subarashii said:


> Because you're both attacking a song about women's sexuality, in a thread about a movie, written by a woman divided by tradition vs modernization in her adopted homeland.
> It's an unnecessary tangent.


For the information I also mentioned Desmond the dragkid....the kids hyper sexualisation affect mostly the little girls and some boys like Desmond. If you want to talk about boys, they are also victims of this hyper sexual society with the easy access of pornography. That affect their way to see a relationship with a women. I already talked about this in thread related to porn restrictions.
The music videos you posted, I don’t know all these songs but from the titles, I believe they shouldn’t be accessible to kids as well.
However it’s legit to point out videos music from female singers because they represent for little girls a model to follow.


----------



## hammer (Aug 26, 2020)

@Subarashii I was refering to the argument of if you like lolicons you're a p*d*p****, I cringed when  saw what these girls were wearing.


----------



## Subarashii (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> For the information I also mentioned Desmond the dragkid....the kids hyper sexualisation affect mostly the little girls and some boys like Desmond. If you want to talk about boys, they are also victims of this hyper sexual society with the easy access of pornography. That affect their way to see a relationship with a women. I already talked about this in thread related to porn restrictions.
> The music videos you posted, I don’t know all these songs but from the titles, I believe they shouldn’t be accessible to kids as well.
> However it’s legit to point out videos music from female singers because they represent for little girls a model to follow.


----------



## Subarashii (Aug 26, 2020)

hammer said:


> @Subarashii I was refering to the argument of if you like lolicons you're a p*d*p****, I cringed when  saw what these girls were wearing.


It is cringy, for sure, and I don't know why they didn't just stick to the original image but I guess controversy = free advertising so they knew what they were doing the whole time.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 26, 2020)

@Subarashii what is your problem seriously?


----------



## hammer (Aug 26, 2020)

Subarashii said:


> It is cringy, for sure, and I don't know why they didn't just stick to the original image but I guess controversy = free advertising so they knew what they were doing the whole time.


it just seems so much worse that netflix did it instead of it supposed to be this way


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> @Subarashii what is your problem seriously?



yep.
I believe they shouldn’t be accessible to kids as well.
And yeah WAP is relevant since little girls are into that stuff and the song is current...


----------



## Subarashii (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> @Subarashii what is your problem seriously?


Your lack of understanding and changing the topic.


T-Pein™ said:


> yep.
> I believe they shouldn’t be accessible to kids as well.
> And yeah WAP is relevant since little girls are into that stuff and the song is current...


Bring it up with YT. They can age restrict the video but it looks like they haven't.  Aren't republicans about NOT infringing on freedom of speech?   And free market capitalism? And the market place of ideas?
I wouldn't let my kid watch this, but there's no way in hell I'm giving them free reign to the internet or even YT.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 26, 2020)

We live in “free” societies. The existence of these music videos is not the problem. The problem is that these contents should remain for an adult audience, just like porn.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 26, 2020)

Nicki Minaj, Cardi B and other trashy singer are free to make music clip where they can do all type of vulgar poses and wear nothing in this. In the role of parents to protect their child from social media.


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 26, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> yep.
> I believe they shouldn’t be accessible to kids as well.
> And yeah WAP is relevant since little girls are into that stuff and the song is current...


That's strip club music with a music video.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 26, 2020)

Subarashii said:


> Your lack of understanding and changing the topic.


You know @Subarashii , posting a gif with a woman holding her head doesn’t automatically make you the smart one on the discussion. 
You accuse me of double standards based on nothing but assumption and when you realise than you have nothing to prove your claims you come back with an other weak accusation which is change topic. 
The hyper sexualisation of children is one of topic of the movie and the reason why Netflix poster shocked. The movie show little girls that want to dance and twerk like celebrities to get attention and recognition on social media. When I post a music video with explicit content, I’m definitely on topic.
Now please drop the contempt attitude and tell us your opinion on all of that.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> We live in “free” societies. The existence of these music videos is not the problem. The problem is that these contents should remain for an adult audience, just like porn.



Agree,
We have "Parental Advisory" stickers on the CD's (for MA)
Like kids cannot go and buy WAP in a retail store but yeah TikTok and what not doesn't regulate the restrictions.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Aug 26, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> Nicki Minaj, Cardi B and other trashy singer are free to make music clip where they can do all type of vulgar poses and wear nothing in this. In the role of parents to protect their child from social media.



optimistic since the content is literally being pushed to kids {by the EmTeaBee}
Hope they really do ban TikTok...
regulate youtube properly... Ect
We all know phones cannot be regulated by "parents"
any kid can make a spotify or utube


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Aug 26, 2020)

Netflix messed up bad, I don't think it's on the movie since a lot of people who have actually seen the movie say it handled sensitive subjects in a very mature and delicate way without going too far. 

It would be pretty easy to turn something handled well into something that looks "controversial" for attention, I mean you could take Donnie Darko and edit a short trailer that made it look like it was all about pedophillia and little girls (his sister's dance scenes and the actual p*d*p**** caught by chance). 

Editing is very powerful and it would be easy to do so with a movie that had enough footage taken out of context, slowed down or focused on, and with the choices of music and lines cut from other places or ADR'd. 

This is a super obvious way for Netflix to drum up outrage that might get people to watch, they thought that they could do this and just took it way too far (it was wrong, because they've now attached a stigma to a director). But off the top of my head  I can think of clever editing making things look like they were there that totally weren't or like things happen that didn't. The first time I ever saw this that I remember was the show Smallville using a dream sequence in a commercial episodes before it happened with a line from the next episode to make it look like two characters had finally gotten together.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 26, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> optimistic since the content is literally being pushed to kids {by the EmTeaBee}
> Hope they really do ban TikTok...
> regulate youtube properly... Ect
> We all know phones cannot be regulated by "parents"
> any kid can make a spotify or utube



When you make a child is your role as a parent to keep them safe from the outsider influence and make sure that they behave correctly in our society, this isn't up to the media to watch them for you but the contrary. If people cannot do this then they need to keep their genital anatomies dry.


----------



## Skaddix (Aug 26, 2020)

I mean its kinda hard to control access for kids as parents when the kids are usually better at tech...this is especially true when the parents working multiple jobs/terrible hours.


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 26, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> When you make a child is your role as a parent to keep them safe from the outsider influence and make sure that they behave correctly in our society, this isn't up to the media to watch them for you but the contrary. If people cannot do this then they need to keep their genital anatomies dry.


7+ years as a parent I can tell you it is hard as hell to do. Man children have far more reach than I did back in the day. You have to be on it.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Aug 26, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> When you make a child is your role as a parent to keep them safe from the outsider influence and make sure that they behave correctly in our society, this isn't up to the media to watch them for you but the contrary. If people cannot do this then they need to keep their genital anatomies dry.


I agree with the role of parents however I believe the work of parents should be helped by measures to limit access to such contents.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Aug 26, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> 7+ years as a parent I can tell you it is hard as hell to do. Man children have far more reach than I did back in the day. You have to be on it.



@lemale

Media should prevent children to see pornographic, gore and violent contents and check their users age before give them acces to any contents however i believe is the parent duites to protect them for outsider influences. This is hard, really hard but being a *good* parent wasn't never something easy from the start.


----------



## Subarashii (Aug 26, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> You know @Subarashii , posting a gif with a woman holding her head doesn’t automatically make you the smart one on the discussion.
> You accuse me of double standards based on nothing but assumption and when you realise than you have nothing to prove your claims you come back with an other weak accusation which is change topic.
> The hyper sexualisation of children is one of topic of the movie and the reason why Netflix poster shocked. The movie show little girls that want to dance and twerk like celebrities to get attention and recognition on social media. When I post a music video with explicit content, I’m definitely on topic.
> Now please drop the contempt attitude and tell us your opinion on all of that.


Never said it was.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 26, 2020)

Be that as it may, galaxy quest is a good movie.


----------



## Pilaf (Aug 26, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> 7+ years as a parent I can tell you it is hard as hell to do. Man children have far more reach than I did back in the day. You have to be on it.




I remember regularly unscrambling cable porn and finding early internet porn way back in the day. Now these kids have smart phones and tablets. They don't have a chance and neither do their parents. Society in general is just fucked. People are, at the very mildest, going to develop a very warped sense of what sexuality is supposed to be.


----------



## Xebec (Aug 26, 2020)

qanon and pizzagate seem slightly less crazy now don't they?


----------



## Hand Banana (Aug 26, 2020)

Pilaf said:


> I remember regularly unscrambling cable porn and finding early internet porn way back in the day. Now these kids have smart phones and tablets. They don't have a chance and neither do their parents. Society in general is just fucked. People are, at the very mildest, going to develop a very warped sense of what sexuality is supposed to be.


Yea I can only do so much but with other children having mobile devices it gets harder.


----------



## hammer (Aug 26, 2020)

Die-Hardman said:


> qanon and pizzagate seem slightly less crazy now don't they?


no


----------



## Yamato (Aug 26, 2020)




----------



## reiatsuflow (Aug 26, 2020)

Yamato said:


>




That's the future liberals want.

"Do you support pedophelia?"
"We respect all cultures and traditions."


----------



## Pilaf (Aug 26, 2020)

Yamato said:


>



Are they really implying pedophilia is a culture?


----------



## Capt. Autismo (Aug 26, 2020)



Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Pliskin (Aug 27, 2020)

Die-Hardman said:


> qanon and pizzagate seem slightly less crazy now don't they?



no


----------



## Skaddix (Aug 27, 2020)

I mean Rapist Rich people sure I buy it....Trump being the Hero and not raping kids next to Epstein and the rest...yeah no dont buy that one.


----------



## NeoTerraKnight (Sep 10, 2020)

So guys, the movie is out in US Netflix.


----------



## creyzi4zb12 (Sep 10, 2020)

Not as bad as that rapeman manga. Still bad tho


----------



## JFF (Sep 10, 2020)

I've seen a short clip and Wtf .. it should not be published.

And creyzi4zb12 fix your sig.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 10, 2020)

Pilaf said:


> Are they really implying pedophilia is a culture?



They seem to be implying it's a _religion_.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 10, 2020)

So did anyone watch it yet?


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 10, 2020)

Since its metacritic is high enough I'm going to assume it's as le male said, an indie drama about culture clash that just so happens to involve the uncomfortable subject of preteens messing around with their sexuality and _that's_ the culture clash.

Does anyone remember that evan rachel wood movie thirteen? I remember there was some hubub around that too but when I saw it, it just seemed like another indie drama. I was also 13 at the time so maybe it went over my head.


----------



## Akira Kurusu (Sep 10, 2020)

creyzi4zb12 said:


> Not as bad as that *rapeman* manga. Still bad tho


Wat


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 10, 2020)

Akira Kurusu said:


> Wat



A manga and a live action movie series.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Sep 11, 2020)

Did any normal person watch it?
I dont trust critics.
They are too far gone.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 11, 2020)

Now that I’m in France, I cannot watch it on Netflix. The movie was not released on Netflix France. The movie in France is in cinemas and I don’t want to go to cinema for this movie.

I saw one scene on Tweeter. It’s confirmed that the movie denounce the hyper sexualisation however in this scene but the scene itself is a shock and embarrassing to watch.
It must be watch with the entire movie to have a real opinion tho.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Sep 11, 2020)

Should I take one for the team?


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 11, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> Should I take one for the team?



Ya, do it 

Critics will lap it up because it meets all the new Diversity Quotas for awards.


----------



## Punished Kiba (Sep 11, 2020)

I've always known Netflix was a force of Evil.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 11, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> Should I take one for the team?



Do it bro we're all here supporting you in spirit.

I'd give it a go but I don't like watching slice of life dramas with kids / preteens because their lives are stupid.

I haven't even seen Florida Project yet even though I've had it on my watch list for years and I know it's going to be great.


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 11, 2020)

Akira Kurusu said:


> Wat



Japan. 

Just Japan.

See my sig.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Sep 11, 2020)

The clips I've seen I couldn't stomach to watch all the way through. 

Disgusting


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 11, 2020)

~Gesy~ said:


> The clips I've seen I couldn't stomach to watch all the way through.
> 
> Disgusting



Wow. I was not expecting that reaction from you, and I don't mean that as a konohana theater section joke, I mean up to this point I still thought this was kind of a conservative bogeyman movie that would just turn out to be like Thirteen or some other indie naturalistic drama and there would be a few sections where preteens are doing suggestive dance movies like a baby Step Up. 

But you don't strike me as a pearl clutcher or especially conservative. 

So this is actually "what the fuck were they thinking" territory?


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Sep 11, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> Wow. I was not expecting that reaction from you, and I don't mean that as a konohana theater section joke, I mean up to this point I still thought this was kind of a conservative bogeyman movie that would just turn out to be like Thirteen or some other indie naturalistic drama and there would be a few sections where preteens are doing suggestive dance movies like a baby Step Up.
> 
> But you don't strike me as a pearl clutcher or especially conservative.
> 
> So this is actually "what the fuck were they thinking" territory?


Yeah as liberal as my views may be, I gotta draw a line at scantily clad children gyrating their bodies.

I mean look at this:


That's an image you'd expect to find in Jared Fogle's hard drive.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Sep 11, 2020)

"To Catch A Predator" shit


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 11, 2020)

_Did_ anyone else see thirteen? It's an early movie from evan rachel wood. Came out in 2003. Won a bunch of awards. 



The actors were like 15 or something and it had some controversy about underage portrayals of drug use, self arm and sexual activity.


The trailer is terrible in 2020 lol, but it did win awards at the golden globes and got some oscar noms.


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Sep 11, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> _Did_ anyone else see thirteen? It's an early movie from evan rachel wood. Came out in 2003. Won a bunch of awards.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'd have no problem even if this movie came out today.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 11, 2020)

90% on rottentomatoes


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 11, 2020)

I'm very liberal when it comes to art and you can see in the clip the crowd is booing and the judges aren't happy about the performance, so the point of the movie is still that, you know, this isn't what womanhood is and these kids have misunderstood sexuality and embarrassed themselves. Apparently the main character's family is muslim and the movie starts because she gets her period and in her culture that means she's a woman, so she tries to act like a woman and embody womanhood in western culture and stuff. You can see the point.

but why did you film it like that and make the dance so elaborate, it's so irresponsible for a movie with actual kids playing the kids


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 12, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> I'm very liberal when it comes to art and you can see in the clip the crowd is booing and the judges aren't happy about the performance, so the point of the movie is still that, you know, this isn't what womanhood is and these kids have misunderstood sexuality and embarrassed themselves. Apparently the main character's family is muslim and the movie starts because she gets her period and in her culture that means she's a woman, so she tries to act like a woman and embody womanhood in western culture and stuff. You can see the point.
> 
> but why did you film it like that and make the dance so elaborate, it's so irresponsible for a movie with actual kids playing the kids


I can see the battle over this film on tweeter. Those who saw the movie say this scene was extracted without the whole context of the movie. We don’t see the girl leaving the stage after in tears.


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 12, 2020)




----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 12, 2020)

I wonder if conservative islam has caught wind of this and is using it to attack western culture, because boy howdy does it give them an opening


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 12, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> I wonder if conservative islam has caught wind of this and is using it to attack western culture, because boy howdy does it give them an opening


The movie is seen as Islamophobic as well.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 12, 2020)

I feel bad for the kids in the movie, although I guess they're foreign and probably french and it was well received in france so at least they're watching all of this controversy from a distance. Even though the criticism isn't directed at them it still must be a strange experience.


----------



## GRIMMM (Sep 12, 2020)

Is the movie not a criticism of sexualisation of young people in the "West"? I thought it was meant to be an eye opener on purpose?

It's the same as those parents who push their children into those horrific kid beauty pageants.


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 12, 2020)

GRIMMM said:


> Is the movie not a criticism of sexualisation of young people in the "West"? I thought it was meant to be an eye opener on purpose?
> 
> It's the same as those parents who push their children into those horrific kid beauty pageants.




It's a criticism in the way that me walking up and punching a guy in the face and getting paid for it is a criticism of violence.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 12, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> I feel bad for the kids in the movie, although I guess they're foreign and probably french and it was well received in france so at least they're watching all of this controversy from a distance. Even though the criticism isn't directed at them it still must be a strange experience.


The Netflix controversy impact the cinema release in France. The movie was released in French cinemas few days or weeks before the Netflix International release. The movie was barely known in France before the Netflix controversy.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 12, 2020)

GRIMMM said:


> Is the movie not a criticism of sexualisation of young people in the "West"? I thought it was meant to be an eye opener on purpose?
> 
> It's the same as those parents who push their children into those horrific kid beauty pageants.



It is, common folk just freak out for a trailer and don't search futher like usual, meanwhile they will still use Tik Tok with 10YLD twerking on purpose.


----------



## Donquixote Doflamingo (Sep 12, 2020)

These youtubers i watch made a decent review of the movie. 

I get where they are coming from but i still think just from the clips i've seen they could of toned down the sexual scenes in this movie and still got there point across.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 12, 2020)

So disgusting. I didn't know about them "dancing" their way out of trouble with a security guard.

It's like filming the live killing a real kitten to tell people "killing kittens is bad".

I also find all the defense regarding it being "necessary" to "show how child sexualization is bad" is laughable as well as misogynistic. So the comments and actions of millions of concerned mothers around the world are irrelevant; the stories and the lives of CSA and human trafficking survivors are irrelevant; the only way we can bring child sexualization to light is by making a highly sexualized fictional movie where we sexualize 11-year-olds. Huh. Okay.

If this film-maker really wanted to "bring this issue to light" and "make a statement", she could have done a documentary.

Reactions: Like 4


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 12, 2020)

> Doucouré, who moves the camera without judging, intelligently avoids demonization and easy solutions to arrive at understanding.





> Doucouré, who moves the camera without judging





> who moves the camera without judging





> avoids demonization



progressives


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 12, 2020)

I mean 
it is artistic and worthy for a director to want to throw a camera into an unsanitized preteen experience where
very young kids are having inappropriate conversations with each other and doing inappropriate things with each other and film that without judgment, without immediately demonizing it or the characters or even the experience, but this is a movie, not a book, there's a reality to it, you're filming actual 11-12 year olds, so yeah. What everybody else said.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 12, 2020)

Nah. This is like filming real literal harmful torture to criticize it. Ironic enough, this would've worked much better as animation.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 12, 2020)

Donquixote Doflamingo said:


> These youtubers i watch made a decent review of the movie.
> 
> I get where they are coming from but i still think just from the clips i've seen they could of toned down the sexual scenes in this movie and still got there point across.


The movie divide people but whatever people like it or not, it would be great if at least it can highlight a problem we have in the western society like these guys saying in the video.


----------



## Donquixote Doflamingo (Sep 12, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> Nah. This is like filming real literal harmful torture to criticize it. Ironic enough, *this would've worked much better as animation*.



People don't take animation super serious when it comes to hard hitting issues. At least from what i have seen anyway.

This movie was made in France though and from what i have read online when it came out in france it did not receive a large back lash. I don't know squat about France culture though when it comes to the sexualization of kids.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## ~Gesy~ (Sep 12, 2020)

I just think there was a better way to say that you think American children are whores


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 12, 2020)

Donquixote Doflamingo said:


> People don't take animation super serious when it comes to hard hitting issues. At least from what i have seen anyway.
> 
> This movie was made in France though and from what i have read online when it came out in france it did not receive a large back lash. I don't know squat about France culture though when it comes to the sexualization of kids though


This movie wasn’t mainstream and didn’t received a huge coverage. It’s the Netflix controversy that pit lights on the movie in France. French YouTube it started to talk about this movie because of the Netflix cover.
The movie is not released on Netflix France but in cinemas.


----------



## Donquixote Doflamingo (Sep 12, 2020)

~Gesy~ said:


> I just think there was a better way to say that you think American children are whores



Not just american children


----------



## Donquixote Doflamingo (Sep 12, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> This movie wasn’t mainstream and didn’t received a huge coverage. It’s the Netflix controversy that pit lights on the movie in France. French YouTube it started to talk about this movie because of the Netflix cover.
> The movie is not released on Netflix France but in cinemas.



Yea the Netflix marketing was ridiculous for sure like wtf were they thinking.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Sep 12, 2020)

*MEMBERS of Congress blast Netflix film 'Cuties, calling it "fodder for pedophiles" and want the Justice Department to investigate.*

A handful of mostly Republican lawmakers in Washington have called for the Justice Department to take legal action against the streaming service for airing the controversial film they claim 


There’s no excuse for the sexualization of children ... ‘Cuties’ is disgusting at best and a serious crime at worst.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Sep 12, 2020)

WTH Tulsi is Based


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 12, 2020)

I guess this is just how our politicians behave now and will continue behaving well after trump.


----------



## T-Pein™ (Sep 12, 2020)

Lowkey would rather have Tulsi than Biden 
I follow her,
She has some really good ideas.
Says some based stuff


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 12, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> The movie divide people but whatever people like it or not, it would be great if at least it can highlight a problem we have in the western society like these guys saying in the video.



Except it isn't.

As I said, even suggesting that this movie can do what hundreds of millions of women the world over have spoken up about and/or expressed concern over is, to be frank, misogynistic.


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 12, 2020)

Donquixote Doflamingo said:


> People don't take animation super serious when it comes to hard hitting issues. At least from what i have seen anyway.



Spirited Away tackles addiction to greed much more seriously and tastefully than this movie could ever tackle sexualization of pre-teens.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Donquixote Doflamingo (Sep 12, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> Spirited Away tackles addiction to greed much more seriously and tastefully than this movie could ever tackle sexualization of pre-teens.



I agree but do most people see it that way


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 12, 2020)

Donquixote Doflamingo said:


> I agree but do most people see it that way



And that's purely their fault.


----------



## Donquixote Doflamingo (Sep 12, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> And that's purely their fault.



I like you 



If you didn't have that Traitor Itachi as your avatar, and if you didn't rep Big Meme we could be friends.


----------



## hammer (Sep 12, 2020)

how many of these people are outraged by the existence of beauty pageants?


----------



## T-Pein™ (Sep 12, 2020)

hammer said:


> how many of these people are outraged by the existence of beauty pageants?



what a terrible take....
you mean little girl ones?
I think they are degenerate.

The adult ones are fine.


----------



## hammer (Sep 12, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> what a terrible take....
> you mean little girl ones?
> I think they are degenerate.
> 
> The adult ones are fine.


I didn't fucking ask the Australian


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 12, 2020)

hammer said:


> I didn't fucking ask the Australian



Who did you ask specifically


----------



## Eros (Sep 12, 2020)

hammer said:


> how many of these people are outraged by the existence of beauty pageants?


They are but another excuse by men to exploit women and girls for money and to sneak a peek at their tits in a dressing room (which has happened of course).


----------



## hammer (Sep 12, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> Who did you ask specifically


the clothes they wear are far worse than the girls in cuties


Shinra Kusakabe said:


> They are but another excuse by men to exploit women and girls for money and to sneak a peek at their tits in a dressing room (which has happened of course).



I always felt weird about the existence of child beauty pageants


----------



## Vermilion Kn (Sep 12, 2020)

Shinra Kusakabe said:


> They are but another excuse by men to exploit women and girls for money and to sneak a peek at their tits in a dressing room (which has happened of course).



While I agree that pageants are gross let’s not pretend women don’t exploit other women in those. It’s specially bad with moms and their infant daughters.


----------



## Eros (Sep 12, 2020)

hammer said:


> the clothes they wear are far worse than the girls in cuties
> 
> 
> I always felt weird about the existence of child beauty pageants


Years ago, I watched them, but since the JonBenét Ramsey, I have lost interest in pageants completely. I was 14 when she was murdered, and I was unaware that children were exploited so much in pageants. 

As for the movie, Cuties, there are worse ones out there, and my guess is that SCOTUS would likely uphold the 1st Amendment and not obscenity laws in this matter.


----------



## Eros (Sep 12, 2020)

Vermilion Kn said:


> While I agree that pageants are gross let’s not pretend women don’t exploit other women in those. It’s specially bad with moms and their infant daughters.


Of course they do. They are often part of the problem, not the solution when it comes to exploitation of women.


----------



## hammer (Sep 12, 2020)

Shinra Kusakabe said:


> Years ago, I watched them, but since the JonBenét Ramsey, I have lost interest in pageants completely. I was 14 when she was murdered, and I was unaware that children were exploited so much in pageants.
> 
> As for the movie, Cuties, there are worse ones out there, and my guess is that SCOTUS would likely uphold the 1st Amendment and not obscenity laws in this matter.


to be honest, if you think girls who dress like in cuties are being sexualized why aren't pageants out right banned? and as far as im aware the movie have nothing to do with child sex trafficing?


----------



## Capt. Autismo (Sep 12, 2020)

hammer said:


> how many of these people are outraged by the existence of beauty pageants?


The movie is breaking more into mainstream and a much wider audience than beauty pageants do, but to be completely frank I don't give two shits about this movie. If it wasn't for the outrage I probably wouldn't even know it existed.

What ever happened to that last movie on netflix people flipped out about, the one where the little girl has her first orgasm or something. Did they ever end up taking that off Netflix?

IIRC that movie was also foreign.


----------



## hammer (Sep 12, 2020)

Capt. Autismo said:


> The movie is breaking more into mainstream and a much wider audience than beauty pageants do, but to be completely frank I don't give two shits about this movie. If it wasn't for the outrage I probably wouldn't even know it existed.
> 
> What ever happened to that last movie on netflix people flipped out about, the one where the little girl has her first orgasm or something. Did they ever end up taking that off Netflix?


did you hear they plan on white washing ATLA and aging them up so they can have sex to make it more mature


----------



## Capt. Autismo (Sep 12, 2020)

hammer said:


> did you hear they plan on white washing ATLA and aging them up so they can have sex to make it more mature


Why does this always happens? Whenever they make a live action, turn a book into a movie or something else along those lines they always end up shunning the original creators ideas and it usually ends up biting them in the ass.


----------



## jesusus (Sep 12, 2020)

hammer said:


> did you hear they plan on white washing ATLA and aging them up so they can have sex to make it more mature


----------



## hammer (Sep 12, 2020)

Capt. Autismo said:


> Why does this always happens? Whenever they make a live action, turn a book into a movie or something else along those lines they always end up shunning the original creators ideas and it usually ends up biting them in the ass.





jesusus said:


>





Capt. Autismo said:


> Why does this always happens? Whenever they make a live action, turn a book into a movie or something else along those lines they always end up shunning the original creators ideas and it usually ends up biting them in the ass.






jesusus said:


>



apparently the white washing is legit, and the sex may not be true. but the original writers left the netflix team


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 12, 2020)

Doesn't make any sense they would age atla up.

Stranger things is a huge netflix hit. I'm sure they'd want another kid property.

...

I don't mean 'another kid property' that way netflix, I see you.


----------



## hammer (Sep 12, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> Doesn't make any sense they would age atla up.
> 
> Stranger things is a huge netflix hit. I'm sure they'd want another kid property.
> 
> ...


because sex


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 13, 2020)

hammer said:


> how many of these people are outraged by the existence of beauty pageants?



The kid ones? Probably a lot, actually. The mothers who are into those are a very small subset of the population.


----------



## hammer (Sep 13, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> The kid ones? Probably a lot, actually. The mothers who are into those are a very small subset of the population.


even as a kid I felt weird when the came on TV.  I am surprised it's still a thing


----------



## hammer (Sep 13, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> The kid ones? Probably a lot, actually. The mothers who are into those are a very small subset of the population.


even as a kid I felt weird when the came on TV.  I am surprised it's still a thing


----------



## A Optimistic (Sep 13, 2020)

Out of all the cool movie topics to choose from...they chose to make a movie about an 11 year old girl?


----------



## Mael (Sep 13, 2020)




----------



## stream (Sep 13, 2020)

A Optimistic said:


> Out of all the cool movie topics to choose from...they chose to make a movie about an 11 year old girl?


Harry Potter is 11 in the first movie


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 13, 2020)

The Hollyweirdos are shaking. Epstein's sex ring is crumbling.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Mael (Sep 13, 2020)

Pilaf said:


> The Hollyweirdos are shaking. Epstein's sex ring is crumbling.


I remember the concentrated defense of Roman Polanski.  Celebrities are weird folk.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 13, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Except it isn't.
> 
> As I said, even suggesting that this movie can do what hundreds of millions of women the world over have spoken up about and/or expressed concern over is, to be frank, *misogynistic*.


Accusing of misogyny to support an opinion doesn’t make the opinion right neither their the accusation true.
Nobody except you bring women in the discussion and you do that just to drop the accusation of misogyny....


----------



## Mael (Sep 13, 2020)

~Gesy~ said:


> I just think there was a better way to say that you think American children are whores


I thank God I have a son because I would fear for any daughter I have nowadays between horrid toy marketing, awful movie remakes, very questionable fashion, and thinly-veiled misandry that's supposedly feminism nowadays.


----------



## hcheng02 (Sep 14, 2020)



Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 14, 2020)

There's a lot of takes out there about a movie that most people haven't seen. 

When I was young we had the movie Kids...where one boy who has HIV unknowingly spreads it around to girls he has sex with in his quest to have sex with a lot of virgins. A young girl finds out she has HIV and she goes out to find and stop him and let him know he has it, as she only had sex with him and knows it came from him.

This movie features kids around 12 having sex, doing drugs, drinking, stealing, and so on. This was eh, twenty-five years ago and some odd the actors in it are huge now (Rosario Dawson and Chloë Sevigny). It's not really a good movie, but it's not a movie I don't think should not exist. And it didn't destroy society or anything or make people likely to fuck kids or something. 

My point is that all the pearl clutching in here is frankly embarrassing.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 14, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Accusing of misogyny to support an opinion doesn’t make the opinion right neither their the accusation true.
> Nobody except you bring women in the discussion and you do that just to drop the accusation of misogyny....



Except it is about women. The kids in this movie who are causing the controversy are girls. It's girls who are being sexualized at a young age. Victims of child sexual assault and sex trafficking are overwhelmingly female. It's mothers who are the most worried about the sexualization of children.

And yet, you're suggesting that none of that matters. You're suggesting that finally! people will care about this issue because some exploitative dirty movie with lots of ass-shots of gyrating 11-year-olds was made! That's pathetic. Anyone who is "made aware" of this issue from this movie has either never talked to a woman before or ignores every word women say.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 14, 2020)

I finally saw this movie

It was very uncomfortable to watch. I won't say it was bad or good. It simply was. Some scen was even too much for me like when  
*Spoiler*: _spoiler_ 



Amy posts a picture of her vagina to prove she’s mature or when she try to seduce a security guard to gave her phone back 




What Cuties accomplishes is that it holds up a mirror up to our society and I think that's what's angering people. We hold up very sexualized content and personalities - we live in that Kardashian/Minaj era and then are surprised that little girls are watching.

It was not fun to watch young girls dressing provocatively and twerking but then we had to admit- that's what society has TOLD these young girls is attractive.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 14, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> I finally saw this movie
> 
> It was very uncomfortable to watch. I won't say it was bad or good. It simply was. Some scen was even too much for me like when
> *Spoiler*: _spoiler_
> ...


This isn’t new. We have always sexualized young girls and we have always turned around and shamed them for expressing sexuality even among their peers. I think that people have a problem with stuff like this because they want to appear to be doing something about the problem or in the right. Attacking this movie accomplishes nothing. The movie didn’t invent sexualization of minors


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 14, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Except it is about women. The kids in this movie who are causing the controversy are girls. It's girls who are being sexualized at a young age. Victims of child sexual assault and sex trafficking are overwhelmingly female. It's mothers who are the most worried about the sexualization of children.
> 
> And yet, you're suggesting that none of that matters. You're suggesting that finally! people will care about this issue because some exploitative dirty movie with lots of ass-shots of gyrating 11-year-olds was made! That's pathetic. Anyone who is "made aware" of this issue from this movie has either never talked to a woman before or ignores every word women say.


You’d be surprised how many people pretend they’ve never heard a legitimate complaint about sexism


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 14, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> This isn’t new. We have always sexualized young girls and we have always turned around and shamed them for expressing sexuality even among their peers. I think that people have a problem with stuff like this because they want to appear to be doing something about the problem or in the right. Attacking this movie accomplishes nothing. The movie didn’t invent sexualization of minors



But it's okay to shame people about their bodies sometimes. I feel like this shaming language is kinda problematic.

For example men are shamed about having erections in public. It's not okay to have erections in public even though it's natural, you're gonna have erections in public sometimes.

People are shamed about exposing their genitals in public or being nude in public. The worst bicycle crash I ever got into skinned my leg something good and tore apart my cycling shorts on the thigh, and the first thing I unconsciously thought of was "Is my dick showing?" It wasn't but after a very dangerous crash, instead of thinking about whether I'd broken anything or hurt myself I made sure my dick wasn't showing.  and that's fine imo.

If a movie nonjudgmentally had real 11 year olds flashing their boobs at cars, the filmmaker would get into legal trouble. It's okay that kids are 'shamed' about being naked in public or dancing sexy in public. Those are our cultural norms.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 14, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> But it's okay to shame people about their bodies sometimes. I feel like this shaming language is kinda problematic.
> 
> For example men are shamed about having erections in public. It's not okay to have erections in public even though it's natural, you're gonna have erections in public sometimes.
> 
> ...


Is the straw man variety hour over yet?

There's a huge different, an gulf, an ocean even between saying you can't have you dick our vagina hanging out in the open and teaching girls in a classroom who are ten that if too much of their legs are showing it could make the boys go crazy and start humping chairs or something.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 14, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Except it is about women. The kids in this movie who are causing the controversy are girls. It's girls who are being sexualized at a young age. Victims of child sexual assault and sex trafficking are overwhelmingly female. It's mothers who are the most worried about the sexualization of children.
> 
> And yet, you're suggesting that none of that matters. You're suggesting that finally! people will care about this issue because some exploitative dirty movie with lots of ass-shots of gyrating 11-year-olds was made! That's pathetic. Anyone who is "made aware" of this issue from this movie has either never talked to a woman before or ignores every word women say.


I’m not suggesting, you are assuming that I believe none of what you listed matter. And you do that just in order to drop the word “misogynistic” to avoid a real debate with real arguments. 
I believe this should be the shock that the society need to really question itself. Unfortunately, it’s when the society is shocked that the society really  start to move. We know that racism and police brutality exist but it’s when these things are filmed and showed in mass that the society really want to deal with these problems. 
I didn’t saw the movie but from what I read in @CrownedEagle comment, this movie make the viewers uncomfortable. It’s supposed to depict our society as it is now and from this work, it should emerge a debate about what’s going on in our society and how we can change things. The problem is that the movie create a other debate around the content itself and overshadow the debate on hyper sexualisation in our society.


----------



## Mael (Sep 14, 2020)



Reactions: Like 3


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 14, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> I’m not suggesting, you are assuming that I believe none of what you listed matter. And you do that just in order to drop the word “misogynistic” to avoid a real debate with real arguments.
> I believe this should be the shock that the society need to really question itself. Unfortunately, it’s when the society is shocked that the society really  start to move. We know that racism and police brutality exist but it’s when these things are filmed and showed in mass that the society really want to deal with these problems.
> I didn’t saw the movie but from what I read in @CrownedEagle comment, this movie make the viewers uncomfortable. It’s supposed to depict our society as it is now and from this work, it should emerge a debate about what’s going on in our society and how we can change things. The problem is that the movie create a other debate around the content itself and overshadow the debate on hyper sexualisation in our society.



Police brutality and sexual harassment always exist without anyone bat an eye before but it only after Weinstern/Flyood Cases that the societie (understand by that big companies and some politicians) decide to take a stand. And here somes continue to say that some documentary and less provokal gestures will be more appropriate, this movie was a good thing, bad or good at least he forced people to see a problem that was here since forever.


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 14, 2020)

I think the blonde one is a dude. 

[HASHTAG]#Dontcancelkurisu[/HASHTAG]


----------



## Donquixote Doflamingo (Sep 14, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> I think the blonde one is a dude.
> 
> [HASHTAG]#Dontcancelkurisu[/HASHTAG]


----------



## Sequester (Sep 14, 2020)

from what i hear it sounds like this movie is exactly what i thought it'd be


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 14, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> I didn’t saw the movie but from what I read in @CrownedEagle comment, this movie make the viewers uncomfortable. It’s supposed to depict our society as it is now and from this work, it should emerge a debate about what’s going on in our society and how we can change things. The problem is that the movie create a other debate around the content itself and overshadow the debate on hyper sexualisation in our society.



As a horror fan, it sort of reminds me of slasher movies that try to tackle the exploitative aspects of slashes by having tons of exploitative slasher kills and then at the end giving a lecture about it. Like rob zombie of all people will talk about his movies in terms of wanting to show murder in an offputting way, he wants it violent and uncomfortable to show what murder's really like (and to pikapika's point, like anybody needs to watch a slasher movie to learn about murder being bad, like anyone needs to watch cuties to learn that it's bad for 11 year olds to hump the stage in booty shorts).

But rob zombie shoots all his murder scenes very entertainingly and/or luridly, zooming in, slomo, stripping the women naked before killing them, and it's dumb if he's trying to comment on exploitation by being exploitative even if that _idea_ is viable in better hands.

Cuties, also, zooms in on the girls bodies, inner thighs, tracks up and down their bodies when they're dancing. The director films the scenes to be engaging. That's why at the jump I wondered, well, maybe it's naturalistic and she'll shoot it from farther away or the camera will just lay there, but no, it slithers right up there and slinks around.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 15, 2020)

Netflix losing a lot of scrips over this.



Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You’d be surprised how many people pretend they’ve never heard a legitimate complaint about sexism



I wouldn't be surprised, because I've met many, but if someone's that much of a dick, watching this movie won't change their mind.


----------



## Vandal Savage (Sep 15, 2020)

I haven't seen this movie and have no intentions of watching it but I don't know how someone at Netflix could see that promotional poster and think it is totally fine to use for the movie. They should have went with the original one but even then I've heard there are a lot of problematic/questionable scenes so I'm not surprised scores of Americans are upset with it.


----------



## Parallax (Sep 15, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Netflix losing a lot of scrips over this.
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised, because I've met many, but if someone's that much of a dick, watching this movie won't change their mind.



Lol i mean clearly not enough to care

Netflix straight up looked everyone in the eye said "and what" and kept it moving


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 15, 2020)

Parallax said:


> Lol i mean clearly not enough to care
> 
> Netflix straight up looked everyone in the eye said "and what" and kept it moving


Because people who leave things or boycott typically go back really soon after the heat dies down. 

We'll see how things look when they announce Witcher Season 2 coming out and Stranger Things 4. 

And seriously this is kind of goofy. Who was boycotting their cable over Toddlers and Tiaras? And that's partially real. What about Honey Boo Boo? Dance Moms? What about anything on TLC? 

People are really quick to cancel Netflix over one movie that was made before they got there, but they (once again because it would take actual effort and forethought) don't think this way with cable subs. 

Years ago when I worked at a cable company as a tech support person I had this lady call and complain she wanted the porn taken out of the channel line up completely for everyone, as in wiped from the service. I explained to her that was impossible, not within her power or mine, and that she couldn't even go anywhere else because she had at best two other options and both of them would have porn somewhere. She hung up on me, but that's to date the only person I've seen dedicated to that kind of thing in TV programming, most of you seem to treat Netflix like it's different and like you have to watch it. There's lots of shit I find kind of ew no on Netflix, I just watch other shit...?


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 15, 2020)

Dance moms


----------



## Parallax (Sep 15, 2020)

also as a side note cant believe people are defending this

yikes

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 15, 2020)




----------



## Marvel (Sep 15, 2020)

Off topic.

But..Anyone seen Babysitter:Killer Queen? They sexualize the hell out of this one child character who would be 17 when the movie was filmed.


----------



## Hand Banana (Sep 15, 2020)

And remember in America when the movie Kids came out? No? Some of you weren't born and never heard of it.


----------



## Mael (Sep 16, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> And remember in America when the movie Kids came out? No? Some of you weren't born and never heard of it.


Right, but even then Chloe Sevigny was 21 when it was filmed, Leo Fitzpatrick was 18, Justin Pierce was 20, Yakira Peguero was 19, and I think only Rosario Dawson was 16-17.  The last actress is in the danger zone at the time, but Cuties dwarfs it in audacity.  These are actual preteens engaging in all of this.


----------



## Mael (Sep 16, 2020)




----------



## stream (Sep 16, 2020)

Mael said:


> Right, but even then Chloe Sevigny was 21 when it was filmed, Leo Fitzpatrick was 18, Justin Pierce was 20, Yakira Peguero was 19, and I think only Rosario Dawson was 16-17.  The last actress is in the danger zone at the time, but Cuties dwarfs it in audacity. These are actual preteens engaging in all of this.


Well in Kids they were having sex, so the story is also different.

The problem here is, the movie wants to show the audience that social pressure pushes young girls to twerking very early and it's not good. If you don't use young actresses to do that, and you use instead 18-years-old pretending to be 12, the audience is going to get exactly the wrong message. The important part is to never show these 12-years-old actresses in a sexy way, and that's where Netflix made a monumental mistake. People who actually saw the movie seem to agree that it doesn't do that.


----------



## Mael (Sep 16, 2020)

stream said:


> Well in Kids they were having sex, so the story is also different.
> 
> The problem here is, the movie wants to show the audience that social pressure pushes young girls to twerking very early and it's not good. If you don't use young actresses to do that, and you use instead 18-years-old pretending to be 12, the audience is going to get exactly the wrong message. The important part is to never show these 12-years-old actresses in a sexy way, and that's where Netflix made a monumental mistake. People who actually saw the movie seem to agree that it doesn't do that.


I don't think you got my point.

Yes, the story had "preteens" engaging in this activity, but the ages of the main cast were in majority over 18 where it's more acceptable.  It's more palatable when you know the cast is of some mature age.  Nothing was lost on the audience as it still produced shock value and it highlighted the AIDS issue.

I don't care what Netflix said.  It's still here and the message is still fucked up.  There's a lot of folks who saw it and couldn't stomach it regardless of original intent.  Some things need not be made at all.  This is one of them.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 16, 2020)

Parallax said:


> Lol i mean clearly not enough to care
> 
> Netflix straight up looked everyone in the eye said "and what" and kept it moving



Just pointing it out.



Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Because people who leave things or boycott typically go back really soon after the heat dies down.
> 
> We'll see how things look when they announce Witcher Season 2 coming out and Stranger Things 4.
> 
> ...



Yea the boycott seems silly to me and is probably more related to the fact that there's shit-all on Netflix lately (at least on Japanese Netflix ), and they were looking for an excuse.



stream said:


> Well in Kids they were having sex, so the story is also different.
> 
> The problem here is, the movie wants to show the audience that social pressure pushes young girls to twerking very early and it's not good. If you don't use young actresses to do that, and you use instead 18-years-old pretending to be 12, the audience is going to get exactly the wrong message. *The important part is to never show these 12-years-old actresses in a sexy way, and that's where Netflix made a monumental mistake.* People who actually saw the movie seem to agree that it doesn't do that.



This.

People defending it seem to be purposefully missing the point. Those upset about the movie aren't upset about the story or the message; they're upset about preteen actresses being heavily sexualized on screen. When it goes that far, the message or story genuinely does not matter. 

If they'd switched to animations for the dance scenes and kept the actresses out of it, I honestly think most people upset about it wouldn't care.


----------



## Deleted member 58423 (Sep 16, 2020)

someone please arrest the bespectacled 'vlogger' calling children 'hot'.

also the clips i've seen (from the film itself) are *revolting*.

let's condemn animal cruelty by filming animal torture, indeed...

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Mael (Sep 16, 2020)

Netflix Adds Warning Before 'Cuties' That It Is A Product Of Its Time When People Didn't Know Any Better



Sagacious.


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 16, 2020)




----------



## Mael (Sep 16, 2020)

It's neither bold nor feminist.  It's a poorly delivered message.


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 16, 2020)

Mael said:


> It's neither bold nor feminist.  It's a poorly delivered message.



I shared the image because I happen to agree with the succinct takedown in the reply, not the original message. Calling attacks on this movie sexist or racist is just the usual slimy ultra-leftie tactics these days.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## hcheng02 (Sep 16, 2020)

Parallax said:


> Lol i mean clearly not enough to care
> 
> Netflix straight up looked everyone in the eye said "and what" and kept it moving



Honestly, that response makes sense. The fervor against it will die down eventually and with the pandemic still in full swing it's not like people have much else to do at home. This will barely be a blip in their radar in regards to their profits.

Although from what I hear in the movie, is it true that the lead girl steals a smartphone from a guy, who manages to track her down, and he doesn't report it to the police or even tell her parents? How is that remotely plausible? You would think he would be pretty pissed about that.


----------



## Mintaka (Sep 16, 2020)

hcheng02 said:


> Honestly, that response makes sense. The fervor against it will die down eventually and with the pandemic still in full swing it's not like people have much else to do at home. This will barely be a blip in their radar in regards to their profits.
> 
> Although from what I hear in the movie, is it true that the lead girl steals a smartphone from a guy, who manages to track her down, and he doesn't report it to the police or even tell her parents? How is that remotely plausible? You would think he would be pretty passed about that.


Yep.

I think she also uses it to take nude selfies afterword.


----------



## hcheng02 (Sep 16, 2020)

Mintaka said:


> Yep.
> 
> I think she also uses it to take nude selfies afterword.



Yeah, that really blows away my suspension of disbelief. You would think he would report that to the cops to make it absolutely clear that he wasn't a p*d*p**** or get falsely accused of being a sex offender. That shot can land you in prison and ruin your life.

Plus I heard that she stole like hundreds of dollars from her mom to buy clothes and shit but at the end of the movie she's never disciplined for that?


----------



## Parallax (Sep 17, 2020)

All religions should be mocked tbh


----------



## Vermilion Kn (Sep 17, 2020)

No wonder feminism is seen as a joke by sane people. 

Anything a woman does is brave and empowering even using kids to produce pedo fuel.


----------



## Pilaf (Sep 17, 2020)

Parallax said:


> All religions should be mocked tbh




Maybe taking them literally or using them in lieu of science should, but there's good evidence that a religious community has some strong positive social and psychological effect, so it's a mixed bag. Maybe someday there will be a way to enjoy the best of both worlds, the rational and the religious.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Capt. Autismo (Sep 17, 2020)

My bosses wife said something defending the movie and her family called her a p*d*p****. Imagine having your family torn apart because an opinion on a movie.


----------



## Masterblack06 (Sep 18, 2020)

My thoughts summed up in a video


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 18, 2020)

Tell that to the people that think Bayonetta shaking her ass is problematic and pandering to the male gaze.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 19, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> Tell that to the people that think Bayonetta shaking her ass is problematic and pandering to the male gaze.



I do find it hilarious that the people who are in an uproar over fandom shit are defending this movie.

I see people who claim to be "triggered" by underage fictional ships or who call all fans of a particular character a rapist loudly praising this movie.


----------



## hammer (Sep 19, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> I do find it hilarious that the people who are in an uproar over fandom shit are defending this movie.
> 
> I see people who claim to be "triggered" by underage fictional ships or who call all fans of a particular character a rapist loudly praising this movie.


oh I'm not crazy then i see it too at least in consistent with my deborchary


----------



## Mael (Sep 19, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> Tell that to the people that think Bayonetta shaking her ass is problematic and pandering to the male gaze.


Because when did modern social media social justice EVER make sense?

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Kisame3rd14 (Sep 19, 2020)

T-Pein™ said:


> Her family has just moved to Paris, but her father, still in Senegal, has decided to take on a new wife. Amy sees her mother visibly shaken by the development, and secretly witnesses her hit herself in response to her pain about the marriage and her obligation to pretend she welcomes it.


Sounds like they had a realistic precedent but didn’t take full advantage of it. If this movie was put together correctly there would be more focus on this failure of a mother/wife, and less focus on sexualizing children, I may have even given it a watch. I’ll pass.

And for anyone defending this garbage, imagine if they make a movie exploring rape and the premiere trailer featured a woman moaning.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 19, 2020)

This pics represented perfectly this whole situation right now :


----------



## Jim (Sep 19, 2020)

I suppose sexualizing teens will become normal.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 19, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> Tell that to the people that think Bayonetta shaking her ass is problematic and pandering to the male gaze.


What people? 

Most gamers never mention Bayonetta because she’s not a 14 year old anime girl.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 19, 2020)

Jim said:


> I suppose sexualizing teens will become normal.


It already is. Like it has been for centuries (the idea of teens itself is a fairly new concept). 

But this movie seems to deal with younger kids.


----------



## Vagrant Tom (Sep 19, 2020)

Perhaps this was already covered but I don't understand what the point they were trying to make is? Sexualising children is bad? Well that's fucking obvious. Pretty sure 99.99% of people agree with that so who are they trying to preach to?

In trying to make their point on sexualising children being bad, they sexualise children more than anyone else.


----------



## jesusus (Sep 19, 2020)

Jim said:


> I suppose sexualizing teens will become normal.


They're pre-teens no?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 19, 2020)

Vagrant Tom said:


> Perhaps this was already covered but I don't understand what the point they were trying to make is? Sexualising children is bad? Well that's fucking obvious. Pretty sure 99.99% of people agree with that so who are they trying to preach to?
> 
> In trying to make their point on sexualising children being bad, they sexualise children more than anyone else.


I haven't watched a movie, like sat down and watched a whole film end to end, in probably two months. I'm going to end up watching this just to see how the movie proves all of these weird takes here wrong from people who have never seen it. 

Like people make movies to express their feelings about something or show a different perspective sometimes. The last thing we need is more dismissive takes on women's voices in media because "we already know X thing that we do all of the time is bad". 

Seriously, apply this logic to other movies. Almost every idea expressed in film is pretty commonplace somewhere, but a lot of the time you don't get anyone saying "we already know that slavery was bad, why did they make 12 years a slave?"

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Vagrant Tom (Sep 19, 2020)

No one involved in making that movie was a slave. The actresses in Cuties are children and they are really doing the dancing.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 19, 2020)

Vagrant Tom said:


> No one involved in making that movie was a slave. The actresses in Cuties are children and they are really doing the dancing.


Okay. 

Do you think it's going to teach those girls to be sexual? 

Or are you saying that it's indecent to look at these girls being sexual because they are so young? 

Because for the first point, they're young women in the modern world. They are sexualized very early, that's the point of the movie. Ask any woman of age when the first time she was leered at or treated like a sex object was and you're going to get some uncomfortable answers. And those women aren't "actors", they lived it. 

And to the second point, if looking at little girls being sexual makes you question what we do to young women then that's probably what the movie is going for. And if all you can think is "this movie is making me think about these girls in a sexual way" maybe you're kind of into it and you need to reevaluate your life. 

One of the big things a lot of movies and shows do is pic people who are closer to 30 to play teens and they do this because they plan to sexualize them or use them for adult situations. Audiences are used to it. Like no one brings up the fact that half the kids in Riverdale are running brothels and Archie fucks a teacher because those "kids" all look 25, even the ones who were younger.


----------



## Kisame3rd14 (Sep 19, 2020)

This guy really using Whataboutisim to defend pedo films.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 19, 2020)

Kisame3rd14 said:


> This guy really using Whataboutisim to defend pedo films.


You really don't know what whataboutism is.


----------



## Vagrant Tom (Sep 19, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> One of the big things a lot of movies and shows do is pic people who are closer to 30 to play teens and they do this because they plan to sexualize them or use them for adult situations. Audiences are used to it. Like no one brings up the fact that half the kids in Riverdale are running brothels and Archie fucks a teacher because those "kids" all look 25, even the ones who were younger.



You're talking about Spiderman (2002) right? I watched that again and that high school was hilarious. Some teachers look younger then the students.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 19, 2020)

Vagrant Tom said:


> You're talking about Spiderman (2002) right? I watched that again and that high school was hilarious. Some teachers look younger then the students.


One of the teachers in that movie is actually younger than one of the students, there's a black teacher in the scene that shushes them at the field trip, that guy is younger than one of the guys playing a student on camera. 

But I just mean in general. Like I can name multiple CW shows where the actors depicted are way older than the characters they play. Basically anyone on there involving teens (Smallville, Riverdale, Vampire Diaries, Legacies (I think)). 

Then there's shows that do this on other channels, like Pretty Little Liars which has the distinction of having the one 14 year old be 14 and she's the worst one (Allison), but the rest of the girls are like in their 20s or at the very least like 18-19. 

Movies do it a lot too, to the point that people really seem to forget what young people look like. I don't know what it is, but I know more than a few men who seem to think any girl they see is either like 18+ or a literal child totally based on look and they can't understand that there are steps between looking five and twenty.


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 19, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> What people?
> 
> Most gamers never mention Bayonetta because she’s not a 14 year old anime girl.



What are you even arguing here? You said "most gamers" which I guess is true since Bayonetta is not a super popular character. But I am talking about the vocal minority on twitter and reset era that for sure had problems with Bayonetta's oversexualization.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 19, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> What are you even arguing here? You said "most gamers" which I guess is true since Bayonetta is not a super popular character. But I am talking about the vocal minority on twitter and reset era that for sure had problems with Bayonetta's oversexualization.


I am saying she's not popular exactly because of the kind of character she is and that there is far less of a crowd on Twitter that have a problem with her being sexual because of how she's depicted as having control over her sexuality and doing it deliberately and not at all in service of men. 

Plus she's a full grown woman with the body and mannerisms of a full grown woman.


----------



## SakuraLover16 (Sep 19, 2020)

I don’t think I will ever see the movie but I did see a review from someone who did watch it she is very articulate. No she isn’t defending it. I feel like I need to say that first for anyone who doesn’t watch it.


----------



## Sequester (Sep 19, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> This pics represented perfectly this whole situation right now :



you keep bringing up child pageants like everyone who has a problem with cuties is fine with that shit

it's a niche thing that survives on creeps n overbearing moms 
its not a national past time over here 

showing us disgusting things ppl already don't like doesn't make cuties less disgusting


----------



## Kisame3rd14 (Sep 19, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> You really don't know what whataboutism is.


Crowned eagles post is blatant whataboutism and you’re a pedo sympathizer, sounds right because you’re also with all the other detrimental shit to society.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 19, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> I am saying she's not popular exactly because of the kind of character she is and that there is far less of a crowd on Twitter that have a problem with her being sexual because of how she's depicted as having control over her sexuality and doing it deliberately and not at all in service of men.
> 
> Plus she's a full grown woman with the body and mannerisms of a full grown woman.



She's not popular because she stars in a niche as fuck style of game that is seemingly a bit too hard to follow for the average gamher. She became way more popular once she got included in the casual mainstream game that is Smash. And that's about when that certain crowd started complaining about her. Her sexualization has nothing to do with her lacking in popularity. Don't forget 2B is a thing. And Nier made big bucks mostly due to her ass. 

It doesn't matter if she was in power of her sexuality. The same crowd still complained just as they complained about 2B and the character in your set. 

I dunno how much the complainers and cuties praisers overlap but you can't call this empowering and feminist for 11 year olds when your allies complain about the same thing for fictional video game characters.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 20, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> She's not popular because she stars in a niche as fuck style of game that is seemingly a bit too hard to follow for the average gamher. She became way more popular once she got included in the casual mainstream game that is Smash. And that's about when that certain crowd started complaining about her. Her sexualization has nothing to do with her lacking in popularity. Don't forget 2B is a thing. And Nier made big bucks mostly due to her ass.
> 
> It doesn't matter if she was in power of her sexuality. The same crowd still complained just as they complained about 2B and the character in your set.
> 
> I dunno how much the complainers and cuties praisers overlap but you can't call this empowering and feminist for 11 year olds when your allies complain about the same thing for fictional video game characters.


I think you're really conflating things, she's in a game that's on par with difficulty of DMC, especially DMC 3 which is hard as fucking balls. The combat in the two is comparable, the difficulty, the story even, DMC makes about as much sense and it is a hugely more popular game.

And if Nier is about as densely lore and philosophy packed as an Emmanual Kant paragraph. The difference with Nier is that the sexualization in that game is also incidental. No one thinks 2B fucks, where as Bayonetta fucks and there's a good chance the person she's fucking might not survive. A lot of weebs are straight up uncomfortable with sexually competent and aware women.


----------



## Parallax (Sep 20, 2020)

I've seen more cosplay models doing skimpy 2b shoots than Bayonetta


----------



## jesusus (Sep 20, 2020)

Why does this movie even exist? 

If you wanted to better raise awareness on child sexualization, would it not be smarter to make a documentary?


----------



## Sequester (Sep 20, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> Tell that to the people that think Bayonetta shaking her ass is problematic and pandering to the male gaze.



ok i found where it started

i was wondering why there was such a fervent bayonetta discussion here n what it had to do with anything


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 20, 2020)

Sequester said:


> you keep bringing up child pageants like everyone who has a problem with cuties is fine with that shit
> 
> it's a niche thing that survives on creeps n overbearing moms
> its not a national past time over here
> ...



My whole point is people who made an massive outrage about this movie who condamn oversexualization of little girls won't do the same for these beauty pageants who promoted them years after years. 

Let not forget people who bash this movie and still use apps like Tik Tok or Instagram, Cuties isn't a movie that is supposed to be pleasant to watch anyways, disguted the viewer is the main goal of this movie.


----------



## Sequester (Sep 20, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> My whole point is people who made an massive outrage about this movie who condamn oversexualization of little girls won't do the same for these beauty pageants who promoted them years after years.
> 
> Let not forget people who bash this movie and still use apps like Tik Tok or Instagram, Cuties isn't a movie that is supposed to be pleasant to watch anyways, disguted the viewer is the main goal of this movie.



for one there has always been outrage for child pageants who knows why the shit is still allowed

if i saw a thread on child pageantry i would have shared my thoughts on it there
i can't speak for other ppl bit i don't use tik tok, instagram or kno what goes on in it

but if its content is this bad i wouldn't assume the ppl who have issues with cuties readily indulge in whatever shit goes on in there
i would think the ones watching would be ppl like that pedo who gave a cuties review calling them "hot" n left the movie with the complete opposite message than what was its alleged intent 

i won't give something a pass just because something i'd find equally abhorrent exists
that logic doesn't follow with me neither does this notion of sexualizing children on film in order to spread awareness that sexualizing children is bad


----------



## Kisame3rd14 (Sep 20, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> My whole point is people who made an massive outrage about this movie who condamn oversexualization of little girls won't do the same for these beauty pageants who promoted them years after years.
> 
> Let not forget people who bash this movie and still use apps like Tik Tok or Instagram, Cuties isn't a movie that is supposed to be pleasant to watch anyways, disguted the viewer is the main goal of this movie.


Whataboutisim


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 20, 2020)

Kisame3rd14 said:


> Whataboutisim



You just saw what you want to see, i already give plenty arguments for this movie on this thread, i won't repeat myself. You just need to read.


----------



## Kisame3rd14 (Sep 20, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> You just saw what you want to see, i already give plenty arguments for this movie on this thread, i won't repeat myself. You just need to read.


If I made a movie about the intricacies of rape, would it be acceptable if I used a woman moaning in my trailer?


----------



## hammer (Sep 20, 2020)

Jim said:


> I suppose sexualizing teens will become normal.


*me putting my cloths in a drop down washing machine*

*step bro come at home intensifies*


----------



## stream (Sep 20, 2020)

Kisame3rd14 said:


> If I made a movie about the intricacies of rape, would it be acceptable if I used a woman moaning in my trailer?


Whataboutism


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> Breaking the barriers for young black women, the movie is about the coming of age of an 11-year-old French girl and her friends caught between traditionalist immigrant families and hypersexualised pop culture.
> 
> French screenwriter Maïmouna Doucouré made her directorial debut with the new film that bagged the best director award at the Sundance film festival earlier this year.
> 
> ...


I don't need to read this shit article.

I saw some parts of the film, #1 on my list of worst films of the decade and I mean past decade.

Those were 7m of life that I will not get back.


----------



## Kisame3rd14 (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> Whataboutism


Whataboutisim can only be used in defense, not on the attack. Learn how basic communication works and you might be able to pass an 11th grade literary class.


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

Nemesis said:


> It's the opposite.  The movie is about how sexualising preteens is gross.


False, it uses sexualization to somewhat virtue signal that sexualization is bad for 13 years old. Shit, no one knew that also no one will accuse the direction because she is a woman of colour uses a teen that is also a girl of colour, god damn the world is shitty today.

The girl was 13 or younger when she starred in the film, the film is M only or 17+.

So legally she can see the film in 2023 and that is illogical at best.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 20, 2020)

Kisame3rd14 said:


> If I made a movie about the intricacies of rape, would it be acceptable if I used a woman moaning in my trailer?



Lol bitching about "whataboutism" and do the same at first occasion .


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> Lol bitching about "whataboutism" and do the same at first occasion .


You guys are defending this shit, for me it is a shit film and it has a 1.3/10 so the awards are for nothing but virtue signaling, I wonder why.

Also if you need to use over-sexualization to show over-sexualization then can you use the word nibbah on AA to show that racism is bad.

I think not.

Also, the film has a part when the girl makes a picture of her genitals and post it on the social network, that is real 13-year-old acting that, yeah sure GG girl 


The execution of this film is garbage tier, I get what they were trying to say but oh boy this film is shit.



DemonDragonJ said:


> Adolescence is a time in which a person transitions from childhood to adulthood, and the most significant part of that transition is becoming able to reproduce and, by extension, developing an interest in sexuality to facilitate reproduction. Therefore, I feel that it is perfectly acceptable to portray adolescent characters in a sexual manner, because doing so will help them to be confident in their own bodies and not be ashamed of their own developing feelings of sexuality. If the characters had not yet started to go through puberty, I would agree that it would be very disturbing to sexualize then, but, since they have, it is not.


I disagree.

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines an adolescent as any person between ages 10 and 19. This age range falls within WHO's definition of young people, which refers to individuals between ages 10 and 24.

You are telling me that 10 years old can see M rated films as this, not only that but star in them and mimic picturing their genitalia on the social network.

I am all for liberalism but someone should not star in an M rated film as a 10-14-year-old, they can use older actors.

Ok, then sorry do not have a take on games from now one Murica.
Also, let alone lolis in Anime because you know that is a cultural thing and most of them are from 18 to 3000 years old.



stream said:


> It seems a pretty good movie, it won a lot of acclaim. But yeah, that image is trash


It is not, far from even average!

1.7/10

Shortly after its release on *Netflix*, *Cuties* had an *IMDb rating* of 1.7/10, reflecting the impact of review bombing in relation to the controversy over the film.





Parallax said:


> I've seen more cosplay models doing skimpy 2b shoots than Bayonetta


Were they 10-13?


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

THIS IS NOT A GOOD FILM PERIOD.

Stop defending it because of politics FFS.

I hate politics.


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> of course let pretend that there is no problem with pedophilia in anime, that the numerous scandal concerning mangaka and schoolgirls and child pornography videos like with Tatsuya Matsuki or Watsuki doesn't exist, that a lof of anime sexualize underage girls in the worst ways possible.
> 
> 
> *Spoiler*: __
> ...


GTFO.

Thos are fictional characters.
You don't even know why that is, at least say it blunt that this was what your arguments wanted to arrive at.




Holy fucking shit as I said:



This is bad:

Elaine is a slender pale-skinned female with a very petite frame. She has neck-length blonde hair, big golden eyes and long, thin eyelashes. Despite being around 1000 years old, Elaine initially resembles a human child. When her large and elegant wings finally grew in, her appearance became more mature and her hair lengthened. However, she returns to her former appearance if her magical power is completely depleted.

As the Holy Maiden, Elaine wore a single white one-piece strapless dress tied together with a butterfly knot at the back. It also had long detached sleeves.

When revived by Melascula, Elaine wore a fancier revealing red gown (black in the anime), along with shoes out of red leaves.

After her official revival, Escanor gave her a forest green tavern gown she wore from then on with a pair of red slippers.

But this is good because it is showing how bad over-sexualization is:
*Fathia Youssouf*

Age: 14
*Medina El Aidi Azouni*

Age: 12 years
*Esther Gohourou*

*Ilanah Cami-Goursolas*

*

Age: 14
*


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> These cases are one thing but the popularization of loli and their sexualization is very old and has never been condemned or even actively denounced by the anime industry.  They're not on the radar  of twitter morality court's yet because a good chunk of active SJWs are often anime fans but believe me when ordinary people start digging a bit they'll will call for cancel and boyscott anime the same way they do for this movie.
> 
> I also can easily say that the whole reality TV and social media industry doesn't sexualize little girls and show several examples where they have had a use and purpose, but this doesn't prevent this problem from being particularly present in these industries.


...


Wrong again.


----------



## Kisame3rd14 (Sep 20, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> Lol bitching about "whataboutism" and do the same at first occasion .


You’re a pedo sympathizer, just think about that for a second.


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

Kisame3rd14 said:


> You’re a pedo sympathizer, just think about that for a second.


Dude these guys are the fucking same that were having 10 pages of discussion with me on One Piece is sexist.

FFS and now he is defending 12 years old right to start in a M rated movie and a 13 yeard old having he right to mimic taking pictures of her genitals to show that the society oversexualizes them.


----------



## stream (Sep 20, 2020)

Wow, your posting rate is rising fast. Remember to breathe.



Kisame3rd14 said:


> Whataboutisim can only be used in defense, not on the attack. Learn how basic communication works and you might be able to pass an 11th grade literary class.


Here's my answer: 
No, really, I have nothing else to answer to that.



Ren. said:


> It is not, far from even average!
> 
> 1.7/10
> 
> Shortly after its release on *Netflix*, *Cuties* had an *IMDb rating* of 1.7/10, reflecting the impact of review bombing in relation to the controversy over the film.


I've got a newsflash for you: Review bombing by people who have not seen the movie does not reflect the quality of the movie.


----------



## Kisame3rd14 (Sep 20, 2020)

Ren. said:


> Dude these guys are the fucking same that were having 10 pages of discussion with me on Piece is sexist.
> 
> FFS and now he is defending 12 years old right to start in a M rated movie and a 13 yeard old having he right to mimic taking pictures of her genitals to show that the society oversexualizes them.


They can’t fool me. I remember in the early 2000s when the wire was at the top of the charts, every single liberal and their mother stood up against Felicia Pearson for being a convicted murderer, portraying a gangster on tv. Now they think it’s acceptable to show actual CP, to show the affects of children sexuality.


----------



## Sequester (Sep 20, 2020)

Ren. said:


> THIS IS NOT A GOOD FILM PERIOD.
> 
> Stop defending it because of politics FFS.
> 
> I hate politics.



is that's what this defense is all about??

because ppl don't want to be seen sharing the opinion of a perceived enemy?


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> I've got a newsflash for you: Review bombing by people who have not seen the movie does not reflect the quality of the movie.


New flash, having awards does not make a film good, and review bombs can be done for 10s. happened a lot with The last Of Maaam.

Stop talking about things you know so little about!

I saw the film, I get what she wanted to say but really using 12 years old to tell that story is not the best way to do it and it is nothing to fictional characters in anime.



Sequester said:


> is that's what this defense is all about??
> 
> because ppl don't want to be seen sharing the opinion of a perceived enemy?


I don't care, if it was a good film I would have said it and I get the message just not a good film, wanted to show us this, do a documentary hire 16 years old that look younger use CGI etc.


Sorry, there is no excuse.

And I am not going essay on the same dude that were lecturing me about hos OP is sexist like @CrownedEagle!



reiatsuflow said:


> That's the future liberals want.


I am a liberal, don't use that word because now it means cultural Marxists.


reiatsuflow said:


> So did anyone watch it yet?


I did, 7  minutes wasted, and my SSD space.

I am not paying for shit like this.

Even the members of the private trackers were saying why is this shit in here.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 20, 2020)

Kisame3rd14 said:


> You’re a pedo sympathizer, just think about that for a second.



No need, i already make plenty of threads to bash pedophilia and clash with several members here about that, you can keep the ad hominem arguments for yourself if you have nothing to say.


----------



## Mael (Sep 20, 2020)

Kisame3rd14 said:


> You’re a pedo sympathizer, just think about that for a second.


----------



## Kisame3rd14 (Sep 20, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> No need, i already make plenty of threads to bash pedophilia and clash with several members here about that, you can keep the ad hominem arguments for yourself if you have nothing to said.


*say


----------



## stream (Sep 20, 2020)

Ren. said:


> review bombs can be done for 10s. happened a lot with The last Of Maaam.


I have no idea what you were trying to say here. Review bombing is done by people with an axe to grind, not by people who have a honest opinion. By definition, review bombing does not reflect the quality of the product.



Ren. said:


> Stop talking about things you know so little about!


You need to take a long, hard look in the mirror.



Ren. said:


> I saw the film, I get what she wanted to say but really using 12 years old to tell that story is not the best way to do it and it is nothing to fictional characters in anime.


Your argument is starting to get muddled here. Which are you trying to say?
1) Using 12-years-old to play sexual scenes is pedophilia
2) Anime with 12-years-old in sexual scenes is completely fine
3) You didn't like this movie

My answers are:
1) It's happened before, in acclaimed movies (e.g Taxi Driver), and it will happen again.
2) That's off-topic
3) Sure, but that's just your opinion. People don't have to agree on what is a good movie.


----------



## Kisame3rd14 (Sep 20, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Then there's shows that do this on other channels


Whataboutisim


Sequester said:


> you keep bringing up child pageants like everyone who has a problem with cuties is fine with that shit


They don’t understand complex thought.


Parallax said:


> I've seen more cosplay models doing skimpy 2b shoots than Bayonetta


I bet you have.


jesusus said:


> Why does this movie even exist?


Look at the enablers.


CrownedEagle said:


> Let not forget people who bash this movie and still use apps like Tik Tok or Instagram


Whataboutisim


Ren. said:


> I saw the film


And that explains why you’re upset.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Mael (Sep 20, 2020)

Guys tell him that Andrew Luck is overrated.


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> I have no idea what you were trying to say here. Review bombing is done by people with an axe to grind, not by people who have a honest opinion. By definition, review bombing does not reflect the quality of the product.


I know and it is done using 0 and 10s, bye.




stream said:


> You need to take a long, hard look in the mirror.


I can debate you on any subject and come on top so thanks for your advice using an ad hominem but I only debate subjects that I have information on so stop while you are in the winning position.


stream said:


> Your argument is starting to get muddled here. Which are you trying to say?
> 1) Using 12-years-old to play sexual scenes is pedophilia
> 2) Anime with 12-years-old in sexual scenes is completely fine
> 3) You didn't like this movie
> ...


 ...

Dude/Maaam Elaine was 1000 years old FFS.
Most of the lolita characters are at least 100 of years old ... in anime, and the point of them are to show that Asian and Japanese look much younger than their age, nothing remotely close to what this film was about, using 11 years olds and I mean mental and body age is nothing close to that.

Heck let me show you with evidence:

hachikuji mayoi cosplay
Nagasawa Marina may look like an elementary school student, but she’s actually an adult woman.

: October 8, 1995 (age 24 years), 
: 1.54 m
: 
:  (2014)

*Nagasawa Marina* (長澤茉里奈) is a gravure model and a former member of Houkago Princess. She was initially dismissed from the group in August 2014, but she later rejoined and was promoted as a 7th generation member of the group. She later withdrew from the group on December 14, 2016, to pursue a career as a gravure model.





I did not even use the P word, as I said read first, read books, watch movie and after debate me on something that I watched and researched.

I would appreciate if some of you do yours due diligence research before posting.


----------



## stream (Sep 20, 2020)

Kisame3rd14 said:


> Whataboutisim
> 
> Whataboutisim


Not going to argue any more, but since you like this word so much: It's written .



Ren. said:


> I know and it is done using 0 and 10s, bye.


...What??



Ren. said:


> Dude/Maaam Elaine was 1000 years old FFS.
> Most of the lolita characters are at least 100 of years old ...


I don't even know what you're talking about. Even  does not know what you're talking about. The one thing that I'm certain of is that it has nothing to do with this movie.


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> My answers are:
> 1) It's happened before, in acclaimed movies (e.g Taxi Driver), and it will happen again.
> 2) That's off-topic
> 3) Sure, but that's just your opinion. People don't have to agree on what is a good movie.


https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...-prostitute-aged-12-taxi-driver-a7040016.html

And no one said that this role was good for her, even she said it was hard.

We never said that the role was used to demonize prostitution and the film was not about her being a prostitute but hey why would you care.


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> ...What??




You sound exactly like these gents that review bombed the game with 10s..




stream said:


> I don't even know what you're talking about. Even  does not know what you're talking about. The one thing that I'm certain of is that it has nothing to do with this movie.





Ren. said:


> Most of the lolita characters are at least 100 of years old ... in anime, and the point of them are to show that Asian and Japanese look much younger than their age, nothing remotely close to what this film was about, using 11 years olds and I mean mental and body age is nothing close to that.
> 
> Heck let me show you with evidence:
> 
> ...





Ren. said:


> Holy fucking shit as I said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...






stream said:


> Even  does not know what you're talking about.


You just don't know how to use it, don't blame the tool or use duck duck go as that does not censor stuff.

I am done, don't quote me anymore.


----------



## Sequester (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> My answers are:
> 1) It's happened before, in acclaimed movies (e.g Taxi Driver), and it will happen again.



so what are you saying exactly?

i wasn't alive for shit like shirley temple n taxi driver but i am for cuties

just because there has been a precedent set for something doesn't mean you have to find it acceptable


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

Sequester said:


> so what are you saying exactly?
> 
> i wasn't alive for shit like shirley temple n taxi driver but i am for cuties
> 
> just because there has been a precedent set for something doesn't mean you have to find it acceptable





Ren. said:


> https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-...-prostitute-aged-12-taxi-driver-a7040016.html
> 
> And no one said that this role was good for her, even she said it was hard.
> 
> We never said that the role was used to demonize prostitution and the film was not about her being a prostitute but hey why would you care.


It is not even remotely the same.

That movie was not about how underage prostitution is bad and we show you so you can see it is bad.

We all know that is not just bad but one of the worst things that can be in RL.

"
Oscar-winning actress Jodie Foster has given a little insight into the filming of Martin Scorsese’s 1976 classic _Taxi Driver_, saying no-one, not even the director, knew how to approach her part.

Foster was 12 at the time and played teenage prostitute Iris.

Talking on _The Graham Norton Show_, she said: "I was 12 years old and had made more movies than anyone else on the film at that point.


"They were very uncomfortable about my character. Nobody knew how to direct me.

"Scorsese would say something like 'unzip his fly' and just start laughing and not know what to do so he would hand it over to Robert De Niro and then Robert would tell me what to do.

"And he was even more 'Robert De Niro' then, even quieter and more strange."

Her use of ‘Robert De Niro’ as an adjective is interesting, and somehow you get what she means even without having met him.
"


In contrast to this!

And I was suggested by the same gents that I don't know what I am talking about, sure sure.


----------



## Sequester (Sep 20, 2020)

@stream also per your example, Jodie foster's role in taxi driver put her in danger after it attracted pedo stalker john hinckley jr


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 20, 2020)

So how long before this becomes a megathread?  Can't believe it's still going strong.


----------



## Parallax (Sep 20, 2020)

Kisame3rd14 said:


> Whataboutisim
> 
> They don’t understand complex thought.
> 
> ...


I'm anti this movie lol


----------



## stream (Sep 20, 2020)

Sequester said:


> @stream also per your example, Jodie foster's role in taxi driver put her in danger after it attracted pedo stalker john hinckley jr


It's not like only girls who play prostitutes have stalkers. A lot of famous women have had stalkers after them, from tennis players to fiction writers, including teen actresses that just play bog standard roles. Should we just ban teens from playing in any movies, or prevent women from being famous?


----------



## Ren. (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> Should we just ban teens from playing in any movies, or prevent women from being famous?


No, we should let 11years old play in R-rated movies that are R-rated because they show the sexualization of teens.
And if we disagree we males are sexists pigs and racists because we are also white:


Disclaimer: I was sarcastic as fuck.


----------



## Mael (Sep 20, 2020)

Parallax said:


> I'm anti this movie lol


It's Kisame, dude.


----------



## Sequester (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> It's not like only girls who play prostitutes have stalkers. A lot of famous women have had stalkers after them, from tennis players to fiction writers, including teen actresses that just play bog standard roles. Should we just ban teens from playing in any movies, or prevent women from being famous?



i know what we shouldn't do

we shouldn't put children in inappropriate roles that will guarantee they'll be ogled by pervs

at the very least we can do that


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 20, 2020)

Kisame3rd14 said:


> Whataboutisim


You don't know what that word means. In fact I was referring to something else in the discussion with someone about how media depicts young people as looking older and I was just listing examples. 

Whataboutism is specifically when you use a "what about" statement to try and accuse an opponent of hypocrisy without disproving their argument. 

Learn to fucking read and follow along.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 20, 2020)

Parallax said:


> I'm anti this movie lol


He posts with the strength of those people who comment on FB news stories


----------



## SakuraLover16 (Sep 20, 2020)

Since I’ve already established that I’m not watching it isn’t there another movie that puts 12 year old boys in a few sexual situations. I didn’t watch that either by the way.


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 20, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> I think you're really conflating things, she's in a game that's on par with difficulty of DMC, especially DMC 3 which is hard as fucking balls. The combat in the two is comparable, the difficulty, the story even, DMC makes about as much sense and it is a hugely more popular game.



That's a very shoddy comparison. DMC is hugely more popular than Bayonetta for many more reasons than just Bayonetta shaking her ass.  


DMC is a legacy series. It has 8 years and 3 more mainline titles on Bayonetta that spans three generations with much more Dante guest appearances (SMTIII and Viewtiful Joe to name a few) than Bayonetta herself.
DMC was the game that introduced (or possibly revolutionized/popularized depending on your definition) the over the top high paced 3D action style of games. It's basically the Mario 64 of action games in terms of revolutionizing the genre. It had a much bigger impact than Bayonetta even when considering every dev and their mother now puts witch time in their games.
DMC is overall the better series with stronger titles and overall better technical performing games between the two series. DMC1 on PS2, DMC3 on PS2, DMC4 on 360+PS3, and DMC5 on PS4+Xbone+PC were all excellent games. Bayo1 on PS3 was giant fucking mess. Bayo2 released on a dead fucking console and Bayo3 is in developmental hell. A character's popularity is directly connected to how good your game is.
DMC is on top of the food chain in terms of over the top high paced action games. Metal Gear Rising, Wonderful 101, Ninja Gaiden, and Astral Chain all don't compare to DMC. The only exception is God of War, and even then the latest God of War slows down things considerably to appeal more to mainstream. It's not just Bayonetta that pales in comparison. 
Difficulty isn't the only only factor when it comes to nicheness. The Soulsborne games are very popular for example. Bayonetta has more do with people "not having any idea what's going on the screen" kinda thing than it being difficult, kinda like the case with the Marvel vs. Capcom series. Bayo 2 wasn't even difficult.  



Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> And if Nier is about as densely lore and philosophy packed as an Emmanual Kant paragraph. The difference with Nier is that the sexualization in that game is also incidental. No one thinks 2B fucks, where as Bayonetta fucks and there's a good chance the person she's fucking might not survive. A lot of weebs are straight up uncomfortable with sexually competent and aware women.



>Incidental

Hate to break it to ya



> Taro also said that _NieR: Automata _protagonist 2B’s design wasn’t meant to be very sexy at first, however when he received the original designs he told the 3D modelers to make her butt as perfect as they possibly could, otherwise they’d be fired. So naturally they went above and beyond making a wonderful buttocks.






Just because 2B's personality is more conservative than Bayonetta doesn't mean she wasn't oversexualized. The blindfolds, the upskirtable skirt, the thong, the butt. There's nothing incidental about it.  





Parallax said:


> I've seen more cosplay models doing skimpy 2b shoots than Bayonetta



Other than 2B being more popualr, I imagine Bayonetta is kinda hard to cosplay. I imagine her costume is a nightmare to make.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ruthless Tsuchikage (Sep 20, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> Other than 2B being more popualr, I imagine Bayonetta is kinda hard to cosplay. I imagine her costume is a nightmare to make.



That and you need legs the size of a giraffe's neck!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 20, 2020)

Ruthless Tsuchikage said:


> That and you need legs the size of a giraffe's neck!



Yeah she's a tall friend 




*Spoiler*: __

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Sequester (Sep 20, 2020)

SakuraLover16 said:


> Since I’ve already established that I’m not watching it isn’t there another movie that puts 12 year old boys in a few sexual situations. I didn’t watch that either by the way.



do you remember what platform it was on or how long ago it came out?

never heard anything about a movie like that


----------



## SakuraLover16 (Sep 20, 2020)

Sequester said:


> do you remember what platform it was on or how long ago it came out?
> 
> never heard anything about a movie like that


Well it was a comedy on Netflix with three boys. To be honest I wasn’t too interested in it. One of the boys was watching porn and was about to attempt “something” but at the last second his room door opened. I also remembered a scene where one of the boys gives a girl a necklace which turned out to be used anal beads. Those are two that I know of I guess the difference would be messaging and execution I guess as well as subject matter.  But I can’t give you a hard opinion on it because I didn’t watch it.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## stream (Sep 20, 2020)

^ looks like


----------



## Mider T (Sep 20, 2020)

What are your thoughts @Orochibuto ?


----------



## Mael (Sep 20, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> Yeah she's a tall friend
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Isn't she a demon?


----------



## SakuraLover16 (Sep 20, 2020)

Mael said:


> Isn't she a demon?


Half witch half angel I think?


----------



## sworder (Sep 20, 2020)

SakuraLover16 said:


> Half witch half angel I think?


No she's human, but has a pact with a demon that grants her some powers. Witches and sages are humans.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Ruthless Tsuchikage (Sep 20, 2020)

SakuraLover16 said:


> Half witch half angel I think?



Half Umbran Witch and half Lumen Sage to be exact.


----------



## Ruthless Tsuchikage (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> ^ looks like



I haven't seen Good Boys but judging from the trailer it was more of a comedy movie if I recall. That does hold different implication than a movie playing it entirely straight.


----------



## Sequester (Sep 20, 2020)

yann maritaud the cinematographer responsible for those close ups in cuties made this 15 min short film called gronde marmaille that supposedly just follows around a 7 year old playing in nothing but her underwear for the entire duration


----------



## SakuraLover16 (Sep 20, 2020)

Now that’s not even a red flag that’s a red billboard


----------



## Mael (Sep 20, 2020)

Sequester said:


> yann maritaud the cinematographer responsible for those close ups in cuties made this 15 min short film called gronde marmaille that supposedly just follows around a 7 year old playing in nothing but her underwear for the entire duration


Dude wtf is wrong with Europe?

Kid diddling isn’t exclusive to that continent but they made it a fucking art form. *coughRomanPolanskicough*


----------



## Jim (Sep 20, 2020)

people get so worried about showing clips about it on youtube and heavily censor it for some reason.


----------



## stream (Sep 20, 2020)

I think if you find Gronde Marmaille scandalous, it says more about you than about the movie. 

It is on Youtube if you want to check for yourself:


----------



## Mael (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> I think if you find Gronde Marmaille scandalous, it says more about you than about the movie.
> 
> It is on Youtube if you want to check for yourself:


Man Europeans can think Americans are nothing but puritanical whiners we just don’t fuck around with that.


----------



## Sequester (Sep 20, 2020)

stream said:


> I think if you find Gronde Marmaille scandalous, it says more about you than about the movie.
> 
> It is on Youtube if you want to check for yourself:


were you were already familiar with it or looked it up?

i was side eyeing him purely on the way he shot the clips of cuties i seen, it gave me funny uncle vibes n learning about this after seeing that was not a good look

makes me far less inclined to chalk it up as innocent


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 20, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> That's a very shoddy comparison. DMC is hugely more popular than Bayonetta for many more reasons than just Bayonetta shaking her ass.
> 
> 
> DMC is a legacy series. It has 8 years and 3 more mainline titles on Bayonetta that spans three generations with much more Dante guest appearances (SMTIII and Viewtiful Joe to name a few) than Bayonetta herself.
> ...


When I say incidental I mean in the games, there is nothing deliberately sexual about 2B on her own part. She happens to be sexy, when her self destruct goes off she happens to be scantily clad, the blind fold isn't a sex thing, She didn't make those choices and she doesn't do them to illicit a sexual response. The blindfold is stated in universe to be part of the crooked belief system that the Androids have cooked up from what they know of humans. If the first two things were different and 2B was a man the game wouldn't really be different because she's completely unaware of her sexuality. 

2B isn't "conservative" she's seemingly unaware of her own sexuality, something we see time and time again in Japanese and Western media, albeit in different ways. 

Dante fulfills a power fantasy, 2B fulfills sexual fantasies, but Bayonetta is humiliating people for her own amusement and it's a head space that the player really doesn't get to share with her, it's more observed and if anything it's treated more like comedy. Like, watch her make these men around her uncomfortable.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 21, 2020)

Sequester said:


> yann maritaud the cinematographer responsible for those close ups in cuties made this 15 min short film called gronde marmaille that supposedly just follows around a 7 year old playing in nothing but her underwear for the entire duration



This seemed too ridiculous to be true but holy shit you are right. The whole thing is somehow on Youtube even though it's nudity of a little girl.

A few months ago I refuted the claim made by somebody here that France had a serious pedo problem. I retract my statement. France is messed up.



stream said:


> I think if you find Gronde Marmaille scandalous, it says more about you than about the movie.



We think it's scandalous because it's inappropriate to record kids naked. It'd be one thing if she were a 16-month old toddling around but the age that girl is at is a huge target for pedos. It's also wholly unnecessary to have her dressed like that. You can show that someone is a "wild child" without them being 95% naked.


----------



## Capt. Autismo (Sep 21, 2020)

SakuraLover16 said:


> Since I’ve already established that I’m not watching it isn’t there another movie that puts 12 year old boys in a few sexual situations. I didn’t watch that either by the way.


I ton of movies that do both that I can think of, but this is the movie where people make their stand I guess. I think this was mostly brought on by the [HASHTAG]#savethechildren[/HASHTAG] Qanon folk though.


----------



## Hand Banana (Sep 21, 2020)

I think this thread long lived past it's purpose. Not even sure what is being discussed anymore.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 21, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> This seemed too ridiculous to be true but holy shit you are right. The whole thing is somehow on Youtube even though it's nudity of a little girl.
> 
> A few months ago I refuted the claim made by somebody here that France had a serious pedo problem. I retract my statement. France is messed up.


This has been a rumor about France for decades. There was some music video from like the 80s where this guy was very weirdly close with his own daughter and I think she might have been 15 at the time. 


Capt. Autismo said:


> I ton of movies that do both that I can think of, but this is the movie where people make their stand I guess. I think this was mostly brought on by the [HASHTAG]#savethechildren[/HASHTAG] Qanon folk though.


Yeah, those people are doing that to get traction for their bullshit conspiracy movement. Never mind that this doesn't even fit the narrative when it was made by some small film maker who isn't from here. 

QAnon is basically a religious cult at this point, complete with little indoctrination techniques.


----------



## Mael (Sep 21, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> I think this thread long lived past it's purpose. Not even sure what is being discussed anymore.


Italy sucks but we gotta own up to France having issues.


----------



## Sequester (Sep 21, 2020)

Capt. Autismo said:


> I ton of movies that do both that I can think of, but this is the movie where people make their stand I guess. I think this was mostly brought on by the [HASHTAG]#savethechildren[/HASHTAG] Qanon folk though.



a ton of other movies like cuties?

i weren't aware of any, please list them


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 21, 2020)

stream said:


> I think if you find Gronde Marmaille scandalous, it says more about you than about the movie.
> 
> It is on Youtube if you want to check for yourself:


The whole thread say a lot about how nobody want to tackle children hyper sexualisation. The discussion is now about Europeans vs Americans on who have an issue.
The point of the movie was to expose the hyper sexualisation that impact young kids in the western societies but look where the discussion go.....


----------



## SakuraLover16 (Sep 21, 2020)

Capt. Autismo said:


> I ton of movies that do both that I can think of, but this is the movie where people make their stand I guess. I think this was mostly brought on by the [HASHTAG]#savethechildren[/HASHTAG] Qanon folk though.


Probably. I guess kids don’t matter unless they suit an agenda for those people.


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 21, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> So for you it’s ok if the author attempt is to trigger potential p*d*p**** with Lolicon compared to a movie that denounce something. You do not care about the author attempts at all. You only analyse what you see without thinking too much. This is what you telling me.



What evidence you have that the authors using loli are attempting that? Nothing. That's just your assumption based on little to no evidence. 
What evidence do you have that using Loli has directly or indirectly resulted in some increase of the number of pedophiles in Japan or in the world? 

What evidence do you have that Loli have an impact on these issues? Because it is just as possible that most people that consume anime, especially in Japan, have the ability to distinguish hand drawn cartoons from real life. 

You started saying that knowing the intention of the author is important, which I agree. But then you immediately made huge assumptions in regards to authors and audiences without any evidence. Not only this is illogical but also contradictory to your previous point. 

You also failed to understand that (some) people criticizing the movie understand the message, but they don't agree that you could basically do the negative thing yourself just to spread the message. Which is reasonable, but debatable. But you assuming that they don't care about the message is again illogical. 

Seems like your arguments in this subject require some professor Xavier abilities you seem to have that you are able to perfectly understand what everyone's true intentions are without sufficient information.


----------



## stream (Sep 21, 2020)

^ Did you just quote a message from August 25th??


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 21, 2020)

WolfusFH said:


> What evidence you have that the authors using loli are attempting that? Nothing. That's just your assumption based on little to no evidence.


Please, prove me that I'm wrong. Prove me that loli have an other purpose.



> What evidence do you have that using Loli has directly or indirectly resulted in some increase of the number of pedophiles in Japan or in the world?
> 
> What evidence do you have that Loli have an impact on these issues?


Where you saw that I said that ?




> Because it is just as possible that most people that consume anime, especially in Japan, have the ability to distinguish hand drawn cartoons from real life.


What exactly do you mean here ? Because with this kind of phrase, you can defend anything animated as long as it’s not real.




> You started saying that knowing the intention of the author is important, which I agree. But then you immediately made huge assumptions in regards to authors and audiences without any evidence. Not only this is illogical but also contradictory to your previous point.
> 
> You also failed to understand that (some) people criticizing the movie understand the message, but they don't agree that you could basically do the negative thing yourself just to spread the message. Which is reasonable, but debatable. But you assuming that they don't care about the message is again illogical.
> 
> Seems like your arguments in this subject require some professor Xavier abilities you seem to have that you are able to perfectly understand what everyone's true intentions are without sufficient information.


Like @stream said you quoted a comment from August 25th. At this time, there weren’t all these YouTube reviews and these video clips and since then I made others comments in this thread saying the movie divide people because of this shock scenes.


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 21, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Please, prove me that I'm wrong. Prove me that loli have an other purpose.
> 
> 
> Where you saw that I said that ?
> ...



1 - That's not how this works. Burden of proof is on you. You can't say that people absolutely do X because of Y based purely on speculation. I could make millions of assumptions about your intentions right now with 0 evidence, following your logic you're the one who would have to prove that they are wrong.

2 - You said that on the comment I quoted. That the authors intentions are to "trigger potential pedophiles".

3 - What I meant by that should be pretty clear. You made an assumption about an authors intentions. I commented on how your assumption is far from being the only possibility. For that, I explained this part that you quoted. A lot of people won't make any connections between the animation and some real life issue. What you can present or not in an animation is a different issue. But it's a fact that some people, including the author, wouldn't make connections between drawings and real life so instantaneously. Which means that, since there is another possibility in regards to the situation, it's absolutely certain that you're the one that has to provide actual evidence for your statements. 

About the date, sorry. I didn't pay attention to the date you made the post.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 21, 2020)

WolfusFH said:


> 1 - That's not how this works. Burden of proof is on you. You can't say that people absolutely do X because of Y based purely on speculation. I could make millions of assumptions about your intentions right now with 0 evidence, following your logic you're the one who would have to prove that they are wrong.


But you are the defendants here. I’m open to heard a different sound but until now, nobody prove to me that loli is not made to tease people that love little girls and potential p*d*p****. It’s a deduction based on the audience and how who usually like sexualised underage girls. 
If you make assumptions on me, I can still tell you how it is for real but in the case of loli, the defendant doesn’t try to prove anything.
Once again I’m open for an other sound and feel free to tell me what is the attempt behind drawing underage girls in a erotic situation.


> [2 - You said that on the comment I quoted. That the authors intentions are to "trigger potential pedophiles".


 Oh that’s an error from me with my understanding of “trigger” in English. I gave it an other definition.
No, I have no idea if lolicon create new p*d*p**** however I believe the potential p*d*p**** probably enjoy lolicon.


> 3 - What I meant by that should be pretty clear. You made an assumption about an authors intentions. I commented on how your assumption is far from being the only possibility. For that, I explained this part that you quoted. A lot of people won't make any connections between the animation and some real life issue. What you can present or not in an animation is a different issue. But it's a fact that some people, including the author, wouldn't make connections between drawings and real life so instantaneously. Which means that, since there is another possibility in regards to the situation, it's absolutely certain that you're the one that has to provide actual evidence for your statements.
> 
> About the date, sorry. I didn't pay attention to the date you made the post.


I disagree with the idea that because it’s an anime, it have a pass to do thing like lolicon because viewers might make the difference between animation and real life. There is a limit. 

These lolicon are part of an “entertainment content “. It’s a entertainment content for a specific audience that love sexualised little girls and the author cannot deny the tendency of his audience. Come on you don’t make lolicon for 35 years old women. You are free to prove me that I’m wrong.


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 21, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> But you are the defendants here. I’m open to heard a different sound but until now, nobody prove to me that loli is not made to tease people that love little girls and potential p*d*p****. It’s a deduction based on the audience and how who usually like sexualised underage girls.
> If you make assumptions on me, I can still tell you how it is for real but in the case of loli, the defendant doesn’t try to prove anything.
> Once again I’m open for an other sound and feel free to tell me what is the attempt behind drawing underage girls in a erotic situation.
> 
> ...



Again, all you're doing is speculation. I don't have to prove you wrong. I already gave you a real possibility based on facts. You disconsidered it.

Nobody should care about what you think people's intentions are. You're not Xavier. So if there is no way to objectively establish these intentions, you'd have to provide empirical evidence. Evidence that only pedophiles enjoy these Loli. Evidence that only pedophiles find them entertaining in some way. Without that, your statement is meaningless. 

I don't find it pleasant at all, so I try to avoid anime that oversexualizes these Lolis. It's annoying to me. But I don't claim things without the necessary information, which I don't have.


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 21, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> But you are the defendants here. I’m open to heard a different sound but until now, nobody prove to me that loli is not made to tease people that love little girls and potential p*d*p****. It’s a deduction based on the audience and how who usually like sexualised underage girls.
> If you make assumptions on me, I can still tell you how it is for real but in the case of loli, the defendant doesn’t try to prove anything.
> Once again I’m open for an other sound and feel free to tell me what is the attempt behind drawing underage girls in a erotic situation.
> 
> ...



As for your statements regarding animation getting "a pass" and the need for a limit, I find it highly unlikely that you have logical reasons for these "limits". What is animation and fiction in general limited to show? They shouldn't display situations that are considerable issues in society? If so, then murder or violence in general shouldn't be plot points of fiction at all. I'm pretty sure murder, war and torture might be potentially much more harmful than pedophilia, and they're also much more common. Should fiction be forbidden to show that as well? 

If the problem is that by displaying some issues, fiction is "normalizing" it, then I'll ask why? If people see things in movies and cartoons and think this is normal, this isn't the fictional work's fault. We don't never forbid the creation of superheroes and cartoons. We just stop some children from watching it if they can't understand that it's not real. So why would it be different with other issues for no reason? And also, how would you know that people are in fact thinking that said issue is normal by consuming fiction? That also requires empirical evidence. The same can be said by claims such as "this fiction influences people to do the thing". 

If the problem is that the fiction is portraying something negative in a "funny" or inappropriate way in general, then again we're back at the violence and murder comparison. These are situations that are used for comedy and many times is portrayed in a "heroic manner". Yet it doesn't seem to be a problem.

If the problem is that the portrayal of something in fiction makes people feel negative emotions (sadness, anger, etc), then why should I ban something based on that? Emotions may vary a lot from one person to another, and a lot of people find many things annoying. We would ban literally everything if this were to be a valid criteria. 

If your arguments fall under one of these, then you don't hold any logical argument, unless you do have some rational rebuttal or empirical evidence for some of these. If it's anything else, feel free to present it. But don't use abstract concepts and speculation, such as "it is clear that X will cause Y" or "this is the limit because it is" or any similar. I will just point it out how it doesn't consist a rational argument and won't be considering it.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 21, 2020)

This point might have been made before but the distinction between this and lolis is, even if both could encourage/enable/entertain dysfunctional and criminal impulses, pedo stuff, the main concern with cuties isn't the content, it's that they had real life 11 year olds do these things on camera and that has a different weight to it.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 21, 2020)

I forget who said this earlier in the thread but this sort of content might have actually been better served as animation.


----------



## hammer (Sep 21, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> I forget who said this earlier in the thread but this sort of content might have actually been better served as animation.


if it was animation more people would jack off to it


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 21, 2020)

WolfusFH said:


> Again, all you're doing is speculation. I don't have to prove you wrong. I already gave you a real possibility based on facts. You disconsidered it.
> Nobody should care about what you think people's intentions are. You're not Xavier. So if there is no way to objectively establish these intentions, you'd have to provide empirical evidence. Evidence that only pedophiles enjoy these Loli. Evidence that only pedophiles find them entertaining in some way. Without that, your statement is meaningless.


Sorry but all you did is disagree and ask for evidences without even advancing an idea that might prove me that what I saying is factual wrong. I don’t think I claimed only pedo watch loli however I said that potential pedo enjoy such content.
The audience targeted is pretty clear, it’s an audience that want to watch sexualised little girls as an entertainment. From that we can deduct that the audience have a weird view in little girly and can be potential p*d*p****. I’m sorry if it’s not based on statistics or studies. It’s a personal deduction based on what we can observe from these anime.



> I don't find it pleasant at all, so I try to avoid anime that oversexualizes these Lolis. It's annoying to me. But I don't claim things without the necessary information, which I don't have.


You also refuse to see what is obvious by saying you don’t have the information.


----------



## Hand Banana (Sep 21, 2020)

Dont know if this was posted. Or something Similar


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 21, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Sorry but all you did is disagree and ask for evidences without even advancing an idea that might prove me that what I saying is factual wrong. I don’t think I claimed only pedo watch loli however I said that potential pedo enjoy such content.
> The audience targeted is pretty clear, it’s an audience that want to watch sexualised little girls as an entertainment. From that we can deduct that the audience have a weird view in little girly and can be potential p*d*p****. I’m sorry if it’s not based on statistics or studies. It’s a personal deduction based on what we can observe from these anime.
> 
> 
> You also refuse to see what is obvious by saying you don’t have the information.



I could say the exact same thing about the movie of this thread, based on "deduction". As it turns out, the director and the movie had other intentions in mind. So what you're doing is pretty much what everyone was doing prior to more information in regards to the movie: basing yourself on potential consumers to state as an absolute fact that this is the author's true intentions. 

You're going to say "oh but the movie had a message, but Loli do not". But that is an specific case. The point of my argument is that: if there are other possibilities in regards to the author's intentions and audience's enjoyment, then you need evidence to make statements regarding such "parameters". So I am not "just disagreeing". I'm explaining why what you're saying is not necessarily a fact, which leads to the necessity of evidence. You say it as if asking for evidence is a bad thing. Oh how dare I try to be certain of facts before making statements. 

You're making a gigantic jump in logic. "These could be enjoyable for pedos" = "these is market for pedos" = "the audience are likely to be pedos". 
Each equal sign is a huge jump. First, pedos might take pleasure in a lot of things by the simple presence of a child. So should we forbid child actors from being a part of any movie? Should we forbid the presence of children in media? Because Pedos will enjoy it? And as a continuation, the presence of a child in fiction, even with the enjoyment of pedos, has no direct relation to the author and the rest of the audience. 
Second: Even if a piece of media has actually some part of it intentionally directed at pedos, if it does not consist the actual marketing and the majority of the product, then you again have no relation to the rest of the audience consuming it. Yes, they might be pedos. Just like anyone else you don't know. This possibility always exists, and the presence of one thing that they might enjoy in media doesn't necessarily result in significant increases in this proportion. 

As for "ignoring the obvious", no, I'm not. All I know about Loli is that they're cartoon girls with body type similar to the average western 13 year old girl. The age of these characters however is usually above 16, from what I know. So japanese adults in childish bodies. I do not know almost anything about the culture of Japan or most of it's media. I can't tell why certain cliches or portrayals appear in their media. Am I annoyed at these choices? Yes. Would I criticize it much more heavily if it was someone in my country doing it? Yes. But I have no idea if the authors make the connection of body type to age in Japan, since despite being unusual, these body types exist. I don't know their usual dress code, and I don't know how they perceive cartoons that can be visually appealing. 

Of course, cultural differences do not allow people to be objectively harmed. But then I'll ask: are people being objectively harmed by this? Did the presence of Lolis increase pedophilia in Japan? Did it "normalize" pedophilia in a Japan? Are people less concerned with it because of Lolis? 

Because if none of these issues happened, then why exactly are we here? Because in this case your assumptions wouldn't be corresponding to a problem that can be seen in real life, making it irrelevant. And if we are here simply because you think Loli creators and viewers are much more likely to be pedos, then you'll again have to account for the cultural differences explained as well as what I discussed before. Hence why you need much more evidence than what you currently have. 

And don't act as if I was asking for something absurd. You're making accusations about people based on information that doesn't necessarilycorrelate to your statement, as I explained. This is very serious, and it is something that should be supported by evidence, not slippery slopes. It upsets me that I'm having to be so explicit about how it is illogical to make accusations and judgement based on incomplete information.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 21, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> Dont know if this was posted. Or something Similar



Cuties is bringing this country together.


----------



## Capt. Autismo (Sep 21, 2020)

Hand Banana said:


> Dont know if this was posted. Or something Similar


My friend cancelled his Netflix. I asked him what is he going to do when the new season of stranger things comes out and he said he will definitely be getting Netflix again, he just cancelled to show them for a month or two. Lol


----------



## hammer (Sep 21, 2020)

Capt. Autismo said:


> My friend cancelled his Netflix. I asked him what is he going to do when the new season of stranger things comes back and he said he will definitely be getting Netflix again, he just cancelled to show them for a month or two I guess. Lol


that fucks him up more than them


----------



## Capt. Autismo (Sep 21, 2020)

hammer said:


> that fucks him up more than them


Yeah, I didn't understand it either.


----------



## hammer (Sep 21, 2020)

Capt. Autismo said:


> Yeah, I didn't understand it either.


people don't know how to protest, Ghandi was the king of it.  not buying anything British and living the rest of his life naked


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 21, 2020)

I couldn't make it through the first season of stranger things.


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 21, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Sorry but all you did is disagree and ask for evidences without even advancing an idea that might prove me that what I saying is factual wrong. I don’t think I claimed only pedo watch loli however I said that potential pedo enjoy such content.
> The audience targeted is pretty clear, it’s an audience that want to watch sexualised little girls as an entertainment. From that we can deduct that the audience have a weird view in little girly and can be potential p*d*p****. I’m sorry if it’s not based on statistics or studies. It’s a personal deduction based on what we can observe from these anime.
> 
> 
> You also refuse to see what is obvious by saying you don’t have the information.



And just to consolidate the arguments I presented, let's apply your "logic" to games that are graphically violent.

"These games have a very graphical portray of beatdowns, gore and murder. So it's obvious that they are targeting the game at violent people. The audience target is pretty clear, it's an audience that wants wants to watch extreme violence as entertainment. From that we can deduct that the audience has a weird view on violence and can be potential murderers and extremely violent people".

Notice how I even reproduced sentences of your argument.

I picked this subject because this is known to be incorrect. There are several studies that can be used as evidence to show that there's no correlation whatsoever between violent people and violent games. Yet we achieve an incorrect conclusion if applying your line of thought.

I hope this makes it perfectly clear as to why I ask for evidence in regards to such statements. Because I can't make it any clearer.

And if you're going to say "this is different", then be sure to prove it why this difference matters to your point. Explain and give evidence as to why the differences of these situations would allow the use of your kgoic. Don't just say it as an arbitrary fact. Otherwise, it will be pointless.


----------



## Capt. Autismo (Sep 21, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> I couldn't make it through the first season of stranger things.


You enjoyed the hell out of Beastars though so maybe you aren't the best judge.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 21, 2020)

Capt. Autismo said:


> You enjoyed the hell out of Beastars though so maybe you aren't the best judge.



Winona ryder having a breakdown every episode annoyed me even though like winona ryder.


----------



## Sloan (Sep 21, 2020)

gg if this is true.  Supa weirdo


----------



## Mael (Sep 22, 2020)

Sloan said:


> gg if this is true.  Supa weirdo


Not enough s


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 22, 2020)

WolfusFH said:


> As for your statements regarding animation getting "a pass" and the need for a limit, I find it highly unlikely that you have logical reasons for these "limits". What is animation and fiction in general limited to show? They shouldn't display situations that are considerable issues in society? If so, then murder or violence in general shouldn't be plot points of fiction at all. I'm pretty sure murder, war and torture might be potentially much more harmful than pedophilia, and they're also much more common. Should fiction be forbidden to show that as well?
> 
> If the problem is that by displaying some issues, fiction is "normalizing" it, then I'll ask why? If people see things in movies and cartoons and think this is normal, this isn't the fictional work's fault. We don't never forbid the creation of superheroes and cartoons. We just stop some children from watching it if they can't understand that it's not real. So why would it be different with other issues for no reason? And also, how would you know that people are in fact thinking that said issue is normal by consuming fiction? That also requires empirical evidence. The same can be said by claims such as "this fiction influences people to do the thing".
> 
> ...


The limits is set by the laws but also by what the morals of the society regarding sexual or sexualised contents. The problem is the normalisation and you ask why. Well, it’s not difficult to predict  that if these a normalisation of pedophilia contents in animation or any support, then it will lead to an acceptance that will strengthen those who support the idea that pedophilia is a sexual orientation rather than a deviance.
We can make the parallel with the spread of pornography that is much more common and accessible than 30 years ago and that have a clear impact on the sexuality and the way the new generations see sex and how it frustrate people.
We can see that the over representation of sexualised contents in the media with iconic celebrities lead to the hyper sexualisation of children, the adults of tomorrow and lead to a change of morals. 
Yes, fictions but not only, can normalise something, change morals norms and influence people to act differently.


----------



## Mael (Sep 22, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> The limits is set by the laws but also by what the morals of the society regarding sexual or sexualised contents. The problem is the normalisation and you ask why. Well, it’s not difficult to predict  that if these a normalisation of pedophilia contents in animation or any support, then it will lead to an acceptance that will strengthen those who support the idea that pedophilia is a sexual orientation rather than a deviance.
> We can make the parallel with the spread of pornography that is much more common and accessible than 30 years ago and that have a clear impact on the sexuality and the way the new generations see sex and how it frustrate people.
> We can see that the over representation of sexualised contents in the media with iconic celebrities lead to the hyper sexualisation of children, the adults of tomorrow and lead to a change of morals.
> Yes, fictions but not only, can normalise something, change morals norms and influence people to act differently.


I'll make it easy for you, mon frere (my keyboard won't let me type accents).

Children sexualized in animation, anime, manga, or movie is fucked up and should be scorned unless you're trying to characterize an individual as a victim of abuse and how that abuse is a focal point to condemn.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 22, 2020)

WolfusFH said:


> And just to consolidate the arguments I presented, let's apply your "logic" to games that are graphically violent.
> 
> "These games have a very graphical portray of beatdowns, gore and murder. So it's obvious that they are targeting the game at violent people. The audience target is pretty clear, it's an audience that wants wants to watch extreme violence as entertainment. From that we can deduct that the audience has a weird view on violence and can be potential murderers and extremely violent people".
> 
> ...


Studies show that there are no correlation between violent people and violent video games. We cannot says the same about sexual contents that have a different impact on people. It can even leads to addiction.


----------



## Mael (Sep 22, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Studies show that there are no correlation between violent people and violent video games. We cannot says the same about sexual contents that have a different impact on people. It can even leads to addiction.


That's not the point we're trying to make.  It's not about converting people into being pedos.  It's about already-existing pedos being given legitimacy in media.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 22, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> This point might have been made before but the distinction between this and lolis is, even if both could encourage/enable/entertain dysfunctional and criminal impulses, pedo stuff, the main concern with cuties isn't the content, it's that they had real life 11 year olds do these things on camera and that has a different weight to it.



Yea TBH I'm not sure why this is even a debate again. One is a fiction composed of a bunch of drawings that don't even look human to begin with. One is a live recording of real human beings who happen to be children. If someone's going to argue that they are equal, then they are past the point of reason and debate


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 22, 2020)

Mael said:


> I'll make it easy for you, *mon frere* (my keyboard won't let me type accents).
> 
> Children sexualized in animation, anime, manga, or movie is fucked up and should be scorned unless you're trying to characterize an individual as a victim of abuse and how that abuse is a focal point to condemn.



french rather say "frero", mon frere is an old fashion expression.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 22, 2020)

Mael said:


> That's not the point we're trying to make.  It's not about converting people into being pedos.  It's about already-existing pedos being given legitimacy in media.


I answer to a comparison with violent video games. Violent and sexual contents doesn’t have the same results on human brains. Violent contents can have a different impact on people but won’t necessarily make people violent however O don’t know if it’s proven that violent people don’t appreciate these games.

mon the case of sexuality, it’s different because the content is based on a attraction from the viewers to such contents.


----------



## Mael (Sep 22, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> french rather say "frero", mon frere is an old fashion expression.


I don't fuckin' know I've never been to France.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 22, 2020)

Mael said:


> I don't fuckin' know I've never been to France.


You couldn’t know. @CrownedEagle really told you what is said nowadays.
For me “Mon frère “ is ok but maybe because I start to be old.


----------



## Mael (Sep 22, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> I answer to a comparison with violent video games. Violent and sexual contents doesn’t have the same results on human brains. Violent contents can have a different impact on people but won’t necessarily make people violent however O don’t know if it’s proven that violent people don’t appreciate these games.
> 
> mon the case of sexuality, it’s different because the content is based on a attraction from the viewers to such contents.


Which is a good point.  Violence and sexual attraction are very different things...and yes on occasion they meet.


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 22, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Studies show that there are no correlation between violent people and violent video games. We cannot says the same about sexual contents that have a different impact on people. It can even leads to addiction.



This is a reply to both your comments. Your first one was purely especulation, again. "It is not difficult to predict that...". Yes, yes it is difficult. You're basically saying that the possibility of something happening means it will happen, regardless of the level of this possibility in regards to all the other possible events. 

Your logic of "something being presented in media results in it being normalized" is incorrect for a lot of things. There are several real life issues portrayed that are portrayed in media frequently, such as bullying, violence, murder, torture, war, abusive relationships, cheating, alcoholism, drug abuse, and so on. 
For all of these, there was no correlation between inaccurate portrayal in media and increase in the number of these events or normalization of these events.

So why is it that this issue is an outlier? You gave no reason, no logic, no evidence that would allow the use of a logic that is generally incorrect.

This is the same thing with violent games prior to the researches. So your arguments holds no value unless it is backed up by researches or evidence. Which you don't have. So here's a link that you could've easily researched:



If you actually read everything, you'll see that at best, the results are inconclusive, meaning there is no concrete evidence for this correlation. There is also evidence that in certain places, child pornography reduced the number of sexual assaults on children, places like Japan. 
And Loli in anime is not child pornography. Not even close. 

So it is much less likely that it would normalize pedophilia. Empirical evidence and logic is overwhelmingly against your argument.

If all you have is speculation based of slippery slopes, your arguments are irrelevant. Especially when confronted by scientific researches. So again, either bring up evidence of don't bother.


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 22, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> I answer to a comparison with violent video games. Violent and sexual contents doesn’t have the same results on human brains. Violent contents can have a different impact on people but won’t necessarily make people violent however O don’t know if it’s proven that violent people don’t appreciate these games.
> 
> mon the case of sexuality, it’s different because the content is based on a attraction from the viewers to such contents.



Again, terrible argument. I already had addressed this. Saying that "x is different than y" isn't enough of an argument. Yes, it's obvious that it is different. You have no proof or even arguments that justifies the use of logic that is generally incorrect for this particular issue.
Your second paragraph means nothing. It could easily be said for anything people enjoy in media.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 22, 2020)

Mael said:


> That's not the point we're trying to make.  It's not about converting people into being pedos.  *It's about already-existing pedos being given legitimacy in media.*



This movie doesn't give any legitimacy to pedos, it quite the contrary in fact. Are we going to say that "AHX" or "the burning bed" promote racism or sexism cause they show racist murders and domestic abuse ?


----------



## Mael (Sep 22, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> This movie doesn't give any legitimacy to pedos, it quite the contrary in fact. Are we going to say that "' promote racism or sexism and xenophobia cause they show racist murders and domestic abuse ?


I meant more providing them a film that is going to get them real excited and not see how it's a bad thing doing that.

Look, we've already got folks advocating for tolerance:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ls-critics-you-re-real-monsters-a6675946.html


We don't need to give them fuel for their clear-cut issues.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 22, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> This movie doesn't give any legitimacy to pedos, it quite the contrary in fact. Are we going to say that "AHX" or "the burning bed" promote racism or sexism cause they show racist murders and domestic abuse ?



Except there's no murder or abuse actually being done on screen. Dressing 11-year-olds in those outfits, teaching them those dance moves and behavior, and recording it in a clearly sexual manner is very different than someone harmlessly pretending to shoot someone for the camera.


----------



## Amol (Sep 22, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> I couldn't make it through the first season of stranger things.


I find lot of things annoying about you but this might be the most offensive thing you probably ever said!
You couldn't go through first season of Stranger Things?
I couldn't stop watching it.
What is wrong with you!!!


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 22, 2020)

Mael said:


> I meant more providing them a film that is going to get them real excited and not see how it's a bad thing doing that.
> 
> Look, we've ah8lready got folks advocating for tolerance:
> https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...ls-critics-you-re-real-monsters-a6675946.html
> ...



Pedophiles will always try to justify their deviant practice by all possible means (lgbt, interacial, gaps age relationship) but artists should certainly not restrain themselves for this reason.


----------



## Mael (Sep 22, 2020)

Amol said:


> *I find lot of things annoying about you but this might be the most offensive thing you probably ever said*!
> You couldn't go through first season of Stranger Things?
> I couldn't stop watching it.
> What is wrong with you!!!


And you've got the nerve to call me an asshole in a neg.


----------



## Sloan (Sep 22, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> I couldn't make it through the first season of stranger things.



Show is pretty overrated imo but it's still good.  First Season was the best actually.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 22, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> Except there's no murder or abuse actually being done on screen. Dressing 11-year-olds in those outfits, teaching them those dance moves and behavior, and recording it in a clearly sexual manner is very different than someone harmlessly pretending to shoot someone for the camera.



They already know these moves and behaviour, they live in the west and have acces to internet.


----------



## Le Mâle-Pensant (Sep 22, 2020)

WolfusFH said:


> This is a reply to both your comments. Your first one was purely especulation, again. "It is not difficult to predict that...". Yes, yes it is difficult. You're basically saying that the possibility of something happening means it will happen, regardless of the level of this possibility in regards to all the other possible events.
> 
> Your logic of "something being presented in media results in it being normalized" is incorrect for a lot of things. There are several real life issues portrayed that are portrayed in media frequently, such as bullying, violence, murder, torture, war, abusive relationships, cheating, alcoholism, drug abuse, and so on.
> For all of these, there was no correlation between inaccurate portrayal in media and increase in the number of these events or normalization of these events.


The normalisation can be expected by simply observation on the normalisation of other aspect of sexuality in the society. 
I explained why sexuality is different so the issues your listed like alcoholism or violence are not relevant compared to the spread of pornography and the impact on the society and sexual behaviour.



> So here's a link that you could've easily researched:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The evidence in your link that state that child pornography reduce the number of sexual assault on children is a correlation with pedophilia. This is in contradiction with your previous phrase when you claim there is no concrete evidence. 




> So it is much less likely that it would normalize pedophilia. Empirical evidence and logic is overwhelmingly against your argument.


 No, the link you provided is on child pornography and child sexual abuse. We talking about p*d*p****, no necessarily child abusers. The correlation between pedophiles and such contents is pretty clear in your link. The normalisation is not mentioned or contradicted. 

Pornography itself managed to normalise sexual behaviours. It have an impact on people expectations and desires.



Loli is just a legal sexualisation of child made to tease those who like it like any sexual contents. There is nothing abusing in making a correlation between sexualised children in entertainment contents and pedophilia.


----------



## reiatsuflow (Sep 22, 2020)

Sloan said:


> gg if this is true.  Supa weirdo



 if true


----------



## Amol (Sep 22, 2020)

Sloan said:


> Show is pretty overrated imo but it's still good.  First Season was the best actually.


Yeah it was Season 1 > = Season 3 > Season 2.
I liked all seasons mind you but season 2 in my opinion lagged at mid point. Season 3 was return to glory.


----------



## Jim (Sep 22, 2020)

Amol said:


> I find lot of things annoying about you but this might be the most offensive thing you probably ever said!
> You couldn't go through first season of Stranger Things?
> I couldn't stop watching it.
> What is wrong with you!!!


Stranger things is good?


----------



## Amol (Sep 22, 2020)

Jim said:


> Stranger things is good?


Yes.
It was at one point most watched show on Netflix. It's cast became nobody to celebrity instantly.


----------



## Jim (Sep 22, 2020)

oh, i never had netflix so i barely even knew about it, lol

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Sloan (Sep 22, 2020)

Amol said:


> Yeah it was Season 1 > = Season 3 > Season 2.
> I liked all seasons mind you but season 2 in my opinion lagged at mid point. Season 3 was return to glory.



I found it a little repetitive and Will always get's GG'd/possessed every time.  Still entertaining enough though.

When's season 4 due?


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 22, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> The normalisation can be expected by simply observation on the normalisation of other aspect of sexuality in the society.
> I explained why sexuality is different so the issues your listed like alcoholism or violence are not relevant compared to the spread of pornography and the impact on the society and sexual behaviour.
> 
> 
> ...



No, you hadn't explained anything prior to this comment. You were simply saying that sex in media normalizes it because it does. Only now you provided evidence. 

As for your evidence, you should always properly read the research you linked. It says explicitly that the findings are nuanced and relate to a specific age range. Not to society as a whole. If you're extrapolating that yourself (because the article doesn't), then you don't seem to have good understanding of statistics and scientific methods. 

Also, it's good to properly research the topic. 


This is a very good compilation of researches on the topic. It also explains some issues regarding methodology, which is very useful for people that are not so familiar with scientific research and statistics. 

As for what I linked, you didn't seem to properly read it or you don't understand statistics. The summary on Wikipedia as well as some of the articles it linked explicitly state that different correlations were found in regards to this issue. We call that "inconclusive results". Meaning that until further elaboration and advanced statistic treatment, you can't actually state that the correlation is a fact. This should be pretty well known. I won't extrapolate these researches beyond their limitations.

You also didn't properly read the whole link, since normalization is one of the topics mentioned in the paragraphs and covered by some of the researches. Some of them are presenting a methodology to measure such normalization as well as the increase of pedophiles. They measure it by sexual assault, abuse, and other forms of actions. You are presenting no methodology. You just said "child abuse is not pedophilia", despite the obvious correlation, yet you present no way of measure this. 

Finally, as the evidence points out, the correlation between pornography of all kinds and normalization of these actions is inconclusive. This is a fact proven by the compilation of researches on the field.
Lolis are not child pornography. They are much less sexual in their display of sexual characteristics and behavior of childish bodies. This is another fact that I assume you understand. If you have no evidence that explicit child pornography increases the quantity of pedophiles, and Lolis are less sexual than this content, then it is much less likely that Lolis have correlation whatsoever to this quantity.


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 22, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> The normalisation can be expected by simply observation on the normalisation of other aspect of sexuality in the society.
> I explained why sexuality is different so the issues your listed like alcoholism or violence are not relevant compared to the spread of pornography and the impact on the society and sexual behaviour.
> 
> 
> ...



To summarize, the empirical evidence on the subject (understand it as the compilation of researches) shows that correlation between presentation of a sexual behavior and normalization of it is inconclusive. Therefore, there is no logical reason to adopt the logic that "the contents of media normalizes negative behaviors in society" in this context, since this logic is known to be generally false for other issues. 

Scientificly, we can only use hypothesis that generally is not valid if there are solid explanations, backed up by evidence, as to why the issue we are discussing consists an exception that validates said hypothesis. 
You provided no explanation, your arguments were circular. Your empirical evidence was incomplete. When completed, it doesn't consist a reason to validate this exception. Therefore, your argument is incorrect and is just pure subjective speculation up until this point. If no further evidence is provided, your arguments are not scientific and thus irrelevant to a proper discussion.


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 22, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> When I say incidental I mean in the games, there is nothing deliberately sexual about 2B on her own part. She happens to be sexy, when her self destruct goes off she happens to be scantily clad, the blind fold isn't a sex thing, She didn't make those choices and she doesn't do them to illicit a sexual response. The blindfold is stated in universe to be part of the crooked belief system that the Androids have cooked up from what they know of humans. If the first two things were different and 2B was a man the game wouldn't really be different because she's completely unaware of her sexuality.





Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> 2B isn't "conservative" she's seemingly unaware of her own sexuality, something we see time and time again in Japanese and Western media, albeit in different ways.



It's true the blindfolds main objective is nonsexual. But it adds to the sexuality of the character. 2B doesn't need to ooze sexuality for her to be sexual. Context matters for sure. But if you're looking at the general presentation, which I assure you is what most of the casual market will be looking at, she's very obviously sexual. Yoko Taro's intention very obviously poured into the character. 

And no she's very much aware of her sexuality:


And the Androids themselves are fully aware of their attractiveness:


The whole Opera Boss is based on the theme of a woman looking attractive to capture the attention of a man to the point of obsession: 





Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Dante fulfills a power fantasy, 2B fulfills sexual fantasies, but Bayonetta is humiliating people for her own amusement and it's a head space that the player really doesn't get to share with her, it's more observed and if anything it's treated more like comedy. Like, watch her make these men around her uncomfortable.



I think you're confusing oversexuality with sexual parody.  Yes, Bayonetta does all those things, but those things do not define her. Nor does Dante's "God mode" power fantasy. I honestly do not know if you played the games, but she turns off the stuff during serious moments, just like Dante. It's part of her personality and design for sure, but there are other things that make her as relatable as any other decently written character. Reducing Bayonetta to just a domme because she sexually tortures her nonhuman enemies (not people lol) is very shortsighted. 

Your only argument is that Bayonetta is of a different and extremely liberal sexualization than 2B. Which is true. Doesn't mean that's what made her less popular than Dante and 2B. Bayonetta suffered from shit ports, being on dead a console, limited exposure from Sega, and currently from being in developmental hell. 

The fact that the Switch port of Bayo 2 exceeded the WiiU release in literally just a fucking month proves that with the right conditions Bayonetta can do very well. Bayonetta also went on to be included in Smash due to fan demand. 

>Like, watch her make these men around her uncomfortable

I don't know where you got those impressions from, maybe it's your own personal analysis, but the truth is much simpler than that. All my friends and I (some not even huge video game guys) watch her BDSM the fuck out of an angel and we bust out laughin. I remember fans were pissed Bayo 2 was exclusive, it's possible the same fans also bought DMC5 and possibly Nier, and they'd buy Bayonetta if it was on their platform of choice. A decent performing multiplatform Bayonetta would do great.


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 22, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> It's true the blindfolds main objective is nonsexual. But it adds to the sexuality of the character. 2B doesn't need to ooze sexuality for her to be sexual. Context matters for sure. But if you're looking at the general presentation, which I assure you is what most of the casual market will be looking at, she's very obviously sexual. Yoko Taro's intention very obviously poured into the character.
> 
> And no she's very much aware of her sexuality:
> 
> ...



If you told me that somehow people would mention DMC in this thread, I would say it's impossible. Would you look at that. 

And this is not a complaint by the way. DMC is my favorite game franchise, and both Nier Automata and Bayonetta are absolutely awesome. The best hack n slash developed alongside metal gear rising.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Superstars (Sep 22, 2020)

23 pages...So let me guess..It's the usual suspects working overtime; finding grey area "logic's" to sexualize 11 year olds?

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 22, 2020)

WolfusFH said:


> If you told me that somehow people would mention DMC in this thread, I would say it's impossible. Would you look at that.
> 
> And this is not a complaint by the way. DMC is my favorite game franchise, and both Nier Automata and Bayonetta are absolutely awesome. The best hack n slash developed alongside metal gear rising.


Can I find some way to make every discussion about video games, writing, or how scary outer space is. I don't know, tune in to find out. 



Superstars said:


> 23 pages...So let me guess..It's the usual suspects working overtime; finding grey area "logic's" to sexualize 11 year olds?



Yeah, this all part of my plan to get a bonus from George Soros for how many children we can feed Hillary Clinton and her cannibal friends.


----------



## Capt. Autismo (Sep 22, 2020)

Superstars said:


> 23 pages...So let me guess..It's the usual suspects working overtime; finding grey area "logic's" to sexualize 11 year olds?


If it were 11 year old boys the church would be all for it though, right?


----------



## Eros (Sep 22, 2020)

Capt. Autismo said:


> If it were 11 year old boys the church would be all for it though, right?


Or the Dutch film about a Canadian soldier and a gay 12 year old boy during World War 2?

And no, I don't approve at ALL. Quite the opposite.


----------



## Superstars (Sep 22, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Yeah, this all part of my plan to get a bonus from George Soros for how many children we can feed Hillary Clinton and her cannibal friends.






Capt. Autismo said:


> If it were 11 year old boys the church would be all for it though, right?


Talk to the Catholics.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Hand Banana (Sep 22, 2020)

Superstars said:


> Talk to the Catholics.


"In the 2011 census, 39 per cent of Canadians identified themselves as Roman Catholic and 27 per cent as Protestant."

I can see why he made that accusation.


----------



## Capt. Autismo (Sep 22, 2020)

Shinra Kusakabe said:


> Or the Dutch film about a Canadian soldier and a gay 12 year old boy during World War 2?
> 
> And no, I don't approve at ALL. Quite the opposite.


I looked up what the hell you were talking about and Jesus Christ that sent me down a weird rabbit hole of foreign movies, there are a ton of these weird European pedo flicks that have to do with little boys.


----------



## Eros (Sep 22, 2020)

Capt. Autismo said:


> I looked up what the hell you were talking about and Jesus Christ that sent me down a weird rabbit hole of foreign movies, there are a ton of these weird European pedo flicks that have to do with little boys.



Not surprised by this. At one time the age of consent was 14 somewhere over there.


----------



## WolfusFH (Sep 22, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Can I find some way to make every discussion about video games, writing, or how scary outer space is. I don't know, tune in to find out.



Now this, I like. Turning discussions into videogame subjects instead of politics? Sign me the fuck up (just don't call every game a souls-like and we're cool)


----------



## Kingslayer (Sep 22, 2020)

As anyone watched the movie , the director is not pedo. Seriously cancel culture is toxic.


----------



## Kingslayer (Sep 22, 2020)

Le Male Absolu said:


> Before Netflix started the disastrous promotion of this movie, it was acclaimed by reviewers. The movie was already released in France and didn’t catch any attention because the communication was completely different. The communication in France was probably more orientated to what the movie want to says.
> It’s funny that I can see now the US far right keep saying it’s a pedo movie while some Muslims in France see it as Islamophobic. The main character is lost between pressure of the Muslim traditions from her family and her desire to do like her friends at school.


I will agree netflix needs to apologise to viewer the poster  is hella misleading


----------



## Kingslayer (Sep 22, 2020)

Sequester said:


> well i don't think a pedo will look at this movie's intention and respect the premise of a little girl self defining and owning her feminity
> 
> i think its much more likely they'll do some creepy pedo shit


Thats the whole message of movie. Have you ever seen how reality child star in shows industry or television are harrased. Director wanted to expose the dark side of it. 

Guess sundance jury is pedo as well given this french movie was nominated .


----------



## Kingslayer (Sep 22, 2020)

CrownedEagle said:


> This film denounces the hypersexualization of little girls at an increasingly younger age, the author speaks about this subject after having observed this in her own neighborhood. It is primarily addressed to parents so that they pay attention to their kids more. Pedophiles are not the target, they can also find better content on the internet by ljust ooking a little starting with the anime promotes this phenomenon sometime in a good light.
> 
> I also the selective outrage of Americans on twitter regarding this movie very ironic when I remember that this hypersexualization started with their shitty reality TV like Toodler and Tiara or Dance Mom which popularized this phenomenon and which still continues until today.
> 
> ...


Yep Americans will never do that. 

Shows like dance moms should have been banned long back but hey lets harrass black french director who is actually exposing ugly side of show business. 

I swear people are going backward.


----------



## Sequester (Sep 22, 2020)

Fallen Angel said:


> Thats the whole message of movie. Have you ever seen how reality child star in shows industry or television are harrased. Director wanted to expose the dark side of it.
> 
> Guess sundance jury is pedo as well given this french movie was nominated .



can't speak for the jury but i know the sundance co founder sterling van wagenen was a pedo

also i don't base my standard of morality on what critics have to say

saying they wanted to show the dark side of child stars being harassed by actually putting children in that situation is ridiculous to me

Reactions: Winner 1


----------



## Donquixote Doflamingo (Sep 22, 2020)

Fallen Angel said:


> Yep Americans will never do that.
> 
> Shows like dance moms should have been banned long back but hey lets harrass *black french director who is actually exposing ugly side of show business. *
> 
> I swear people are going backward.



Yes lets do that please, more of it actually.


----------



## Eros (Sep 22, 2020)

Imagine becoming a grandmother at 17. That's the dark side of monarchy in the 19th century.


----------



## Kingslayer (Sep 22, 2020)

Sequester said:


> can't speak for the jury but i know the sundance co founder sterling van wagenen was a pedo
> 
> also i don't base my standard of morality on what critics have to say
> 
> saying they wanted to show the dark side of child stars being harassed by actually putting children in that situation is ridiculous to me



Netflix trailer and poster made it worse, the whole point director wanted to show how child actors are abused in show business. 

It is controversial movie but no way director had bad malice . She wanted to show how immigrant children are being  exploited .

Reactions: Optimistic 1


----------



## Sequester (Sep 22, 2020)

Fallen Angel said:


> Netflix trailer and poster made it worse, the whole point director wanted to show how child actors are abused in show business.
> 
> It is controversial movie but no way director had bad malice . She wanted to show how immigrant children are being  exploited .



i didn't say anything about her intent

i also know what she said was her reason for making the film, still at best she didn't think it through properly and has shown a lack of regard for the children starring in her own film

i can only go by the product put out
i don't know what goes on in anyone else's head, which is why i don't care about the ppl over at sundance

i don't know who they are or what they get up to so their stamp of approval doesn't mean anything to me


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (Sep 22, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Can I find some way to make every discussion about video games, writing, or how scary outer space is. I don't know, tune in to find out.



I'd more than happy going back to my original point. I dont mind claiming sexy dancing empowers women. But Bayonetta doesn't get such privilege cuz reasons according to a vocal group on the interwebz.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 23, 2020)

Charlotte D. Kurisu said:


> I'd more than happy going back to my original point. I dont mind claiming sexy dancing empowers women. But Bayonetta doesn't get such privilege cuz reasons according to a vocal group on the interwebz.


I don't think that group is that vocal, Bayonetta doesn't stir them up because she doesn't suffer from a lot of the same problems as the characters they actually do get upset over.


----------



## Deleted member 58423 (Sep 23, 2020)

Fallen Angel said:


> Guess sundance jury is pedo as well given this french movie was nominated .



thanks for mentioning sundance. the festival's co-founder is a convicted p*d*p****.



edit: ah, @Sequester already beat me to it...


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 23, 2020)

girafarig said:


> thanks for mentioning sundance. the festival's co-founder is a convicted p*d*p****.


Boom, that's almost the most useless argument in this thread and I spent several posts arguing about Bayonetta.


----------



## Deleted member 58423 (Sep 23, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Boom, that's almost the most useless argument in this thread and I spent several posts arguing about Bayonetta.



it wasn't an argument


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 23, 2020)

girafarig said:


> it wasn't an argument


Ehh, you brought it up to prove a point as if it was proof that Sundance was a celebration of pedos instead a celebration of movies where no one has robot arms or pisses in food to stop goblins from eating them


----------



## Deleted member 58423 (Sep 23, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Ehh, you brought it up to prove a point as if it was proof that Sundance was a celebration of pedos instead a celebration of movies where no one has robot arms or pisses in food to stop goblins from eating them



i didn't. i brought it up so that people wouldn't forget who gets their money when they attend this festival, though.


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 23, 2020)

Why bayonetta is even up in this convo, last time i checked she was an adult woman and wasn’t even real for starter.


----------



## PikaCheeka (Sep 23, 2020)

Fallen Angel said:


> I will agree netflix needs to apologise to viewer the poster  is hella misleading



No, it really isn't. It's literally just a scene from the movie.



Fallen Angel said:


> As anyone watched the movie , the director is not pedo. Seriously cancel culture is toxic.



This has nothing to do with "cancel culture", which is about non-issues like an author using a slightly offensive stereotype or a TV show having a realistic percentage of straight people.

This movie isn't _about_ the sexual exploitation of children. It _is_ sexual exploitation of children. Or did you not realize that the actresses were 11-12 years old?

Reactions: Agree 1


----------



## Sequester (Sep 23, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Ehh, you brought it up to prove a point as if it was proof that Sundance was a celebration of pedos instead a celebration of movies where no one has robot arms or pisses in food to stop goblins from eating them


it was brought up initially by me only because it was mentioned that the movie won a sundance award suggesting that should mean anything to me

funny enough it came about because i thought it winning a sundance award was the most useless argument made in this thread


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 23, 2020)

PikaCheeka said:


> No, it really isn't. It's literally just a scene from the movie.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Did you see it? You’re talking to someone who has...


----------



## Jim (Sep 23, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> Did you see it? You’re talking to someone who has...


I think pika meant the poster shown in america isn't misleading considering that it's literally a scene from the movie.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 23, 2020)

Jim said:


> I think pika meant the poster shown in america isn't misleading considering that it's literally a scene from the movie.


I mean that’s not always the case. How many movies have misleading trailers using scenes from them that are only subtly manipulated?

There’s a good case for something like Passengers (2016) to basically be a horror movie with subtle changes to its final cut(score, edits, creative use of the Kuleshov effect).


----------



## Sequester (Sep 23, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> I mean that’s not always the case. How many movies have misleading trailers using scenes from them that are only subtly manipulated?
> 
> There’s a good case for something like Passengers (2016) to basically be a horror movie with subtle changes to its final cut(score, edits, creative use of the Kuleshov effect).



are you saying its not always the case or its not the case in this instance?

that the poster is not reflective of the movie?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Sep 23, 2020)

Sequester said:


> are you saying its not always the case or its not the case in this instance?
> 
> that the poster is not reflective of the movie?


I am just saying that acting like a poster or trailer (I thought you guys were talking about that stupid Netflix thing at the top of the account) can't be subtly manipulated to make one thing seem like another is just not true. Acting like marketing has the same ideal and vision as a director is just not true. I can name more than one movie off the top of my head that is advertised completely wrong and against the director's wishes to attract a certain kind of audience. I am not saying no one is blameless, but Netflix had a choice about how to portray this movie knowing that it was about a delicate subject and they chose to go for "controversy".


----------



## CrownedEagle (Sep 23, 2020)

*French culture minister defends Cuties from US criticism*

Culture minister Roselyne Bachelot-Narquin has given her support to the director of the film Cuties (Mignonnes in French) after accusations that the film over-sexualises young girls. 

“The virulent critics who target the film 'Mignonnes' suggest the director has an intention that is in total contradiction with the purpose of her work. They are based on a series of reductive and decontextualised images of the film,” Ms Bachelot-Narquin said in a statement.


----------



## hcheng02 (Sep 23, 2020)




----------



## Sequester (Sep 23, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> I am just saying that acting like a poster or trailer (I thought you guys were talking about that stupid Netflix thing at the top of the account) can't be subtly manipulated to make one thing seem like another is just not true. Acting like marketing has the same ideal and vision as a director is just not true. I can name more than one movie off the top of my head that is advertised completely wrong and against the director's wishes to attract a certain kind of audience. I am not saying no one is blameless, but Netflix had a choice about how to portray this movie knowing that it was about a delicate subject and they chose to go for "controversy".



well yeah i know bad marketing could mislead and in turn damage a movie or whatever medium being marketed, but as someone who has seen cuties (i believe you previously said you did) do you feel that the image netflix initially used to promote the movie wasn't representative of the content found within it?


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 6, 2020)

Not sure if this has any teeth but uhhh


----------



## Jim (Oct 6, 2020)

reiatsuflow said:


> Not sure if this has any teeth but uhhh


but i thought the creator wasn't in the US, let alone texas?


----------



## Sequester (Oct 6, 2020)

Jim said:


> but i thought the creator wasn't in the US, let alone texas?



its against netflix itself i believe


----------



## reiatsuflow (Oct 6, 2020)

You guys are both right, yeah.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Oct 6, 2020)

It's a pretty stupid case and it is probably at least a little motivated by something else.


----------



## NeoTerraKnight (Oct 6, 2020)

Cardboard Tube Knight said:


> It's a pretty stupid case and it is probably at least a little motivated by something else.



Yeah. Plus, aren't child pageantry big especially in Texas?


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Oct 6, 2020)

NeoTerraKnight said:


> Yeah. Plus, aren't child pageantry big especially in Texas?


I don't know what we're doing these days. We let kids wrestle live stock for entertainment.


----------



## stream (Oct 7, 2020)

I do wonder about the people at Netflix who designed the infamous poster, why they thought it was a good idea, and what they think now...


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (Oct 7, 2020)

stream said:


> I do wonder about the people at Netflix who designed the infamous poster, why they thought it was a good idea, and what they think now...


They thought they were being provocative and edgy. I doubt the thought process went any further than just that.


----------

