"Cuties"
-
All this stuff gives me the creeps. Middle school and HS cheerleaders, beauty pageants for kids, the whole lot.
Apart from anything else, it sends a pretty miserable message to girls about their role in the world.
-
I disagree with canceling this show.
It's the right wing version of cancel culture.
It's also hypocritical given that nobody complains about these disturbing beauty contests for kids, which are just as sexualized.
Several people on this forum have, correctly, imo, complained about the "beauty pageants" for kids.
My understanding of "cancel culture" is that it is based on what one considers a politically incorrect idea. This seems to be outrage over the sexualization of young girls. Would you agree that there's a difference between those?
My understanding of "cancel culture" is that it is based on what one considers a politically incorrect idea. This seems to be outrage over the sexualization of young girls. Would you agree that there's a difference between those?
The difference, as far as I see it, is merely that "politically incorrect" is replaced by a different "trigger", in this case titillating depiction of minors (from what I hear - haven't seen the trailer or anything).
Are we going to ban "Lolita" and the movies based on it, too?
Netflix shouldn't have removed "Gone with the wind". It shouldn't remove "Cuties" either. All the book burning and person/institution canceling leads to a dark place, regardless of whether it's "left-wing" or "right-wing". The only proper position, in my opinion, is that everything that's legal is fair game, and any bans/cancelllation/... should be restricted to the most extreme cases.
-
I would have thought it quite likely that having the movie on Netflix would cause more backlash against these dreadful events, but I haven't seen it.
I was only joking
-
My understanding of "cancel culture" is that it is based on what one considers a politically incorrect idea. This seems to be outrage over the sexualization of young girls. Would you agree that there's a difference between those?
The difference, as far as I see it, is merely that "politically incorrect" is replaced by a different "trigger", in this case titillating depiction of minors (from what I hear - haven't seen the trailer or anything).
Are we going to ban "Lolita" and the movies based on it, too?
Netflix shouldn't have removed "Gone with the wind". It shouldn't remove "Cuties" either. All the book burning and person/institution canceling leads to a dark place, regardless of whether it's "left-wing" or "right-wing". The only proper position, in my opinion, is that everything that's legal is fair game, and any bans/cancelllation/... should be restricted to the most extreme cases.
everything that's legal is fair game, and any bans/cancelllation/... should be restricted to the most extreme cases.
I agree.
(haven't seen the film, so I can't comment on whether it's extreme or not)
Would you consider Larry's description of the telephone incident "extreme?"
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
-
I would have thought it quite likely that having the movie on Netflix would cause more backlash against these dreadful events, but I haven't seen it.
-
everything that's legal is fair game, and any bans/cancelllation/... should be restricted to the most extreme cases.
I agree.
(haven't seen the film, so I can't comment on whether it's extreme or not)
Would you consider Larry's description of the telephone incident "extreme?"
Would you consider Larry's description of the telephone incident "extreme?"
I don't know. I'd have to actually watch it.
But in any case, many of us are annoyed about how meaningless the word "racism" has become since it has been applied to way too many things that are not actually racist. It would be wise to not make the same mistake with "pedophilia". In both cases it is tempting to misuse the great power this word gives to the speaker.
-
It is OK to censor child pornography.
Even if it creates some false-positive racism accusations.
-
Imagine if they started censoring movies that glorified and/or glamourised violence and/or criminal behaviour.
Netflix would be out of business in a week.
-
There are various definitions of pornography.
This is within some of them.
Maybe not in others.
-
OK, I'll give you 2 definitions wiki and google
The phrase "I know it when I see it" is a colloquial expression by which a speaker attempts to categorize an observable fact or event, although the category is subjective or lacks clearly defined parameters. The phrase was used in 1964 by United States Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart to describe his threshold test for obscenity in Jacobellis v. Ohio.[1][2] In explaining why the material at issue in the case was not obscene under the Roth test, and therefore was protected speech that could not be censored, Stewart wrote:
I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description ["hard-core pornography"], and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that.[3]
-
OK, I watched the trailer now. Calling this "child pornography" is just ridiculous and insults the victims of actual child pornography.
Link to videoOK, I watched the trailer now. Calling this "child pornography" is just ridiculous and insults the victims of actual child pornography.
Link to videoIf that was as bad as it got I would agree with you. Unfortunately, that trailer was so well cherry picked that it makes it look like a Disney movie.
-
||
Link to video|| -
||spoiler||
Link to video||spoiler||
