Netflix’s upcoming underage twerking movie - “Cuties”


NeuroTypical
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, NeuroTypical said:

Whelp, Cuties is now live on Netflix.  We're getting ready to dump our account and move to Disney+ and Hulu - about the same price.

 

We dumped Netflix about a year ago, just because their offerings weren’t that consistently great (and we wanted to wean our kids off My Little Pony).  I’m not sure Disney would be an improvement—they’ve gone pretty Woke and now seem to be in the ChiComs’ pocket as well.  We still have Amazon Prime, but surprisingly (given COVID) we find that neither our kids, nor we, have had a lot of interest in streaming media this summer.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Whelp, Cuties is now live on Netflix.  We're getting ready to dump our account and move to Disney+ and Hulu - about the same price.

 

Ours is done as well....I will never again sign up for it.

Just look at the rotten tomatoes score...currently 88% for "critics" and 3% for average people who still have a conscience. I read a few reviews of it and am appaled at how this is being hailed as an "extrordinary" film. No, this girl doesn't have what is considered a proper upbringing, but that is no excuse to swing the pendulum the other way in the extreme. The way the media are trying to portray the world and what is considered moral and desireable is disgusting. It is also quite suprising to me how quickly our society has openly forgone moral standards. Morality is now seen as something subjective...but when you read the scriptures, those people repeatedly fell quite quickly as well. Our day and age are no different - especially if the adversary is quadrupling his efforts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason I'd get Netflix is for my job as an entertainment writer, but I have so many physical DVDs I still need to go through that it'd be a hard sell, especially if I wanted to seek reimbursement. 

Now, I have no desire to ever sign up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/11/2020 at 3:39 PM, NeuroTypical said:

Whelp, Cuties is now live on Netflix.  We're getting ready to dump our account and move to Disney+ and Hulu - about the same price.

 

I have not seen the shows that Disney is putting out recently, though we do have a Disney account for the kids to watch, we have been careful in what shows are allowed.  I have heard that there are Disney shows that are pushing several agendas upon children these days...though maybe not as obvious as the Netflix film this thread is about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/24/2020 at 3:19 PM, Anddenex said:

 

I simply was saying I am not sure this Netflix movie is coincidental, or if it is trying to decrease the potential outrage toward Epstein's Island and pedophiles.

I doubt the two are related at all. The timing isn't right, nor is the motive for producing the film. Epstein was arrested in July of 2019.  Cuties was shown at the Sundance Film Festival in January 2020. It was probably already filmed and edited before Epstein was even arrested. I believe the producer had an important and critical  message she was trying to portray about culture clashes and women's rights. She just had poor judgement in how she went about that. The FACT that she used actual 11 year old girls as the actresses in the movie was just so tone deaf. And she deserves all the criticism she's getting for doing that. I doubt she had a smidgeon of the motive of feeding pedophelia when she produced the film, though..

I haven't seen any more than the trailer so I don't really know but from what I understand the theme is very much about the young girl's father not being present in her life and him being gone to Senegal to bring home a second polygamous wife. And all the crazy abuses and neglect of women in the Muslim culture and what happens to this poor little girl as she gets lost in the shuffle in France and the group of fun little friends she gets involved with to fill an emotional cavern in her life. If there is a hint of pedophelia in it, I haven't heard about it. 

Truthfully, child actors have been used in horrible films for a very long time. This isn't the first one. If a man has that tendency, there are plenty of other films they probably shouldn't watch. In fact it probably doesn't even have to have sexual overtones for a man with that problem to be affected. ( My guess.) 

Edited by carlimac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

I have heard that there are Disney shows that are pushing several agendas upon children these days...

Well, Disney, and pretty much all the rest of children's programming out there, has basically normalized same sex marriage and will have the occasional (sometimes the spotlighted) gay character.  I wouldn't call that so much as pushing an agenda, as following the money.  Majority of same-sex acceptance in the country happened more than a decade ago.  Now there's something wrong with you if you don't have a gay character. 

Other than that, Disney is about as center-left as anyone else.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Well, Disney, and pretty much all the rest of children's programming out there, has basically normalized same sex marriage and will have the occasional (sometimes the spotlighted) gay character.  I wouldn't call that so much as pushing an agenda, as following the money.  Majority of same-sex acceptance in the country happened more than a decade ago.  Now there's something wrong with you if you don't have a gay character. 

Other than that, Disney is about as center-left as anyone else.  

Last year the PBS show Arthur made Mr. Ratburn gay. He had a gay wedding with his husband and all of the kids were so happy for him saying it was a great thing. Drives me crazy how so many shows, people, and associations are now forcing this issue with no visible outside pressure to do so. Sexuality has no place in elementary school programming. Arther is no longer watched in our home, and PBS will be cancelled if another show does the same thing.

It will not be many years until pedophilia us not viewed at as evil. It will of course start with celebrities and those who have pull in the media. We will be told that we should better understand those who are attracted to children. We will hear "they are such good people, and they can't help the way they feel." More freedom will also be encouraged among young children, including things sexual in nature, and the mixed messages will in turn cause more mental illness.

I'm not trying to be preachy, but I feel strongly about protecting our children due to the damage I have seen from pedophilia and gender confusion. A family in our stake has left the church because they wanted their daughter, who thinks she is a boy, to be given the priesthhood. We also had a brother in our ward have his membership revoked last month due to child pornography. The world will soon be a much more difficult place to live.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

California also just changed a law to allow sexual consent between a fourteen year old an twenty-four year old.  You cannot buy a handgun or legally drink alcohol in California until the age of 21. You cannot vote until the age of 18 but now California politicians want to say it is okay for a fourteen year old to legally engage in sexual relations with a twenty-four year old and this is just sick.

I also watched a Fox news clip and was highly disgusted at the dance moves eleven year olds were doing on the Cuties series.  They were very graphically sexual in nature.  Critics of the movie also say one of the eleven year old girls exposes her breast at one point in the series.

Recently I just wrote my Senators and asked them to encourage the Federal Department of Justice to investigate the creators of this movie.  It is immoral and food for pedophiles in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, scottyg said:

Last year the PBS show Arthur made Mr. Ratburn gay. He had a gay wedding with his husband and all of the kids were so happy for him saying it was a great thing. Drives me crazy how so many shows, people, and associations are now forcing this issue with no visible outside pressure to do so. Sexuality has no place in elementary school programming. 

Well, the 'visible outside pressure' is shown in this chart of US opinion over time:

Changing Attitudes on Same-Sex Marriage | Pew Research Center

 

Folks who oppose SSM have been in the minority for a decade now, and the gap grows wider every year.  Last decade, it was about who will be a pioneer and break new ground with a gay character.  Now, it's a simple matter of following the money and knowing your audience. And the majority of today's kids know this or that gay couple, so (as the argument goes), with a desire to have a show be representative of a child's world, there's no more reason to exclude a gay couple, than there is reason to exclude a minority couple, or a divorced character, or what have you.

The obvious answer to "Sexuality has no place in elementary school programming", is "what, you think depicting a heterosexual married couple is 'sexuality'?  What's the matter with you?"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

California also just changed a law to allow sexual consent between a fourteen year old an twenty-four year old. 

Well, not really.  What the law says that judges would decide on a case by case basis if the perpetrator will be permanently registered on the sex offender list.  Most of them still will be, but now there can be an exception made (as to what exceptions there are; I don't know).

PS, I'm just pointing out what the new law says.  I am not supporting the new law and am strongly against it.  
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Scott said:

Well, not really.  What the law says that judges would decide on a case by case basis if the perpetrator will be permanently registered on the sex offender list.

Why should it be legal for a fourteen year old to consent to sexual acts with an 18 to 24 year old?  It should not be in my opinion.  A fourteen or fifteen year old minor is too young to be making decisions like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Still_Small_Voice said:

Why should it be legal for a fourteen year old to consent to sexual acts with an 18 to 24 year old?

It shouldn't.

A fourteen or fifteen year old minor is too young to be making decisions like this.

I agree.  In fact this is one of the stumbling blocks I have with Church history.  There were many 12-15 year olds married off to men in their 30's to 50's.

When doing our genealogy we have found that one of our polygamist ancestors had children with one of his wives starting at age 14.  He was around age 50.  It wasn't unusual back then and was quite common in Utah (but no where else in the US).

Why it was allowed in the church is something I don't understand (and probably never will-at least on this earth).   The practice seems to have faded out in the late 1870's, even though polygamy still existed after that.  I guess that's an entirely different subject though.  

Back to Cuties discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Scott said:

It shouldn't.

 

I agree.  In fact this is one of the stumbling blocks I have with Church history.  There were many 12-15 year olds married off to men in their 30's to 50's.

When doing our genealogy we have found that one of our polygamist ancestors had children with one of his wives starting at age 14.  He was around age 50.  It wasn't unusual back then and was quite common in Utah (but no where else in the US).

Why it was allowed in the church is something I don't understand (and probably never will-at least on this earth).   The practice seems to have faded out in the late 1870's, even though polygamy still existed after that.  I guess that's an entirely different subject though.  

Back to Cuties discussion.

(I wish I’d saved the cite, but Brigham Young actually gave some sermons/wrote some letters warning men not to marry girls who were too young.

Also:  While gender balances in Utah territory were more-or-less equal, gender balances in Utah *within the Church* were very much weighted towards females. As unappealing as a marriage to a fifty-year-old graybeard may have been, devout LDS teenaged girls may well have found it preferable to marriage to a younger man who was also a violence-prone miner or a hard-drinking soldier or a VD-infested traveling salesman—or who just plain couldn’t or wouldn’t make temple covenants with her.  This was pre-Disney; a time in American history when “love” was perceived as a relationship you consciously created through behavior rather than a state of physical attraction/obsession that you could fall in and out of.)

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This issue is making some news.

USA Today: State attorneys general ask Netflix to pull controversial 'Cuties' as director defends 'feminist' film (Ohio, Florida, Louisiana, and Texas) 

Senator Ted Cruz "sent a letter calling on @TheJusticeDept to investigate whether Netflix, its executives, or the filmmakers violated any federal laws against the production and distribution of child pornography."

US Senator from Hawaii Tulsi Gabbard says Cuties "will certainly whet the appetite of pedophiles & help fuel the child sex trafficking trade."  And points out "1 in 4 victims of trafficking are children. It happened to my friend's 13 year old daughter. Netflix, you are now complicit." 

The Washington Post attacks Cruz and defends Cuties.

I think I did the right thing by canceling my family's Netflix account. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Also:  While gender balances in Utah territory were more-or-less equal, gender balances in Utah *within the Church* were very much weighted towards females. As unappealing as a marriage to a fifty-year-old graybeard may have been, devout LDS teenaged girls may well have found it preferable to marriage to a younger man who was also a violence-prone miner or a hard-drinking soldier or a VD-infested traveling salesman—or who just plain couldn’t or wouldn’t make temple covenants with her.  

That still doesn't explain why they were married at ages 12 through 16.

Edited by Scott
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Scott said:

That still doesn't explain why they were married at ages 12 through 16.

It seems you have specific marriages you are referring to (Of course if you don’t that would be silly). What specific marriages between individuals do you have concern with?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Scott said:

That still doesn't explain why they were married at ages 12 through 16.

Because many people only lived to around the age 45 in the older days so they married younger.  At least that is what I have discovered in my study of history though I may be wrong.  I personally feel it too young to marry below sixteen in the older days (1910 and earlier).  A girl or boy had not fully developed physically.

Current Utah law allows for a sixteen year old to marry with parental permission though I feel that is too young presently.  Marriage should be reserved for ages 17 and older in my opinion.

Edited by Still_Small_Voice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Fether said:

It seems you have specific marriages you are referring to (Of course if you don’t that would be silly). What specific marriages between individuals do you have concern with?

As mentioned there is at least one in my own genealogy (see my earlier post) 50 years old having a child with a 14 year old.

As mentioned, I don't understand why it would be allowed, but it was obviously allowed and accepted at the time.  I am just admitting that I don't understand it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share