"Cuties" Texas Indicts Netflix

[HonestJoe]

The fair and balanced assessment is that it depicts minor children engaged in sexually provocative acts.

The person I was replying to hadn't (and won't) seen the film. Have you and, if not, how do you know what it depicts?

That is called child pornography and in the United States of America it is illegal

The legal definitions, federal and state, are set out in the OP article. It isn't quite as simple as you'd like to imagine.

 

[Quag]

I watched the film it was meh.
Didnt see any child porn in it, though there was a lot of adults using violence on zombie children.
Is this like the frozen "controversy" where some nut who hadnt seen the movie decided it was trying to turn kids homosexual?

 

[roguenuke]

Where is the line drawn on child exploitation?

IMO, this show is disgusting, certainly not something I plan to watch. But, does it cross the line warranting criminal prosecution of the distributors, as if it were actual child porn?

Texas Grand Jury Indicts Netflix Over Cuties, Doesn’t Understand First Amendment

The frenzy over Cuties was whipped up by, among others, Sen. Ted Cruz, who has never met a moral panic he couldn’t promiscuously embrace.

slate.com

From everything I've read, no. It seems that this is mostly based on a (likely purposeful so certain groups have something else to rail against) misunderstanding or presentation of the material in question. As the article points out, the film has a very solid social and political message, presented with no actual sex acts. If adults are being aroused by this, having their "prurient interests" increased by the scenes in this film, that is not only not the intent and is not normal, it shows much more about those people than the film itself.

 

[ProgressPlease]

It isn't just the right who is in a tizzy over the film. It's the right wing who is trying to make it a political issue. They love moral panics. How many of them have actually seen the film? How many of them are actually engaged when it comes to issues of girls and women (other than wanting some control over them)? Do your research on the crisis for adolescent girls in this culture of internet and media. The toll it has taken on the mental health of girls is horrifying and needs to be addressed. French filmmakers are rarely afraid to take on controversial topics. They routinely make films that many Americans would consider islamophobic, too.

In many southern parts of the US child beauty pageants are part of the culture. The goal of this film is to criticize the sexualizing of young girls. Child beauty pageants glorify that - talk about exploitation.

The French do not sanitize things. Sometimes reality is ugly and people need to see it.

 

[Phys251]

Where is the line drawn on child exploitation?

IMO, this show is disgusting, certainly not something I plan to watch. But, does it cross the line warranting criminal prosecution of the distributors, as if it were actual child porn?

Texas Grand Jury Indicts Netflix Over Cuties, Doesn’t Understand First Amendment

The frenzy over Cuties was whipped up by, among others, Sen. Ted Cruz, who has never met a moral panic he couldn’t promiscuously embrace.

slate.com

Last weekend I watched Cape Fear. There's a scene where Juliette Lewis lip-kisses Robert De Niro and sucks his thumb. (I did not know about this scene and was horrified when I watched it.) At the time of filming, she was 17.

If that's not enough, consider American Beauty. Thora Birch, who was also 17 at the time of filming, is topless in one scene.

Cuties has some extremely lewd behavior by 11-year-old girls but no nudity.

So. Which one of these should be banned?

 

[Geoist]

I've seen multiple lib posters on Twitter making the comparison to Nabokov's novel, and its like you guys all get your talking points sent to you in a newsletter daily.

I don't go on Twitter. And this site is about the extent of the social media I engage in. But it doesn't surprise me others have brought up Lolita. It is one of the most censored books and it contains similar subject matter.

Neither the book nor the two films titled Lolita contain anything remotely resembling the crass display of borderline child porn seen in Cuties.

Well, apparently you've watched it. I have not. But lots of people have called Lolita borderline child porn, so I guess it depends on who you ask.

 

[Geoist]

absolutely. In fact there should be a ministry of propaganda and moral enlightenment with the authority to censor material deemed harmful to public morals.

Why am I not surprised the fascism-lover wants a ministry of 'moral enlightenment.'

 

[truthatallcost]

I don't go on Twitter. And this site is about the extent of the social media I engage in. But it doesn't surprise me others have brought up Lolita. It is one of the most censored books and it contains similar subject matter.



Well, apparently you've watched it. I have not. But lots of people have called Lolita borderline child porn, so I guess it depends on who you ask.

Then you're defending a film you've never actually seen, and comparing it to a book you've never read? Makes sense.

 

[Geoist]

Then you're defending a film you've never actually seen, and comparing it to a book you've never read? Makes sense.

I am defending free speech. If child abuse can be proved in court then throw the book at the filmmakers.

 

[Glitch]

I am defending free speech. If child abuse can be proved in court then throw the book at the filmmakers.

As the adage goes, "your rights end at my nose." There is no right that permits harming others, physically or financially. Which is why child abuse laws exist. However, those laws vary from State to State. The Federal Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) (42 U.S.C.A. § 5106g), as amended by the CAPTA Reauthorization Act of 2010, defines child abuse and neglect as, at minimum:

• "Any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation"; or
• "An act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm."

This definition of child abuse and neglect refers specifically to parents and other caregivers. A "child" under this definition generally means a person who is younger than age 18 or who is not an emancipated minor.

If that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law then all those involved need to be sentenced accordingly. Otherwise they have the right to film anything they please, and they do not have to conform to any community standard of decency, meet any criteria, or have any merit whatsoever. That is what "freedom" means.