Netflix sexualising children.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 21-08-2020 08:22PM

circadian wrote: »

I find it funny that the posters that regularly complain about virtue signalling and the perpetually outraged, are actually the ones virtue signalling and being perpetually outraged.

Are you equating cancel culture to this, really? Are you keeping score of the internet points you want to win with this one? How about take off those political points scoring glasses of yours and look at the subject as it is here.

21-08-2020 08:24PM

Ah sure, Netflix is overflowing with and being run by Dems, so it must be ok right?

circadian · 21-08-2020 09:02PM

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Are you equating cancel culture to this, really? Are you keeping score of the internet points you want to win with this one? How about take off those political points scoring glasses of yours and look at the subject as it is here.

Not equating it to cancel culture at all, but now that you mention it.

I don't keep score of Internet points, I'm not fickle and don't desire the approval of random strangers on an Internet forum.

I've not seen the movie so I cannot comment on the content.

I can, however, comment on the content of posts in this thread and my point still stands. Across the threads of Boards there are some users who like to use phrases like virtue signalling and perpetually outraged, yet display both these characteristics themselves on this thread and many others.

Eric Cartman · 21-08-2020 09:44PM

Why has this gone on 31 pages, surely we all could have agreed that parading 11 year old girls in skimpy outfits doing stripper poses is wrong ?

The optimistic part of me would like to think posters are only defending it because of presumptions theyve made about those of us who are disgusted , and not them actually defending children being abused like this.

I understand some people have issues capitulating in any way to the ‘right’ or presumed ‘right’ during the ‘trump era’ :rolleyes: but come on its right there, its disgusting and wrong, just admit it, lay down the pitchforks and admit this is in awful taste

Quantum Erasure · 21-08-2020 09:51PM

Don't think this one is 'photoshopped'. [Not Safe For Anywhere]

http://tr.web.img4.acsta.net/r_1280_720/pictures/19/07/18/15/28/3691309.jpg

RickDeckard · 21-08-2020 09:54PM

I thought this was a joke, I just watched about 5 seconds of that trailer...Like WTF???

Thats some sick ****. 400,000+ downvotes on YT, lol.

What is going on in this world, everything is warped

Psychiatric Patrick · 21-08-2020 09:57PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Why has this gone on 31 pages, surely we all could have agreed that parading 11 year old girls in skimpy outfits doing stripper poses is wrong ?

The optimistic part of me would like to think posters are only defending it because of presumptions theyve made about those of us who are disgusted , and not them actually defending children being abused like this.

I understand some people have issues capitulating in any way to the ‘right’ or presumed ‘right’ during the ‘trump era’ :rolleyes: but come on its right there, its disgusting and wrong, just admit it, lay down the pitchforks and admit this is in awful taste

Even Netflix is saying it is wrong and they ae the ones responsible

Eric Cartman · 21-08-2020 10:05PM

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

Don't think this one is 'photoshopped'.

http://tr.web.img4.acsta.net/r_1280_720/pictures/19/07/18/15/28/3691309.jpg

Lad edit that with a not safe for anywhere tag, that on its own is sick

ronivek · 21-08-2020 10:25PM

Girls dress like this and behave like this in the real world too; they're not just made up to look this way for this particular film. There are also things like swim meets and gymnastic competitions where young girls are wearing skin-tight revealing clothing; not to mention beauty pageants and talent shows etc.

So are you guys saying you're disgusted by that too? Or is it simply that there can never be any kind of media which tries to discuss or draw attention to issues around sexuality and young people no matter the context or content?

Hunky Monster wrote: »

Are you equating cancel culture to this, really?

So is cancel culture only cancel culture when it is related to something you personally don't find distasteful? Or how exactly do you think it works?

AndrewJRenko · 21-08-2020 10:27PM

JL555 wrote: »

Ah sure, Netflix is overflowing with and being run by Dems, so it must be ok right?

You're not hinting that this ^^^ could possibly be the reason for all the outrage, are you?

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000 · 21-08-2020 10:33PM

circadian wrote: »

Not equating it to cancel culture at all, but now that you mention it.

I don't keep score of Internet points, I'm not fickle and don't desire the approval of random strangers on an Internet forum.

I've not seen the movie so I cannot comment on the content.

I can, however, comment on the content of posts in this thread and my point still stands. Across the threads of Boards there are some users who like to use phrases like virtue signalling and perpetually outraged, yet display both these characteristics themselves on this thread and many others.

Hold on. You’re more outraged by people using certain phrases than then the actual subject matter here?

Incredible.

As I said before your internet points seem to matter more than sexualising children. You’re a disgrace.

SusieBlue · 21-08-2020 10:51PM

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

I don't know if your are genuine or having a laugh but the Irish dancing is exactly the same as that pagent muck.

My sister's used to to do it. I don't know what it was like back in the 70s but I went to a competition that two of my nieces in maybe 15 years ago. It was a horror show.

Fake tans, wigs, layers make up and the vicious comments from mothers to the kids. And the costumes!!!

I had my hands over my eyes nearly the whole time but was afraid to leave. My girlfriend at the time was with me and she was horrified through the whole thing - and she ha been a stripper when going to university.

It really isn’t the same at all though.
There are actually very strict costume rules in Irish dancing. The torso, shoulders, back and full arms must be completely covered.
The skirts are quite short but that’s so the movements can be seen properly.
And they wear massive pairs of kick pants/knickers underneath the dresses that cover their entire bottom area to protect their modesty, you can even see them in the photo.
There would be more ‘legs in their air’ at a gymnastics competition than at a Feis, and to be honest, I don’t see the issue with it?
It takes serious talent and practice to be able to execute those moves properly.

The tan and makeup are worn for the same reasons as broadway/theatre performers wear them, the theatre stage lighting is blindingly strong, it’s all just part of the costume.
And the wigs are hands down the best invention ever, they save severe damage from happening to young children’s hair from being put in rollers, curled and manipulated into styles every weekend as was the standard before the wigs became popular.
They are far gentler and better for their hair than pumping it with products and heated tools every week.

And lastly, the kids are judged purely on talent, the judges aren’t allowed to give any points based on the costume, hair, makeup, or overall appearance. Pageants judge only on appearance.
You can have the sparkliest most expensive dress, the biggest wig, thickest makeup and darkest tan but if you aren’t talented you’ll get nowhere in Irish dancing.
That isn’t the case in pageants.

Psychiatric Patrick · 21-08-2020 11:21PM

ronivek wrote: »

Girls dress like this and behave like this in the real world too; they're not just made up to look this way for this particular film. There are also things like swim meets and gymnastic competitions where young girls are wearing skin-tight revealing clothing; not to mention beauty pageants and talent shows etc.

So are you guys saying you're disgusted by that too? Or is it simply that there can never be any kind of media which tries to discuss or draw attention to issues around sexuality and young people no matter the context or content?

So is cancel culture only cancel culture when it is related to something you personally don't find distasteful? Or how exactly do you think it works?

That kids dress in this way is is one of the things the movie is about and one of the things that sets people

People on the thread also don't like the beauty pageants, etc. or that kids dress as you describe,

And nobody said there shouldn't be media to discuss it.

Rather than focusing on your high horse why don't read the posts?

The movie tables a lot of issues, one is the sexualisation of young girls. The filmmakers are against it and that is what the movie s about.

Netflix created and released a marketing campaign that not only sexualised the young cast but misrepresented the filmmakers message and wen against the entire point of the story.

Anyone not upset to some degree with imagery from the marketing and from the film itself needs to withdraw from society and out themselves in life long care because the poster and initial description of the movie are DISGUSTING. And the imagery from the movie of how these girls dress and behave is supposed to HORRIFY you. The filmmaker wants you to be aware this happens and to be upset.

I personally don;t think the topics should be used in a drama movie or series BECAUSE it requires he young cast to speak, dress an behave in a way that children should not. I think better way is to examine these problems in a documentary.

As best I can remember no on the thread said the topics should be brushed under the carpet.

Junkyard Tom · 21-08-2020 11:22PM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I understand some people have issues capitulating in any way to the ‘right’ or presumed ‘right’ during the ‘trump era’

*Sigh* If 'the right' were half as concerned with child poverty/hunger/refugees/labour as they are with policing morals then we'd have a much better world.

Psychiatric Patrick · 21-08-2020 11:22PM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

You're not hinting that this ^^^ could possibly be the reason for all the outrage, are you?

What is Dems ?

Psychiatric Patrick · 21-08-2020 11:40PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

It really isn’t the same at all though.
There are actually very strict costume rules in Irish dancing. The torso, shoulders, back and full arms must be completely covered.
The skirts are quite short but that’s so the movements can be seen properly.
And they wear massive pairs of kick pants/knickers underneath the dresses that cover their entire bottom area to protect their modesty, you can even see them in the photo.
There would be more ‘legs in their air’ at a gymnastics competition than at a Feis, and to be honest, I don’t see the issue with it?
It takes serious talent and practice to be able to execute those moves properly.

The tan and makeup are worn for the same reasons as broadway/theatre performers wear them, the theatre stage lighting is blindingly strong, it’s all just part of the costume.
And the wigs are hands down the best invention ever, they save severe damage from happening to young children’s hair from being put in rollers, curled and manipulated into styles every weekend as was the standard before the wigs became popular.
They are far gentler and better for their hair than pumping it with products and heated tools every week.

And lastly, the kids are judged purely on talent, the judges aren’t allowed to give any points based on the costume, hair, makeup, or overall appearance. Pageants judge only on appearance.
You can have the sparkliest most expensive dress, the biggest wig, thickest makeup and darkest tan but if you aren’t talented you’ll get nowhere in Irish dancing.
That isn’t the case in pageants.

When wee you last an Irish Dancing competition ?
Maybe it has changed from the last time I saw one but it was a horrendous display - mothers belittling their children, with the kids plastered with that rubbish.

if the dancers are judged solely on their dancing talent then there is no need of the fake tan, the make up or the wigs. Even the dress could be simplified. Wouldn't even need to be dress. I find it hard to believe their is difficult to the dancing ability of someone wearing pants.

I have never been to a childrens' gymnastics competition, Do the girls dress the same way at Olympics and such?

Why do women need to have their legs and bum display for those events but the men wear pants (or at least they used to ).

briangriffin · 21-08-2020 11:44PM

SusieBlue wrote: »

It really isn’t the same at all though.
There are actually very strict costume rules in Irish dancing. The torso, shoulders, back and full arms must be completely covered.
The skirts are quite short but that’s so the movements can be seen properly.
And they wear massive pairs of kick pants/knickers underneath the dresses that cover their entire bottom area to protect their modesty, you can even see them in the photo.
There would be more ‘legs in their air’ at a gymnastics competition than at a Feis, and to be honest, I don’t see the issue with it?
It takes serious talent and practice to be able to execute those moves properly.

The tan and makeup are worn for the same reasons as broadway/theatre performers wear them, the theatre stage lighting is blindingly strong, it’s all just part of the costume.
And the wigs are hands down the best invention ever, they save severe damage from happening to young children’s hair from being put in rollers, curled and manipulated into styles every weekend as was the standard before the wigs became popular.
They are far gentler and better for their hair than pumping it with products and heated tools every week.

And lastly, the kids are judged purely on talent, the judges aren’t allowed to give any points based on the costume, hair, makeup, or overall appearance. Pageants judge only on appearance.
You can have the sparkliest most expensive dress, the biggest wig, thickest makeup and darkest tan but if you aren’t talented you’ll get nowhere in Irish dancing.
That isn’t the case in pageants.

When you are explaining for 2 paragraphs you are definitely losing. I've been to one feis to see my niece dance last year, a few of us went uncles and aunties we all talked the next day about nothing else but the wigs the makeup/fake tan and the short skirts what the actually fùck has any of that got to do with how talented a dancer a young girl is?

AndrewJRenko · 21-08-2020 11:53PM

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

What is Dems ?

It's Dem over dere.

I just hope Netflix never shows a classic movie like Taxi Driver with the 12 year old prostitute Iris. Several posters here would be in danger of spontaneous combustion in that scenario.

Psychiatric Patrick · 22-08-2020 12:00AM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's Dem over dere.

I just hope Netflix never shows a classic movie like Taxi Driver with the 12 year old prostitute Iris. Several posters here would be in danger of spontaneous combustion in that scenario.

At]re talking abut the American democratic political party ?

SusieBlue · 22-08-2020 12:03AM

Psychiatric Patrick wrote: »

When wee you last an Irish Dancing competition ?
Maybe it has changed from the last time I saw one but it was a horrendous display - mothers belittling their children, with the kids plastered with that rubbish.

if the dancers are judged solely on their dancing talent then there is no need of the fake tan, the make up or the wigs. Even the dress could be simplified. Wouldn't even need to be dress. I find it hard to believe their is difficult to the dancing ability of someone wearing pants.

I have never been to a childrens' gymnastics competition, Do the girls dress the same way at Olympics and such?

Why do women need to have their legs and bum display for those events but the men wear pants (or at least they used to ).

I was last at a competition in March, I’ve been involved in it for over 25 years.
I don’t disagree that some of the mothers can be weapons but I’ve seen similar displays from fathers at the sidelines of GAA matches and at speech and drama rehearsals.
Unfortunately anything competitive involving children attracts a certain cohort of overzealous parents, it can be seen in pretty much any children’s activity.

You’re right, they don’t need the dresses and the tan and there is no requirement for it. Those dresses cost about 2k each and most kids get a new one every year, it’s a ridiculous and unnecessary expense.
There is no obligation to buy into it and some parents don’t, but getting into costume is part of the ritual of going on stage for some kids.
It helps them to feel confident.
I think it’s just another aspect of modern life, like people trying to outdo each other by having the latest iPhone or newest car or whatever. It’s another type of consumerism.
The governing body have tried several times to strip back on the ornate dresses, hence the rules about the torso being covered and skirt length etc, but it’s never worked or lasted.

In pretty much all types of performing arts, from ballet, to tap, to musical theatre, to contemporary dance etc the performance involves heavy makeup, a costume and sometimes wigs.
So long as the costume is accompanied by an actual talent and the children aren’t being adjudicated on said costume or their appearance, I have no issue with it.

SusieBlue · 22-08-2020 12:15AM

briangriffin wrote: »

When you are explaining for 2 paragraphs you are definitely losing. I've been to one feis to see my niece dance last year, a few of us went uncles and aunties we all talked the next day about nothing else but the wigs the makeup/fake tan and the short skirts what the actually fùck has any of that got to do with how talented a dancer a young girl is?

You’re admonishing me for offering an explanation because apparently that’s ‘losing’ and yet you end your post by asking for another explanation?

It’s the same with any type of performing arts, makeup, tan, wigs and customes are par for the course for performances. I even saw some clips of traditional Scottish highland dancing on YouTube a few weeks ago, and you guessed it, the children were all wearing tan and makeup and had their hair styled.
It happens in every type of dance, not just Irish dancing.

Even if you have a top of the range dress, you won’t get anywhere without talent. They wear them because they want to. There is no requirement.
Makeup is banned on children under 11 and this is strictly enforced, unlike the pageants it’s been compared to where they put fake eyelashes on 6 month old babies.

Eric Cartman · 22-08-2020 12:18AM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

*Sigh* If 'the right' were half as concerned with child poverty/hunger/refugees/labour as they are with policing morals then we'd have a much better world.

Sorry lad but no, no you dont get to do this. Poor people exist sadly, hungry people exist sadly, refugees exist sadly,

NOT ONE SINGLE ONE OF THOSE UNRELATED ISSUES EXISTING JUSTIFIES OR IS AN ALLOWED DISTRACTION FROM CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE.

MoonUnit75 · 22-08-2020 12:18AM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

*Sigh* If 'the right' were half as concerned with child poverty/hunger/refugees/labour as they are with policing morals then we'd have a much better world.

In the US, one of the few places that look at this, conservatives give significantly more to charitable causes than liberals. Even taking socio-economic factors into account. When the differences between conservatives and liberals are studied carefully you find that liberals and conservatives care about harm to the vulnerable about the same.

MoonUnit75 · 22-08-2020 12:19AM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's Dem over dere.

I just hope Netflix never shows a classic movie like Taxi Driver with the 12 year old prostitute Iris. Several posters here would be in danger of spontaneous combustion in that scenario.

That’s a character featured within the story, in this series the sexualisation of children is the story.

Errashareesh · 22-08-2020 12:42AM

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's Dem over dere.

I just hope Netflix never shows a classic movie like Taxi Driver with the 12 year old prostitute Iris. Several posters here would be in danger of spontaneous combustion in that scenario.

What on earth is your difficulty with acknowledging people's concern here?

Taxi Driver is a film for adults that addresses the ugly reality of children being prostituted. And it's about a man who turns vigilante to save one such child.

Absolutely bizarre.

Junkyard Tom · 22-08-2020 01:11AM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Sorry lad but no, no you dont get to do this. Poor people exist sadly, hungry people exist sadly, refugees exist sadly,

NOT ONE SINGLE ONE OF THOSE UNRELATED ISSUES EXISTING JUSTIFIES OR IS AN ALLOWED DISTRACTION FROM CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE.

I'm not justifying anything. I'm simply stating that 'the right' or 'conservatives', or whatever they call themselves, haven't a leg to stand on when it comes to pointing the finger at others when it comes to children's well being.

Quantum Erasure · 22-08-2020 01:44AM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Sorry lad but no, no you dont get to do this. Poor people exist sadly, hungry people exist sadly, refugees exist sadly,

NOT ONE SINGLE ONE OF THOSE UNRELATED ISSUES EXISTING JUSTIFIES OR IS AN ALLOWED DISTRACTION FROM CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE.

I don't know what I'd call the film, but I wouldn't call it 'sexual abuse'

MoonUnit75 · 22-08-2020 01:55AM

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I'm not justifying anything. I'm simply stating that 'the right' or 'conservatives', or whatever they call themselves, haven't a leg to stand on when it comes to pointing the finger at others when it comes to children's well being.

Your point makes no logical sense. If conservatives were so uninterested in children’s well-being, why did the Catholic Church go to such extremes to keep a lid on what it was finding on the ground? Your attempt to stop conservatives pointing at the moral blind spots of some factions of liberals is extremely transparent and to be honest comes off a bit desperate sounding.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 22-08-2020 08:35AM

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Sorry lad but no, no you dont get to do this. Poor people exist sadly, hungry people exist sadly, refugees exist sadly,

Judging by your viewponts on the poor and immigrants, this is a lie.

NOT ONE SINGLE ONE OF THOSE UNRELATED ISSUES EXISTING JUSTIFIES OR IS AN ALLOWED DISTRACTION FROM CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE.

Been over this - what's it got to do with the trailer?

22-08-2020 10:24AM

Errashareesh wrote: »

What on earth is your difficulty with acknowledging people's concern here?

Taxi Driver is a film for adults that addresses the ugly reality of children being prostituted. And it's about a man who turns vigilante to save one such child.

Absolutely bizarre.

In fairness, this film is supposed to be critical of the hypersexualisation of children. It's just looking as if the director was fecked over by Netflix marketing.

Netflix sexualising children.

Comments