10 ms·

The show is criticized for being essential erotic material for pedophiles, filled with up close shots of bums and panties of children. The American poster comes

The show is criticized for being essential erotic material for pedophiles, filled with up close shots of bums and panties of children. The American poster comes closer to that, but is still tame compared to the actual content, which is what this is about. > And it's worked, in a sense: It wouldn't be on the front page of HN otherwise. Compared to other stories, this one is already being penalized, and the top comment (yours) is about a total red herring. Ever since Elsagate I am just in awe at the collective ability to look the other way.

vmception 6y ago
I don’t really buy the controversy I found that movie to be the lamest and most cringeworthy material and couldn’t watch more than 2 minutes of some of the clips The people complaining about it seem to have their own discomfort that they project onto a phantom pedophile Has anyone noticed that? Actual pedophiles have plenty of actual explicit material from that age group and the older teenagers that could still land them in hot water but plenty more under they can just lust over, so what do actual pedophiles think? All I see are men on twitter doing a scene by scene breakdown of fairly benign but cringeworthy material of a dance scene that really is like that in the real world, is this really insight into what phantom pedophiles are turned on by? Is it the overprotective brother or father hoping for a different world? Or are these people having their own internal struggle with lust? Does it matter? I don’t think this movie crosses any community standards, it is just annoying child actors in an annoying plot because its just not that good, like it needs the controversy in order to be viewed
- ravenstine 6y ago
  I don't know anyone who is concerned with pedophiles getting off on the film. Almost all the arguments I've heard against it are based on potential exploitation of the child actors and people generally being uncomfortable with overt sexualization of children.
- cutitout 6y ago
  > The people complaining about it seem to have their own discomfort that they project onto a phantom pedophile > Has anyone noticed that? How can I "notice" something you're just claiming, based on nothing, that doesn't even make sense on top of that? I'm not projecting my own discomfort at sexualized depiction of underage girls on a phantom pedophile, since I would assume such a pedophile wouldn't feel discomfort, but arousal. > I don’t think this movie crosses any community standards And if anyone disagrees, you speculate a bit, then say it doesn't even matter.. yet think your assessment matters. These aren't "community standards", these are yours. The suppression of how "the community" actually reacts speaks volumes in and of itself. > like it needs the controversy in order to be viewed I don't need anything for any Netflix stuff to be viewed. I simply call things as I see them. edit: and for the "men on Twitter" thing (as if there's not plenty men calling this a profound something or other), here's shoe0nhead's take: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvFyhqSE51A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvFyhqSE51A
- yaypolitics 6y ago
  > The people complaining about it seem to have their own discomfort that they project onto a phantom pedophile Ah yes, the old “people who have a problem with pedophilia are the real pedophiles”
  - vmception 6y ago
    Stranger things have happened Everyone could just ignore the movie because it’s not that interesting
    - EricE 6y ago
      Or we can condemn it for the filth it is and the blatant attempt to normalize absolutely disgusting behavior. People love to dismiss slippery slope arguments, but we see time and time again "oh, we only want X" soon turns into Y, Z and infinity and beyond. People are amazed that Harvey Weinstein got away with what he did for so long. Matt Lauer - the lists go on. Hell do we even need to talk about Roman Polanski or indeed the co-founder of Sundance (where the award that Netflix points out they won) was CONVICTED of child pornography? How does this keep happening? It's because there were people like you willing to make the argument you are making - "oh, it's just a little bit - it's not that bad". Nope. There is NO QUARTER. Not one more square inch. This movie is flat out unacceptable in and of itself and that is more than enough. You can defend kiddie diddlers if that's really the legacy you want to leave here but I have zero problem being unequivocal on where I stand on this issue. I wish that having people willing to compromise even the slightest on the exploitation of children could shock me - that's what's even more disgusting to me about this thread.
      - vmception 6y ago
        Its a dumb movie We're at the bottom of the slope, there is nothing "being" normalized we're way past that point by the standard of whatever is triggering you
  - Igelau 6y ago
    That's not quite it. It's that there are some people crying wolf who see something as erotic material when it's not. Do you see the difference there? Getting to the heart of why they see it this way when others don't is an interesting question. There's an ugly implication of the "I know it when I see it" standard -- something in the individual's brain has realized that what it's getting from the eyes is supposed to be exciting. How could they otherwise make the claim? That's got to be an unsettling experience for a lot of people. The self-disgust this causes is likely to be so visceral and panic-inducing that it will be hard for someone experiencing it to understand that the reaction is not universal.
- EricE 6y ago
  There is nothing sophisticated in "pushing boundaries" to make a point - it's sophistry to justify child pron, plain and simple.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
skitout 6y ago
The director said she did want to denounce over-sexualisation of young girls with this movie. I (and 2 of my friends, feminist women) think she managed to do it, with a relatively good and a relatively subtle movie. Talking about over-sexualisation of young girls require to show stuff linked to... over-sexualisation of young girls, to show some aspect of reality... But if you find this movie erotic, well the problem is you, not the movie !!!
- identity0 6y ago
  No, wanting to denounce sexualization does not require showing over-sexualisation. It especially doesn't require the film maker doing it herself to these poor actresses. It doesn't matter how "subtle" it is, the movie is part of the problem. It's like making a movie denouncing puppy murders and then the entire movie is just the director shooting puppies. "But don't you get it? How can our movie be bad if it's denouncing bad things?" you may say, oblivious to the fact that this director just created a great movie for puppy-murder enthusiasts.
  - hhas01 6y ago
    Donnie Darko did it years earlier, flaying the same culture for the same reasons. And guess whose culture it was that got flayed? Yup.
    - identity0 6y ago
      I've never seen that movie so I can't guess. Would you tell me?
      - hhas01 6y ago
        Oh tsk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accEKtBebaU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accEKtBebaU Good movie. A bit nuts. Product of a much more innocent time; set in an even more innocent time than that. Also no-one’s innocent. Free to watch with ads on Amazon Prime, or you can rent or pick it up on DVD for a few bucks. https://www.amazon.com/Donnie-Darko-Jake-Gyllenhaal/dp/B002MGGM9I https://www.amazon.com/Donnie-Darko-Jake-Gyllenhaal/dp/B002M...
hhas01 6y ago
“The show” Perhaps you’re confusing it with Dance Moms? Or preteen beauty queen pagents? Both of which are obvious targets of this film, being an attempt (whether good or bad) to criticize that culture. And both of which are also, I’d wager, solidly red state phenomena. Besides, at this point it’s pretty much a given that everything the Titular Right accuses its enemies of is what it’s balls-deep in itself, so outrageous hypocricy there is no surprise either. See also: alt-right incels, Qanon’s 21st-century blood libel, Kentucky and Oklahoma Trump campaign officials currently serving time for child sex trafficking, undocumented kids stolen from family and locked in cages, and so on. None of which should Netflix’s appalling advertising campaign nor its lousy attempts to suppress the right-wing tweets attacking them, but let’s not pretend all these Twitter “critics” are suddenly thinking of the children. Obvious propaganda war is so obvious that even a passing student of history can see exactly what’s going on.
brabel 6y ago
I've watched this movie and found it to be a very touching movie. It's a shame everyone seems to focus only on the children's sexualization when that, while definitely pushing the boundary a bit further than most people are used to, is clearly contrasted to the girl's otherwise incredibly childish behaviour the whole length of the movie, as well as her desire to escape oppression by her own family. The girls are 90% of the time behaving like completely normal kids (screaming, jumping, playing around), even while wearing suggestive clothes that would be just quite normal in any primary school in most of the western world (at least until the second half of the movie, when the main character starts to slowly go a bit too far even for her own "cool" friends). As the movie progresses, we see a young child who is already being indoctrinated into a religion she clearly has no desire to partake. She starts to realise her destiny as she sees how the life of her mother is basically centred around being a servant to her husband, to whom she got married when she was just a little older than herself (it's not clear how much older, but it's made obvious that it's not more than a year or two). Now, the husband is preparing to take a second wife, which makes her mom suffer profoundly... but as part of her culture, she must accept that the woman (as the movie explains in the beginning) must obey their husbands always, so she must even call friends and family to "proudly" announce the wedding, adding incredible insult to the injury. It's against this background that she starts to seek the total opposite life, which she finds in a new friend who, as so many young western world girls, is obsessed with pop dancing and its overly sexualised tones. To anyone who did not watch the movie, this is where the movie is coming from when it shows the girls behaving, I agree, completely inappropriately for their age... however, that's so common nowadays that I find people who claim to be shocked by this to be turning a blind eye to our society. Do you really think 11-year old children seeing the kind of dance we find everywhere will not try to emulate that, having basically no idea that they are emulating sexualised behaviour? I think this is the root of the problem which people conveniently ignore. Is it normal for a 17 year old girl to behave like that on TV? How about 20? The funny thing is : I am a conservative, I just don't like hypocrisy. If you don't want to see children dressing and dancing as portrayed in the movie, ask yourself why you think it's ok for women not much older to do so, openly, and how you expect children to "know" it's something that they shouldn't do (even while you watch it eagerly).
- odshoifsdhfs 6y ago

vmception 6y ago

I don’t really buy the controversy I found that movie to be the lamest and most cringeworthy material and couldn’t watch more than 2 minutes of some of the clips The people complaining about it seem to have their own discomfort that they project onto a phantom pedophile Has anyone noticed that? Actual pedophiles have plenty of actual explicit material from that age group and the older teenagers that could still land them in hot water but plenty more under they can just lust over, so what do actual pedophiles think? All I see are men on twitter doing a scene by scene breakdown of fairly benign but cringeworthy material of a dance scene that really is like that in the real world, is this really insight into what phantom pedophiles are turned on by? Is it the overprotective brother or father hoping for a different world? Or are these people having their own internal struggle with lust? Does it matter? I don’t think this movie crosses any community standards, it is just annoying child actors in an annoying plot because its just not that good, like it needs the controversy in order to be viewed

ravenstine 6y ago
I don't know anyone who is concerned with pedophiles getting off on the film. Almost all the arguments I've heard against it are based on potential exploitation of the child actors and people generally being uncomfortable with overt sexualization of children.
cutitout 6y ago
> The people complaining about it seem to have their own discomfort that they project onto a phantom pedophile > Has anyone noticed that? How can I "notice" something you're just claiming, based on nothing, that doesn't even make sense on top of that? I'm not projecting my own discomfort at sexualized depiction of underage girls on a phantom pedophile, since I would assume such a pedophile wouldn't feel discomfort, but arousal. > I don’t think this movie crosses any community standards And if anyone disagrees, you speculate a bit, then say it doesn't even matter.. yet think your assessment matters. These aren't "community standards", these are yours. The suppression of how "the community" actually reacts speaks volumes in and of itself. > like it needs the controversy in order to be viewed I don't need anything for any Netflix stuff to be viewed. I simply call things as I see them. edit: and for the "men on Twitter" thing (as if there's not plenty men calling this a profound something or other), here's shoe0nhead's take: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvFyhqSE51A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvFyhqSE51A
yaypolitics 6y ago
> The people complaining about it seem to have their own discomfort that they project onto a phantom pedophile Ah yes, the old “people who have a problem with pedophilia are the real pedophiles”
- vmception 6y ago
  Stranger things have happened Everyone could just ignore the movie because it’s not that interesting
  - EricE 6y ago
    Or we can condemn it for the filth it is and the blatant attempt to normalize absolutely disgusting behavior. People love to dismiss slippery slope arguments, but we see time and time again "oh, we only want X" soon turns into Y, Z and infinity and beyond. People are amazed that Harvey Weinstein got away with what he did for so long. Matt Lauer - the lists go on. Hell do we even need to talk about Roman Polanski or indeed the co-founder of Sundance (where the award that Netflix points out they won) was CONVICTED of child pornography? How does this keep happening? It's because there were people like you willing to make the argument you are making - "oh, it's just a little bit - it's not that bad". Nope. There is NO QUARTER. Not one more square inch. This movie is flat out unacceptable in and of itself and that is more than enough. You can defend kiddie diddlers if that's really the legacy you want to leave here but I have zero problem being unequivocal on where I stand on this issue. I wish that having people willing to compromise even the slightest on the exploitation of children could shock me - that's what's even more disgusting to me about this thread.
    - vmception 6y ago
      Its a dumb movie We're at the bottom of the slope, there is nothing "being" normalized we're way past that point by the standard of whatever is triggering you
- Igelau 6y ago
  That's not quite it. It's that there are some people crying wolf who see something as erotic material when it's not. Do you see the difference there? Getting to the heart of why they see it this way when others don't is an interesting question. There's an ugly implication of the "I know it when I see it" standard -- something in the individual's brain has realized that what it's getting from the eyes is supposed to be exciting. How could they otherwise make the claim? That's got to be an unsettling experience for a lot of people. The self-disgust this causes is likely to be so visceral and panic-inducing that it will be hard for someone experiencing it to understand that the reaction is not universal.
EricE 6y ago
There is nothing sophisticated in "pushing boundaries" to make a point - it's sophistry to justify child pron, plain and simple.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

skitout 6y ago

The director said she did want to denounce over-sexualisation of young girls with this movie. I (and 2 of my friends, feminist women) think she managed to do it, with a relatively good and a relatively subtle movie. Talking about over-sexualisation of young girls require to show stuff linked to... over-sexualisation of young girls, to show some aspect of reality... But if you find this movie erotic, well the problem is you, not the movie !!!

identity0 6y ago
No, wanting to denounce sexualization does not require showing over-sexualisation. It especially doesn't require the film maker doing it herself to these poor actresses. It doesn't matter how "subtle" it is, the movie is part of the problem. It's like making a movie denouncing puppy murders and then the entire movie is just the director shooting puppies. "But don't you get it? How can our movie be bad if it's denouncing bad things?" you may say, oblivious to the fact that this director just created a great movie for puppy-murder enthusiasts.
- hhas01 6y ago
  Donnie Darko did it years earlier, flaying the same culture for the same reasons. And guess whose culture it was that got flayed? Yup.
  - identity0 6y ago
    I've never seen that movie so I can't guess. Would you tell me?
    - hhas01 6y ago
      Oh tsk. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accEKtBebaU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=accEKtBebaU Good movie. A bit nuts. Product of a much more innocent time; set in an even more innocent time than that. Also no-one’s innocent. Free to watch with ads on Amazon Prime, or you can rent or pick it up on DVD for a few bucks. https://www.amazon.com/Donnie-Darko-Jake-Gyllenhaal/dp/B002MGGM9I https://www.amazon.com/Donnie-Darko-Jake-Gyllenhaal/dp/B002M...

hhas01 6y ago

“The show” Perhaps you’re confusing it with Dance Moms? Or preteen beauty queen pagents? Both of which are obvious targets of this film, being an attempt (whether good or bad) to criticize that culture. And both of which are also, I’d wager, solidly red state phenomena. Besides, at this point it’s pretty much a given that everything the Titular Right accuses its enemies of is what it’s balls-deep in itself, so outrageous hypocricy there is no surprise either. See also: alt-right incels, Qanon’s 21st-century blood libel, Kentucky and Oklahoma Trump campaign officials currently serving time for child sex trafficking, undocumented kids stolen from family and locked in cages, and so on. None of which should Netflix’s appalling advertising campaign nor its lousy attempts to suppress the right-wing tweets attacking them, but let’s not pretend all these Twitter “critics” are suddenly thinking of the children. Obvious propaganda war is so obvious that even a passing student of history can see exactly what’s going on.

brabel 6y ago

I've watched this movie and found it to be a very touching movie. It's a shame everyone seems to focus only on the children's sexualization when that, while definitely pushing the boundary a bit further than most people are used to, is clearly contrasted to the girl's otherwise incredibly childish behaviour the whole length of the movie, as well as her desire to escape oppression by her own family. The girls are 90% of the time behaving like completely normal kids (screaming, jumping, playing around), even while wearing suggestive clothes that would be just quite normal in any primary school in most of the western world (at least until the second half of the movie, when the main character starts to slowly go a bit too far even for her own "cool" friends). As the movie progresses, we see a young child who is already being indoctrinated into a religion she clearly has no desire to partake. She starts to realise her destiny as she sees how the life of her mother is basically centred around being a servant to her husband, to whom she got married when she was just a little older than herself (it's not clear how much older, but it's made obvious that it's not more than a year or two). Now, the husband is preparing to take a second wife, which makes her mom suffer profoundly... but as part of her culture, she must accept that the woman (as the movie explains in the beginning) must obey their husbands always, so she must even call friends and family to "proudly" announce the wedding, adding incredible insult to the injury. It's against this background that she starts to seek the total opposite life, which she finds in a new friend who, as so many young western world girls, is obsessed with pop dancing and its overly sexualised tones. To anyone who did not watch the movie, this is where the movie is coming from when it shows the girls behaving, I agree, completely inappropriately for their age... however, that's so common nowadays that I find people who claim to be shocked by this to be turning a blind eye to our society. Do you really think 11-year old children seeing the kind of dance we find everywhere will not try to emulate that, having basically no idea that they are emulating sexualised behaviour? I think this is the root of the problem which people conveniently ignore. Is it normal for a 17 year old girl to behave like that on TV? How about 20? The funny thing is : I am a conservative, I just don't like hypocrisy. If you don't want to see children dressing and dancing as portrayed in the movie, ask yourself why you think it's ok for women not much older to do so, openly, and how you expect children to "know" it's something that they shouldn't do (even while you watch it eagerly).

odshoifsdhfs 6y ago