@great-king-rat said🙄
You care about children watching that video, but are fine with children being used the way they are in Cuties. Presumably because the cause justifies it.
Preposterous.
You don't understand that you shouldn't use children this way?? You really don't see it?
Edit: this was aimed at Shav.
@great-king-rat saidOK, I see you meant to talk to Shav
You care about children watching that video, but are fine with children being used the way they are in Cuties. Presumably because the cause justifies it.
Preposterous.
You don't understand that you shouldn't use children this way?? You really don't see it?
Edit: this was aimed at Shav.
1 edit
@athousandyoung saidLet's not move the goal posts with this ATY. And let's stay ON TOPIC,
Do you apply the same skepticism about Epstein?
https://www.propublica.org/article/ice-guards-systematically-sexually-assault-detainees-in-an-el-paso-detention-center-lawyers-say
https://www.businessinsider.com/evangelical-leaders-outraged-over-reports-of-immigrant-sterilization-2020-9
Epstein has its own thread. Now, stay on topic, get me a video of the forced medical procedures,
show me what preliminary investigations from government officials have found.
I am not going to go back and forth with you while you are clearly on nothing but a fishing expedition.
Jeeeesh.
@kevcvs57 saidYou are defending the proliferation of softcore child smut by fear mongering over religious fundamentalism.
Oh well if foul mouthed you tubers are saying it it must be right.
Look given that you have to rely on ridiculous statements like this
“ This is essentially the same argument that prostitutes use to argue that they are involved in a transaction by consent thus it is a victimless crime. ”
Maybe you should accept that you don’t actually have an argument and just let people ...[text shortened]... to ban them no matter how much Psychological and emotional harm I think they do to children.
But I can't blame you -- this is the best option that you have, as any serious treatment of the film Cuties would result in a total route.
Then, there was this;
Netflix Stands By ‘Cuties’ After Streamer Indictment In Texas Over Film’s “Prurient Interest In Sex”
A Lone Star State grand jury has indicted Netflix over the controversial Cuties film.
According to the September 23 indictment out of Tyler County, Texas, the streamer led by Reed Hastings and Ted Sarandos “knowingly promote visual material which depicts the lewd exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of a clothed or partially clothed child who was younger than 18 years of age at the time the visual material was created, which appeals to the prurient interest in sex, and has no serious, literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.”
---------------
https://deadline.com/2020/10/cuties-indictment-netflix-texas-child-sexualization-maimouna-doucoure-sundance-1234592561/
The controversy just went into warp-drive.
@earl-of-trumps saidA ridiculous publicity stunt by a local DA.
Then, there was this;
Netflix Stands By ‘Cuties’ After Streamer Indictment In Texas Over Film’s “Prurient Interest In Sex”
[i]A Lone Star State grand jury has indicted Netflix over the controversial Cuties film.
According to the September 23 indictment out of Tyler County, Texas, the streamer led by Reed Hastings and Ted Sarandos “knowingly promote visu ...[text shortened]... xualization-maimouna-doucoure-sundance-1234592561/
The controversy just went into warp-drive.
@earl-of-trumps saidBecause, you know, Texas.
Then, there was this;
Netflix Stands By ‘Cuties’ After Streamer Indictment In Texas Over Film’s “Prurient Interest In Sex”
[i]A Lone Star State grand jury has indicted Netflix over the controversial Cuties film.
According to the September 23 indictment out of Tyler County, Texas, the streamer led by Reed Hastings and Ted Sarandos “knowingly promote visu ...[text shortened]... xualization-maimouna-doucoure-sundance-1234592561/
The controversy just went into warp-drive.
@philokalia saidI don’t have to fear monger, here you are large as life.
You are defending the proliferation of softcore child smut by fear mongering over religious fundamentalism.
But I can't blame you -- this is the best option that you have, as any serious treatment of the film Cuties would result in a total route.
@earl-of-trumps saidYeah that’s correct right wing Texans have long been known as arbiters of what has “literary, artistic, political, or scientific value”.
Then, there was this;
Netflix Stands By ‘Cuties’ After Streamer Indictment In Texas Over Film’s “Prurient Interest In Sex”
[i]A Lone Star State grand jury has indicted Netflix over the controversial Cuties film.
According to the September 23 indictment out of Tyler County, Texas, the streamer led by Reed Hastings and Ted Sarandos “knowingly promote visu ...[text shortened]... xualization-maimouna-doucoure-sundance-1234592561/
The controversy just went into warp-drive.
Meanwhile back in the 21st century Netflix subs keep going up whilst covid has smashed most of the film and entertainment industry to pulp.
@earl-of-trumps saidGood grief.
Then, there was this;
Netflix Stands By ‘Cuties’ After Streamer Indictment In Texas Over Film’s “Prurient Interest In Sex”
[i]A Lone Star State grand jury has indicted Netflix over the controversial Cuties film.
According to the September 23 indictment out of Tyler County, Texas, the streamer led by Reed Hastings and Ted Sarandos “knowingly promote visu ...[text shortened]... xualization-maimouna-doucoure-sundance-1234592561/
The controversy just went into warp-drive.
Just read it!
“...knowingly promote visual material which depicts the lewd exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of a clothed or partially clothed child...”
It depicts the genitals? If is it depicting a clothed area around the genital region?
The person who wrote that should be dragged off screaming.
Just because they irritate me.
@no1marauder saidNow, that is a quip you could throw out there in any prosecution started by any DA.
A ridiculous publicity stunt by a local DA.
So echoing right back at you, No1, "You have no evidence"
to ALL:
We must remain open minded here.
If you do not like the law, change the law. Until then, we are a nation of laws, not people.
It has yet been decided in a court of law whether or not NETFLIX violated the law
so I am open minded enough to hold back calling them "criminals".
But my opinion is mine and I need not worry what people in here think, this STINKS.
Making $money on the sexualization of children is a really despicable act and I hope NETLFIX is convicted.
@earl-of-trumps saidThey won't be and I hope they sue for malicious prosecution and violation of their civil rights.
Now, that is a quip you could throw out there in any prosecution started by any DA.
So echoing right back at you, No1, "You have no evidence"
to ALL:
We must remain open minded here.
If you do not like the law, change the law. Until then, we are a nation of laws, not people.
It has yet been decided in a court of law whether or not NETFLIX violated the la ...[text shortened]... $money on the sexualization of children is a really despicable act and I hope NETLFIX is convicted.