ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 3 of 5
< 123 45 >
Washington DC and The Holy Land>Netflix Indicted in TX for 'CUTIES'
BucEyedPea 08:02 PM 10-06-2020
Lewd Depiction of Kids Alleged

Netflix is being dragged into a criminal courtroom in Texas over the controversial film, "Cuties" ... a film a grand jury believes shows young kids in sexual situations.

The grand jury in Tyler County, TX just handed up the indictment ... and according to the docs, Netflix is being charged with promotion of lewd visual material depicting children. By streaming "Cuties," Netflix allegedly promoted the lewd exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of a clothed or partially clothed child younger than 18, appealing to the prurient interest in sex....

Critics have been very vocal about the controversial film -- some feel it encourages the sexual exploitation of pre-teens ... some have even used the word "pedophilia" to describe "Cuties."

https://www.tmz.com/2020/10/06/netfl...hild-sex-lewd/

[Reply]
CarlosCarson88 03:11 PM 10-14-2020
It is not child pornography. But could some sicko into kids be turned on by it? I'd have to say yes.
[Reply]
stevieray 06:28 PM 10-14-2020
Originally Posted by AdolfOliverBush:
This, from a guy who thinks leaving the light on is freaky.

:-)

I used to lived with a rock DJ in Denver.

I've prolly had more threesomes than you've had women.

Thanks for the chuckle, though.
[Reply]
stanleychief 07:41 PM 10-14-2020
Originally Posted by Hoopsdoc:
There were underage girls twerking in the film. Twerking is, by definition, a sexually suggestive and erotic dance.

This isn’t complicated. It’s child pornography.
It isn't that simple. By your definition twerking is pornography. By a dictionary's definition, it -might- be. In a court of law, it probably isn't. Context is important. I would assume harsher charges would have been pursued if they thought the film was truly pornographic, such as this one:
https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-c...ect-43-26.html

It will be interesting to see how this plays out in court. It would certainly be wise for Netflix to pull the film. They are taking a lot of heat over it. In the end, I'd guess is that this is dismissed or settled somehow.
[Reply]
HonestChieffan 07:45 PM 10-14-2020
amazing the lengths people will go to define right and wrong
[Reply]
eDave 07:55 PM 10-14-2020
Originally Posted by HonestChieffan:
amazing the lengths people will go to define right and wrong
No kidding.
[Reply]
CarlosCarson88 08:52 PM 10-14-2020
Well, right from wrong in many cases is a construct.
Many things aren't really wrong but law and religion have created unnecessary guilt. No lol I'm not condoning current topic
[Reply]
Chief Pagan 09:01 PM 10-14-2020
Originally Posted by HonestChieffan:
amazing the lengths people will go to define right and wrong
Well, when you get dragged into a criminal court in Texas, I would sort of think that might be expected.
[Reply]
SuperBowl4 09:32 PM 10-14-2020
Originally Posted by stevieray:
:-)

I used to lived with a rock DJ in Denver.

I've prolly had more threesomes than you've had women.

Thanks for the chuckle, though.
impressive:-)
[Reply]
stanleychief 10:08 PM 10-14-2020
I wonder how they plan to prosecute given the requirement in section b, 3. The film won a Sundance award in 2020.

Texas Penal Code § 43.262. Possession or Promotion of Lewd Visual Material Depicting Child
(a) In this section:
(1) “Promote” and “sexual conduct” have the meanings assigned by Section 43.25.
(2) “Visual material” has the meaning assigned by Section 43.26.
(b) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly possesses, accesses with intent to view, or promotes visual material that:
(1) depicts the lewd exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of an unclothed, partially clothed, or clothed child who is younger than 18 years of age at the time the visual material was created;
(2) appeals to the prurient interest in sex;  and
(3) has no serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

[Reply]
ScareCrowe 10:03 AM 10-15-2020
Originally Posted by stanleychief:
I wonder how they plan to prosecute given the requirement in section b, 3. The film won a Sundance award in 2020.

Texas Penal Code § 43.262. Possession or Promotion of Lewd Visual Material Depicting Child
(a) In this section:
(1) “Promote” and “sexual conduct” have the meanings assigned by Section 43.25.
(2) “Visual material” has the meaning assigned by Section 43.26.
(b) A person commits an offense if the person knowingly possesses, accesses with intent to view, or promotes visual material that:
(1) depicts the lewd exhibition of the genitals or pubic area of an unclothed, partially clothed, or clothed child who is younger than 18 years of age at the time the visual material was created;
(2) appeals to the prurient interest in sex;  and
(3) has no serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
Winning an award doesn't make something artistic. They have porn specific awards does that mean a movie could use child actors in porn as long as it won the "best shower scene" award?
[Reply]
RubberSponge 10:13 AM 10-15-2020
Originally Posted by SuperBowl4:
impressive:-)
indeed:-)
[Reply]
stanleychief 04:53 PM 10-15-2020
Originally Posted by ScareCrowe:
Winning an award doesn't make something artistic. They have porn specific awards does that mean a movie could use child actors in porn as long as it won the "best shower scene" award?
Seems like a bit of a stretch there. It won a Sundance award. The Sundance Film Festival does not have any porn categories. To better frame this up, here's the purpose of the festival in the words of its founder:

Originally Posted by :
“Sundance was founded on the idea that art can not only entertain, it can convince, discredit, agitate and empower,” said Keri Putnam, director of the Sundance Institute, in her opening remarks. “In volatile times like these, democracy and storytelling aren’t separate, they’re inextricably linked.”
By definition then, the winning films could quite easily be considered 'art'. To try and prove that the film has no serious artistic value would be difficult.

Reference: https://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...ners-2020-list
[Reply]
BucEyedPea 08:55 PM 10-15-2020
Stanley, Come Man! /Biden]

What about the film director and the rest of his supporting staff, being involved in directing under-age children to grab their crotches and simulate intercourse on a stage? That is corruption of children sexually just to make the damn thing. Any professional who cast those kids, assistant directors and producers involved are all complicit. Perhaps even the parents.
[Reply]
stanleychief 01:52 PM 10-16-2020
Originally Posted by BucEyedPea:
Stanley, Come Man! /Biden

What about the film director and the rest of his supporting staff, being involved in directing under-age children to grab their crotches and simulate intercourse on a stage? That is corruption of children sexually just to make the damn thing. Any professional who cast those kids, assistant directors and producers involved are all complicit. Perhaps even the parents.
I'm more interested in this from a legal aspect, not so much the morality of the film, or the people involved with it. The point of the film was to criticize hypersexuality in preadolescent girls. As such, I don't think I could condemn or condone anyone involved with the film, as it is a complex issue. For instance, at what age is an actor/actress able to separate their role from reality? I'd think just being a child actor/actress would be more detrimental to their development than any acting they actually did. I had read somewhere that the girls in the film were actually 14 years old. Perhaps by that age, they are mentally mature enough to handle the role.

I do find exploitation of children for entertainment purposes quite disgusting. Toddlers & Tiaras, and Here Comes Honey Boo Boo come to mind. Those shows seem far more damaging on the actors/actresses to me, yet they seem to enjoy broad acceptance.
[Reply]
Hog's Gone Fishin 03:32 PM 10-16-2020
Originally Posted by CarlosCarson88:
Meanwhile in europe, topless women pass by children at public pools
Fuck it , moving to Europe!:-)
[Reply]
Page 3 of 5
< 123 45 >
Up