đŸ§”threadđŸ§”

We must be a society that can call evil by its rightful name. Instead, countless mainstream outlets are defending the movie ‘Cuties’, which hypersexualizes 11 year old girls.

Here’s @trim_obey advocating for a better understanding of “child sexuality” in @Telegraph.
He’s far from alone. Outlets lined up to defend the movie and @Netflix’s decision to run it.

The worst might be @NewYorker. Amazing that, to them, only “scandal-mongers on the right” are concerned by the sexual exploitation of 11 year old girls.
He’s far from alone. Outlets lined up to defend the movie and @Netflix’s decision to run it. The worst might be @NewYorker. Amazing that, to them, only “scandal-mongers on the right” are concerned by the sexual exploitation of 11 year old girls.
He’s far from alone. Outlets lined up to defend the movie and @Netflix’s decision to run it. The worst might be @NewYorker. Amazing that, to them, only “scandal-mongers on the right” are concerned by the sexual exploitation of 11 year old girls.
Here’s @RollingStone.

What amazes me is the marketing deflection: the criticism was over a picture *from the movie* that was vile.

If showcasing a key scene of the movie is a “marketing mistake,” what does it say about the movie itself?
Here’s @RollingStone. What amazes me is the marketing deflection: the criticism was over a picture *from the movie* that was vile. If showcasing a key scene of the movie is a “marketing mistake,” what does it say about the movie itself?
Here’s @RollingStone. What amazes me is the marketing deflection: the criticism was over a picture *from the movie* that was vile. If showcasing a key scene of the movie is a “marketing mistake,” what does it say about the movie itself?
@USATODAY pulled a similar runaround.

This is simple. “Pre-teen actresses dancing in midriff-barring tips and short shorts with their backs arched” isn’t a sentence that should exist in the English language.
@USATODAY pulled a similar runaround. This is simple. “Pre-teen actresses dancing in midriff-barring tips and short shorts with their backs arched” isn’t a sentence that should exist in the English language.
@USATODAY pulled a similar runaround. This is simple. “Pre-teen actresses dancing in midriff-barring tips and short shorts with their backs arched” isn’t a sentence that should exist in the English language.
@USATODAY pulled a similar runaround. This is simple. “Pre-teen actresses dancing in midriff-barring tips and short shorts with their backs arched” isn’t a sentence that should exist in the English language.
Somehow it is entirely lost on @NPR that you can call out the hypersexualization of young girls without, you know, *actively hypersexualizing young girls*!

I feel like I’m going crazy.
@thedailybeast calls it a “must watch.”

I think I’ve seen all I need to “for myself,” thanks.
The ‘AKSHUALLY this movie is a glorious triumph’ spin is strong from the outlets that cover culture. Here’s @vulture.
Apparently for @Independent, the movie is “too clever a film to be subjected to the kind of policing it has experienced so far.”

As if being “clever” should permit it to sexualize and exploit children. Just shameful.
Again: if the marketing material - which pulls directly from the movie - is inappropriate, what does that say about the movie, @latimes?
And more of the same here from @Forbes. Tolerating that which is intolerable, and cloaking it in the rarified air of artistic exploration.
Actress @TessaThompson_x called it “a beautiful film.”

I don’t know how you can be tethered to reality and believe that.
Actress @TessaThompson_x called it “a beautiful film.”I don’t know how you can be tethered to reality and believe that.
Actress @TessaThompson_x called it “a beautiful film.”I don’t know how you can be tethered to reality and believe that.
This is like sounding an alarm by lighting your house on fire, @TIME.

It may be very narrowly true, but it certainly isn’t helping the problem.
More here from @ScottMendelson, the author of the @Forbes piece above.

Again, whether or not it can be seen as condemning the hypersexualization of children, it’s still engaging in that conduct.

I don’t get why that’s lost on people, or why they think it’s okay.
I don’t think I’ll be doing either of those things, @decider.
And I’m not gonna link to the gross and exploitive video/pictures. You can look them up or you can read this detailed thread from @GhostJim4: https://twitter.com/ghostjim4/status/1303843324344897537
It’s intellectually disingenuous to pretend that you need to hypersexualize 11 year old girls in order to make the point that the hypersexualization of young girls is a problem (which, of course, it is!).

I don’t know what there is to not get about that.
More than anything, what these movies (and things like children doing drag) have the power to do is normalize something vile.

We must stop that. A society that doesn’t have the moral clarity and courage to do so doesn’t deserve to exist.
Really good thread on the context of the movie: https://twitter.com/fuehrerking/status/1304197761064144896
You can follow @DrewHolden360.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled:
Those who think consciousness raising & movement building are disconnected, or even a distraction from electoral politics have not paid attention to the history of social change.In this thread, we
Read more
The 2020s will be known as the Remote Work decadeA few predictions of what is likely to emerge[ a thread ] Third Space: Office and Working from Home will
Read more
1/29: Have you ever had a concept explained to you that helps frame complex issues you’ve been wrestling with and opens your eyes to new possibilities? A concept that I
Read more
By continuing to use the site, you are consenting to the use of cookies as explained in our Cookie Policy to improve your experience.