The French documentary ‘Cuties’ comes to Netflix in America provoking a disgusted reaction by Conservatives who oppose sexual exploitation of preteen girls. Progressives defend Netflix and attack Conservatives for their obsession with the film.
Stephen Green, Bill Whittle and Scott Ott create 20 new episodes of Right Angle each month thanks to our Members. The only way to make sure that you can seen them all, plus 20 more episodes of Bill Whittle Now, is to become a Member. Join us now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOSVk_WC4X4
Listen to the Audio Version
Bill Whittle Network · Progressives Defend Netflix 'Cuties', Attack Conservatives Disgusted by Sexualizing Preteen Girls
22 replies on “Progressives Defend Netflix ‘Cuties’, Attack Conservatives Disgusted by Sexualizing Preteen Girls”
It’s not bad art; it’s bad propaganda.
Small note about the intro text, above. Cuties isn’t a documentary, it’s fiction.
Now, about the film: YUKKO!
I didn’t watch the whole movie but I saw a number of excerpts and was horrified. That anyone accepted this … thing … as legitimate entertainment, whatever its creators’ and promoters’ claims about its intended meaning, astounds me.
I am tolerant, even accepting, of many things but I canceled my Netflix subscription over this one.
Besides Roots, another movie that helped bring home strong visuals of the African slave trade and the treatment of the enslaved persons was Amistad [1997]. Very brutal and graphic. At the end of the movie they said the black “hero” went back to Africa and ended up with slaves of his own.
But this type of role reversal, with blacks as the oppressors, seems to be ignorant of the fact that the blacks sold into slavery to the Europeans were first captured/ kidnapped by other Africans. And also I recently found reports that even some freed slaves ended up buying and trading other slaves, not necessarily treating them any better than their white neighbors did. Finally, the Muslims raided the Atlantic coasts of Spain, Ireland, France, etc. to kidnap over a million white Europeans for sale to the slave markets in Africa and the Middle East, plus forcefully removing whites from the Caucuses area to serve as slaves or soldiers for the Muslim army, etc. ” A new study suggests that a million or more European Christians were enslaved by Muslims in North Africa between 1530 and 1780 – a far greater number than had ever been estimated before.” https://news.osu.edu/when-europeans-were-slaves–research-suggests-white-slavery-was-much-more-common-than-previously-believed/ RTWT.
The actual passage and signing of the The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 were due to the parents and grandparents of the boomers (Greatest Generation?) voting for LBJ and the associated Congress critters, as even the oldest boomers were not old enough to vote until a year or two later [1946 to 1967?]. The 26th amendment lowering the voting age to 18 passed March 23, 1971.
But, yes, the young adult boomers did have to, and generally did, come to grips with racial justice issues, accepted busing and other elements of affirmative action, so that by 2007 Bill is correct when he says at 11:25 “… and the [racial] wound … that we had almost healed…”
Grievance porn, indeed!
Are the show’s creators implying that If the roles were reversed, that black people of that time and social setting would have been just as brutal in enslaving others and treating them as property, as some white people were? So, the circumstances of slavery in our country, and the end to it, were a societal progression? and not because the leadership in real history was white and white people are the worst? Hmm.
That is a very interesting point, Karen. Certainly not what they were likely trying to put out there, but, yea; things that make you go HMMM.
.Wanted to get your tale on Netflix ‘Cuties’ but Cracka is the video shown?
Jah, me too.
I sent Scott a message earlier today. He is probably at his day job. Think he got his links swapped.
The correct video linked to this title is on YouTube, where you can spare BW.com the bandwidth expense and watch it there if you really want to see it before Scott fixes this. Poor Scott, he’s burning the candle at both ends it seems and I’m afraid with the problems I was having with the page earlier I just added to his burden.
All Hail the Mighty Ott!
I thought with the video embedded as it is, the bandwith (and ads) are YouTube’s responsibility. I don’t think the video goes from YT to BW to us.
Scott has to upload the video to YouTube for it to be viewed there.. At least that’s the way it used to work but I haven’t had any dealings with this sort of thing for a few years so things might be different now. If things are as they were and you view it on YouTube you are using YouTube’s bandwidth. (I don’t see the YouTube ads, I have stuff that blocks all that so I can’t speak to the ads but I’m assuming that’s how YouTube pays for the bandwidth along with the reimbursement incentive for content creators.)
I suspect that things are still that way because the title above is attached to the correct, Right Angle video with the Terrible Trio and not a BWN video about “Cracka”. So Scott must have uploaded the right video for the right title to YouTube and got things mixed up here on the website. If YouTube and the website were pulling from the same video file on the same server then it wouldn’t work that way, the mix-up would be the same in both places.
Another clue about this is that when you finish the video (or pause, at least on a computer) the referral videos are ALL BW.com titles, no outside referrals. Here BW.com has control of that, on YouTube, YouTube controls that. If you watch an embedded video from YouTube on another website you’ll see YouTube referrals at the end, the little thumbnail video boxes that show after the video concludes. That doesn’t happen here.
If you watch it here it comes over the CDN (Content Delivery Network,in this instance that’s Cloudflare CDN) and BW.com pays for the bandwidth. Usually there’s some sort of deal or package for bandwidth included in the CDN contract so I don’t know if it actually costs BW.com any more money, at least to a certain point, to watch a video here rather than YouTube.
It’s an “either/or” situation. You can either watch it here or there on YouTube but it doesn’t look to me like the two are directly connected so I’m fairly sure it’s an upload to the site here and an upload to YouTube there. This also accounts for the mix-up showing up here and not on YouTube.
Either way, if you watch it on YouTube you make BW.com a little money, very little, like a couple cents to a nickle, provided you’re not a stinker like me and block the ads. If the ads don’t play then no one makes any money, YouTube loses money on bandwidth and the sponsor who floats the ads doesn’t pay either. YouTube and I have a love-hate relationship. They hate people like me and I love sticking it to them, even if it’s only a little bit. Death from a thousand cuts is still death.
Edit:
I’ll just add that recording, editing and uploading many videos a week is very time consuming and a lot of work, especially for a guy with two other jobs. So I’m not slagging on Scott here, he must have as much energy as Donald Trump. I know I not only couldn’t do all he’s doing, I wouldn’t if I could. AHTMOSS*
(*Pronounced “OTT-mohs” … All Hail The Mighty Ott! Semper Sursum)
Did not know about paying for the backhaul, but since I have my adblocker turned off here I do see a little pop up ad overlaid on the video I can X to close. No interstitial ads inbetween like I have seen on other ads when I was using a browser for a quick test and did not have uBlock or Ghostery setup.
I thought that the video on Youtube would be correct but the wrong video code was posted here so this page got linked to an old video. I never really noticed that all of the “next videos” were BW, and thought that the overwhelming number was just the limited number of other videos I was giving YT to create a taste profile.
I’m not claiming to be a canonical authority here … Like I said, it’s been a while since I was involved in any of this stuff. My experience is more in the server & domain controller/network and routing/digital and physical security and general infrastructure area. If you’re an IT wonk you’re aware that just because you know enough about a certain area doesn’t make you an expert in all of them … Though some do try to give that impression and giving that impression is not my intent. I’m just recounting what my analysis is of this situation and I sure as heck could have it all wrong. I haven’t got a whole lot of experience in content creation and delivery.
I see the correct video is linked up above now, so Scott must have caught the error and fixed it. Like I also said, we can’t hold that against him, he does a pretty good job for having so much on his plate.
Being as I found the above now properly linked video on YouTube I watched then had a lot of fun in the comments wallowing in the “cesspool of social media” as Scott says. I don’t generally pick fights, but I don’t have much reservation about joining them either. A fault in my personality I try to curb here because it’s not called for with the subscribers. After a couple decades of scrapping in online forums I’m having to learn a new, more civil means of discourse with people on the same side as I am.
Thanks for the heads up, Ralph. And apologies to all.
No worries, Scott. As ACTS posted, you are working at least three jobs and dealing with the videos here and YT takes a lot longer than people think. Click through his full post to appreciate the AHTMOSS!
Ditto. My earlier comment is about Cuties, not Craka. If I need to move it after whatever fix is applied, I will.
One excusing such trash as a documentary that scorns the mistreatment of children is akin to one claiming to read Playboy Magazine for the articles. It’s a fallacious claim deserving of nothing but scorn and mockery.
The original Roots was in 1977 and spanned 8 nights. It averaged Superbowl level ratings of almost 32 million households. For comparison, in 1977 (statista<dot>com) there were 74.14 million households. So 43% of the country watched Roots in 1977. Somehow I think it was higher because everyone I knew watched it every night. As a family. The same site has 2019 data as 128.58 million households for reference.
We certainly sat down and watched the whole original series together. I remember being allowed to stay up a little later than usual to watch it. Roots was a big deal.
I really should watch that some day, thanks for the reminder. I was overseas in 1977 when it aired and by the time I got back into the US on a more-or-less permanent basis I had missed a lot of pop culture at home including Roots. I missed out on the whole music video craze, had not yet heard of AIDS and quite a few other things that transpired on that time line. But, hey, you really haven’t lived until you’ve heard “Undercover Angel” sung in Hebrew on an Arabic radio station, over and over and over …
You missed a whole lot of bad TV, too. And missing the music video craze is probably a net positive. Though Pat Benatar “Promises in the Dark” was epic when I was a teenager 😉
The whole role reversal thing is a trope older than the hills.