Zoccalo [none/use name]

I don't understand what's 'smooth brain' about this. Trump voters are working class. A huge amount of them voted for Trump not because he's a racist, but because he's a populist who - during his campaign at least - spoke to working class interests. Now unfortunately he didn't actually do anything along those interests, which isn't surprising - but regardless, there is a section of Trump voters who are very susceptible to being radicalized to leftism. Especially now after he's failed to come through for them.

Weird. It's not even a leftist/marxist programme., but it talks the talk. It even calls them 'liberals'.

Ok lib.

Do you even know what 'liberal' means, you circus clown? It doesn't mean that I'm by default a conservative.

What the fuck are you even doing on here? You're clearly not a socialist, let alone an ML.

'It's quite striking how I'm completely oblivious to the intentional choreography of the movie, the morality of putting children in that position, and the very real underground sex trade that's going on. I'm completely unable to connect various elephants in the room, so I just consume vapid liberal propaganda normalizing sexualization of children uncritically - so therefore you're the pedophile'

That's how you sound.

Hiding behind abstractionism to justify actual, real sexualization of children by intentionally putting them in inappropriate positions and filming them in suggestive camera angles is the height of liberal degeneracy. You should be ashamed of yourself. Fucking disgusting.

Imagine being so devoid of material analysis that you think that any censorship is fascism. You have zero right to call yourself a Marxist. Shame on you.

This has pissed me off so much since I posted my last comment that it's actually caused me to harden my stance on it.

1. No context ever should make the sexualization of children ok.
2. This includes the sexualization of children to 'make a point against sexualizing children'.
3. There should be absolutely, zero space for 'nuanced' discussion allowing this.
4. Having an uncompromising view on the literal depiction of sexualization of children does not instantly make one a right-wing 4can Qanoner.
5. There is no 'middle ground' in finding the sexualization of children acceptable. Either you agree it is acceptable in any circumstance, or you don't.
6. Arguing against any of the above makes you a reactionary pedophile-apologizing piece of shit.

Fuck anyone who wants to use this issue as an opportunity to write a self-gratifying thesaurus-bashing pseudo-intellectual essay about the 'finer' points of why 'a movie that shows children twerking is okay actually'. The filmmaker and Netflix knew exactly what they were doing by commodifying child sexualization. The dance numbers were choreographed and the camera angles closing in on little girls' posteriors were painstakingly intentionally planned, none of which are fucking necessary to make the supposed 'point' of the movie.

Fuck anyone who claims that 'this is a right wing talking point'. Some things do not deserve nuanced acceptance, and child sexualization and fascism are two of them. It's incredibly fucking dangerous to write off any criticism of pedophile-enabling content like this as 'conspiracy/right wing' views. By allowing the right wing to own and direct the narrative of child sexualization, we become the 'side' which allows this to happen by default.

Also fuck anyone who thinks you have to watch the movie in its entirety to make a judgement on it. Even if the movie was literally just the trailer, there exists zero possible context or combination of additional pixels they could show which would vindicate the fact that they intentionally put children in sexually compromising positions for money, and anyone who makes this argument can fuck right off.

It doesn't matter what the fucking intention of the movie was. If anyone chooses to pick this hill to die on defending this piece of shit movie, then as far as I'm concerned, there should be serious suspicions raised about them.

'vibe' test? Dude I've been a ML for at least 5 years now. The fact that I have a new account on here is partly due to the fact that I only found out about this community recently.

Are we seriously not allowed to call them pedophiles anymore? Why is it 'thinking' to call them 'people who molest children'? Why should we mince words?

Also more importantly - why is the suggestion that there's a strong incentive to commodify sexualizing children such a contentious issue all of a sudden? Do the forces of capital somehow end their influence on this subject?

Um.. Guys... Is it any wonder this movie won a Sundance award? https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/sundance-film-festival-co-founder-charged-sex-abuse-n993601

There's a lot of frustrating analysis in this thread that either tries too hard IMO, or completely misses the point. Trying to make a point against sexualization of children should not involve sexualizing children. Period. Absolutely no context could or should possibly justify this.

The fact that the right has somehow co-opted and taken ownership of pedophilia accusations through conspiracy theories does not mean that there isn't a very large, very well-funded black market child sex industry. There is more than enough evidence for this, and simply acknowledging it does not mean you are instantly a Qanon conspiracy nutcase.

It is MASSIVELY IMPORTANT that we do not let the right poison the well on this issue and therefore direct the narrative on this.

Pedophiles deserve the wall, and we should loudly speak out against this disgusting film and any other attempts to openly commodify the aesthetic of sexualizing children in ALL its forms.