Debates
08 Oct 20
10 Oct 20
@averagejoe1 saidIf you see most of us as high schoolers, smartass, that puts you way back in the third grade, at best. Your debating skills are infantile.
Sorry, was at an evening fundraiser for children, if you can imagine mean ole me. Now, everyone, this is your assignment for tomorrow. Vivify, of the Forum Squad, has stated that I was asked what possible 'suspicious" activity there was, on the "27Cells Wiped Clean' post. We suffer these people for entertainment, but i looked up what in the hell he is talking about. I wa ...[text shortened]... 't say.
Get some sleep Vivify. You can maybe give us a report on the assignment in the morning?
10 Oct 20
@vivify saidYes I'm sure they all erased their cell phones by accident.
In other words, you don't like having to back up your false claims. Like when you started a thread implying Mueller's team wiped cell phones on purpose; when called out you were forced to admit you had zero reason to believe any thing suspicious happened.
No wonder you're ranting.
Happens all the time.
10 Oct 20
@handyandy saidAndy, take your Lexapro. Emotion has no place in debates. This will be your first assignment in class.
If you see most of us as high schoolers, smartass, that puts you way back in the third grade, at best. Your debating skills are infantile.
10 Oct 20
2 edits
@dood111 saidI used to work for Blackberry in their MDM sector. Mobile data management is when an entity has the ability to control information sent from mobile devices.
Yes I'm sure they all erased their cell phones by accident.
Happens all the time.
Each company is able to determine what level of control they want over their mobile devices. This level of control can also include controlling the phone itself, and even locking or completely wiping their devices.
How this works is a company would download the app into their phones and then determine what level of control they want over their phone. They would have the ability to lock the phone after incorrect passwords or even completely wipe the data. And this is determined by what the security needs of the company is. In the case of the government, they have set their phones to be completely wiped if certain conditions are met.
For example too many incorrect password attempts can be seen as someone trying to hack a phone, or if a phone hasn't been accessed after a certain amount of time, that can be seen as a lost device, in which case the data would be wiped.
In other words there's lots of reasons why phones in MDM can be wiped. It's actually quite easy. You need to understand that the users of the mobile devices are not actively wiping the phones themselves; they are meeting criteria set by the government for the conditions to wipe their phones.
One of the clients I worked with was the U.S. navy, on a fairly frequent basis. They used MDM with similar restrictions.
Without being aware of this I can see how conspiracies can be concocted. But the simple truth is that devices under MDM can very easily be wiped just for simple human error like incorrectly entering passwords.
10 Oct 20
https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-43-25.html
Texas Penal Code § 43.25. Sexual Performance by a Child
(1) “Sexual performance” means any performance or part thereof that includes sexual conduct by a child younger than 18 years of age.
(2) “Sexual conduct” means sexual contact, actual or simulated sexual intercourse, deviate sexual intercourse, sexual bestiality, masturbation, sado-masochistic abuse, or lewd exhibition of the genitals, the anus, or any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola.
(3) “Performance” means any play, motion picture, photograph, dance, or other visual representation that can be exhibited before an audience of one or more persons.
(4) “Produce” with respect to a sexual performance includes any conduct that directly contributes to the creation or manufacture of the sexual performance.
(5) “Promote” means to procure, manufacture, issue, sell, give, provide, lend, mail, deliver, transfer, transmit, publish, distribute, circulate, disseminate, present, exhibit, or advertise or to offer or agree to do any of the above.
(6) “Simulated” means the explicit depiction of sexual conduct that creates the appearance of actual sexual conduct and during which a person engaging in the conduct exhibits any uncovered portion of the breasts, genitals, or buttocks.
Since the OP is no longer being discussed, I take it everyone agrees Texas has no case against Netflix?
10 Oct 20
@vivify - Since the OP is no longer being discussed, I take it everyone agrees Texas has no case against Netflix?
No. Not without hearing the Prosecutor's side of it, Mister Defense Attorney.
10 Oct 20
@earl-of-trumps saidWe already heard from him and I'm sure he'll be on Laura Ingraham or Jeanine Pirro or some such in the near future.
@vivify - Since the OP is no longer being discussed, I take it everyone agrees Texas has no case against Netflix?
No. Not without hearing the Prosecutor's side of it, Mister Defense Attorney.
So what do you think he discovered that the other 253 county prosecutors in Texas and 3140 in the US missed?
10 Oct 20
@earl-of-trumps saidExcept no one was "about to be indicted" from Mueller's team. But merely saying something untrue is enough for conservatives to feel better about themselves.
@vivify - In other words there's lots of reasons why phones in MDM can be wiped.
Yes, and "about to be indicted" is one of them.
10 Oct 20
@vivify saidI watched the film clip. I read the TX penal code. At no time in the clip did I see any uncovered breast below the top of the areola, uncovered genital, or uncovered buttock. The law has not been broken. Case without merit.
https://codes.findlaw.com/tx/penal-code/penal-sect-43-25.html
[quote] Texas Penal Code § 43.25. Sexual Performance by a Child
(1) “Sexual performance” means any performance or part thereof that includes sexual conduct by a child younger than 18 years of age.
(2) “Sexual conduct” means sexual contact, actual or simulated sexual intercourse, deviate sexual interc ...[text shortened]... ce the OP is no longer being discussed, I take it everyone agrees Texas has no case against Netflix?
Did the girls in the film understand what they were doing (bearing in mind, they rehearsed it many times, probably mostly with jogging suits which completely covered them up)? To them, it was probably only a dance routine, something like what cheerleaders do (e.g., Shakira and J.Lo at the Super Bowl halftime), in different circumstances (with cameramen and lights and props all around and a director yelling "CUT!" ).
Did the girls in the film understand how adults might later interpret what they were doing? That depends a lot on what they were told by the producer/director, and the intent of making the film in the first place (e.g., as a social statement or to titillate). If the director said to them, "Look, you're going to be doing something girls your age shouldn't really be doing, to show adults in the audience that this is inappropriate," then I'm ok with that; it's an important message and a legitimate issue to present in cinematic form. One of the girls did look uncomfortable in the film, which is either great acting or not acting at all. Undoubtedly, the girls practised a lot to be able do that routine in synch, so there was a professional choreographer involved who rehearsed the moves with them, step by step, over and over; that was the point at which the actresses' parents must have wondered, "what's this all about? Do I really want my daughter doing this?"
Without knowing the intent of the producer/director, but just going by the expressions on the faces of some of the adults depicted in the film-crowd, I would hazard a guess that the intent of the film is to highlight an issue and make a social statement, something like "Little Miss Sunshine" (but on a smaller scale), not to titillate. In one short scene, a mother tries to cover her daughter's eyes, but the daughter is clearly fascinated by the show on stage and pulls away from her mother's protecting hand. So, wake up and small the coffee, this film seems to be saying: kids today are more able to deal with provocative content than their parents might want them to be. Take-home message: anything forbidden becomes doubly interesting.
Is the real issue here that the film depicts something people think shouldn't happen but it really does, ubiquitously (namely, the sexualization of under-age girls in America)? or is it that the making of the film was itself exploitative of under-age actresses (i.e., did not not merely depict such exploitation)? Then ask these same questions of (the making of) "The Innocents" (Deborah Kerr) -- a chilling horror story about children possessed by evil spirits, the ghosts of people who were lovers in a past life and re-enact a romance through the children's bodies.
10 Oct 20
@earl-of-trumps saidEven though nothing described about Cuties matches anything Texas has laid out as a crime?
@vivify - Since the OP is no longer being discussed, I take it everyone agrees Texas has no case against Netflix?
No. Not without hearing the Prosecutor's side of it, Mister Defense Attorney.
Suit yourself.
10 Oct 20
@moonbus saidThe whole subject was covered ad nauseam in this thread. https://www.redhotpawn.com/forum/debates/is-netflix-guilty-of-child-abuse.186735
I watched the film clip. I read the TX penal code. At no time in the clip did I see any uncovered breast below the top of the areola, uncovered genital, or uncovered buttock. The law has not been broken. Case without merit.
Did the girls in the film understand what they were doing (bearing in mind, they rehearsed it many times, probably mostly with jogging suits which comp ...[text shortened]... hosts of people who were lovers in a past life and re-enact a romance through the children's bodies.
The motivations of the writer/director are no mystery; I cited written interviews with her and on Netflix there's about a 10 minute piece called "Why I made Cuties". https://www.netflix.com/watch/[WORD TOO LONG]
The lead actress was 14.
10 Oct 20
1 edit
@no1marauder saidThe Texas penal code is regarding children under 14. Yet another reason Texas has no case against Netflix.
The lead actress was 14.
10 Oct 20
@vivify saidI believe at least one of the girls was 12 and the average age of the "Cuties" was 13.
The Texas penal code is regarding children under 14. Yet another reason Texas has no case against Netflix.
Even in the highly unlikely event that the law was meant to possibly cover what was done in the movie, it would fail under well-established First Amendment grounds.
10 Oct 20
@no1marauder saidFunny, my own post is making me sick to my stomach.
I believe at least one of the girls was 12 and the average age of the "Cuties" was 13.
Even in the highly unlikely event that the law was meant to possibly cover what was done in the movie, it would fail under well-established First Amendment grounds.