Responding to Backlash After Promoting Child Sex, Netflix Boss Says He’s Surprised That People Want Censorship

Wait wait wait – he’s surprised about censorship? In the single most censored society ever?

These people are actually trying to drive us all insane with their bullshit.


Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos is taken aback that anyone would seek to censor ‘Cuties,’ saying the film – called “child porn” by critics and the subject of a criminal indictment by a Texas grand jury – is just “very misunderstood.”

“It is a film that is very misunderstood with some audiences, uniquely within the United States,”Deadline quoted Sarandos as saying on Monday at the Mipcom online trade show for entertainment content distributors. “The film speaks for itself.”

The statement marked Sarandos’ first public comments on the controversy since a grand jury in Tyler County, Texas last month indicted Netflix for promoting “lewd exhibition” of the genitals or pubic area of underage children. The indictment said the material “appeals to the prurient interest in sex and has no serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.”

Netflix said last week that the charge was “without merit” and that ‘Cuties’ was “social commentary against the sexualization of young children.”


But lawmakers called for a federal investigation of whether Netflix violated child pornography laws by distributing the film, and Democrat US Representative Tulsi Gabbard said ‘Cuties’ would “whet the appetite of pedophiles and fuel the child sex-trafficking trade.” Republican senator from Texas Ted Cruz, meanwhile, has asked US attorney general to investigate whether Netflix violated federal laws against child pornography. A boycott campaign to cancel Netflix subscriptions erased $8 billion of Netflix’s market value as a publicly traded company in two days.

Sarandos didn’t expect such intense controversy, especially after the film was shown in Europe without much pushback. “It’s a little surprising in 2020 America that we’re having a discussion about censoring storytelling,” he said.

What they do in sexualizing children in this film is actually attempt to trigger sexual attraction to them in normal people who are not attracted to children. They paint the girls’ faces up like women (makeup simulates signs of sexual heat in women), then have them move around sexually like women.

It’s just the same thing they do with trannies. It’s a trick.

It’s an attack on the entirety of basic society.

People are mad.

But the thing is done.

They got backlash.

But the next film will get less backlash.

The one after that will get virtually none.

This is how they do you.

It’s how they did us with homos.

I hate to say it, but pedophilia is naturally less offensive than homosexuality. This is going to be easier. They could have done it at any point if they wanted to, but they instead decided to make this whole “protection of children” thing a moral value as they were destroying all other moral values.

Being against pedophilia was the last moral stand that people were allowed to take.

Now, they’re removing that. And the single thing that will be immoral is joking about the Holocaust.

The other big thing here is this: most of our society is addicted to pornography. Pornography is like drugs in that you need a stronger and stronger dose to get the same dopamine hit from it. The stronger dose is more hardcore and anti-social material. This means in real terms that the addict goes from watching normal heterosexual sex to anal, to BDSM, to blacks-on-blondes, to trannies, and so on and so forth. The last step of course is children. And we would probably be shocked to find out how many people are ready for that.

We don’t know how many people watched Cuties, but I think it’s fair to assume that virtually all of the men who turned it on and watched it all the way through were aroused by it. What other reason would someone have for watching it? The Sarandos explanation – they wanted to learn why the sexualization of children was bad?