12 year old Dakota Fanning wants Oscar: Nude Scene?!?!

[Nehkara]

A 12-year-old girl, especially one who has probably been involved in as much "adult stuff" as Dakota Fanning, probably knows well what sex is. You have to remember, in the not too distant past 12-year-olds were getting married.

[Flames_Gimp]

meh, a rape scene. big whoop.

[FireFly]

This is wrong for one reason and one reason only. It's child pornography. She is underage, I don't care who consented to it. Old dirty men will be lining up to rent or buy this film. It's sick. And I have no problems with a rape scene, but I don't see how this can be classified as anything other than child porn.

[Nehkara]

Originally Posted by FireFly

This is wrong for one reason and one reason only. It's child pornography. She is underage, I don't care who consented to it. Old dirty men will be lining up to rent or buy this film. It's sick. And I have no problems with a rape scene, but I don't see how this can be classified as anything other than child porn.

Because she is only half nude (probably upper half) and it is not a pornographic film. It is a drama set in the American south and apparently has quite a bit to do with Elvis Presley.

If every nude/sex/rape scene was pornographic we would have a HUGE number of pornographic movies.

[Nehkara]

I think at the end of the day as long as Dakota and her family are okay with this then there is no reason, really, for anyone else to be angry. If it bothers you, don't watch it.

If it wins a talented young actress an Oscar, good.

I think it is worthy to note that this film was written and directed by a woman.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

Because she is only half nude (probably upper half) and it is not a pornographic film. It is a drama set in the American south and apparently has quite a bit to do with Elvis Presley.

If every nude/sex/rape scene was pornographic we would have a HUGE number of pornographic movies.

Mhmmmm. Right. So that makes it okay to view a 12 year old's tits? Say it's art? That's how old dirty men get off the hook actually. Well hell then why don't I go out and strip a bunch of 12 year old boys and have them jump like fairies and call it art?

A picture can be pornographic. I wasn't talking about the whole film. Any 12 year old naked on film of any kind is child porn and should not be allowed. Why don't you freeze frame the rape scene with her 12 year old boobies hanging out and then tell me that picture would not be considered porn?

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Nehkara

I think at the end of the day as long as Dakota and her family are okay with this then there is no reason, really, for anyone else to be angry. If it bothers you, don't watch it.

If it wins a talented young actress an Oscar, good.

I think it is worthy to note that this film was written and directed by a woman.

OMG the girl is 12. Dakota's family may or may not be looking at $ signs. My 13 year old neice would likely take her shirt off for $20 if you asked nicely but just because she consented doesn't make it okay.

And also, because it's a woman, that makes it better? So a male director should then be able to do the same with a 12 year old boy?

[fleudian]

I'm just angry

...because Dakota Fanning annoys me.

[Nehkara]

Originally Posted by FireFly

Mhmmmm. Right. So that makes it okay to view a 12 year old's tits? Say it's art? That's how old dirty men get off the hook actually. Well hell then why don't I go out and strip a bunch of 12 year old boys and have them jump like fairies and call it art?

A picture can be pornographic. I wasn't talking about the whole film. Any 12 year old naked on film of any kind is child porn and should not be allowed. Why don't you freeze frame the rape scene with her 12 year old boobies hanging out and then tell me that picture would not be considered porn?

If that is the way you see it, then please report everyone who watches the movie to the police and have them charged with possession of child pornography.

I think you are overreacting.

[Nehkara]

Originally Posted by FireFly

OMG the girl is 12. Dakota's family may or may not be looking at $ signs. My 13 year old neice would likely take her shirt off for $20 if you asked nicely but just because she consented doesn't make it okay.

And also, because it's a woman, that makes it better? So a male director should then be able to do the same with a 12 year old boy?

The movie had a budget of less than $5 million. I don't think $ signs are why Dakota is doing this movie.

I just thought it was note worthy that the director is a woman.

At the end of the day it touches on a subject that no one talks about and more people should. It deals with child sexual abuse and how a young southern girl survives it. My best friend went through it and is still recovering.

Here is a quote from the New York Daily News from Lawrence Robins who located the emergency funds and investors needed to complete the film:

"The subject matter is very tough," Robins told me, "but I was attracted to it because in the end it's a story about human understanding, about a little girl who's dealt a very bad deck of cards, but finds solace in the music of Elvis and survives."


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/goss...p-367837c.html

[fleudian]

"about a little girl who's dealt a very bad deck of cards, but finds solace in the music of Elvis and survives."

...

i think i'll give this one a miss.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Table 5

they most like do, and definitely should. 12 is not that young, and by that time kids are extreme interested about sex...the sooner kids are taught the realities of it the better. Why keep them in the dark? That will only lead to stupid decisions like unprotected sex and pregnancy.

Not saying keep them young, but I went till grade 9 at least to learn about sex.

Learning about the human body is a whole different matter, and I went through that in grade 6.

12 years old seems way to young to me for some reason.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by Azure

Not saying keep them young, but I went till grade 9 at least to learn about sex.

You were in grade 9 before you learned about sex? Man, I had friends getting pregnant in grade 9....

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Azure

Not saying keep them young, but I went till grade 9 at least to learn about sex.

No kidding, I went to a Catholic school here in Calgary and we started doing sexual education in grade 5. GRADE 9 you say???!!!

As for the film, there are probably some creeps out there who will take it the wrong way and use it as a way to fantisize. That's terrible and dispicable and makes me angry. But should we ban everything from society that a small percentage of people may use in wrong or bad ways?

It's a touchy subject for sure, but that might be why it should be discussed. Hey at least it got us talking right? And it hasn't even been released yet.

The way I look at it is, nudity is not necessarily pornography. There is lots of depictions of the naked human body at every age in art (statues, paintings, photos) television (they show naked children in commercials for overseas help, heck even in Seseme Street they used to show kids bathing to learn about bathtime) and learning (medical journals, etc).

Now the problem with this is that it IS in a sexual context. However, in that context, the sex is simulated, it's not actual pornography meant to titilate. It is also in an art context (as it is a movie) and perhpas in a learning context (as it sounds like it's trying to get a message across).

So I guess it goes back to my first question. Should something that could be artistis and could help bring positive change or at least cause learning be banned because a very small percentage of the population decides to view it differently?

That said, one could also ask the question, is this movie doing more harm than good? Is it cause people with tendancies to act on them?

I think that's also an important question because while a paedophile renting it is one thing, one deciding to act on urges becaue of it is quite another.

Ultimately though, I am of the mindset that it will probably do more good than harm (if any, cause creeps like that will probably be looking for something realistic anyway) and that society should have to lower it's standards to those that corrupt society.

You want to stop paedophiles, increase the jail terms, increase money for researching and treating this disease (as most will agree it is a brain disorder) and get people talking about it.

This film, actually does one of those.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by icarus

You were in grade 9 before you learned about sex? Man, I had friends getting pregnant in grade 9....

Yeah, and I wasn't pulled out of the sex education classes either.

I guess when you learn about it in Grade 9, there is a greater chance of getting pregnant in grade 9.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by FireFly

OMG the girl is 12. Dakota's family may or may not be looking at $ signs. My 13 year old neice would likely take her shirt off for $20 if you asked nicely but just because she consented doesn't make it okay.

And also, because it's a woman, that makes it better? So a male director should then be able to do the same with a 12 year old boy?

You make it sound as though the scene is being shot with the express purpose of allowing viewers to see a minor's nude body. I'm pretty sure it's an actual 'movie' with 'scenes', not a pornographic film.

As I said earlier, the human form, male or female at any age, is not a disgusting or perverse thing. What's perverse is getting totally worked up about a man/woman/boy/girl being naked for the purposes of telling a story, not for jerking off.

I suppose National Geographic is pretty morally eroded given that they show nude children all the time in their porno mag.

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

Not saying keep them young, but I went till grade 9 at least to learn about sex.

Grade 9!? I went to a Catholic school and we started with no qualms in grade 7. I thought that was the norm...

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Agamemnon

Grade 9!? I went to a Catholic school and we started with no qualms in grade 7. I thought that was the norm...

Gee whiz, did everyone go to a Catholic school?

[Agamemnon]

dp

[Agamemnon]

Originally Posted by Azure

Gee whiz, did everyone go to a Catholic school?

There are quite a few in Calgary... its a whole 'separate system'.