The Point

Could “Cuties” Claim “No Children Were Harmed” in the Making of the Film?


John Stonestreet

David Carlson

Each Wednesday on the BreakPoint Podcast, Shane Morris and I answer listeners’ questions. This one was pretty pointed: “The director of ‘Cuties’ was trying to highlight the sexualization of girls. Why are you condemning this movie when … the film so clearly portrays what happens to girls in a highly sexualized culture?”

To paraphrase the satirical website Babylon Bee, you don’t have to actually murder puppies in a movie to warn that murdering puppies is bad. That’s why every film with an animal comes with a disclaimer: “No animals were harmed in the making of this film.”

There may be a way to make a film warning against the sexualization of children, but a movie like “Cuties” which sexualized and harmed real-life pre-teen actresses, exposing their bodies in suggestive ways, isn’t it.  Or let me put it another way, “Cuties” could never run this disclaimer at the end of that movie: “no children were harmed in the making of this film.”


  • Facebook Icon in Gold
  • Twitter Icon in Gold
  • LinkedIn Icon in Gold


WAP and “Cuties”

John Stonestreet | Breakpoint | August 26, 2020

Cuties and the Sexual Revolution’s Lie

John Stonestreet | Breakpoint | September 17, 2020

Have a Follow-up Question?

Related Content