The Public Is Being Groomed by Hollywood
(Not kids being read to at libraries, nor reading books on their own about puberty, slavery, fascism, or whatever else the demagogues don't want people to learn about or form their own ideas about.)
The following regards Jenna Ortega in the making of the TV show, Wednesday.
Unfortunately, it's a terribly prepared and written article. It's not clear what line she supposedly crossed. It sounds like the script needed her input, so...
And this tracks along with the larger issue with Wednesday, it's production, casting, writing, and direction. I'm not surprised that Ortega had to weigh in. I'm curious if she had any regrets, in hindsight, about taking the role. What all did she have to put her foot down about? Because what I've seen nothing about is the age-play going on there. Ortega is currently twenty years old. The Wednesday character in this series is in high school, presumably not a senior, so not an adult. It's not new for an actor who's not a teen to play a teen. But there's some context here that doesn't get a pass. It's not tidy or clear-cut either. Wednesday was previously no older than about fourteen. And it's not a trivial part of her character. She's a "quiet" little girl, quite separate from most things adult. She's not a love interest, for example. And for sure not eye candy. With so much supposed concern over groomers and grooming, the silence here is telling.
Suddenly, Wednesday Addams is a teen, and not with her usual (canon, even) plain look. She is honestly smoldering. Which is "okay" because the actress is over eighteen. (??) Okay, wait, isn't it weird enough when a child actor becomes a sex object the day they turn eighteen? "Age play is a legitimate kink!" Look, goddammit! Uncritical consumption of images and ideas is fucking dangerous. I'm not attacking kinks. Privacy of bedrooms, and whatnot. (Just ask yourselves what the deal is if you end up doing that diaper stuff. I'm saying please, here. Just ask. Nowhere here am I pointing at any one thing, person, or group and saying, "That's just wrong." I mean to look at all of society. Look at causes and effects; unconscious choices; and their unintended results, which can include harm of all sizes.
Errrr, that's disingenuous, and anyone saying otherwise is very very comfortable with grooming. Here's the catch- The adult audience is being groomed. The line between adult and underage is being blurred, suspiciously so. None of that, "Young women can dress and present themselves how they like without being labeled a slut, and shouldn't be subject to your standards of respectability!" Again, that's disingenuous. Nobody said, "slut." It's not about restricting her or any woman, nor women in general. Besides the creepy, possibly unconscious "being okay with it," ignorance and dim-wittedness are at the core of this. Doesn't matter if your politics are progressive or libertarian, or whatever. And this isn't about legality. It's not illegal to cast a TV show or film in such a manner, and nor should it be. Though... well, it's the kind of thing that merits very clear critique, in the open, in the light of day.
And I'm not saying that anything untoward was perpetrated knowingly. But that's worse, really. People in charge of that aren't even asking, "Hmm, could there be a problem with this?" Failures of critical thinking are pervasive. It's societal, which is why it's so difficult to see and take apart, and why it's important to question. Again, it's not about laws. Legislation to do what, exactly? Laws are so blunt as fuck. There's no room for nuance there. It's not about the difference in age between the actor and the character they play. For a society to become sustainable and maintain that, our awareness must be fed by critical thinking, euchre which requires nuance. Something can be a bad idea, unwise, even harmful--without anyone having any bad intentions whatsoever.