this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2026
475 points (98.0% liked)
Mildly Infuriating
44588 readers
1107 users here now
Home to all things "Mildly Infuriating" Not infuriating, not enraging. Mildly Infuriating. All posts should reflect that. Please post actually infuriating posts to !actually_infuriating@lemmy.world
I want my day mildly ruined, not completely ruined. Please remember to refrain from reposting old content. If you post a post from reddit it is good practice to include a link and credit the OP. I'm not about stealing content!
It's just good to get something in this website for casual viewing whilst refreshing original content is added overtime.
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
7. Content should match the theme of this community.
-Content should be Mildly infuriating. If your post better fits !Actually_Infuriating put it there.
-The Community !actuallyinfuriating has been born so that's where you should post the big stuff.
...
8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.
-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.
...
...
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
Reach out to LillianVS for inclusion on the sidebar.
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
For people who weren’t around in the 70s and 80s trust me the sexism and sexual abuse back then was unreal!
How Shields was treated was not unusual at all.
And fwiw, it wasn't acceptable then nor now.
It was obviously acceptable then. They put it in a magazine to prove the point.
Just because people did it, didn't make it acceptable then nor now. Just because a person murders another person and it happened, doesn't make it acceptable. There is a bend to history written by the powerful that history absolves because "what was acceptable was different at the time." This line of thinking is flawed, ethics existed then too. Things like slavery and racism were just as wrong during times of codified 'legal' chattel slavery as it is today. It silences those enslaved and the many many people who decried its existence.
Same applies here.
You speak like you were an adult during that time. Were you outspoken against the incident then or can you remember people showing revulsion like we do towards the Billionaire/Trump-Class Epstein event?
I mean... They made a whole movie lmao
It was completely acceptable then!!!!
It was not.
I was a bit young so I don't remember well, but wasn't there a mainstream movie about a girls sports team that was essentially just teen (13+ not 18+) softcore lesbian porn? I think one of the Hemmingway sisters was in it.
EDIT: I think I am jamming two movies together. One is Personal Best (1982) with Mariel Hemingway. I still can't remember the name of the young teen girls one but I do now remember that the plot was that these young girls were trying to lose their virginity. Fucking boomers. Seriously.
EDIT 2:
Found it. The second movie was Little Darlings about girls at camp.
One was a boomer and one was Matt Dillon who was their age, but yeah it was an insane movie.
AND IT WAS BILLED AS FAMILY ENTERTIANMENT TOO!!!
The image above shows that it was rated R, so not a family movie. IDK, that kinda makes it worse in a way? If it were PG then there wouldn’t be any nudity. And a PG movie could be intended for actual teenagers. A rated R movie is primarily for an 18+ audience, so these girls were definitely being marketed to the adult male gaze.
ETA: I saw this decades ago when I was way too young and don’t recall if there was actually nudity.
the family that fucks together has therapy forever!
Not exactly of boomer age myself but deducting that you're younger I think it's pretty sad that you have this opinion...
Yeah, teenage girls are interested in sex. Even lesbian sex! Sorry. It's sad that you think it's 'unhygienic' or whatever that there's movies about it.
A few decades later American Pie broke the box office on the same premise. Is that ok because it's all heterosexual?
I don't think the opinion that young teens have an interest in sex is the problem.
I think it's the tasteless execution of creating a whole ass movie about that ~~opinion~~fantasy, and portraying them as debauched sex starved little whores.
just my 2¢
Read my comment again. In the edits I clarified that my memory jammed Personal Best and Little Darlings together.
Yes, I am younger than a boomer, but I am still in my fifties.
I'm bisexual and have been dealing with homophobic bullshit for over forty years, so please kindly fuck off with your insinuations of homophobia.
But then what do you find wrong with that movie? Apparently it's about 15 year olds trying to get laid at camp. I sure was trying to get laid at camp when I was 15
It, and other movies of the seventies and early eighties opted to sexualize young actresses, primarily for the enjoyment of adults and not to help young people feel seen and represented.
You bring up American Pie, a movie about teens trying to get laid. Not a single one of those actors being sexualized was a minor or presented as a minor. That's what I have a problem with.
I do not have a problem acknowledging young teen sexuality. I have a problem with the sexualization and exploitation of young teens by movie makers at the time.
I haven't seen the movie, only read synopsis and reviews, and it doesn't seem at all like the actresses are sexualized. It's a coming of age comedy. Maybe the idea about 15 year olds thinking about sex is what got your mind going at the time?
Can you explain how they were exploited?
The main actresses were of age (17 & 18 at time of filming) but the movie was about a girls camp. Most of the other girls were much younger. Cynthia Nixon was 13 and looking younger. My issue is more with the portrayal than the plot. For a few years in the 70's and early 80's there was a trend to make jailbait movies for the pleasure of adults. Little Darlings wasn't the worst, but it is still problematic. The plot of Tatum O'Neil's character flirting and trying to bed a man in his late twenties or thirties was included for no other reason other than to feed the fantasies of the adult males in the Audience.
Manhattan is another disturbing example. The actress was 16 and the plot was of a man in his forties in a sexual relationship with a high school girl.
The Fog. Jamie Lee Curtis plays a teen hitchhiker than promptly fucks the rando trucker that gives her a lift.
Examples seem endless and they all point to the same obsession that generation of men have with young teen girls. Woody Allen, Trump, Epstein, Ted Nugent, etc. They all demonstrated the same issue.
Well if you can't watch a movie with an actress that's 18 or even in her twenties without automatically thinking she's being exploited, I guess you just need to turn off the tv, stop reading books and, finally, stay off the internet.
Teens have (consensual) sex, people are going to tell stories that reflect life, young actresses (and actors) are going to play teens and twentysomethings that crave and have sex.
I get thinking a 17 y/o in an explicit sexual role is a bit risqué but if you need them to be 30+ it's just completely ridiculous for me
It's a weird hill you've chosen to die on, but ok. You do you.
Ok boomer
So sorry I can watch a 20 y/o actress doing a sex scene without dreaming of Epstein ;-)