New York Times Lament Little Mermaid's Lack of Kink

There seems to be no shortage of people questioning willing to question or challenge taboos when it comes to children's sexuality

Maybe keep your children away from the New York Times.

The paper’s movie critic Wesley Morris had this to say about the latest Disney version of The Little Mermaid ...

“The new, live-action ‘The Little Mermaid’ is everything nobody should want in a movie: dutiful and defensive, yet desperate for approval. It reeks of obligation and noble intentions.

Joy, fun, mystery, risk, flavor, kink — they’re missing.”

No kink in the live-action remake of “The Little Mermaid”?

Well, scratch that off my list of movies to see in the holidays with small children.

I mean, it could have been such a great kids movie if only it had contained a little more inter-racial porn.

Seriously?

I was really looking forward to the scene where Prince Eric dressed in bondage gear, returns from the Mardi Gras to whip Ariel for 15 minutes as she hangs upside down in their underwater cave. But alas! It appears to have been left out! Maybe it will be in the director’s cut.

Wait. What?

What the hell is going on at the New York Times? And why the hell do we need ‘kink’ in a kids’ movie?

Okay, I’m sorry. Here I go perpetuating the culture war again. The culture war, after all, is me asking the question, not the New York Times wanting to groom kinky kids.

I would have thought that ZERO was exactly the right amount of kink in a kid’s movie. It’s The Little Mermaid, not the The Little Fifty Shades of Sea!

But hey, I’m not a New York Times columnist.

“Waiter?”

“Yes Mr Morris?”

“There’s not enough kink in my soup.”

Let me consider that critique of the Little Mermaid one more time …

“Joy, fun, mystery, risk, flavor, kink - they’re missing.”

One of those things is not like the other.

Sometimes you should just stop after the fifth noun.

Now I completely understand that the word ‘kink’ can mean an unexpected plot twist.

But since Morris constantly bangs on about the importance of “culturally reparative work” (that’s Leftese for undoing white heteronormativity) so it’s likely he meant ‘kink’ when he wrote kink rather than ‘unexpected plot twist’ when he wrote kink.

He was saying the quiet part out loud, but with just enough ambiguity to make fair minded people pause before asking to whom they should report film critics lamenting a lack of kink in kids’ movies.

A sub editor might have reworded Morris’ intro for clarification.

‘Joy, fun, mystery, risk, flavor, twists and turns - they’re missing’ would have worked.

They decided to go with “kink”. They knew exactly what they were doing.

So what did you think of The Little Mermaid?

Meh. Could have been more, you know, groomy.

‘Sex positivity’ and childhood should never, ever, be mixed. Yet there seems to be no shortage of people questioning this taboo, or willing to challenge it.

Perhaps I’m being too hard on the New York Times.

Afterall, here in Australia the Victorian Government recently opened up Parliament House for a Drag Queen story time as the Premier and his ministers stood around grinning while small children were taught about gender fluidity by a man in a dress.

It’s a sign of where our culture now is that the New York Times are only surprised when sexual fetishes are NOT being taught to children.

If there was anymore 'kink' around children at the moment, the world would go off its axis.