I watched most of the movie, skipping through bits of the slow parts. I do personally think part of outrage is influenced by the right wing, with the implicit message being like, "the 'artsy black feminist' left wants to create pedophile fodder", but I really think it was just very poorly executed and not her (knowingly, at least) pandering to pedophiles.
The shots of their butts and everything lingered for too long (not that they were necessary anyways), and there wasn't anything shown in the vulva picture scene. The vulva picture scene was meant to be like, a shocking logical conclusion that kids would come to when growing up in an environment where they receive rewards and likes for objectifying themselves, so there was a (hackneyed) purpose to the scene. But yes, the movements were very suggestive and the shots were gratuitous and the point was already plenty made the first time. I don't think it's AS BAD as everyone is claiming, but the countless slow panning shots were very unnecessary. I don't think it needed to be shocking to be effective, and ultimately that artistic direction calls into question then the director's motivations which just further obfuscates the messaging, so it was just very counterproductive.
My main issue with the movie is that it really didn't show the pressure at all angles that the girls face to be sexual, so all of these scenes were kind of all just thrown together with a loose storyline about objectification by two different cultures. The main character mostly just did sexual things without detailing enough HOW AND WHY she would do those things, so it almost seems as if she's -somewhat- acting on her own motivations. They didn't specifically show many influences other than that they get more likes online when they objectify themselves, and that the main character comes from a very misogynistic religious background that puts extraordinary pressure on women. There should have been a larger focus and way more screentime spent on those specific western cultural influences that pull women and girls in the same direction as religious oppressive cultures, just with different presentation.
In most of the scenes (save for like one or two), the girls are actually pretty heavily chastised (by men and older boys, even) for acting in aggressively sexual ways considering their age. I don't think that is reality at all. I don't think sexualized girls are chastised like that in reality, and I don't think the pitfalls and dangerous/potentially lethal consequences of conforming to these expectations were fully explored, but it did circle back around to how sexualizing yourself as a young female results in humiliation and ostracization, and that there's more joy and fulfillment to be found in just being a kid.
Ultimately, the message could've been conveyed a lot better. She was (imo) trying to show that the French and Senegalese cultures were almost 2 sides of the same coin in terms of the way girls and women are expected to serve males, but that the way they are expected to do so is different. The movie isn't non-stop sexualized shots, but it's... really bad and literally pointless artistic direction. It's entirely possible the director just sucks ass at recognizing how to best frame and present her story. Most of the elements of the film were really unimpressive, the screenplay was bad, none of the storyline necessarily flowed, etc, so I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of this was just ineptitude and an attempt to be avant-garde or something, because even the scenes that were not sexual at all just didn't convey their messages effectively and could've been done soooo much better. Media like this though sets a really bad precedent and people need to be more mindful of the work they create.