"99% of people attracted to children probably never act on their desires!" Any idea where Lars plucked that figure from? Even as someone sympathetic to this train of thought, I couldn't help but think that estimate might be just a little generous.
There's very little data on this for obvious reasons, but I wonder what percentage of the male population is primarily sexually attracted to children. 1%? 2%? Could it be that high? Or higher still?
I am not sure, but I think there are more pedophiles than many people realize: http://jdlarsenmn.tripod.com/kinsey.htm
This is my signature: http://jdlarsenmn.tripod.com/megiddo.htm
I suspect so too. That site is terrible, though, I have to say ... just links to dreadful, poorly-researched articles that conflate paraphilia support networks with promotion of child sexual abuse. Such a shame that such ignorance still proliferates on this subject.
shareSeems to me liberals are trying to legalize pedophilia to me.
shareSeems to me you have a tin ear for nuance in debate and discussion. Nobody pretty much anywhere—apart from radical intergenerational sex groups that are probably less prominent now than in any time in the last 50 years—is promoting the legalisation of "paedophilia" (by which I presume you mean legalising sex with children). Nobody.
What some people (and these are a minority, even within "the left") are trying to do is separate the crime of child abuse from the fact of being sexually attracted to children, a condition that nobody chooses or can be cured from. People who labour under that sexual disorder/orientation need to be able to seek help openly and not be afraid of being chased out of town by a pitchfork-wielding mob, both for their own sake and those of children everywhere (after all, nothing breeds abuse like silence and ostracisation).
That's the issue that I think Lars was (none too subtly) trying to raise with this scene, and despite its hamfistedness, I applaud him for that.
Anyone? Surely Lars's fishing expedition wasn't a complete waste of time.
shareI'm a hebephile which is more accepted since age of consent in majority of us states and UK is 16 and 14 in most other places
I dated my wife she was 16 I was 28. In my state marriage is legal with parental consent of 1 parent at 16 but 17 requires no parental consent.
Her mother signed the consent and we married
We've been married now 18 years
Joe says only 5% of pedophiles act on their thoughts. That didn't ring true to me.
Love isn't what you say or how you feel, it's what you do. (The Last Kiss)
The thing is, how would you know?
To be honest, I suspect Lars was just trying to be provocative. For once. ;)
Common sense? Human nature? Urges and drives are the most powerful element in human relations. Rarely if ever will you find a 95% success rate in repressing such strong human urges. But hey...if you do have such a study that verifies it...show it. That'd be really interesting.
(More likely...one of two things are operating here. One, the very notion is totally bogus. Two, whoever might possibly fall into the "95%" category is not a pedophile. Just like the classic "every woman who fantasizes about another woman sexually is not a lesbian" group.)
Love isn't what you say or how you feel, it's what you do. (The Last Kiss)
I doubt any such study exists. For fairly obvious cultural reasons, people with a sexual attraction to children don't tend to broadcast their identities and rarely seek professional help. We only tend to find out that someone is a paedophile when they've acted on it, or when they get charged with possessing child pornography.
I'm also very sceptical of the 95% claim, but I would expect that it's at least 50%. Why? Because, as strong as the sexual urge is, the deterrent factors here are huge. Everything from shame, to repression, to fear of consequences, to empathy (being attracted to children doesn't necessarily mean you're blind to the horrible effects of child abuse on victims). Plenty of reasons why a person would stay celibate, or stick with sexually unsatisfying relationships with adult partners.
As for the differences between fantasy and sexuality, I agree?having a fantasy featuring someone of the same sex doesn't mean that you're necessarily gay. But we do know that there are people (both within the prison system and in anonymous online communities) who have an exclusive sexual attraction to children (and, interestingly, usually only children of a certain gender and age range). I don't see how that is fundamentally different to any other sexual orientation. Whatever percentage they constitute, they most certainly exist; and I think we have a responsibility as a society to reach out to them and support them to live ethical and functional lives.
Did anyone think Joe qualifies as a paedophile herself for her grooming of and subsequent relationship with P? It's kinda unclear what age she is when she moves in and when they start sleeping together, it's similarly borderline to how the sex in Blue Is The Warmest Colour is a little uncomfortable for the age difference for me. Seems like another deliberate provocation from Lars Von Trier so soon after the paedophile interrogation. The film had totally lost me by that point, it was just getting increasingly ludicrous and desperate.
shareWell, she's obviously not a paedophile by any clinical definition; and even if the girl is under 18, she'd surely be above the age of consent in the UK (16?). Same with BITWC?Adele is above the age of consent when she and Emma first meet, so the point is moot.
Of course, your own ethical values may differ from the letter of the law, and fair enough. I don't really think there was enough of an age difference in BITWC for there to be a significant power differential (certainly, no more than exists in many adult relationships), but I agree with you that the relationship in Nymphomaniac was preposterous, and to be honest that's about the point where the film lost me too.
I did once see an item on TV where some type of therapist or social worker said roughly the same thing. Unfortunately I can't remember what it was. Considering both the moral implications and the reactions of society, I'd expect most otherwise normal people to keep a lid on those urges.
What rang false for me is the part where Seligman is suprised at her sympathy towards the guy she was interrogating. In all his literature, he apparently never came across the concept of people being victims to their desires..
Yeah, I kind of think that was just Lars being didactic (although, to be fair, a lot of people would react like that). The trouble is that, as you say, it was out of character. There are a lot of things about that last hour of the film that seem implausible and badly written.
share