Want to talk about a media double standard? Not one, but two new movies will depict statutory rape in a positive light. Kim Basinger in the movie The Door in the Floor will be depicted in numerous sex scenes with a teenage boy. Nicole Kidman goes even further, playing a nude scene in a bathtub with a 10-year-old boy in Birth. Of course, there’s also the director Roman Polanski who is feted in Hollywood despite his conviction for having had sex with a 13-year-old girl. He’s never served time because he fled the US.
I’m not saying that priests who abuse kids should not be punished to the fullest extent of the law or should not be removed from ministry. But it is indicative of a double standard that the depiction of the same thing in a movie as a positive is not also excoriated. The irony is that in five or ten years sex with kids will be promoted in public as a good thing (just like homosexual sex went from bad to acceptable in recent years) and we’ll be left wondering what the big deal was with the Scandal. Well, some of us won’t be.
Peace, Dom.
I heard a little bit about the Basinger film, but I’m not sure a “dark” film can be characterized as having a favorable view of sex with a teen. You might have access to more information on it, so I’ll wait and see.
Funny thing is that women having sex with boys is not quite as edgy as men having sex with boys or girls. Think about it. Maybe there’s something to my suggestion that pedophilia is more about power than gay scapegoaters might want to admit. Additionally, you have to admit that there is a long “cultural tradition” of young men learning sexuality from a kindly (or not so kindly) older woman.
And Polanski was persona non grata in Hollywood for two decades after his flight.
But yes, I agree that sexual themes like these in film are disturbing. A really creative person, author, filmmaker, songwriter, poet, etc. can tell difficult stories without being explicit.
I’m surprised woody allen did get a cameo…
…didn’t…
“Maybe there’s something to my suggestion that pedophilia is more about power than gay scapegoaters might want to admit.”
The sexual abuse scandal is about homosexual men committing a perverted sex act on teenage young men. Sexual desire bewteen men and women is normal. Sexual desires between people of the same sex is disodered, no matter the age.
Todd,
Don’t you ever get tired of that old warhorse?
Let me explain it one more time:
If power and domination were the main factor tempting these predatory priests to these wicked acts, then why all of the boys? The rapists who really do fit the mold you cast tend to attack little old ladies. These priests were and are HOMOSEXUALS following their lust to molest attractive young men. If not, where are all the young girl victims? That is a question that neither you nor America Magazine nor any other apologist for all of those gay priests infesting our Church have yet to answer.
It is not about power. It is about sodomites lusting after boys. SSAD. It is a disorder and it is a political force.
Peace, John.
Your warhorse is bigger than my warhorse, as many times as you might want to explain it.
You asked, ” … where are all the young girl victims?”
Easy. One-fifth of underage victims are girls. Most adult victims are female, however. And as far as why there weren’t more than 20% girl victims, it’s partly a question of accessibility: girls weren’t widely used as altar servers until long after the abuse rates went down *and* the segregation of girls and boys activities in parishes and schools.
The answers are there; you just have to stop beating your own dead horse to find them.
And for the record, sexual desire across gender lines when one of the people is far from normal: the original thread topic. Dominating and abusing a child sexually is not always about sexuality. Interesting how some of you avoid that topic and home in on homosexuality. Dom has lots of other threads for that. Off with ya.
“Dominating and abusing a child sexually is not always about sexuality.”
Vague. Committing a homsexual act on a 16 year old is about sexuality. Spin anyway who want, it is about homosexual lust primarily.
The topic of this thread is about movies depicting sexual contact between an “older” woman and an underage male.
If the male is postpubescent, that may be sinful and illegal, but not necessarily disordered. Sexual attraction between physically developed men and women is natural. Sexual attraction between members of the same sex is disordered.
I see why you and others want to confuse the issues. That gives cover for the “gay” agenda. It allows some to spin the fact that homosexual men really desire teenage boys, and at the same time play it like it is pedophilia.
As much as I disagree with Todd (and agree with the anti-Todds out there), the original thread was about the older/younger dynamic, and why it seems to be acceptable in some circumstances, or at least to some people.
I’d like to know why, if there is justifiable prosecution of adult perpetrators of statutory rape, there isn’t prosecution of youthful statutory rapists. Let’s face it, having sex with a minor is about the inability to form consent by the minor, making whatever sexual relations he/she engages in de facto rape. Why, then, does the age of the perpetrator matter?
If we started prosecuting for statutory rape even if the offender is of the same age as the victim, do you suppose child sexual activity would decrease? Just food for thought . . .
Father,
My thoughts are that the age gap at times may be a pathology and at times could be only a moral failing. I guess it would depend on the individulas involved and degree of maturation.
Maybe we too quickly call every situation a psychological name instead of what it really is…lust or perversion.
Father Elijah,
If the age of victim is material as to whether or not the victim could give assent, then I would assume that the age of the perpetrator is material as to whether or not the perp had conscious knowledge that what was being done is wrong. An adult male or female is assumed to have knowledge that sex with a minor is illegal, while a minor is not assumed to have the same knowledge. But all that is just a guess on my part.
Let’s be more concrete: two 16-yr-olds have sex where 18 is the age of consent. So, should both be prosecuted for statutory rape, because in each case, both are assumed not to be able to assent?
Interesting legal theory, to be sure. In any case, this would end up being like sodomy laws: rarely prosecuted. It’s different if it’s a 23-yr-old woman and 14-yr-old boy, or 40-yr-old man and 16-yr-old girl. When they’re both teens, the idea of “abuse of power” and “taking advantage of the other’s youth” doesn’t make much sense.
Todd,
“Easy. One-fifth of underage victims are girls. Most adult victims are female, however. And as far as why there werenhor_email>tf1212@kc.rr.com
http://catholicsensibility.blogspot.com
65.28.83.216
2004-06-29 18:58:15
2004-06-29 22:58:15
Peace, all.
There’s a difference between confusing the issue and conceding the issue is more complex than easy answers will allow. Nobody here says gays are not predators, but the notion that gays are exclusively to blame is sheer fallacy.
Some pedophiles care not for the sex of their victims. Some abusers are content with expressions other than straight (or gay) vanilla sex.
“People on the street” have all sorts of interesting ideas about life. It’s better to strive for the truth. Some people on St Blog’s can’t get homosexuality out of their heads even when the thread starts out on Kim Basinger. That tells you something.
Good night.
I think people are conflating pedophilia, which would be predation on very young, prepubescent children, and the molesting of teenagers, whether male or female.
A 16-yr-old girl can be rather physically developed (and, indeed, in many states girls can get married at age 16, with parental permission), as can a 16-yr-old boy. One is not so scandalized at the sexualization of those who are in the throes of incipient sexuality. Hormones, anybody? Judgment is severely lacking at that age, but desire is natural to that age. I know that my own body didn’t change much from 15 til I had my first child at 29, whether in height or development. The idea of statutory rape applied to teens is to prevent adults from messing with them before they get their brains and bodies a little better in order. They lust, but they really don’t have a good control over their physical impulses. Adults could take advantage of that (and some do).
Pre-adolescents are something altogether different. Sexualize a 5-yr-old? A 10-yr-old? That’s definitely deviancy. They’re not developed, and their level of understanding is even lower. Sexuality shouldn’t be pertinent to them at that age (no matter what Freud says). I’ve never heard of a statutory rape conviction when the victim in prepubescent – it’s always child molestation charges that are pressed.
I cannot think of any sexualized scene with a 10-yr-old that would be acceptable, or of “redeeming artistic value”. I don’t care if it’s a “fantasy sequence” in a movie. I note in the article Dom linked about =Birth=, the child actor explains that he’s been in films where he’s played parts with an abusive father, and a pedophile father. Sounds like this kid has great parents looking out for his career. Fooey.
Woody Allen has no problem with the child sex thing. Don’t you remember that scandal he was in with his stepdaughter?
This is the next thing, folks. Protection for the young is a distinctively Christian value. That’s how it entered European culture, and as Christianity ceases to be a Western value system, the old ways will come back. Expect to see some truly spooky things.
Todd, give it a break. The priestly sex abuse crisis is NOT what this thread is about. We all know what you think. We think you’re wrong and we’re sick of hearing you repeat yourself, ok?
Hell, this thread isn’t even explicitly about homosexuals. It’s about sexual child abuse in general getting a foothold in our culture because it’s being glamorized in the entertainment media….
And most guys, now that they’ve pretty much shed themselves of Christian morals, won’t see any reason why they can’t go after some little girl with 1/2 her clothes on. This theme in the movies is just about to open a floodgate of disgusting cross-generational lust, y’all.
Brace yourself and keep an eye on your kids!
I feel like a one-note band. Probably because I’ve never been able to provide a URL for this story. When the Scandal broke in 2002 there was a day when the headlines in the Washington Post were about it and the below-the-fold story was about a report from the UN on normalizing adult-child sex. “In five to ten years..?” It’s already here or would be, except for the Scandal.
Well, no, Jane. A couple of things have to fall before child sex, so that it can be squared with the latest consensus that’s brewing in the USA.
We have to finish off 1) attachments to marriage as man/woman exclusive legal status, and 2) full homosexual franchise before child sex American-style can really take hold.
The child-sex thing isn’t being done for itself, by the way. It’s a step on the way to whatever people want when they want it.
The culture is in deep trouble.
Resisting this is going to get us in deep trouble too. But we will.
Peace, mc.
“The priestly sex abuse crisis is NOT what this thread is about.”
Well, duh. Too bad John and hardhead are more interested in it than Kim Basinger.
You shouldn’t repeat that stuff either, Jaime.
Oh I figure I can say something intelligent at least one more time you say something silly michigancatholic
We’re waiting, Jaime.
And what praytell are you waiting for Michigancatholic? I haven’t heard you offer a rebuttal to what I’ve posted (on this and several other threads) so the only thing I can infer is that you actually agree with me.
If not, please share!!
Read the post above mine.
Care to be a bit more specific? And would you care to explain as to why?
or if you prefer, would you care to be evasive, vague and pointless?
Okay, this thread has officially ended. Neither of you are saying anything. Take it to email because I’m sick of reading this back and forth.