I saw this movie years ago and have always had a problem with it. I just don't believe that pedophilia can be cured. I wouldn't want a pedophile living next door to my family no matter how much time he'd served in prison and how many psychiatrists had pronounced him cured.
Absurdity: A Statement or belief inconsistent with my opinion.
The psychology in this movie was extremely hokey anyway. Aside from the fact that a few sessions of group therapy alone are hardly going to affect one's sexuality, the guy wasn't even a "plausible" pedophile to begin with. His attraction to children was portrayed as something of a strange phase that he went through in his adulthood after experiencing feelings of sexual inadequacy with adult women. From what I understand, actual pedophiles develop their fixation at a much younger age, and it usually sticks with them their whole life.
Having said that, I still rather enjoyed this movie, especially Rod Steiger's performance. Too bad this is so hard to get on DVD.
Obviously pedophilia is a serious transgression and I respect the OP's opinion. The fact is that people that commit most serious crimes have a high residual rate. I do believe once someone serves a sentence they should be allowed to live their lives. At the very least, we now can easily find who the sexual offenders are and where they live. A tool we did not have back when this film was made.
shareI think it's clear in the film that he isn't a true paedophile. Regardless of the accuracy or lack thereof, the film offers the notion that the way to tackle mental illness is not defaming and attacking the afflicted, but to approach the situation with compassion and a serious intent to improve the situation.
In the movie, if the protagonist was really a danger, the doctor would not have advocated his release.
"I'll book you. I'll book you on something. I'll find something in the book to book you on."
I was bothered by this storyline and was curious what others thought.
On the surface, if we take the storyline at face value, he's not a "true" pedophile because he had this bizarre attraction during a phase in his adult life, and when he was mentally stronger, the attraction went away. As mentioned before, true pedophiles are that way from a younger age, and it sticks with them.
I don't know enough about the nuances of mental health to know if a man can have a "phase" where he imagines himself attracted to pre-pubescent children, and it passes when he is more mentally healthy. I find that a bit of a stretch, but I'm not in the medical health field, so what do I know?
*SPOILERS*
Assuming that it is possible, then sure, he's not a "true" pedophile. And thankfully in this storyline he never touched a child. (That would have been a bridge too far for the viewers.) I also found the knee-jerk reaction from the woman he was dating (after she found out about his past) to be realistic. (She instinctively didn't want him near her kid.) Realistic and believable and very, very understandable.
I think some of the problem for a modern viewer is that the psychology is 100% Freudian.
I am a firm believer that one's upbringing and past can affect one's life and personality in many ways, and that facing the past can help a person change.
But the idea of an attraction to young girls stemming from having an "emasculating" harpy for a mother is pretty ridiculous.
Humans are complex, so I suppose someone could have a temporary attraction to children, or molest due to a need to control and dominate, and/or due to having been molested in their own childhood. There do seem to be people who molest children who are not considered pedophiles.
But true pedophilia does not seem to fit that mold. From what I've read, the cause of pedophilia is still not known, but it is likely to have a biological basis.
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/14/local/la-me-pedophiles-20130115
That LA Times article is very biased, written by someone who has a profound empathy for pedophiles and a clear agenda to remarket his harmful sexual deviance as a "sexual orientation." The article claims that pedos are simply seeking "love" with children, and that it's other people, not they, who are harming children. The final sentence of the article laments that the pedo who gives human voice to the article will never be able to love someone and be loved back. The clear goal of the article is to get people to sympathize with the struggle of pedophiles, and chip away at our defenses so we'll come to accept them touching little children. Very sick and disturbing. I don't trust any of the "facts" in this article.
shareVelvet Tigress wrote:
That LA Times article is very biased, written by someone who has a profound empathy for pedophiles and a clear agenda to remarket his harmful sexual deviance as a "sexual orientation."
The article claims that pedos are simply seeking "love" with children, and that it's other people, not they, who are harming children
The clear goal of the article is to get people to sympathize with the struggle of pedophiles, and chip away at our defenses so we'll come to accept them touching little children.
In searching for causes of pedophilia, researchers have largely dismissed the popular belief that abuse in childhood plays an important role. Studies show that few victims grow up to be abusers, and only about a third of offenders say they were molested.
Scientists at the Toronto center have uncovered a series of associations that suggest pedophilia has biological roots.
Among the most compelling findings is that 30% of pedophiles are left-handed or ambidextrous, triple the general rate. Because hand dominance is established through some combination of genetics and the environment of the womb, scientists see that association as a powerful indicator that something is different about pedophiles at birth.
"The only explanation is a physiological one," said James Cantor, a leader of the research.
Researchers have also determined that pedophiles are nearly an inch shorter on average than non-pedophiles and lag behind the average IQ by 10 points — discoveries that are consistent with developmental problems, whether before birth or in childhood.
In a 2008 study, Cantor's team conducted MRI brain scans on 65 pedophiles. Compared with men with criminal histories but no sex offenses, they had less white matter, the connective circuitry of the brain.
The evidence also points to what Cantor explained as "cross wiring": Seeing a child sets off the same neural response that men typically experience around an attractive woman.
Resisting desire
Most clinicians have given up on changing the sexual orientation of pedophiles in favor of teaching them how to resist their unacceptable desires.
Experts believe that pedophiles who also have a significant attraction to adults stand the best chance of staying out of trouble, because of their capacity for some sexual fulfillment that is legal. For others, injections of hormones to reduce sex drive are often recommended.
I just re-read the article twice and I really don't know where you get the second part of what you wrote -- there's nothing in about pedophiles claiming that others, not they, are harming children.
Not all pedophiles molest children. Nor are all child molesters pedophiles. Studies show that about half of all molesters are not sexually attracted to their victims. They often have personality disorders or violent streaks, and their victims are typically family members.
By contrast, pedophiles tend to think of children as romantic partners and look beyond immediate relatives.
There actually WAS a time when it was accepted both by law and society in human history. Look up Ancient Greece as one example. I have to wonder - were they too inexperienced at the time to know why it is so wrong?
Also - if you believe that soon there is a risk that it may become acceptable, what does this say about us humans overall and whether good and evil are subjective or not? Do we naturally know what's good and what's bad or is it all learned?
And why would there even be otherwise normal and ordinary people "sympathizing with pedophiles", is that even POSSIBLE?
Dear God. We human beings are deeply flawed AND our own worst enemies. What shall be done about it?
The greatest trick the Devil has ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist!