Pedophile subplot
I know it was meant to be dark and creepy, but him watching Pretty in Pink was hilarious.
shareHow is that a paedophile subplot?
sharedid you miss the whole abducted missing girl storyline? And him watching a movie about teenage girls?
shareYeah liking teenage girls is not pedophilia.
shareIt is if they're underage... I feel like some people need to be updated on what's legal..
I'd marry Catwoman if I wasn't Gay
#GayBoyProblems
It is if they're underage... I feel like some people need to be updated on what's legal..
Pedaphila doesn't mean just anyone under legal law age. It's regarding prepubescent children. Anywhere from a baby to 13 years old. Anything above 13 isn't considered pedaphilia. The legal age for sexual consent is 18, but don't get it mixed with pedaphilia who are attracted to prepubescent children. share
A child is 0-17. What planet are you all on??
shareThe "girl" in question is packing up her bags and driving away from somebody who later calls her on the phone - clearly a boyfriend she is walking out on. How is anybody defining her as a "child?"
shareThere are sort of two different conversations happening that are overlapping, which might be why you're confused about what people are saying.
One conversation is about whether or not Goodman's character has a sexual interest in Michelle (or his own daughter, or the other girl who he'd kidnapped). Is there sexual motivation, or does he fixated on having a daughter and that's the beginning and end of it?
Then there is a whole other conversation about whether or not a sexual interest in a 15/16/17 year old (the approximate age of the daughter) constitutes pedophilia, because some people are arguing that pedophilia is an interest in pre-pubescent children and Howard's daughter has clearly passed the age of puberty. Others are arguing that attraction between a 50-something year old man and a teenage girl does constitute pedophilia, especially if the girl in question is emotionally immature.
No one is defining Michelle as a child. But there is the question of whether Howard is attracted sexually to his "daughters" and whether or not that attraction would constitute pedophilia.
I personally don't know exactly what name I'd give Howard's issues, but he is clearly disturbed and his emotions and controlling behaviors are unhealthy and out of line.
A pedophile is someone who prefers young children. Young as in prepubescent. No hair in certain places, no sign of puberty at all. So if a 50 year old man or woman is with a 16 year old, they're not considered a pedophile. Disgusting/twisted pervert yes. But not pedophile.
sharePedophiles are attracted to PRE-pubescent children.
Most teenage girls over the age of about 13-14 would not be targets of pedophiles.
Get educated, laws and science regularily dont match-up
150 years ago 14 year old teenage girls who were married wasnt completely out of the ordinary as it is today. Once again, Not due to natures laws, but societies.
He was a 60+ year old man, who could not relate to an adult woman, which is why he couldn't see the protagonist as anything but a girl/princess. He might not have wanted to have sex with her or the girl he abducted. But I think that unlikely, and he abducted young women, and kept them in his dungeon with the intention of them taking the place of the daughter that was taken by her mother far, far away to be clear of him. Did she do that because she was a psycho, or because she caught him touching her? He may have just been a megalomaniac, and a psycho, and not interested in her at all sexually, but is that the most obvious explanation? No. And this isn't a terribly clever film, and because of that obvious answers are best.
Now to your definition: pedophilia is being attracted to children, and/or having an underdeveloped sexual identity. The fact an obvious child (emotionally, mentally) has physically matured enough to produce a child does not make her an adult. Your definition of pedophilia is plainly stupid, because some girls start menstruating when they are under 10.
There have been cases of girls as young as 6 having children, which means they were made victims of some pedophile as early as 5 years old. Do you think that it was perfectly normal for a grown man of 35 or 40 to be sexually attracted to a 5 year old girl because her body had developed early?
According to your definition a lot of 7,8,9,10 year olds aren't girls at all, but women.
150 years ago...? Maybe 250. And this was largely due to women dying giving birth, and a preoccupation with a woman's 'virtue' being her virginity.
Who cares what they did in ye olde England or in Taliban central in 1800. You might as well say it is good enough in Afghanistan to marry children today, so why not? All sorts of rubbish was the norm. Hell, let's have slavery again because 150 years ago it was all good!?
You sound like you could possibly be part of some or other religion that endorses marrying children to old scrotes. However, most people realise that what was good enough for Mohammed is not good enough for many of us today.
Mind if I ask why you seek to promote 60 year olds having sex with 15 year olds?
No pedophilia is being attracted to prepubescent children. Someone who is 16 can actually be diagnosed with pedophilia in some cases. The cut-off point is a child who is 13.
Hence, if Howard truly is attracted to 14-17 year olds, by definition, he does not have pedophilia.
Now, I think this discussion is getting caught up too much in terms and definitions, as I believe the point is that Howard may be obsessed with underage girls.
No pedophilia is being attracted to prepubescent children. Someone who is 16 can actually be diagnosed with pedophilia in some cases. The cut-off point is a child who is 13.
By its very definition, "prepubescent" mean "before puberty". Girls go through puberty at different ages, which is why the DSM definition says that victims are generally 13 years old or younger. There is no official cut-off point. I've had fourth graders come into my classroom at nine years old who are already menstruating and developing breasts and hips. I've also coached 12-13 year old girls who still look like children.
I think that such a rigorous definition also ignores the emotional element, which is having power over someone who is still emotionally child-like.
Howard's fixation doesn't seem to be about the age, but more about being his daughter (or like his daughter). It's hard to tell from the movie if this fixation is sexual in nature. Frankly I think it's more of an incest issue than one of pedophilia. He isn't obsessed with underage girls so much as with a relationship of a girl/woman with signifiers (like the shirt) that remind him of his daughter. share
Yeah, you're right. The DSM does say "generally" 13 years or younger.
In any event, and mainly directed to some of the other posters on here, the point is that, by definition, everything is not automatically pedophilia simply because it involves someone underage. I think your opinion makes sense in that, if Howard has any sexual desires in relation to girls, it seems to be an incest thing and not pedophilia.
Without any evidence to the contrary I'll assume he didn't want to bang his great aunt, and for all we know the reason his wife and daughter left was his sexual abuse of his daughter. Incest/pedophilia same thing when all you want is young girls, or the fantasy of it, be they his daughter or not. You are arguing that he wants to relive a specific incest, but that just seems to be the one he enjoyed for the longest time and which was denied to him. The fact she *was* his daughter doesn't even seem to be important.
He's @#$#%# in the head, and not a good guy. End of story, until some psychiatrist pipes up and blows the entire thing out of the water for being grossly inaccurate and/or silly.
by definition, everything is not automatically pedophilia simply because it involves someone underage
I mostly agree. But when you're talking about a middle-aged man, I don't think that a girl being 14 or 15 takes you out of child territory and immediately into adult/normal sexuality territory.
I think that there is a grey area between when someone is truly a child and when they are truly adult who is fully capable of consent. Puberty isn't merely physical--there are changes to the brain and to a person's emotional state.
There isn't a magical moment where you suddenly cease being a child. And, by extension, a man's attraction to a girl doesn't magically stop being pedophilia just because she turns a certain age. And if someone watched the movie and had the impression that Howard had been possibly molesting his daughter for a while (I don't think this, but I see why someone might), it wouldn't be out of line to call him a pedophile. There are people who want to say that it's totally normal for men to be attracted to 16 year old girls. I understand that on a physical level, but many if not most 16 year olds are incredibly emotionally immature. They might have bodies that have gone through puberty, and they might have the legal right to consent to sex, but there's something icky to me about the idea of an adult man wanting to have sex with a teenage girl (or maybe I should say actually having sex with a teen, because I think that wanting to is harmless fantasy).
Howard doesn't want Michelle playing with dolls, wearing distinctly child-like clothing, or doing any other behaviors that speak to being a young child. I think that his behavior toward Michelle is controlling, unhealthy, and more than a bit delusional, but the movie never comes outright to say that there is any sexual element. share
Yeah, I was perhaps oversimplifying the issue here. I agree with about everything you said.
shareThere are different levels of interest in children.
Hebephilia is the strong and persistent adult sexual interest in pubescent (early adolescent) individuals, typically ages 11–14 (see the Tanner stage). It differs from ephebophilia, which is the strong and persistent sexual interest to those in later adolescence, approximately 15–19 years old, and from pedophilia,[2] which is the primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.
If he had an attraction to his daughter/the missing girl/Michelle, it would most likely fall into what I bolded. Paedos are for prepubescent children.
I don't want the world. I just want your half.share
That's a clinical term, not the colloquial use.
shareTo me it seemed as he saw every woman as "little girls / daughters" that needed to be saved, not on a sexual-attraction way.