In the current movie, "Lifeguard," released in late Summer 2013, and probably actually filmed/made within the last 2-3 years, had the central relationship depicted been between a 20-something year-old man and a 16 year-old girl, there would have been a hew and a cry-AND RIGHTLY SO-about a movie that at least tacitly gives its "O.K." to a perverted, immoral relationship. So, why, again, in 2013, is it okay for a movie to depict a 20-something year-old WOMAN in a sexual relationship with a 16 year-old BOY. There absolutely IS a double-standard at work here. My question is this: Is the existence of this double-standard due, perhaps, to the assumption on everyone's part that when a 16 year-old female has sex with any male 18 years-old or older, whether she realizes it or not, she is being robbed of something, and therefore raped, whereas when any male capable of the sexual act-REGARDLESS of his age-REPORTS that he was willing, everyone concludes not only that said male was unharmed, but also that, frankly, he was damned lucky to "get what he got" from "an older woman." I really don't know how "Lolita" got made and received a major release back in 1962. I suspect it was partly because the sexual relationship betw. Humbert & Lolita, though very clearly implied, was never explicitly depicted on-screen. Also, movies like "Psycho," released around the same time and proving to be very profitable, were ushering in a new, edgier era for Hollywood. Also, I think one has to "credit" the power/influence of "Lolita"'s director, Stanley Kubrick. In any case, what really bothers me is the deeply split-personality our society displays TODAY, where a couple of times a month one hears of arrests of this/that middle-aged man/woman for the CRIME of having had a sexual relationship with a minor, while Hollywood continues, UNSWAYED, to make TONS of $$$, pumping out theatrical releases and HUGELY popular broadcast TV shows that glory in depicting what are, in fact, sick/criminal relationships.
reply
share
Zakredding
11 years ago
Exactly, thank you for summarising it so well.
reply
share
avenuesf
11 years ago
Let's put this into even more context: "Lolita" presented the main character's fixation on Lolita as something taboo and not okay. He ends up paying for it. "Lifeguard" and another recent film, "Adore" (in which two mothers have affairs with each others' sons) don't seem to find anything unusual about the act. There is a definite double standard here... as originally stated, if these two films presented things as older males having affairs with teenage girls, there would be a major brouhaha over it.
reply
share
mldardar
11 years ago
Right, any form of sensual titillation sells. Especially when portraying male teen fantasies. But Lifeguard might be considered tame compared to others. Let's not forget the independent and foreign movies that are often praised for portraying the same subject matter even more explicitly, but resulting in awards at Cannes and Sundance. Malena portrays preteen male fantasies, which include a father taking his 12 old son to a brothel for his first experience with a woman. In addition, there are more and more movies these days that portray lesbian teen fantasies--same age and with the older woman. It's evidence of who's influencing movie-making. Mainstream movie studios began slowly competing with the porn industry in the 60s. And now it's catching up! If this movie would've been done on Lifetime, there wouldn't have been anything graphic, and thus, no (or very few) complaints. At least you can watch some of their movies with your son or daughter to use for teaching principles.
But here's something no one has mentioned concerning the relationship between a woman and boy. If this same women had wanted to marry the boy--not having had premarital sex--and had gotten his parents legal approval, no laws would've been broken! They could legally have sex. There's still the same age difference, but a paper changes everything! As mentioned in another post, young girls in some cultures are married off to older men at very young ages. Well, it was also common in America. But I've also seen court documents from the early 1800s of a 14 year old boy marrying a young lady in her 20s. The parents signed the document. Also in the early 1960s my 12 year old cousin married a 16 year old boy! Many people thought the parents should be committed. That marriage lasted only a few months. My cousin remarried when she was 15, a boy that was 18. And let's not forget Elvis and Prisilla!
There are gray areas when it comes to feelings. There are laws that keep adults from having sex/seducing/raping underage people, but other laws allow those same people of differing ages to legally marry. This is why instilling principles is more effective than laws that allow no room for examining situations individually. The movie portrays one gray area--although, for titillation--of human feelings that western laws see as black--wrong, sick, perverted, etc. And for the movie, maybe that is a correct description.
reply
share