My take on what was really going on ***SPOLIERS***
-
!!!deleted!!! (58906484) — 10 years ago(July 22, 2015 02:32 PM)
It is the problem of beauty and specifically beautiful woman. Ted Bundy was such a shocker because he was great looking and highly intelligent which made it hard correlate him the abhorrent behavior. Beautiful people always get a pass. This is actually a psychosocial phenomenon which well known and manipulated daily in advertising.
Putting Beauty back in the box, we are simply asked who has displayed unacceptable behavior? Not implied but actual behavior on the screen that we can point to as evidence of some pathology? Mrs. Parker tried to seduce the slow kid! If the Bridie is 18 years old and has mental age of 15 or less then Mrs. Parker was committing an act of rape or sexual assault. I think Bridie's mental age is depressed 25% which would mentally 13.5 years old. Remember that IQ is mental age divided chronological age so maybe Bridie is 14years old? RAPE! He can not consent. -
greg-goremykin — 10 years ago(July 24, 2015 06:14 PM)
Here's a little more reality, literally, to inject into the discussion:
"In 2001, the National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System developed by the Children's Bureau in the United States found that approximately 903,000 children were victims of maltreatment, and 10 per cent of them, or a little more than 90,000 were sexually abused. In these approximately 90,000 cases it was found that 59 per cent of the perpetrators of the abuse were women and 41 per cent were men, statistics that reflect international findings."
So women sexually abusing children isn't the odd case, it's by far the norm, with men acting as abusers being a considerably rarer occurrence. And yet, I would bet anything at all that the average person off the street would believe the exact opposite to be true despite all the gathered evidence pointing to the contrary. Why?
The problem of beauty as you explained it is probably much to blame for this, as well as those bizarre double-standards that have unfortunately been on full display in the comments section for this film, where consent is a completely foreign concept when a woman's quest for sexual gratification is at stake.
The sexual abuse I suffered myself, which occurred between the ages of 2 or 3 until 6 years of age, was perpetrated by a completely normal looking, in fact quite attractive, normal acting teenaged girl who was our family's babysitter, starting when she was 13 or 14 to 17 about the last person on Earth that we'd expect, even though statistics clearly show that she was exactly the person we should most expect.
The abuse finally ended when she made the mistake of performing oral sex on me in the presence of one of her friends that luckily for me recognized it for the aberrant behavior it was. My parents dealt with it quietly, I guess they thought it was for the best of all involved, and it was 1976 so a very different time as well.
We live in a sick society, and women aren't immune to this sickness of being sexual predators and molesters of children in particular, and in far greater numbers than men, and unfortunately, it's innocent children that are suffering because of the blinders we collectively, inexplicably, choose to put on. -
!!!deleted!!! (58906484) — 10 years ago(July 25, 2015 07:29 AM)
That is always the problem when a stereotype behavior it is contradiction of sorts. My favorite example of "stereotype behavior blindness" is Female Spousal abuse. This where the man gets beaten and the woman gets a pass. According to a source is completely under reported. I would mention emotion and verbal abuse but it would fall mostly of deaf ears. I suggest to look at it from a human being and behavior perspective. Mrs. Parker's behavior is a clue at best and criminal at worst. The teacher and the overage boys raped Lilly. Bridie? That is matter of consent.
-
ginger-51 — 10 years ago(February 01, 2016 06:28 AM)
Only problem is that the study you quote is lumping physical and sexual abuse together in their stats. yes, women DO the greater portion of abuse, because women (at least in the US) tend to be home with the kids more and thus are subject to more frustration in terms of parenting.They are statistically more likely to haul off and hit the child when they get overwhelmed. However, the FAR greater percentage of sexual abuse happens at the hands of men. It's extremely rare for women to be the sole perpetrator of sexual abuse. They occasionally assist their partner in sexual abuse, but it's pretty rare for them to do it on their own. I used to work on a sex offender treatment team when I was in grad school.
In my opinion, you have a pretty good interpretation of the story, except that I don't necessarily agree that the mom was molesting her kids. Maybe the screenwriters intended us to think that she was, even though it's unlikely in real life (movies often go for the most intense possibility even if it's highly unlikely) but I just don't see evidence of it in the actions in the film. However, I DO think the mom was extremely unstableunpredictableloving at times and hostile and insane at others. And that could easily lead to emotional or physical abuse of one or both kids. I mean, we saw her shake and smack her traumatized son when he was extremely weak. And after she left the room, he told his dad that the reason he didn't tell her what he knew was because he was scared. Of mom's reaction? Possibly. Likely, in my opinion. A crazy, unpredictable mother could create such an unsafe family environment that the two kids could run away, for sure.
Also, I'm not sure that the movie intends us to see this, but often when an adolescent female is acting out in a sexually provocative manner with older men, it's less about the actions of that girl's mother, and more about the actions of her father. An emotionally distant or physically absent father can cause a young woman to seek the approval of any man, and she probably hasn't learned to value any other part of herself thanks to inconsistent parenting so she sees value in the characteristic that the men respond to first and foremost: her physical body. She learns that is the way to get men to pay attention. We don't know what her father was like before the incident with the teacher, but he was certainly emotionally (and often physically) absent during the events of the movie. And there were comments about trouble between the parents prior to the incident with the teacher, toothat Nicole Kidman was out of control when she was young too, and that her husband always seemed uncomfortable. -
MidnightThud — 10 years ago(July 26, 2015 06:50 AM)
The touching in the night could also just be the daughter exploring herself and her sexual awakening. Also if the wife was a molester, would she really give the book to the cop?
I didn't see the wife as molester of the girl but there are certainly parallels with their sexual urges, and use of sex as an emotional outlet, remembering the husband several times mentions her loose past when they were younger. -
MidnightThud — 10 years ago(July 26, 2015 01:24 PM)
I think she cried when reading the book because she recognised the daughter was going through the same mental and emotional strain she did which is why we see her get drunk and dress up like the daughter/herself as a young teen and the attempted seduction of the Aboriginal boy was part of the role play.
Most of us know women like this. part loving the attention from men but also loathing it and the lack of real, lasting and honest intimacy they receive.
I just think the molestations theories are stretching. -
!!!deleted!!! (58906484) — 10 years ago(July 26, 2015 04:35 PM)
If you had drunk sex with a minor it would still be a problem. Being drunk is not an excuse. You drive drunk and kill somebody there are still laws and victims. She gets drunk and get to have sex with a retard? She is sexually frustrated and can rape her hubby? She can make strong aggressive passes at the cop in charge of investigating your child disappearance. Why are all the scenes there? Are they just random fillers or are they clues about her character?
-
WolfgangHorizon — 10 years ago(August 07, 2015 03:55 PM)
Bravo! I had to sign in just to say 'Yes!" Yours is by far the best explanation, and the most logical. Excellent interpretation! There was always something so strange about the mother's behaviour, but I just didn't want to admit that perhaps she was the molesterbut as the show went on it seemed the father was by far the more normal of the two, and it couldn't just be chalked up to her grieving for her childrens' disappearance.
She was definitely the one with sexual issues. -
trisul — 10 years ago(August 18, 2015 01:54 PM)
Thanks for the long explanation, but I think you are completely wrong.
Even more thanks for the link to the interview with the director, as that was really conclusive for me. It is also really big of you to provide "evidence" that does not support your point of view. I like that, it shows you would like to understand, a researcher at heart.
The director mentions how some people react to stress and uncertainty in a sexual way or workaholic ways and she wanted to depict this. So the sexuality of the wife was something else altogether, response to stress.
I think it much more likely that the father touched her in the dark, and that this was the one moment he would like to take back. The wife also mentions that the sex between them disappeared on the day Lily went naked and that the husband was upset by this. In short, he sees his beautiful daughter naked, gets hung up on her, starts touching her in the dark and loses sexual interest in his wife. Remember the first scene were he is uncomfortable about his daughter being scantily dressed and all that violence regarding his daughter. -
jasminka26 — 9 years ago(April 13, 2016 10:58 PM)
At the end of the movie the father said he decided NOT to go after her (he said her, not them) to punish her. He said he decided not to go after her to punish her. He didn't say I wanted to go after her to punish her. That was the strangest part of the movie.