Fantastic!

I have absolutely never seen anything like this movie before. You have to see this movie.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

I would say this documentary was exactly what I expected it to be. At least people who made it understand a dfference between pedophilia, the real mental disorder, and an arbitrary legal rule that makes a 19 yrs old having oral sex with 17 yrs old a "pedophile" because the state legislature forgot to ad extra provisions for teenagers having oral versus vaginal sex (hello, state of Georgia).However the fundamental premise of the documentary is wrong. In Western Europe the age of consent is 15 or 16 yrs old and yet you almost never hear about 35 yrs old guys having sex with 16 yrs old. Why? Because normal men do not find teenagers attractive. Even if the law permits it. Actually the ideal procreative age for female today is about 22- 28 yrs old and this is the group most men find attractive, regardless of age.Also, "teenage porn" is models in their 20s, sometimes 30s, telling to the camera they are 18. Most actual teenagers look 11 on film. Why do you think all high school movies cast actors in their 20s?And sorry but the only people who find 15 yrs old half-starved models attractive are other women and gay men fasion designers. I mean models look so asexual to normal men that they dressed a teenage boy as a female model and nobody could tell the difference. What does that tell you?As to the ancient times, yes, in ancient Egypt the average life span was 25, if you did not start having kids at 13, you did not have kids at all. But a few 1000s of years later in advanced civilisations like Greece people lived until 60 and men were not even allowed to get married until they completed their military service at 30. In Sparta, where women got education and were allowed to choose a husband out of their free will they did not even start to think about marriage until 16 and quite often did not marry until 19-20.

This documentary brings up a valid an interesting point about sexual attraction and its relation to the age of puberty.Certainly young pubescent women will be attractive to older men because evolutionarily, they are the fittest partners. This is why we find so many "normal" non pedophilia labeled men attracted the porn stars dressed in school uniforms having sex with "teacher." The documentary does a great job of explaining the difference between pedophilia and hebophilia which I think is an interesting and valid issue to bring up.However, where I disagree is the film's suggestion that sexual attraction to young teens is acceptable more or less as long as consent in there. But it fails to bring up the issue of changing maturity levels between pubescent teens today, and pubescent teens who were courting and reproducing at 13 in the stone age.Young teens today are far more sheltered and much less mature in my opinion then they have been at other time periods in world history. Certainly they have access to much more knowledge via the internet but most teens live at home in western culture today well into their 20's.In short, I can understand a biological attraction to young girls or boys clearly in or past puberty, but I still don't think children below the age o maybe 17 or 18 are mature enough to consent to their bodies being used sexually by older people or even people their own age.The film seemed to pushing an agenda to me that suggested that only actual pedophilia (attraction to pre pubscent children) should be shunned, while hebophilia has actually been celebrated in past cultures.No. My 13 year old cousin may be in puberty, but she still plays with dolls and participates in the girl scouts. If any man tried to tell me she can consent to any sexual act with him, I'm going to jail for manslaughter.Mental maturity and ability to truly consent should always be an important aspect of this discussion and was conveniently left out of a film that seemed to be made for old men wanting to justify sex with teens.

Since Are All Men Pedophiles? deals with real life and its issues, it's classified as a "documentary" in contemporary parlance. However, unlike most documentaries which examine a historical event or set of events, this movie focuses more on a widespread cultural phenomenon which is only incidentally historical; I would prefer to term this an educational film or maybe a cinematic investigative report (basically a big-screen version of the hard-hitting exposes regularly available on news channels on TV).Of course, such reports rarely come without an agenda, and a cinematic version is hardly likely to be any more neutral than TV. To hear this film's many hostile critics talk, though, I tend to think it more successful as a social experiment than as propaganda for much of anything. If the point of making it was to stir up a lot of self-righteous hysteria and make its detractors look like raving imbeciles, at this it has succeeded most impressively. Apparently, a vast majority of the hostile reviewers either didn't actually watch the movie, or were determined not to let any facts confuse their opinions by paying any attention to what it actually says.In fact, what agenda this film does seem to have is as concise as it is modest. While it raises a great many questions about pedophilia and related topics, the only answer this movie unambiguously provides is to the question in the title. In this answer also lies the agenda: put simply, the popular definition of pedophilia in most contemporary cultures is far too broad. By this definition, not only are virtually all *men* pedophiles (apart from the odd asexual and gerontophile), but all boys and no small number of girls and women! What director Jan-Willem Breure would like us to do is accept the much narrower clinical definition of pedophile commonly used as the basis for our laws, which refers only to individuals (male or female) sexually attracted to prepubescent children; nothing more, and nothing less.As to "justifying" pedophilia or hebephilia (or the less-commonly-used English variant "hebophilia" this movie uses) or advocating for changes in age-of-consent laws or any other sexual laws, neither this movie nor anyone in it attempts anything of the sort. It's not advocating for "men's rights" or "children's rights" or any other "rights" except for the individual rights all of us are already supposed to have that popular culture's insanely broad and hypocritical definition preemptively denies us: habeas corpus, presumption of innocence, and a fair trial. To this end, the movie points to a number of historical and contemporary realities that tend to contradict the tidy cultural narrative so many have adopted by which any male so much as a day over eighteen who finds anyone so much as a day under eighteen the least bit sexually attractive is to be condemned as a pedophile, which is to say a monstrous sexual predator whose humanity and very right to exist are questionable at best.In all other matters, this movie seems to serve almost no purpose but to raise questions without answering them. It takes us on a brief tour of cultures from past to present, bringing up the practical concerns of childbearing in savage eras when the average lifespan was dangerously low and few would live to see the births of their grandchildren, and pitting them against more contemporary philosophical concerns about sexuality and its impact on our society. Through snippets of popular culture, sound bites from various individuals on the street, and in-depth testimonies from pedophiles and victims and various experts on related subjects, we hear a great many opinions and narratives that flatly contradict each other. At no time are we offered any simple resolutions to any of these contradictions.If any actual pedophiles come looking to watch this movie for prurient purposes, chances are they'll be sorely disappointed. Its most potentially prurient sequence is exactly one brief and relatively tame animated example of Japan's "lolicon" line-drawings which employs all the usual censors' tricks to stop just short of showing us all of an obviously prepubescent girl's forbidden parts during a magical clothing transformation. Likewise, if they come looking for some kind of justification for molesting youngsters, they won't find one. Accepting the clinical distinction between hebephilia, pedophilia, and normal adolescent sexuality (as our legal systems already do to some degree) is not going to make statutory rape any more socially acceptable or make children and teenagers any more vulnerable to sexual predators.Indeed, if anything, the popular broad definition of "pedophile" with all of its paradoxical inconsistencies is by far the greater danger to our children and our civilization. As Are All Men Pedophiles? points out, the popular definition of "pedophilia" already has men and boys looking over their shoulders as a sexist double standard bars males from seeking employment in schools and daycare centers, while boys (but almost never girls) are declared child pornographers and registered as sex offenders for "sexting" whether they are on the sending or receiving end. Beneath all their pretended concern for the safety of our children and our society's alleged need to crack down on sexual crime, our politicians know that if "pedophilia" can mean anything they and their media lackeys want it to mean, no dissenter will ever be safe from character-assassinating show trials.Breure's report is far from being a complete recommendation for what kind of moral and social (not to mention legal) reforms we need to end the hateful hysteria-generated witch hunt against men and boys our supposed superiors have foisted on us through popular culture. Nevertheless, it's a start.

That is the question posed by this new Documentary by Jan-Willem Breure focusing on adult-teenager intercourse, and the lines between finding a younger girl attractive or not. The poster for the flick features an attractive chick…who is 14. Or, if you find her attractive, it makes you a pedophile I guess.In my opinion, saying this girl is attractive is fine. Your average adult male is not thinking about going and diddling her, she's just good looking. After all, she is a model. The movie was actually inspired by Breure's attraction to teenage girls. He is 23. And he wanted to investigate whether this was pedophilia or not. They base theories on younger girls in the past getting married. Even, as you'll see in the trailer below, they discuss the age of the Virgin Mary when she may have been impregnated with Jesus. They talk about our age laws here in North America Vs. other countries around the World. Personally, I think the laws make perfect sense her. Girls and boys are raised differently here. We are still immature and don't quite understand consequence until a later age. Our society reflects this perfectly. Whereas somewhere in a third world country where you are a "man" or "woman" no longer a boy or girl, at the age of 13, it's completely different. Even then, the idea of an adult male, say 33, having intercourse with a teenager is simply wrong. Definitely a provocative sounding documentary. What do you think? Matt Berry - x929