Re: As did I...

____________________________________
I agree with a lot of what you say. Clearly the protagonist lacked empathy and showed many sociopathic traits. At the same time, he did have sexual and emotional feelings for a child. We don't know why he does or the nature of these feelings, but there is a lot in the film that points to an emotional dissatisfaction in Michael. I think underneath it all he really wanted to be able to love, but he might just be incapable.
____________________________________

The protagonist was the antagonist, so to speak. I think his feelings were much more sexual than emotional. In fact, I found his lack of emotion to be glaring. He also seemed to lack the sociopath "charm" that a lot of them seem to have. He might have had a touch of autism as well as sociopathic tendencies. Most people with autism are not sociopathic and most sociopaths are not autistic, but the main character seemed to have some tendencies from both of those groups. Apparently not a very good combination to have.
___________________________________

I have tried to explain already that I brought this movie up not recommending it as a good portrayal of a MAP or of anything that represents your lives. I brought it up because it is a film that deals with issues of adult/sexual relationships and minor-attraction. Yes, it is extreme and sensationalized and unrealistic. But I think it is interesting how these things are portrayed in the media and thought some of you might be interested in talking about it in that manner.
___________________________________

I think you can barely classify it as a relationship. It's forced co-habitation. The boy chose "the knife" with no hesitation as those of us who've seen the movie would know. And with all due respect, I don't think a child rapist is a good model for minor-attraction. Just like a man who rapes women is not a good model for heterosexual teleiophile attraction. The underlying factor is the desire to dominate and control, which exists regardless of the object of attraction. So rapists of all stripes, heterosexual or homosexual, minor-attracted or adult-attracted, speak more to each other than to non-rapists with a similar attraction base.
___________________________________

Also, I should say that Jeffrey Dahmer does very much have to do with gay issues.
___________________________________

I guess you're coming at this from a somewhat different vantage point than most people. We should try to recognize that and respect it, but for better or worse, you can sort of rub people the wrong way by saying things like that, especially identity groups like gays, Jews, blacks, or in our case MAPS. If you point to the worse examples of human behavior performed by someone from a particular group, especially a group which has experienced oppression, and then tell them it has to do with "their issues" then they may feel insulted. With regards to Dahmer, much like I feel about "Michael", I feel that his homosexuality was mainly an under the surface factor, at least in terms of his crimes. His psychopathic tendencies were what made him a danger to society. Most people couldn't care less whether he was gay or not. I would like to get to that point with pedophilia/hebephilia/ephebophilia. Where we judge not by the age of attraction, but by the behavior, good or bad, empathic or sociopathic.