bruce-129 This movie tries to be titillating and provocative, and I suppose it is to a certain degree given just the subject matter, but it is mostly kind of boring because there is no real thread of ideas, a plot or a point.The one thing it does it is give the viewer some information, such as what various terms actually mean and what are their histories as well as what is the age of consent and what is considered normal in other countries across the world.Does not seem to advocated for any particular viewpoint or really explore the subject such as comparing what same age relationships are like versus different age and gender situations. Also seems to ignore feminist issues such as the objectification or commoditization of women, so contrary to a lot of comments here this is not a feminist movie per se, though the facts do lean in a certain way .... as Stephen Colbert quoted reality has a well known liberal bias! ;-)Probably worth watching if you are interested and want to know some facts.5/10

Karl Self This documentary starts by putting forward the thesis that "all men are pedophiles" because they find girls around the age of 16 sexually attractive while the legal age of consent "in most countries" is 18. To drive home this theory it shows us a bunch of sultry lolitas in frilly frocks. Well, just a quick shufty at the internet shows that a common age of consent doesn't exist and that it's often around 14-16. Simplistic theory debunked, lurid title exposed.The movie then goes on to briefly discuss the terms pedophilia, infantophilia and hebophilia and the qualifiers acting out / offending and exclusive / non-exclusive. Strangely, some of the interviews are conducted in a glossy, scripted style that is reminiscent of the fake customer testimonials of home shopping commercials ("I've lost ten stone with the fab ab trainer!"). This is dubbed with the heavy Dutch brogue of the director.This documentaries has a few good interviews, but overall it never lives up to its overblown premise and consequently is a bit of a dud. So, not all men are pedophiles, but we already knew this. The underlying questions, what is pedophilia, why are some (men) pedophiles and how do we deal with it, are neither touched nor illuminated.

candylilacs It becomes very evident, in about the first few minutes of watching this on Netlix, that this "documentary" has an agenda. I think when you come out with a generalization that since you found children attractive at the age of 13-16, "As you grow older, children under the age of 18 do not become less attractive."Granted, I'm not a man, but I find 16 year old boys kind of funny- looking, I see many young girls as being skinny and weird-looking, too. Anyway, the whole film is just riddled with hasty generalizations and awful, illogical arguments. Since when does the age of the Virgin Mary have to do with anything? Or that one 13-year-old dated an 18-year-old and isn't traumatized by it? That hardly counts as more than an anecdote, not evidence of anything.Add the labored and barely understandable narration by heavily-accented director/writer Jan-Willem Breure, junk science (it makes *a lot* of poor evolutionary hypotheses that could be destroyed in an elementary school science class), and an underlying agenda of the producer and his ilk wanting to date/have sex with young girls -- although Breure does admit that sex with young girls before puberty is wrong -- and it's not surprising this has only appeared on Netflix. No network or distributor would touch this because of its amateurish content.Breure also uses the argument that women can be pedophiles -- which means what? That doesn't cancel out the fact that men are pedophiles, too. He also suggests that teens are sexting, and that teens are considered distributors of one-third of the world's child pornography, but this argument is used to insinuate that many child pornographers and users are teens, not adult men. If you are a pedophile, or want to commit statutory rape, please speak to someone and seek help. Don't attempt to justify your decision by watching this film.

Kendra Holliday So often sensitive or taboo subjects are avoided, and it's better to be open and honest about them so we can gain a better understanding of ourselves and those around us.If a person is 24 and is in a relationship with a 16 yr old, is that wrong? What about 30 and 16? 40 and 16? The film argues that girls mature sooner than boys, and for thousands of years our life expectancy was 33 so it made sense to reproduce as soon as the woman came of age (began menses) In the film, they interview a female pedophile. Her graphic story was difficult for me to hear. Another shocking moment is when they interview a woman who was repeatedly raped as a child by her father and a neighbor.They also interview a man who is out about being a pedophilia. During that interview it is noted that pedophilia is an orientation, not an action. The man interviewed claims to be a non-exclusive, non-offending pedophile, meaning he admits he is sexually attracted to children, but is also attracted to adults and does not act on his attraction to children. He believes a lot of people are attracted to kids; they just won't dare to acknowledge it.What about the weird sexualization of girls in our society, such as making sweatpants for little girls with words like "JUICY" on the butt? Makeup for kids grooms them for future sexual advertising. And of course, there's the whole beauty pageants for little girls racket.A friend of mine went to jail for a year because his friend sent him a topless picture of his girlfriend. Turns out the girlfriend was 16 and he got busted for possession of child porn. When he got out of jail he found a job, but was fired two weeks later when the employer found out about his criminal record.Chid porn is people under age 18 who are portrayed in sexual, lewd conduct erotic behavior. So wouldn't that mean that many magazine ads are child porn? This film digs into these topics and more.