Read the full article on Firstpost, here: https://www.firstpost.com/entertainment/head-burst-which-had-asian-premiere-at-iffi-is-a-sympathetic-look-at-the-plight-of-a-paedophile-7713271.html
Looking at Markus — the protagonist of Savas Ceviz’s Head Burst (Kopfplatzen in German) — you’d think he’s a nice, normal guy. One day, entering the building he lives in, he sees a woman, Jessica, struggling with some boxes. She’s moving into an apartment near his, and he helps her. He meets her young son, Arthur. A few days later, she invites him over for a thank-you dinner. She talks about Arthur’s father, a drunkard. “I was a single mom even then,” she says. You sense she’s looking for a new partner, especially from the look on her face when she sees Marcus playing a board game with a clearly delighted Arthur.
But Markus would rather be with Arthur. That’s his sickening secret. He’s a paedophile. He drops in on his sister and gets a bear-hug from his young nephew. A little later, he excuses himself and goes to the toilet and masturbates. “This sucks,” he says — not because he isn’t able to get what he wants, but because he hates that this is what he wants. In other words, he’s aware. He knows it’s wrong. He’s not like the other paedophile he chats with online, someone who says he can send a link about how to lure young boys, and ends the chat with a wink. Markus knows he isn’t that guy.
Continued at the link above.
Copyright ©2019 Firstpost.
Baradwaj Rangan 
Anu Warrier
November 28, 2019
I don’t know whether to feel disgust or sadness or both at this behaviour. There are real people – kids! – being hurt by this predation. But I read of a paedophile, who works hard to keep himself away from temptation – will not work /volunteer anywhere there are children; has a reputation for being a ‘child-hater’ in his family because he actively ignores nieces and nephews; will not marry for fear of harming his own children, etc. For that man, at least, I have a heck of a lot of sympathy; and respect, for what he’s doing to keep his predisposition under control.
The men, especially those in power, who prey on the vulnerable, the defenceless, and oftentimes, the wards they are sworn to protect, are the vilest of the vile. The women, who help them, and often groom children for these predators deserve equal opprobrium.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Karthik H.S.
November 28, 2019
Reminded me of the stretch in Nymphomaniac II about the paedophile. Loved how Trier uses this character as a symbol of restraint and to contrast with all the deviances and excesses of the other characters who belong in a normal society. Also, the way Joe explains her empathy towards this character to Seligman was a real insight into her own character.
LikeLike
Reuben
November 28, 2019
This reminded me of Jackie Earle Haley’s (oscar nominated) performance in the movie Little Children. He brought out the pain, frustration and helplessness of his predisposition and ends up taking an extreme measure at the end of the movie.
LikeLike
Subhadra
November 29, 2019
These feel like taking liberalism too far where there could even be attempts to classify ‘pedophilia’ as a sexual orientation. You know what will follow in the name of rights soon after.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Madan
November 29, 2019
Subhadra : Indeed, conservatives have long alleged that legalising same sex marriage is meant to open the door to normalising pedophilia. On the face of it, and ideologically, this argument makes no sense. But consider that many among the rich and powerful have a thing for kids. I have not been following the news closely but Prince Andrew appears to be in deep trouble. So, yes, normalising pedophilia will serve their interests eminently. I completely refuse to sympathize with the ‘plight’ of a pedophile. Where do we stop then? We already have Salman pleading with us to sympathise with his deviant tendencies.
LikeLike
Karthik H.S.
November 29, 2019
Paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder marked by sexual desire towards children. Child sex abuse is the crime of acting upon such desires. Nymphomaniac II and Head Burst (I’m assuming) explore a person’s headspace in between. While I have no sympathy towards any form of abuse, I believe it’s important to empathize with people with such conditions to understand the condition itself and the moral strength it takes to not act on such impulses. As Anu Warrier mentioned, there are several paedophiles who are not child sex abusers and it’s important to know why.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
November 29, 2019
@Karthik, thank you for making that distinction. I too think it is important to understand the reasons why some people have such a desire and why some do / don’t act upon it. Not to empathise with them, or normalise them, but to be able to offer solutions to people who suffer from them.
@Subhadra – your argument is the ‘slippery slope’ argument that is used here in the US to deny LGBTQ people their rights, because God forfend, if we recognise sexual orientation as a fluid spectrum, then we are “opening the doors to normalising bestiality and necrophilia’ (as quoted by one stellar member of a state legislature here.) Karthik makes a fine point when he makes the distinction between the condition and the action. Conditions need to be treated; actions need to be punished.
@Madan – Being attracted to underage girls/boys is not paedophilia, by the way. That is ‘sex with a minor’ and unfortunately, even in the US, may actually be legal depending on what the age of consent is in each state. The girl Prince Andrew is alleged to have had sex with, was 16 at the time.
Paedophilia is the psychiatric condition where one is attracted to pre-pubescent girls or boys. A tiny distinction, perhaps, and not one that is of much comfort to the poor kids who were caught in Epstein’s (and others of his ilk) web, but a very important one.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
November 29, 2019
“That is ‘sex with a minor’ and unfortunately, even in the US, may actually be legal depending on what the age of consent is in each state.” – Well, then, it shouldn’t be because I don’t see how consent obtained from a person who is not recognised as adult by law is meaningful at all. I don’t care if it is supposed to be done with the minor’s knowledge and not coerced; the relationship is way unequal in such cases and should be strictly discouraged by all means.
I also don’t have problems with treating pedophilia (why would I, prevention is better than cure any day) but I do have problems with a movie asking us to look at the world through a pedophile’s gaze. Nope, sorry, can’t go there. What’s next, is being neo nazi a mental condition and are we required to empathise with them too? I get that lots of people have demons of their own to deal with and maybe some of us have too but that doesn’t mean all such demons should evoke empathy. I am prepared to offer help to a pedophile who sees that he/she is a problem but I cannot see the world through their prism; that’s a bridge too far.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
November 30, 2019
Well, then, it shouldn’t be because I don’t see how consent obtained from a person who is not recognised as adult by law is meaningful at all.
No arguments there, Madan. None at all. You’re preaching to the choir.
I do have problems with a movie asking us to look at the world through a pedophile’s gaze.
and
but I cannot see the world through their prism; that’s a bridge too far.
Actually, I’m not disagreeing with this either. Neither can I. I was just making a distinction between paedophilia and sex with a minor. 🙂
To be clear, I have no objections to medical professionals understanding the root cause of these behaviours and trying to find out how to treat it. I don’t want to watch movies about it.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
November 30, 2019
To be even clearer here (since I haven’t watched this film and have no intent to watch it either) – a’sympathetic look at the plight of a paedophile’ is different from ‘a sympathetic look at a paedophile’. Paedophilia is a genetic aberration (not a mental condition) and it’s hard to live with (and not act upon) behaviour that is ethically and morally repugnant, but that is wired into your DNA.
For people who try and control those natural impulses, I have a great deal of sympathy. I firmly believe that it is your actions that determine your character. (I still don’t want to watch the movie.)
LikeLike
Sifter
December 1, 2019
I have zero patience for such movies. Let’s have a sympathetic look at the plight of a paedophile….let’s celebrate another film that treats its ‘acid-thrower-at-his-girlfriend’ character with great sensitivity. I just wanna throw-up.
This as someone wrote, is not taking liberalism too far but it is like the extreme religious nuts slowly, but surely getting better and better with playing the victim and with excusing their disgusting behaviour. The priests will start with their excuses that they tried their level best to not sexually abuse the altar boys, but the devil thwarted it. Or, the altar boys had the devil in them that had to be exorcised by continuously abusing them. The Guruji’s will start to explain away their sexual abuses on minor girls by saying it is the path to salvation (or some shite like that). Not to say these excuses were not attempted, but now it will gain more traction with the so called ‘scientific researches’ trying to explain and declare it is a disease and any or all perpetrator can blame it on the disease.
Pity us the perpetrators, pity us who wreck havoc on children, pity us, pity us, pity us. Be sympathetic. Understand. Declare it a Medial Disease. Discuss how it can help us. Is there a Paedophiles Anonymous/Sexual Abusers Anonymous that we can join and escape prison? Forget those on whom all these hideous acts were perpetrated.
The DNA of every human being is wired uniquely if it comes down to it. But when people start using that information as an excuse to justify their actions is abhorrent.
As i said I just wanna throw-up. And that is an understatement. No amount of intelligent, objective,or dispassionate discussions will fly with me on this topic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Enna Koduka Sir Pera
December 1, 2019
Very well written piece. I also sympathize with those who are naturally wired this way, but know it’s wrong and can’t do anything to suppress the thoughts (and only can suppress the actions). I wish the medical field can offer some solutions to those who seek help with this and other conditions where their wiring instigates them to abhorrent thoughts. I wish there was a safe space for them to go seek help without being judged for their disposition (am referring to only those who have suppressed actions, not ones that have acted on their deplorable thoughts).
LikeLike
Madan
December 1, 2019
“Paedophilia is a genetic aberration (not a mental condition) and it’s hard to live with (and not act upon) behaviour that is ethically and morally repugnant, but that is wired into your DNA.” – I know this is what the wiki article on pedophilia says and I do not agree completely with this because predators like Kim Fowley exploited underage and adult women all the same. And, as Sifter says:
“Is there a Paedophiles Anonymous/Sexual Abusers Anonymous that we can join and escape prison? ” – Exactly. Already, the US accepts temporary insanity as a defense. Once you recognise pedophilia as a mental disorder, it would allow those who commit the act to escape criminal punishment. THAT is what I am afraid of.
” Forget those on whom all these hideous acts were perpetrated.” – Exactly. It’s almost as if being deviant deserves a medal or something and a normal person, however vulnerable, should be ignored.
So, to come back to what you, Anu Warrier, were saying:
“For people who try and control those natural impulses, I have a great deal of sympathy. I firmly believe that it is your actions that determine your character. (I still don’t want to watch the movie.)” – I agree with this but all the same, worry that a narrative that is sympathetic to the plight of those born with the condition who don’t act on it will only be appropriated by the predators. And sex with underaged clearly seems to be the playground of the aristocrats. I don’t remember exactly who it was, but a man came forward with allegations of child sexual abuse by bigwigs in showbiz and the media coverage of it was scant compared to MeToo. They seem to not want to blow off the lid on this racket; the extremely suspicious ‘suicide’ of Epstein is another red flag. We can be thankful to Prince Andrew for wanting to come forward and clear the air and looking so unconvincing in his efforts as to lend credence to the suspicion that what we have seen is just the tip of the iceberg.
LikeLike
Subhadra
December 1, 2019
Of course it’s just the tip of the iceberg considering the deep Dark Web and the its operations catering to the rich and the powerful who are predators. These things are not fantasy anymore to them. It is real.
To me the global agenda starts with encouraging the masses to the idea of empathizing and sympathizing with the so called plight of a possible mental disorder of a pedophile, only to be followed by something more concrete that could be used as a justification later.
To me this idea is not something to be entertained but needs to be dispirited asap.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
December 1, 2019
Madan, as I said, no arguments about anything that you said. I’m really not interested in narratives that look into the head space of paedophiles, rapists, murderers, Nazis… [insert noun of your choice here]. I don’t want to look sympathetically or otherwise at them. I honestly don’t care if s/he was traumatised in childhood by having his/her favourite teddy bear taken away. As I said, your actions determine your consequences.
But I do want to address something, not at you, specifically, but in a broader, more general way. You said:
worry that a narrative that is sympathetic to the plight of those born with the condition who don’t act on it will only be appropriated by the predators
How many films are made that look at paedophilia (or serial killers or rapists) sympathetically? One? Two? Ten? How many people watch them?
I get the outrage. Believe me, I do. Yet…
When we protested about our indigenous films that celebrate a toxic masculinity, that considers stalking ‘wooing’, we were told, ‘Because ART (TM)’. We were told to chill, to not ‘over react’, that cinema is absolved of responsibility [because ‘ART (TM)]. We were told that we might as well burn down cinema halls and build libraries there. That we were holding cinema to a higher standard and that artistic vision is, should be criticised only on artistic grounds, not on moral responsibility. That even protesting such cinema was the slippery slope to censorship.
But… there are more of such movies. There are enough studies that show that these movies do affect impressionable minds. We have all seen the results of such ‘love’, have heard painful personal anecdotes of being stalked. Yet, we were told that ART (TM) is sacrosanct. Consider that we made the same arguments then that are being today – make an Arjun Reddy/Kabir Singh/ Adithya Varma* sympathetic and you’re causing immense harm to an already vulnerable populace; glorify the ‘hero’s’ stalking as a measure of his ‘love’ and you’re increasing the chances that yet another girl/woman is being forced to desperate measures to safeguard herself; by normalising such characters by calling them ‘flawed’ (instead of psychotic) and having charismatic, popular ‘heroes’ play the roles, we were runnng the risk of yet another young man thinking it was quite okay to do it.
The reason that paedophiles may escape jail time based on ‘mental illness’ as an excuse will not be cinema’s fault, because that’s not how courts of law work. It will be because Science [may] finds a co-relation that can stand up to scrutiny. However, women will continue to feel unsafe, will continue to be abused, even murdered whenever yet another film normalises what should be seen as an aberration.
So. The next time you protest a niche film for normalising deviant behaviour, or sympathising with its protagonist, remember the very popular film you rooted for, remember just how much more insidious its messages are, and how much more harmful to an-already vulnerable populace.
Once again, I was only riffing off Madan’s point; this is NOT directed at him. Lest anyone think otherwise.
*Choosing this as the most recent, not the only representation of it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
December 2, 2019
Anu Warrier : You will get no argument from me on that. I have opposed the glorification of stalking or of toxic masculinity (AR) before this movie was made. I have no problem with depiction of such behaviour. Alex from A Clockwork Orange is the most deviant character I have seen in a movie but at no point does Kubrick sympathise with him, much less implore us to join him in doing so. I also don’t believe the dividing line between glorification/sympathising and depiction is all that thin or blurred but artists often hide behind the subjectivity defence when confronted on this (as Sandeep Reddy Vanga did in his interview).
LikeLike
Sifter
December 2, 2019
@ Madan- “It’s almost as if being deviant deserves a medal or something and a normal person, however vulnerable, should be ignored.”
Who knows, research scientists may soon ‘find-out’ a recessive gene that makes all those children/women in general/young men…vulnerable to the perpetrators. So, viola–just grin and bear it.
@ Anu- I do agree with you mostly on your comments. I also believe that many scientific theories are not absolute. Some of those that were considered as ‘absolutes’ by the researches earlier are ‘not absolutes’ anymore. One can’t dismiss the thought that there is always a chance that some with money would fund a research that ‘will find’ a co-relation and it ‘will be’ made to stand up to scrutiny….for at least some amount of time..
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
December 2, 2019
Sifter – no arguments about research being skewed, my friend. I agree with most of your other points too.
Madan – I know you have. Which is why I made it clear I was only riffing off your point. 🙂 The whole ‘art is sacrosanct’ theme sickens me. Nope, there are no holy cows. Nothing can, or should be, above being questioned.
I also don’t believe the dividing line between glorification/sympathising and depiction is all that thin or blurred but artists often hide behind the subjectivity defence when confronted on this (as Sandeep Reddy Vanga did in his interview).
Ah, yes. The subjectivity defence. Don’t get me started. 🙂 You’re right, you know – grey characters are absolutely welcome. Even black as pitch characters can be depicted without making them out to be poster boys worthy of being emulated. Don’t excuse deviant behaviour away. Don’t make them out to be misunderstood heroes when they are anything but!
LikeLiked by 2 people