By todays US sexual standards, the author, producer, director, and entire cast of "Summer of 42" would be imprisoned as "sex offenders.

This.

"Every breath you take, every step you make, I'll be watching you.. oh don't you see.. you belong to me.."

Holy shite.. how creepy.

Isnt the age of consent in your country 16. Oh the irony.

Don't blame religious people you dumbass. The bible makes no 18 and above statement. If i'm not mistaken, age of consent - menstruation there. Correct me if im wrong.

You obviously have no idea how Puritan the US is when it comes to sexual issues. At least in 2020. They will lock people up here and make them "sex offenders" for things that are quite common all around the world.

"Bush II" says enough. Complete idiot.

True.

Brooke Shields was totally nude in "Pretty Baby." Her mother/manager got her that role.

[link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)]

[link to www.vanityfair.com (secure)]

Shes "proud" of being in a mainstream movie nude at age 12. Shes lucky her mother and everyone else involved in that movie were not sent to prison. Today, they would be.

How times have changed in just 40 years. Unreal.

This.

was a great movie I liked it when i was lil

This.

Not 12... I think in some states, the lowest was 13 years. But I suppose they had to get the parents' agreement.

FYI... in the 90's, there was an article in the biggest Flemish newspaper about a family having spent their vacation in Turkey. Their daughter was 13. She had met a young barkeeper or something and they had fallen in love and the parents were going back to Belgium without her.... I don't know how that is possible without the parents having given their consent. Turkish law I suspect would have allowed it.

How puritan on one hand, yet at the same time and OTOH, they will allow any kind of wierd kinkiness, like in California.

The US did NOT used to be that Puritan ... but it is now thanks to the GOP Religious Bible Thumpers (started after Reagan, before that the GOP didn't cow tow to the Bible Thumpers - back then they just ignored them)

Look at this very website. EVERY TIME a thread comes up about what the Legal Age of Sex should be ... or the Minimum Age of Marriage a whole group of people, mostly women is seems, come out of the woodwork arguing that NOBODY should be having sex before 18 ... and marriage shouldn't occur until then (and some argue NOT UNTIL 21).

Sheesh ... what a change from when my grandmother was growing up and females were LEGALLY getting married at 14, LOTS of them, and most of those marriages lasted 50-75 years!! (until one partner died) ... or when I was growing up in the 60's and it was a given that 1/2 the kids in high school were having regular sex and their parents knew it.

The subconscious drives of the human animal are NOT any different now than they were 100 years ago ... once a female is fertile and a boy has gone through puberty the Biological DRIVE to have Sex is there, and nothing any Bible Thumping Preacher say, and NO LAW that a Bible Thumping politician passes is going to change that Biological Drive. Kids, once they turn 14-16 are going to engage in Sex ... no matter what the "LAW" says.

Over the years I have seen so much hypocrisy by the Bible Thumpers that I have lost any respect for them since virtually 100% are Pure Hypocrites in one way or another.

Not sure how you get rid of those crazy laws those Republican Legislators have passed, while trying to curry favor with those Hypocritical Bible Thumpers, but young people are effectively being taught to just IGNORE THE LAW since it is so ridiculous on those matters anymore. (a mindset that then carries over to every other law that is on the books)

Idiot Bush Jr was the one who signed all this sex offender crap, not Reagan. As with everything else, he just did what the religious hypocrites told him to do. Same for his wars.

People were saner in 1971, immeasurably saner in 1942. And in 1942, they had other things to worry about.

Dorothy didn't rape Hermie. She wasn't his teacher. I think the scenario is implausible, but it's also a movie. And implausible or not, the author says something sort of like what's portrayed in the movie actually did occur.

There's also a gender inequity to consider. 22 year old widows shouldn't prey on willing 15 year old boys, but I find it more palatable than 22 year old widowers taking comfort with 15 year old girls. Sorry, but that's my considered opinion on the matter. And I reiterate: it's implausible.

I do think it's a damn fine film. It captures the spirit of the era (as I imagine it, anyway); its main theme music is masterful; Jennifer O'Neill delivers a great performance (in an admittedly simple role). I'll have to check Blockbuster and see if it's available. Oh, wait . . .

What about Risky Business? Its about high schoolers running a whore house out of his mothers house while they are away.

He even gets into an ivy league school by giving the recruiter a hooker.

the woman is a pedophile, then

So explain the Brooke Shields movie listed earlier in this thread? Nude at 11 in a main stream movie?

Correction, she was nude at 12 years old in a main stream movie released only 40 years ago.

If that happened today, everyone who made it and everyone who watched it would be a "sex offender" according the DOJ.

So there were more homosexuals that heterosexual couples what an idiot

And yet people move HERE and there's an American Dream, not a Swedish Dream or Argentinian Dream. Wonder why. If you want to be fucked up go somewhere else.

This.

No, it wasn't.

That is still a popular movie today. Its re run on TCM every few months or so.

True, none of these laws could be enacted today. "Sex offenders" before Bush Jr were just hands on rapists. You physically had to touch or rape someone. After Bush Jr, almost everyone can be labeled as a "sex offender."