Polanski. Boy am I cross

[lexin]

Harvey Weinstein: "Roman Polanski is a man who cares deeply about his art and its place in this world. What happened to him on his incredible path is filled with tragedy, and most men would have collapsed. Instead, he became a great artist and continues to make great films. I was with him the day he won the Legion of Honour in France, which was a spectacular day. I remember the incredible love and affection that people have for him." From here .

Bollocks. Bollocks. Bollocks. Irrelevant bumlicking bollocks.

Roman Polanski is by his own admission a rapist who abused the trust of a 13-year-old girl. The judge in the case had no cause to be making an agreement with him whereby he got off with 40-odd days and latterly realised the fact, at which point Polanksi skipped.

I don't care how many good films he's made, he's a rapist and should be in jail.

There is a point where even I become an authoritarian and some things are just wrong. That Polanski's been swanning about Europe for the past thirty years before being arrested is one of them.

Comments

[mecurtin.livejournal.com]

What depresses and, yes, surprises me is the collateral damage -- the number of people who I have to cross off my "may be a reasonable human being whose work I am willing to support" list.

[lexin.livejournal.com]

I'm surprised by that, too. It's as if they feel there ought to be one rule for the talented and another for the rest of us. And, no, there shouldn't.

[twistedanimator.livejournal.com]

agree

[lexin.livejournal.com]

Thanks!

[gloria1.livejournal.com]

Let me agree and say it again: Bollocks.

And if one more person brings up Sharon Tate's murder, I shall likely commit murder myself.

PS: and his films are not that great.

[lexin.livejournal.com]

I'd forgotten about Sharon Tate - but I mean what happened to her doesn't give him carte blanche to be a rapist. It just doesn't compute.

[lee-rowan.livejournal.com]

What does having one's wife murdered have to do with committing a crime against a child? I remember that case (yeah, I am that old) and I remember some people suggesting Polanski had attracted the attention of the Manson gang because of the satanist content of Rosemary's Baby. Which I thought was a disgusting movie, because--let's see, taking sexual advantage of a helpless woman to bring evil into the world? Oh, yeah, great theme. (Yes, that is sarcasm.)

Jail the child-raping scum-sucker. And throw away the key.

[briarwood.livejournal.com]

I could not agree more.

[lexin.livejournal.com]

Thanks!

[melodyclark.livejournal.com]

It's not authoritarianism in the least, it's thinking like an ethical human being and I agree completely.

[lexin.livejournal.com]

It's like I said to gloria1, they seem to want one rule for him and another for everyone else. No, cannot have.

[smirra.livejournal.com]

Might be even worse if the victim forgives him just like that - more reason for those still "Oh come on girls, don't be like that!" - thinking guys.

[lexin.livejournal.com]

There's almost a feeling of 'oh, come on, it was a joke, haven't you got a sense of humour' about it. It makes me want to bite them.

[actionreplay.livejournal.com]

Kate Harding has a great article in Salon on this topic. He raped a child. End of story.

[lexin.livejournal.com]

To be fair, the Indy did have Dominic Lawson make the same points Kate Harding did.

[shezan.livejournal.com]

That Salon piece is excellent.

[treehavn.livejournal.com]

Tony's (http://poliphilo.livejournal.com/665339.html) got an interesting debate along these lines at his journal. Suffice to say, and without getting too graphic, whenever I feel slightly swayed by the holocaust upbringing/Sharon Tate murders/Oscar winning director argument, the recollection that he had anal sex (and more) with an unwilling 13-year old brings it all back into context.

[lexin.livejournal.com]

It sure does.

[shezan.livejournal.com]

I don't see that anal sex is any worse than "normal" sex. (He switched to it after she told him she wasn't on the pill.) What makes me deeply uneasy, to say the least, is that the girl DID. NOT. WANT. IT. At any stage. Her testimony is at the Smoking Gun (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/polanskib1.html).

[treehavn.livejournal.com]

Yeh, I meant to clarify that point in my original comment - not to get into a Whoopi Goldberg argument: 'there's rape-rape and rape'. Obviously the fact that she was in no way consenting throughout is the primary factor. Cheers for bringing me up on that.

[labellerose.livejournal.com]

Hear hear. He's just not that special and I don't give a rat's ass if the young lady had been sexually active previously or not.
Adult+child+non-con = wrong.
Why is this so hard to grasp?

[lexin.livejournal.com]

Well if she'd been sexually active previously, that person too is guilty of statutory rape.

[labellerose.livejournal.com]

Absolutely! It's NO excuse

[lee-rowan.livejournal.com]

Not if it was another 13-14 year old kid. Well, technically, perhaps, but not the same thing as an adult taking advantage of a very young teenager.

[ringbark.livejournal.com]

I don't always take note of the views of Jesuits, but this one puts an interesting perspective.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnewser/2009/09/father-polanski-would-go-to-jail-says-jesuit.html

"What kind of line is that you're giving me?
One rule for you - one rule for me!"