There has been much indignation – and rightfully so – from various parties over the fact that Hollywood is “circling the wagons” around Roman Polanski, who was finally arrested in Switzerland after being a fugitive from justice for over 30 years for the drugging and subsequent rape and sodomy of a 13-year-old girl despite her pleas to stop – to which he pled guilty, by the way.
An excellent article, which really says it all, is by Kate Harding over at Salon.com – if you haven’t read it yet, you should. She reminds us that Roman Polanski – wait for it – raped a child. I don’t care if the victim, now 45, wants it all dropped because she’s tired of being the focal point of publicity. I don’t care it it’ll be a drain on California’s over-extended budget (how about not footing the bill for the education and medical care for illegal aliens? That’d fix things in a big hurry). I don’t care if she “looked” older than 13, or if her mother was the proverbial stage mother from hell, or if the sky was green instead of blue that day. And I certainly don’t care that Polanski is such a talented director – what WOULD we do without Hollywood to entertain us? – with a troubled past of his own. Many of us have troubled pasts. We don’t all use it as an excuse to do whatever the hell we want just because it “feels good” at the time.
It’s time for him to man up and face the music for committing a disgusting crime against a child – one that took away her innocence forever.
But not according to some big names in Hollywood, no sirree Bob. Whoopi Goldberg says it wasn’t a “rape-rape.” What the hell? When someone says “no,” it’s rape. Even if the girl had said “yes” it would still be rape because since when to we expect children of that age to know when they’re being taken advantage of by an adult? If they knew better, they would reach their majority status at 13, not 18. Kids have a lot of growing up to do during those years in between.
Patrick Goldstein talks about the boy as a fugitive who became a fugitive as an old man. No one would deny that as a survivor of the Holocaust he and his family, along with millions of other Jews and “undesirables,” were viciously prosecuted by the Nazis. And I’m sure it was painful to be an early suspect in his wife Sharon Tate’s murder (she was a victim in the grisly Manson Family crime spree). But he became a fugitive later in life due to his own actions. Had he not done what he did to that girl and then run off before serving his sentence, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. He probably would have been an even bigger hero to the Hollywood left had he gone to prison. After all, Hollywood always forgives unless you’re a conservative. And don’t tell me his “exile” has been hell on earth. He continued to earn a lavish living while making films overseas, including “The Pianist,” which earned him a 2003 Academy Award for Best Director. Boo hoo, he couldn’t come here to claim it. Cry me a river.
Debra Winger, jury member for the Zurich Film Festival, seems more worried about the impact this will have on the festival than serving justice, as the festival was getting ready to bestow a lifetime achievement upon Polanski. She said in a statement, “This fledgling festival has been unfairly exploited and whenever this happens the whole art world suffers. We hope today this latest (arrest) order will be dropped. It is based on a three-decades-old case that is dead but for minor technicalities. We stand by him and await his release and his next masterpiece.” The whole art world is suffering because Roman Polanski violated a 13-year-old girl and then ran out on his sentence? Damn those technicalities. What’s next? Should we be bemoaning the fact that Phil Spector is in jail for murdering a woman in his home because the music world is somehow suffering too?
I could go on, but you get the point. As a parent, the stench of moral equivalency is making me ill.
But I suppose we shouldn’t be surprised that so many Hollywoodites have decided that Polanski has “suffered enough” and, in fact, may not even be guilty because not only did he have a tough childhood, the girl with a pushy mom may have been a real-life Lolita. Think about it: The entertainment industry believes it is responsible for the moral compass of America and, by extension, the world – and look at much of what comes out of Tinseltown. Many of the movies, television shows and videos to which we are treated glorify sex and violence, and some of it is aimed at young people. (Ever see that show “Degrassi” on the cable network aimed at teens, The N?)
Then there are movies like “Lolita” (two versions), based on the book of the same name, where a young girl “seduces” an older man. And who could forget “American Beauty?” Kevin Spacey’s character Lester Burhham is a family man who rebels against the horrible life he lives in the suburbs and, among other things, begins lusting after his teenage daughter’s friend. It actually gets to the point where his sordid dreams about her are about to come true – but when he rips open her blouse, he realizes she is still a child and comes to his senses. Too bad Polanski didn’t.
Oh, the man who wrote “American Beauty” also wrote “Nothing is Private” (a/k/a “Towelhead”), about a 13-year-old Arab-American girl who is struggling with her sexual awakening. What is it with 13-year-old girls in Hollywood?
Smut and other “unconventional” behavior, heavily laden with moral equivalence, is Hollywood’s stock in trade. Why would they criticize someone who does in real life what they sell to their patrons every day? (Yes, you could argue that if people wouldn’t buy it, they wouldn’t sell it. Sex sells, yada yada yada. But let’s keep the kiddies out of it, shall we?) Drug abusers and alcoholics are always given second, third and fourth chances. Why not men who sexually abuse children? As long as they can keep making money for the industry and giving them reasons to hand out awards that only they care about? Awesome.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.