It’s pretty much impossible to answer that question. Chaplin himself claimed to have slept with more than 2,000 women, and many of them were pretty young. It’s likely that quite a few of them were underage. There’s a recent biography of Chaplin by Peter Ackroyd that has much to say about his sexual exploits. If you want to read it and report back to us on ages and locations, please do so.
18 is over the age of consent in every US state, and as far as I know always has been. I’m not sure what having a legal, consensual relationship with an 18 year old has to do with violent rape of a 13 year old.
I have no idea, don’t care and it has absolutely no bearing on the question of if made him a bad guy because of it.
Of course it does.
Do you, or do you not think it is ok to rape a13 year old?
But there’s a huge developmental difference b/w 18 and 13. And he had sex with her when she wasn’t consenting–wrong whether the victim in question is 13 or, say, 30.
There’s a difference between thinking a 16 year old girl is attractive (sexually) and actually involving yourself with one. What man in his youth hasn’t had a young girl try to flirt with him or the reverse for women? You walk away shaking your head as to what they must be thinking?
There’s a world of difference between a 19-year-old going out with a 16-year-old and a 35-year-old going out with a 16-year-old.
And a much bigger world between any of those and 13. Heck 16 and 13 would have skeeved me out a little when I was in High School ( not that it didn’t happen, but such pairings drew a lot of disdain ).
The law of most jurisdictions in which I am willing to live states that it is not.
Certainly to some people it’s not. But if I did that at 19 my friends and family would have distanced themselves from me. I can hear my mother saying something as blunt as “what is wrong with you”.
I suppose it’s how you’re raised.
So we have a) a guy having sex with a seventh grader, b) a guy drugging a thirteen year old and, c) a guy raping a thirteen year old against her will. How the fucking hell does that not add up to a crime by a guilty asshole? What the hell did he have to do to get jail time and societal condemnation? Give her a few black eyes? Smash her skull against a wall? Tear apart her private parts?
This thread reminds me to keep a close eye on my girls until I send them off to college.
Well, it shouldn’t raise your ire that much - really you only have one or two outliers in this thread. It’s not like the SDMB or the world at large is chockablock with Polanski defenders. It’s just the contrary opinions stick out admidst the overall chorus of condemantion.
And the law says he wasn’t her father, step-father, nor adoptive father. Your personal opinion of the matter does not negate the legal fact, especially as Miss Previn was not adopted by Allen.
You’re tossing out a childish comment with that insult. Stick to fact, if you don’t mind. As another poster informed you, the marriage was a legal marriage and therefore not, in law, child molestation.
The 17-year old was past the age of consent and therefore that act was not, in law, child molestation.
Bully for you. The man broke no law. You don’t like the law? Agitate to have the law changed.
Now, let’s get back to the subject of Polanski. Now he really did break the law and he compounded his child molestation (rape) with fleeing the jurisdiction to avoid the lawful penalty to be imposed by a judge. Why should Polanski be the only child molester to be considered cured somehow by the corpus of his work created while he is actively and publicly remaining free as a fugitive from justice? Other child molesters get death threats, are restricted in their movements even after they’e served the sentence imposed by a court, and generally treated as the worst kind of pariah. Polanski committed a heinous crime in the past and has not faced due punishment for that crime. And he his committing a crime now.
It’s not just the Polanski shit. It’s the kind of view of young girls as seen in Halloween costumes like these:
Yah. Lavender, there’s no shortage of societal condemnation of Polanski.
“PharaHo”… bwahaha…
There seems to be a shortage in Europe, or they would have sent him back.
I’m sorry, but I’m not seeing how that is either accurate or relevant.
Yeesh. Can’t argue much with that, though like the author of that piece you kinda gotta wonder about who all the parents are that are buying all of these French Maid outfits for their twelve year-olds.