# Polanski...seriously **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 21, 2003, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615 "2003-10-21T00:55:18Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/61 "2003-10-21T22:09:06Z")
> [@](#): > > A rather absolutist view, _ne pas_? By characterizing statutory rape as a crime based solely upon age, as opposed to being based upon relative ability to give consent irrespective of age, you equate actually consensual acts to much worse acts. I implied in my post - though I guess I didn’t state it flat-out - that the absolutist view is a problematic one. My point was not that statutory rape is wrong every single time it happens (i.e. a 20-year-old could probably be prosecuted for sex with a 16-year-old, but I don’t think that’s necessarily wrong). I was trying to say that I think overall it’s better to have the laws than to not have them because kids can get taken advantage of and they need to be protected from it. My view of the situation is not absolutist. I don’t have a problem, under forthright circumstances, if a 20-y.-o. and a 16-y.-o. to get together. Some cases of statutory rape are like that, but there are others where I think things are more clear-cut. Sorry, but I just don’t think your average 13-year-old - or indeed, pretty much any 13-year-old - is in a position to consent to sex. A 13-year-old can know what sex is and say ‘yes’ to it when asked, but I’m not really convinced that he or she can make an informed appraisement of the situation, the risks, etc. Until I’m convinced otherwise, I’m going to say that yes, stat. rape should be a crime - not that it’s ALWAYS a crime by the letter of the law, but that it shouldn’t be legal under all circumstances. One reason I was miffed at your post is the “spooje should die in prison?” comment. Several people have said Polanski should spend the rest of his life in jail, but I wasn’t one of them. Thus, I felt it was unreasonable for you to say I was making such a judgment about **SPOOJE** , who I don’t think did anything wrong in the first place. > [@](#): > > when [rape] is violent, and it deserves capital punishment. For whatever it’s worth, I don’t agree. > [@](#): > > Violent rape is real rape, as defined by common usage of the term, whereas statutory rape can be proven simply on a technicality Not all ‘real’ rape is violent. As has been noted in this thread, people who are intoxicated are unable to consent as well. This might seem like another technicality, but I think it’s just as much rape as raping a woman at knifepoint- or a 43-year-old taking advantage of a 13-year-old. While statutory rape can hinge on a technicality - i.e. I may have committed it a few times between my 21st birthday and my girlfriend’s 19th birthday, a period of about 4 months - I don’t think that’s generally how it shakes down. Nevermind matters of proof in court and of bringing charges, I would wager that few cases are of the “gotcha,” getting-caught-by-a-single-day variety. That is, there are more people like Polanski, who is not in a gray area, getting in trouble because of statutory rape than people like **SPOOJE**. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/62 "2003-10-21T22:11:36Z")
> [@](#): > > And your knowledge on this matter is better than mine why? Well, I’m not the one who made the original assertion here. If you truly believe that Polanski has been merrily molesting young women in the close to thirty years since his return to France, and has simply not been caught doing so, let’s hear some evidence. As for your claim that you were not taking a stab at the French, explanation accepted without further comment. I’m really not interested in continued battling over this issue, which is somewhat tangential to the discussion anyway. I’ve already expressed my main point, which is that I believe his best works stand on their own and remain worthy of being seen, regardless of what one thinks of of his personal behavior. Sorry to have upset you further. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/63 "2003-10-21T22:27:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by El\_Kabong \* > \*\* If you truly believe that Polanski has been merrily molesting young women in the close to thirty years since his return to France, and has simply not been caught doing so, let’s hear some evidence. \*\* “For all I know…” (which is what I said) is a far cry “\* truly believe…” (which is what you said.) I don’t think there’s a person here who would disagree with my original statement. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/64 "2003-10-21T22:44:42Z")
Hey, **Cisco** , for all I know, you’re a serial killer who eats the flesh of his victims. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/65 "2003-10-21T23:25:33Z")
Hey, Miller, have I been to court and then fled the country for killing people and then eating their flesh? Eat shit then. ---
**Author:** ![clairobscur](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/839c29/32.png) [@clairobscur](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clairobscur)\ **Post date:** [October 21, 2003, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/66 "2003-10-21T23:38:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by El\_Kabong \* > \*\* > > Polanski is a naturalized French citizen (dating, I believe, from his childhood). France is not obligated to honor, and normally does not honor, extradition requests for its citizens from the US. He apparently could be extradited should he, for example, travel to certain other EU countries such as the UK. > \*\* Actually, it seems to me that France actually _never_ extradite its own citizens. However, as a french citizen, it seems to me it could be tried by a french court for a crime (also punishable under french law) commited on foreign soil. But there’s something I probably get wrong, since France recently passed a law allowing the prosecution of french people who were involved in pedophilia cases commited in foreign countries (sex tourism, mainly), so I assume they couldn’t be prosecuted before for some reason. On the other hand I clearly remember the trial (by a french court) of a french citizen who had been accused of a murder commited in the US on a US citizen. So, I don’t really understand how these things work. ---
**Author:** ![LordVor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/90ced4/32.png) [@LordVor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LordVor)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 2:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/67 "2003-10-22T02:02:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Marley23 \* > \*\* My point was not that statutory rape is wrong every single time it happens (i.e. a 20-year-old could probably be prosecuted for sex with a 16-year-old, but I don’t think that’s necessarily wrong). \*\* I agree, and if you believe the girl’s testimony, I can’t believe that anybody would argue that this situation, which involved (according to the testimony): 1. Getting a 13 year old girl drunk 2. Convincing her to take off her clothes for sensual pictures 3. Going down on her (which she doesn’t even know the word for, her calling it “cuddliness” in her testimony) 4. Drugging her 5. Fucking her until he realized that she wasn’t on the pill, and then, instead of pulling out and finishing himself, he 6. Fucks her in the ass as she asks him to stop, is anything other than rape and him anything less than an ass who deserves to rot in prison. This if freaken rape according to 1970s outdated rape laws, it’s certainly rape by modern standards. I’ll also say that plea bargens are sometimes accepted to bring a speedy end to emotionally draining trials. -lv ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/68 "2003-10-22T02:21:34Z")
> [@](#): > > Originally posted by Zoe: > Perhaps it is because you have not seen _The Pianist_ that you are lacking an insight into Polanski that some of the rest of us share now. The movie is about terrible pain and survival and there is much of Polanski’s heart in it. I cannot imagine that an evil man could have made that film. > [@](#): > > **Greyson3** : That’s an interesting sentiment, and I suspect it lies at the heart of the OP’s problem. Exactly what makes you feel that way? I have spent the better part of a lifetime trying to atone for pain I have caused others along the way – and still do from time to time. The same self-serving disregard for the humanity of others that brought Polanski down at one time is alive and well in my own character. It has just manifest itself in different ways in our lives. And just as our failings survive under different guises, so do our gifts back to the world. Cinematic art is Polanski’s atonement. _The Pianist_ soars! No only is it about survival; it is about the survival of talent itself. I can’t imagine a director choosing such a huge project unless it has enormous personal meaning for him. I just cannot look at that film and see a hardened person behind it. I know that I’m not the same person that I was thirty years ago. I doubt that many of us are. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/69 "2003-10-22T03:11:57Z")
Put me in the “Polanski is a scumbag” category. I have thus far refused to see _The Pianist_ because I just can’t look past the crime he committed against that young girl. That kind of trauma damages the victim for life. He drugged and raped a child (yes, a 13 year-old is a child, I don’t care what anyone says). That is the act of a sociopath and it deserves a life sentence as far as I’m concerned. John Wayne Gacy painted some very nice clowns. That doesn’t mean he wasn’t an evil fuck. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/70 "2003-10-22T03:24:53Z")
I hardly think that the two situations are anywhere near comparable, Diogenes. ---
**Author:** ![Cisco](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ccd318/32.png) [@Cisco](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cisco)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/71 "2003-10-22T03:42:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zoe \* > \*\*I hardly think that the two situations are anywhere near comparable, Diogenes. \*\* Umm, I do. RP’s crime may not have been _equal_ to JWG’s but I would most certainly put them in the same ballpark. ---
**Author:** ![JDeMobray](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/85e7bf/32.png) [@JDeMobray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JDeMobray)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/72 "2003-10-22T03:46:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zoe \* > \*\*I hardly think that the two situations are anywhere near comparable, Diogenes. \*\* "But to be fair [he is a really good football coach](http://www.vindy.com/local_news/302532919391109.php). A crime is a crime, whether your name is Polanski or Panici or Bryant or John Smith. Is Polanski a good director? Sure, I don’t think anyone is debating that. But the guy committed and was convicted of a crime and he should pay his debt to society. He’s sorry? Fuck him. He’s learned his lesson? Maybe he can volunteer to counsel other prisoners. His films make up for rape. Bullshit of the highest order. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/73 "2003-10-22T04:33:00Z")
If you read carefuly, **JDeMobray** , I don’t think anyone has suggested that his films completely make up for his rape or that he shouldn’t face the consequences of his actions. Poor reading skills of the highest order. A crime is a crime? Aren’t some worse than others? Have you never committed a crime? Are you sure? ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 7:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/74 "2003-10-22T07:23:27Z")
**Marley** : I’m glad we’ve calmed down. Now we can establish another arm of GD right here in the Pit. 😉 Anyway, I was a bit vague when I said that `violent rape is real rape'. I should have said `_nonconsensual_ rape is real rape, but most people think nonconsensual is the same as violent’. I’m aware that using roofies or ethyl alcohol to make someone have sex with you are both vile crimes and would fit most people’s definition of `rape'. My point was this, however: When the average person on the street thinks about rape, he or she thinks about a man holding a woman down and forcing himself on her as she screams and fights. Drugs may not enter into it, and the notion of a sixteen-year-old and a nineteen-year-old getting busy in the back of a Volvo are many miles from the person's mind. By extending rape to include the final instance (consensual sex between a 16-y-o and a 19-y-o), you have created `Dangerous Sex Criminals’ out of people who, in the minds of me and most people, did nothing wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 7:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/75 "2003-10-22T07:37:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Diogenes the Cynic \* > \*\* . He drugged and raped a child (yes, a 13 year-old is a child, I don’t care what anyone says). . \*\* So I took a child to bed? Or, more accurately, one took ME to bed. The vileness of Polanski aside, I shudder every time the word _child_ is thrown around here. There are some 13 yr olds out there who are sexual beings. Some folks grow up fast. They act like adults, they look like adults. Their bodies are developed, and their apetites are going strong. In the old days, you could even marry 'em off. Yes, on the whole their maturity level is not up to par. But neither is mine and I’m pushing 40. ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/76 "2003-10-22T08:23:26Z")
Of course they are sexual beings. That doesn’t mean that they are of an age appropriate to make choices about what to do with their sexual urges. I’ve seen 13 year olds that are very child like and others that have obvious maturity. The men need a clue sometimes about what is off limits. Age seems to be a reasonable guideline. No thirteen year old has completed her education and is living on her own in a stable situation where she can deal responsibly and maturally with all possible consequences of physical intimacy. But aside from that, the thirteen year old that Polanski had sex with was drugged. You don’t do that at any age. To me there is nothing that can make what he did excusable and nothing that can make _The Pianist_ unworthy or Polanski irredeemable. Is it a paradox? I don’t think so. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 9:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/77 "2003-10-22T09:02:17Z")
Somebody help me out here. When we say ‘drugged’, do we mean he slipped her something or he ‘turned her on’ to some drugs? Because if it’s the former, than I’m ready to get on the bandwagon with y’all. If it’s the latter, I’ll still need a little convincing. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 9:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/78 "2003-10-22T09:28:51Z")
> [@](#): > > When the average person on the street thinks about rape, he or she thinks about a man holding a woman down and forcing himself on her as she screams and fights. Drugs may not enter into it, and the notion of a sixteen-year-old and a nineteen-year-old getting busy in the back of a Volvo are many miles from the person’s mind. By extending rape to include the final instance (consensual sex between a 16-y-o and a 19-y-o), you have created `Dangerous Sex Criminals’ out of people who, in the minds of me and most people, did nothing wrong. I don’t think the perception of the average person on the street is really important here. Although statutory rape and sex assault rape are different crimes - as you said, they’re not necessarily the same act, and they’re not treated 100% the same. Like I said, it’s wrong to prosecute a 19-y-o for having sex with a 16-y-o. But on the other hand - and I guess you don’t get cites down here 😉 - I don’t think that’s how statutory rape generally works; I’m gonna hold that the cases where someone has taken advantage of a kid outnumber the cases that hinge on a ‘technicality,’ as you put it. If there are no drugs in the equation, I still think Roman Polanski has done something wrong by having sex with a 13-y-o girl 30 years his junior. I think the problem, if you eliminate statutory rape altogether, is that anyone who can talk a kid into saying ‘yes’ would probably be on safe legal ground. I don’t think that’s right. There has to be something to deter people from doing that, and without these laws I’m not sure what that deterrent is. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 9:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/79 "2003-10-22T09:35:47Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Marley23 \* > \*\* Like I said, it’s wrong to prosecute a 19-y-o for having sex with a 16-y-o. \*\* IIRC, (hey, it could happen), that wouldn’t be statutory rape. I seem to remember a standard of the alleged victim being under 18 and the alleged rapist more than 3 years her senior. But I agree that there’s wrong with someone bedding someone 30 years their junior. Not criminal, mind you, but…just wrong… ---
**Author:** ![Waverly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/57b2e6/32.png) [@Waverly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Waverly)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2003, 10:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615/80 "2003-10-22T10:31:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Zoe \* > To me there is nothing that can make what he did excusable and nothing that can make _The Pianist_ unworthy or Polanski irredeemable. Is it a paradox? I don’t think so. I can see not calling the _film_ irredeemable, but you are specific to Polanski here. I wonder what you would think of a rapist who had the reputation for being the best toy designer in the world, bar none. Could such a man not have a touch of joy in him? A childish love of life? Personally, I think Polanski should have been directing a prison musical about the time of The Pianist. I’m a bit irked he has the opportunity to freely create - and I don’t find the quality of those creations a mitigating factor. The Pianist soars?! I suppose it well should. _It should be thrown with great force.” - Dorothy Parker_ [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/polanski-seriously/208615.md?page=5)