I just don’t know what to think here.

By some people’s definition, I am a rapist.

20 years ago, while being 18 and at a party at a friends house, I met a very hot chick who seemed interested in nothing else than a night of hot loving with yours truly. This brought me great joy. It wasn’t till the next morning that I discovered, to my horror and embarassment, that she was 13. I had no idea.

The only reason I found out is that several of ‘friends’ wanted to tease me about it. Se, THEY knew. They thought it was hilarious. (She had already left by that time). I can still hear the woman who owned the house saying through her laughter, “she goes to the school with my son!!”

Some may want to boycott my threads and posts now.

I don’t know what the deal was Polanski. Did he know she was 13? Did he want her because she was 13. Did she change the story at the time to keep her out of trouble with her mom? Has she changed her story since out a ‘need’ to forgive him and move on? I don’t know the answer to any of these.

But I disagree that his work has ANY reflection on his character. We cannot know anything about him from his films. He may be a good guy, deep down, or he may be an evil fuck. Who says an evil fuck can’t make something beautiful or heart-wrenching?

And why would I deprive myself of something beautiful or heart-wrenching because this guy is an evil fuck?

Personally, I think Polanski is an average director. He misses as often as he hits. But that’s just me. YMMV.

I must’ve missed it. His villification is far more universal than the praise of his films, and even people who like his movies will generally admit he’s a scumbag.

If you don’t want to watch his movies, that’s fine. But it leaves you in no position to criticize people who do.

Polanski knew the girl’s mother. He knew the girl was thirteen.

spooje, read the transcript linked earlier in the thread – I assure you, your story bears no resemblance to his.

That said, I don’t watch his movies, either. It is my opinion that Mr. Polanski is a creep and a criminal who fled the country to avoid prosecution. Therefore, I refuse to support him with any of my own personal money. This is a line I’ve drawn for myself. My husband (and both kids) wanted to see The Pianist when it was on pay-per-view a month or two ago. Well, my money is half my husband’s (or his is half mine) and he has a right to a difference of opinion with me on such matters. So, they rented it and I went upstairs and read while they watched it.

From the Original Chinatown Thread

Unfortunate for Polanski? Fuck the child raping bastard.

While you keep on saying that his personnel life and choices should be ignored when talking about the mans work you seem to be doing the same thing except in reverse. You’re obviously a big fan of the man and this seems to be tainting how you are looking at this despicable situation.

This was a 40+ man with power and influence with a 13 year old girl trying to be a model. He drugged her and then fucked her up the ass. The girl was by her own admission too scared to get him to stop. He’s a piece of shit. You should admit that.

You can still love his movies and talk all you want about them but you seem to be putting your fingers in your ears and singing LALALALALALALA when it comes to what the sick bastard did to that child.

I can still like listening to Bing Crosby while knowing he was a bit of a fucker to his kids. I can still appreciate the skill and majesty of “Triumph of the Will” while knowing what lay behind was some of the worst elements of humanity.

Polanski IMNSHO is a sick child raping bastard. He may have made some movies that I would class as some of my favourites but he’s still a perverted cunt.

I suppose that works for me, too.

As for the part about facing punishment, I can only say that I personally wouldn’t face it, as few things can compare to the horror of prison. Especially as a sex offender. Few think he would need to die at the hands of a fellow inmate for what he did. I supose he is a really sick and screwed up guy.
I still like Chinatown.

Hmm, then what about this line? Just askin’:

Excellent point, because, as we all know, in France one is free to rape as many children as one wishes :rolleyes:

Anyway, the opinions of the antis here are noted by all, and I think we all agree that Polanski did something wrong and left the country to avoid prosecution. Nevertheless, I have the impression that there is something deeper going on here than mere righteous indignation.

Personally, I had found Polanski an interesting if uneven filmmaker prior to the rape charge, and am unable to simply erase my memory and think only “rapist” and “all his works invalidated” post-charge. Hate me if you want, but I have no particular problem separating the intentions of a work of art from the behavior of the artist, especially when the work in question is a large-scale collaboration, such as a film. As for whether or not I validate Polanski’s criminal behavior by having bought a DVD copy of Chinatown, based on the specific facts of the case at hand, I consider it a non-issue.

I thought I heard the kid say she holds no ill feelings toward him and hopes everyone will watch his movies. Did she lie because she was a scared little girl? Was it really consentual? Who knows?

I believe you are letting your admiration for Polanski the filmmaker cloud your judgment of Polanski the individual. It’s rather the same mistake you are accusing detractors of making.

Both of them were drunk, both of them were on drugs? Whew! What a relief that you can mitigate your own act of depravity by drugging your victim first.

It was consensual? Last time I checked, no state in the union, and that includes Louisiana, makes room for consent coming from an intoxicated minor. I think what you mean to say is that it wasn’t *violent *, but knowledge of the case leads me to believe it was highly coercive. A terrible thing to do to a child, and the fact she has a large enough heart to forgive him does nothing to diminish it.

You like his films, you consider him a genius? Fine with me. He should be the greatest filmmaker of all time to die in prison. I will add, at the risk of veering off on a tangent, that sex with a girl you know to be 13 is something quite different from finding out the girl you had sex with was 13. Frankly, Polanski hasn’t got the slightest mitigating factor working for him.

You know, this is just divisive and insulting. There is not a shred of evidence in the thread to support that statement. While some have pointed out mitigating factors, no one said that what he did was OK.

For the record, my opinion from most evil to least evil goes Leni, Roman, Elia.


I’ll probably get flamed to hell for this, but I do not think statuatory rape is immoral in the slightest. If two people truly wish to have sex with each other, I do not see anything morally wrong with it, even if one involved is thirteen. However, if there is any coercion involved, I would definitely agree that it is morally wrong. The legal age of consent of 18 is useful in that younger people are more easily coerced and thus helps to protect them. It is a broad stroke that doesn’t always make sense for a particular situation. Some people below the age of 18 are more mature than some people above the age of 18. And I definitely think that some people below the age of 18 can participate in consensual sex.

For the case at hand, if the girl was indeed coerced, then Polanski is a scumbag. If she actually did consent and knew what she was getting in to, then I don’t see a problem with it. I don’t think most thirteen year olds are capable and mature enough to make this decision, but I am not presumptuous enough to think that all thirteen year olds are incapable of this. In this scenario, most of the evidence seems to indicate that Polanski did coerce or take advantage of the girl, and thus does deserves whatever vilification you want to throw at him. But it just bugs me that people take the statuatory rape law so seriously, automatically condemning people who have sex with a minor. The boundary is just as meaningless as the drinking age of 21. I don’t think statuatory rape is rape at all. Let each individual situation be judged as rape or not.

Waverly, you’re my hero for the day.

I’m not a fan of the drinking age here, but both exist for the same reason: young people don’t always have the experience or worldliness to make good decisions, and it’s sometimes necessary to protect them. I think that’s valid as a rationale for a law. Yes, both the drinking age and statutory rape laws are generalizations, and there are problems with this.

If there’s no age boundary, Polanski is still a rapist. So in this case it doesn’t even really matter. But unless you think an older man using influence and deceit to have sex with a child is OK, you need these laws in some capacity. Even on the face of it, regardless of the supposed maturity of the kid, I’m going to insist it’s not OK for a 43-year-old to have sex with a 13-year-old.

Well, there is still some conflict in her statements then and her statements now.

Sorry, I gotta come back to this. I listen to music made by drug addicts, drunks, wife-beaters, people who had promiscuous sex… didn’t Leadbelly kill a guy? I disapprove of all those things, but I emphatically reject the notion that they have an effect on my “personal integrity.” That’s the kind of thing Tipper Gore would say. :stuck_out_tongue:

To those who keep calling it statutory rape, read the transcript on the Smoking Gun. If that doesn’t convince you that she was raped, then nothing will. It’s a very sad and scary thing that little girl went through.

That said, I still watch Polanski’s movies even though I think he’s a piece of shit.

Waverly, that was nicely put and pithy.

Marley23: So, it’s okay for a 40-year-old to take advantage of a 23-year-old with severe cognitive deficits? It’s okay for a 20-year-old to ply another 20-year-old with booze to have sex with him/her? And yet for what he did, spooje should die in prison?

I’ll never understand the sex laws we inherited from the Victorians.

And of those 13 year olds who appear to consent, how do we know which were capable and mature enough, and which weren’t? I’ve got an idea! How about we let each state picks an age, and an age difference, they feel comfortable with, and then they stick to it. While a few ultra-mature children don’t get to have older lovers, most of the kiddies stay safe.

Just wanted to add that you should also boycott, Victor Salva too. Scum.