“It wasn’t ‘RAPE’ rape”

NS September 28th, 2009


You’ve probably heard that director Roman Polanski has been arrested in Switzerland and will likely be extradited back to the United States to face law enforcement officials who want him for fleeing the country in 1977. What was he fleeing from? Rape charges. Rape charges that he admitted and plead guilty to.  Who did he rape? A 13-year-old girl. How did he rape her? By telling her he wanted to put her in French Vogue, inviting her to a private residence for a “photo shoot”, drugging her with champagne and quaaludes and then performing numerous sex acts on her, to each of which his victim said ‘No.’  Even if she hadn’t said a word or put up any resistance, he would still be guilty of rape seeing as she was a child.

Polanski used his influence to get the girl alone and put her in a position where she was eager to please and be unlikely to question what was going on. What 13-year-old girl wouldn’t be thrilled to be hand-picked by a famous director to appear in a chic and world-famous magazine? The fact that he fed her drugs and alcohol to make her more compliant and maybe also to cover his tracks tells us a lot. Maybe he thought that later, if he was accused of anything indecent, he could just claim they were both high on drugs and booze and testify that she threw herself at him and he didn’t know she was only 13, honest-to-God, Judge; haven’t you seen how much makeup she wears and how developed her body is? C’mon, give a red-blooded guy a break! he’d say.

Think that’s sounds like a pathetic, bullshit excuse that no one would be stupid enough to use? Well, it works all the time for other men so it’s not farfetched in the slightest, actually. And even now, Polanski’s case has people wondering out loud if the ‘sex’ was ‘consentual’ or not, or if it even matters after all this time and because he’s a famous movie director who has had some tough knocks in life.

*Wait, let me get my hankie out*

Boo-fuckin-HOO! I don’t care if you find a way to solve world hunger or discover the cure for AIDS, if you rape a 13-year-old girl you must be punished for that, no matter how long ago it was.

Some bright sparks are bringing up the statute of limitations in California, as if the victim was only just reporting the rape and poor Polanski was being hunted down and tried for something he may not have done. The guy pleaded guilty, was convicted, and then fled the country because (and I quote, in a whiny, self-important voice) “The judge will give me 100 years.” So yeah, you can take your ‘statute of limitations’ crap and mosy on down to Stupid Town, y’all.

And, as usual, Hollywood is coming to the rescue of one of its own, questioning why Polanski is being arrested after all this time and even saying it’s a waste of taxpayer money.

But with so many far more important cases sitting idle because of budget cuts and lack of manpower, it is hard to fathom why the D.A.’s office is suddenly spending time and money trying to re-energize an ancient sex case when there are so many more nasty characters so much closer to home who need to feel the strong arm of the law

If you need more evidence that some people just can’t wrap their heads around ‘sex’ with a child always being rape, just watch this clip from The View, in which the following exchange takes place:

Whoopi Goldberg (after explaining the basic details of the case): …so I’m asking you guys, should he go to prison?

Joy Behar: I believe that no matter how old you are or how long ago the crime was committed, that you should be punished for it. I mean, he’s a great director. The man suffered the Holocaust, he lost his family, he escaped from the Germans, the Nazis. He lost his wife, Sharon Tate, in the horrible Manson murders. People know about that, he had a terrible time. And he’s a wonderful director. But he did rape a 13-year-old child and…

Whoopi: Wait, wait, wait. Wait, you guys. The language that we use here is very important because that is not the allegation. That is not the allegation. I’m talking legal.

Joy: Allegedly, he plied her with a quaalude and alcohol. And he also pleaded guilty.

Whoopi: Yes.

Joy:  So we can assume that he did…

Whoopi: That’s a rape?

Joy: Well, it’s not consentual sex when she’s 13 and he was 40.

Whoopi: Well…

Melissa Gilbert, guest panelist: The grey area is when mama’s in the building [referring to the victim's mother, who apparently is alleged by some to have been around when the rape happened].

Whoopi: Yeah, and mama’s sort of set it up…

Melissa: …taking you to this house…

Sherri Shepherd: Okay, but she’s not being charged, we’re looking at Roman Polanski.

Whoopi: No, but you have to, you can’t, you can’t, if you’re going to look at the suit you have to look at the whole thing.

Melissa: I agree.

Whoopi: This is why some of the legal people say, you know, some of the sentence was a little excessive. Having gotten all the information, some thing should have changed. So I think all Melissa and I are saying is just be aware what he is charged with and what they are doing.

Sherri: I think that as a grown person, take responsibility for the fact that you knew…

Melissa: He did…

Sherri: Take responsibility for the fact that you fled the country as well.

Melissa: I think he’s trying to atone. I think the punishment at this point may be excessive. I don’t know, that’s just my opinion.

Sherri: Why?

Melissa: Well…

Sherri: We tried Nazi war criminals from a long time ago.

Melissa: I think the crime itself is horrible, I just think the circumstances of it are so grey and so mushy and so messed up, and now you have this woman who actually is the victim who, for whatever reason, is saying let’s just back away, walk away from it, he’s…she’s over it.

Sherri: Well, a 45-year-old woman is thinking a lot differently than she was at 13. It doesn’t change the fact that at 13 years old, this woman was drugged and anally penetrated, orally penetrated. So yes, she may have forgiven him and she may have moved on, but still the crime remains. Allegedly…

Whoopi: I am not saying ‘allegedly’…

Star: If it was your daughter, even 10, 12 years later…

Melissa: Does he have daughters?

Sherri: Roman Polanski?

Whoopi: Yes, he does.

Melissa: Well, then, I think he’s going to be very mindful and watchful and I think he should be…

Sherri:  So, what, that should be enough punishment?

Melissa: No, not that he has daughters…

Whoopi: Let’s be realistic here. He went to jail and plead guilty to having sex with this young lady. So it’s not like he ‘allegedly’ had sex, he DID have sex with her. What I’m saying is he did not “rape” her because she was aware and, apparently, the family were aware.

Sherri: Was it consentual? I mean, what is rape? What’s the definition of rape?

Whoopi: I don’t know if it was consentual but he was not…

Joy: Wait a second.

Sherri: When you have to give somebody drugs, I don’t know.

Whoopi: What I’m saying is he was not charged with rape, that’s all I’m trying to say.

Sherri: Even if you’re 13-years-old? And…

Whoopi: Wait. Wait! We have to get it correct. If we’re gonna bitch about what he did we have to get it right about what he did.

Melissa: What he did was despicable and disgusting, when you’re that age and have sex with a 13-year-old.

Joy: When a child is 13 years old, it’s called statutory rape. It’s not called anything BUT rape.

Whoopi: He was NOT charged. He was not charged…I know it wasn’t “rape” rape.

Sherri: Statutory rape?

Melissa: Child molest, maybe? I’m not sure.

Whoopi: Maybe child molest, but I don’t believe it was “Rape” rape.

Ah, that clears it up, then. It wasn’t “Rape” rape because the sex may have been consentual (even though she was only 13 so consent to sex with a 44-year-old man is impossible) and because her family may have known what was going on (which makes it okay, she was theirs to pimp out). Got it, good to know.

Remember folks, it’s only rape if you are grabbed from a moving vehicle or from behind in a dark and secluded area and if you are tied up, drugged, and/or beaten to within an inch of your life while struggling, screaming and scratching every second until your attacker either lets you go or kills you! Any other scenario will be torn down and picked apart by people who are too blind to see that rape is about power, not sex, and that children cannot ever have ‘consentual’ sex with adults.

It doesn’t matter if a girl walks up to a man completely naked with two cans of whipped cream, some bondage chains and a sack full of condoms, she is not consenting. If you believe otherwise you are either delusional, looking for an excuse to abuse her, or she is emotionally damaged and in need of therapy, not a quick fuck. Either way, it is rape, not sex. Yep, “Rape” rape.

There is no other kind.

23 Responses to ““It wasn’t ‘RAPE’ rape””

  1. That’s just sick! Having sex with a minor, even if its consensual or not is still irresponsible, and is still a crime!! He really should be prosecuted!

  2. Irene says:

    Thank you for stating that so clearly and making no doubts about it. Shame on Whoopi and Melissa for not calling it what it was and excusing Polanski. I thought they were brighter women than that. It’s a shame when even women don’t know when something is a ‘real’ rape or a ‘fake’ rape. She was a child, for god’s sake! Is he excused because her mother may have known about it? Give me a break!

  3. Wow, that is some post NS.
    It seems the Hollywood elite live under a different set a laws to us mere mortals. So she was a child – but he is a revered director. So he got her high – but he’s Roman Polanski. They see to think they are untouchable.
    And it comes as no surprise that the French have jumped to his defence – look at the way that government has abused its power.

    If anyone else had committed this crime there would be an outcry. He is a man who raped a 13 year old. His job and how long ago it happened should not come in to it.

  4. [...] think it’s not so bad because it isn’t “rape rape”. Because you know, if you say the word twice it makes it less the thing that it actually is. Hi [...]

  5. I completely agree, of course. I hope he finally pays for what he did.

  6. Geekymummy says:

    NS, thinking about this case had reminded me of a childhood friend, who at 13 had a sexual relationship with our school bus driver. Was it “consentual”? No, because he was in his 30′s and she was 13. Did she initiate it, and enjoy it? Apparently so. Did she have deeper issues? Likely she did. No kne ever knew (well apart from us kids), so it was never tested. We were a little jealous of her. This Polanski case is different, all cases are, but I do think it is tricky to just throw out an age limit and say ” younger than this is rape”. In the us it is 18, the UK 16. 13 is young by anyones standards and I do think they should throw the book at him, but it raises questions for me.

  7. jen says:

    well, the day i start worrying what the women on “The View” think about women’s issues, is the day feminism is in *real* trouble. ::eye roll::

    13 year old children are not capable of making informed decisions about sex. and certainly not under the influence – there can be no consent when someone is not able to understand all the implications of a decision. the law reflects that because it’s true.

    if it was a murder instead of a rape, would we even be having this conversation?

    or:what if it was a boy, instead of a girl?

  8. NS says:

    @Caitlin – Yep, I agree.

    @Irene – The whole mother-blaming thing is just mind-boggling. The mother knew she was getting her pictures taken with him, she didn’t sell the rights to her daughter’s body to Polanski. But I guess in our fucked up culture, merely allowing a girl to be in the presence of a man is permission to rape her.

    @Tara – Yeah, I’m pretty pissed off at France right now. I can’t believe they’re trying to hide and defend this asshole. I think it’s more a resistance to being told what to do by the USA than a defense of Polanski, but it’s still wrong.

    @Vered – Me too.

    @Geekymummy – I don’t think it matters whether your 13yo friend ‘initiated’ the relationship with your school bus driver, or whether she ‘enjoyed’ it. A girl of that age seeking out an older man for a sexual relationship is not offering sex as a freely consenting, fully-formed and free-thinking individual. A 13yo girl offering sex to a grown man is using her burgeoning sexuality, and what she knows (probably too well) men do with that sexuality, to make herself feel loved, secure, desirable and safe. A 13yo girl is not able to consider the costs and consequences of her actions. An adult man, on the other hand, can. Any adult man who would ‘have sex with’ a girl of that age, knowing that she is not capable of having come to a mature, reasoned decision free from emotional frailty and a place of deep insecurity, is abusing his position in order to gain sexual favours. That is abuse, plain and simple. It’s rape. To me, that is not a grey area, it’s pretty black and white.

  9. NS says:

    @Jen – Exactly, regarding The View. I didn’t expect anything less from them, frankly. But since two of them were arguing FOR Polanski’s conviction and two (sort of) against, I thought it was a good snapshot of the conversations that take place with issues like this. I agree with you too that this conversation wouldn’t even be happening if he’d murdered someone. It shows just how little regard many people give for rape as a true crime. To some it’s just a minor annoyance that the victims should move past and forget after awhile.

  10. andrea says:

    i am sickened and appalled that there is anyone who feels that roman polanski is the *victim* in this case rather than the predatory rapist that he truly is. i have been reading many articles and forums and am disgusted at how many people seem to support polanski and are arguing for his freedom. they say the he didn’t know the girl was only 13 at the time, that her mother practically forced her daughter on him, that judgement was skewed by drinks and drugs, that the sex was consensual, that polanski has had a rough and difficult life, that the judge in his case was unfair. guess what – NONE OF THAT MATTERS.

    the fact remains that roman polanski raped a child. he gave a 13-year-old champagne and drugs and proceeded to force her into sexual acts even as she said no. i don’t give a shit if her mother gave the girl to him with a big bow on her head or if polanski had a magnified fear of punishment because of his experience during the holocaust. it doesn’t matter if the judge, in hindsight, was going to give him a tougher sentence than planned. he raped a child, he admitted to it and then fled the country. and no one cared. he ran away and was allowed to start over – a new family, a long and successful career, a lifetime of respect and accolades from the film industry. he was never held accountable for this brutal crime.

    i’m sorry that he grew up during the holocaust and endured losing his parents to genocide. that is something no one should ever have to go through. i’m sorry that his wife was brutally murdered when she was heavily pregnant. i cannot imagine how you pick up the pieces of your life and go on after something like that. but what about the horror and pain he inflicted on samantha geimer? what about the brutality and fear he brought to her life? what about the impact his actions had on her life? why isn’t anyone talking about what she has gone through as a victim who has lived the past 32 years knowing her rapist is free and living a life of luxury? ms. geimer has said that she does not want to deal with the media circus that will surround polanski’s arrest and would rather just let the matter drop. though i can respect ms. geimer’s position and admire the fact that she has been able to work though the aftermath of her rape, i personally think justice will only be done when polanski is behind bars, serving time for the crime he committed 32 years ago.

  11. nicola says:

    Brilliant post. Of course it is fucking rape. And he should serve time for the crime committed. It just beggars belief that ANY sane man could argue that sex with a 13yr old girl is consensual. Irrespective of the consequences. Thank you for posting about this. It is a subject very close to my heart.

  12. There’s a word for grown men who sleep with 13 year old girls. It begins with ‘p’ and it ain’t ‘Polanski’.

  13. Iota says:

    I really don’t buy the “he’s had a hard life” line. Not that I’m unsympathetic, but my guess is that the majority of people in the dock for rape, murder, gbh, theft, have had hard lives. Having a hard life doesn’t give you a ticket out.

  14. [...] still steaming about the whole Roman Polanski fiasco. It’s all I can think about and I keep devouring more and more column inches in my quest to [...]

  15. I’ve not commented before because I’ve been trying to read around this – Polanski has never suggested that he didn’t commit the crime, he pleaded guilty after all. It seems to me that there are a bunch of apologists who are trying to muddy the waters (was it consensual, was her mother there, etc) on his behalf but the facts remain that he pleaded guilty of the crime

    Surely we need to take a step back and remember what message this is giving out to young girls (it doesn’t matter if you say no, as long as he’s [insert important, older, whatever] no doesn’t really mean no) and to other rape victims (sorry but even if he pleads guilty and is convicted it doesn’t actually mean he’s guilty of the crime and should be punished)

    Switzerland should be applauded for making the arrest – a good, honest action and hopefully reminding people that you do have to pay for your actions

  16. Staranela says:

    There’s no such thing as consensual sex with a child. Period. And, the fact that she doesn’t want it pursued now, whether because she’s tired of the attention, or because of the undisclosed settlement he made with her, is irrelevant. Rihanna didnt want to press charges against Chris Brown for battery, but, the legal system is coming to realize the fact that victims can be influence by so many factors. That puts the responsibility on the justice system to prosecute the level of behavior society considers acceptable. Polanski’s had a lot of tragedy in his life, more than many people, but, not only does that not excuse him perpetuating tragedy onto someone else, you would think it would have made him even more mindful of not inflicting pain on others. That Salon editorial is great, so is Eugene Robinson’s editorial in today’s Washington Post – http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/28/AR2009092802403.html .

  17. [...] Savage’s It Wasn’t “RAPE” Rape posted at The Noble [...]

  18. Dan says:

    Looks like Goldberg really shot herself in the foot with this, and probably wrecked her career. Quite rightly to, the fool.

  19. Lizzy says:

    Agree with all your points, NS.

    There is no statute of limitation on rape, and Polanski should not be defended by anyone. He’s a fugitive from justice and if he had a shred of decency and honor he would stand up and face it. But considering his crime, it should come as no surprise. And of couse, his money bought him the 42 days he spent in jail. A travesty from the beginning.

    Having said that, I think it is right to question the mother’s behavior. Where was she when she left her daughter alone with a strange man? As a mother, I feel that she abandoned her duty to protect her child from danger. I feel that if my children cannot make a choice, I have to make it for them, and I bear moral responsibility for the consequences if I fail to act as I should.

    As a woman I think we should be aware of the perils that surround us, because men are predators and women are their target. Rape happens, and it happens to women. My daughter is only five years old, but when she is old enough I will definitely put her on her guard and teach her to take precautions to remain safe. I have made sure she knows that nobody should ever touch her, even at her young age.

  20. notSupermum says:

    Absolutely spot on post. I’m sorry to come to this so late, but I’m also appalled at the apologists for Polanski. He raped a child, that makes him a paedophile as well as a rapist. In my book, nothing…..NOTHING….excuses that. I have a daughter who is about to turn 13 and this issue makes my blood run cold to think that it would be OK for a 40 year paedophile to have sex with her (can’t even write that without shivering) just because he has made a few films. NO!

  21. [...] View” debates Roman Polanski’s “rape” case. Also read Noble Savage’s views about the [...]

  22. blues says:

    Oh, this is really UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!!!!!

    How can there possibly be controversy surrounding this?