Tuesday, November 17, 2009


October, 2009

I don’t understand. All the talk about Roman Polanski and his recent arrest has made Hollywood even crazier than it already is. The rash of celebrities who are supporting Polanski’s “freedom” is alarming. On the September 30th episode of The View, Whoopi Goldberg defended celebrities like Debra Winger, saying (to paraphrase), “I don’t think they are supporting child molestation. They are supporting Polanski the director.” WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MEAN?? Goldberg stated that, “ . . . the family was aware . . .”, meaning the 13 year old girl’s family. Oh, so I guess that was ok then for Polanski to have sex with their daughter.

If Polanski was a plumber, a homeless man, a banker, or anything else, and had committed this crime, I can’t imagine the media and everyone who could get on board would NOT be after his hide to be imprisoned. Why should his job have anything to do with whether or not he is guilty? Because he creates art? Because he won awards? For crying out loud, he himself confessed to the crime and the fled the country. Rape is rape is RAPE Whoopi. He was charged with six, count them six, felonies prior to running away like a little Sally.

I am so horrified at the outpouring of support by big names, that I am prepared to boycott. I used to enjoy The View, but I am not sure I can watch it after this. I don’t think child molestation is being taken seriously. I do think celebrities supporting Polanski going free should be psychiatrically evaluated. Samantha Geimer rightly wants her peace and privacy. But that was sadly and irrevocably traded when this tragic event occurred. Which leads me to a bigger question I hear no one asking at all: Where was her mother, and why was she even allowed to go anywhere alone with Polanski? Multiple times?

Clearly Ms. Geimer had a permissive lifestyle laid out for her already. Despite this, she was still a child. She now claims that the courts have done more harm than Polanski did. Given the way the media gobbles up scandal, I don’t doubt it. However, even if she has moved on, it does not excuse Polanski from drugging and raping a 13 year old. Apparently Hollywood thinks this is semantics. What sort of depravity is this? Oh wait, there isn’t more than one kind. Are these people so out of touch with reality that they will excuse any behavior in the name of art? Isn’t that what terrorists do in the name of religion? When did justifying crime become the way of the world? Or have I had my head in the sand for too long?

I don’t care how old this guy is now. As a parent, I would not care how many decades it took to get this man behind bars if my child had been victimized. Again, where were Ms. Geimer's parents?? When you read the original transcripts of this case it is evident that there is indeed a crime, and Polanski is a man who believes he is above it all.

In Polanski’s own words, “Hollywood is like that: a spoiled brat that screams for possession of a toy and then tosses it out of the baby buggy.” What exactly does the film world think they will receive from Polanski if he is released? Art? Redemption? Attention? Money?

He also said, “I would like to be judged for my work, and not for my life”, and, “I would never think of doing a movie for children if I did not have any . . . I relate to all the sufferings much more now that I have kids.” Maybe Polanski would have had better luck pleading insanity. Clearly though, it is not temporary.

No comments:

Post a Comment