This is's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
I think that might well be true. But really isn't that what they always do? And let's face it: society's not even making it hard for them to build and keep this delusion. I can only speak for myself of course, but in my expirience people are fast in blaming anyone but the rapist himself. Good example in the Polanski case is the Mother. Why did she let her 13 year-old go there alone in the first place? Isn't that what people were/are asking? So, in peoples eyes, she was being irresponsible. Meaning: she actually is partly to blame. Completely letting go of the fact that all she actually did was letting her daughter go with a relatively famous filmmaker who promised her a job a girl dreams of. Naive? Probably. Her fault all this happend however? NO! The fact that the victim naturally always partly blames itself doesn't help here either, which the Polanski case again is a great example for. I mean, come on. I don't know about US media, but on german media I've seen the "Even the victim says to let him go!"-card played to death. Only question that's running through my mind time and time again is: yes, she does. But did anyone think about WHY so? Reasons spontaneously coming to mind: 1. You're always asking yourself if you could have done something different. "If I've only gone earlier." "If I've only told my mother to get me when on the phone." "If I only..." You eventually come to the point where you notice it didn't matter what you would have done.. or did it? (Meaning: some of this doubt is always there. At least from what I can tell.) 2. THIS was a hell of a trauma for a 13 year-old. A trauma that stays with one years and years after, if not forever in parts. Did anyone, anyone at all, stop to think that all of this is brought right back to her now? That she has to think about it and relieve the whole drama again and that maybe, just maybe, all she want is for it to be over and done with? And sure, simply setting him free would be the easiest way to get to this. I could go on, but.. to what effect? Everyone in at least half a sane mind already has that figured out anyways and the rest.. well, they most likely don't even CARE to see it this way. So, all I'm really saying is, considering the above, it's shockingly easy to imagine how one can even start to go into such delusion - and more so - keep it up for 30 years. We really are making it easy on them, aren't we? Which partly is the exact same way of thinking that got us into this whole absurd discussion..
Toggle Commented Oct 7, 2009 on Good For You, Swiss at Starfish Envy
@Sarah: First of all: thank you SO much for this article, it's telling my thoughts exactly. I'm from Germany, where this case is on TV like 24/7 right now, and I was horrified by the amount of 'celebrities' actually supporting Polanski (a lot of german actors, comedians, etc. too)! By now I have to change channels everytime another one of them is on and defending Polanski yet again because it's making me SICK. I mean, honestly, what the heck? I knew there is a lot wrong with our world, but when for christs sake did we start defending rapists?? Sorry for the language but: personally I don't give A SHIT who he is! He drugged and raped a THIRTEEN YEAR OLD! He could be the Pope himself and I'd still want him to stand trial and I'm sure many others think so too.. I mean, like you already said, these people should really think about there own daughters/granddaugthers and then ask themselves what they'd want for a man who did rape one of them. So, bearing this in mind it simply is a complete miracle for me how ANYONE can get in front of a camera and say this man should be put to freedom. If he was NOT famous we wouldn't even be HAVING this discussion. *growls* I myself am a BIG movie and tv fan, but being good at what you're doing for a living doesn't give you the right to do whatever you want. That NEEDS to be true for a director/producer/actor a.s.o. just as much as for a carpenter or teacher! This said: and no, I also don't think it's a possibility to just go with the "but it's been 30 years" answer. There's good reason why there's no statutory period of limitation for rape (in the US, at least). *breathes deeply* Sorry, but this rant was absolutely necessary. This was bothering me a hell of a lot lately. @Les: Oh, let me assure you: it unfortunately is not only an american way. Seems to work perfectly fine here in Germany as well.. *rolls eyes* @Young Poland: As someone who chose "Ancient Greek" to be a topic for her exams (in history class as well as philosophy) let me tell you only two things: Next time, before you compare two so different cases: #1 - you might want to read up on the subject a little better, as well as take the "slightly" different times (and with that views on subjects especially like sexuality) into your considerations & #2 - might think about what this whole discussion is about. Socrates was an outstanding philosopher and no one's doubting that. That's what he's gotten statues for, not for being pedophil. No one's doubting Polanki's professional skills either. But as you said yourself: EVEN Socrates was convicted for his deeds. So, why shouldn't Polanski be? Sorry, but basically, you finished your own argument..