« What If... The Alzheimer's Dilemma | Main | More on Roman Polanski »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

COULD NOT AGREE MORE. Thank you for sandblasting away all the bullshit defenses around this case.


Thank you so much Sarah for restoring some of my faith in the liberal left. I was just racking my mind lately wondering how a case could possibly be made for the release of this predator. I admit that I don't come down on the liberal side of an argument, but usually, I can appreciate the other side. In a case this heinous, however, I thought either everyone had just lost their minds, or this guy must have been such a boon for mankind after his little infraction. He makes frickin movies for a living, he didn't cure cancer (not that that would be grounds for getting him off either).

I'm with you, those people who signed the list should be ashamed of themselves for putting the rapist ahead of his victim in consideration. Also, to have the hubris to think that being a director of a piece of make believe should be a get out of jail card.

How about Sharon Tates sister saying on the today show that "it was consensual"!!!!! Nothing is consensual when its a 40 something year old man and a 13 year old child! COME ON!
Great Blog!

Ugh, this is why the left has such a bad rap. I'm a midnight blue liberal and I too have been horrified by the entertainment establishment's response to this.

If we want to keep a majority in both houses and the white house, we as a whole, have to apply the law equally no matter if they are 'one of our own' or not.

Equal justice needs to work in this direction as well.

I mean, really? Defending a child rapist when we are trying to pass health care reform? Besides just being wrong, it makes us look insipid and gives the right something to point out when they talk about our 'morals.'

Go Sarah!

I think your position makes total sense philosophically, and I happen to agree with you in general. The only thing that gives me pause is, in a cost-benefit analysis, what is to be gained by arresting him now and putting him through the process that he should have gone through years ago? I totally don't condone his fleeing and getting away with it. Not for a second. It is unquestionably and unconscionably wrong. But, at the same time, I shudder to think of the enormous resources that are going to be expended on this case when I don't think it will deter anyone from committing crimes or fleeing justice in the future, or serve any real retributive purpose, esp. in light of the backlash by loonies who make the arguments you cite above. And that money could go to benefit so many who need it so much, especially these days. Any thoughts?

Rebecca-- Happy to sandblast, and I'm not the only one. There are some great blog posts by women like Kate Harding, and we should all check them out and lend our voices in support. In fact, I'll try to post links to some of them...

Brenna-- I'm with you. I think some people have just flat out lost their minds.

Dr. McCray (I totally can't call you Carolyn!)-- EXACTLY!!!! I'm just out of my head about this. How can liberals take this position and then expect to be taken seriously? Unconscionable.

Austex-- You bring up an extremely valid point. That money could absolutely benefit many people. But realistically, it's not going to go them any way you slice it. And I do think going after people who flee justice is a deterrent for those who are considering doing the same. On the flip side, NOT going after him sends the message that rich criminals can just take private planes to France, or wherever, and continue with their lovely lives no matter what they've done. Especially when the crime is raping a thirteen-year-old, I think it's important that the Justice Department takes a firm stance. If it were a less serious crime, then I would agree with you that bringing Polanski back isn't worth the money. But he raped a thirteen-year-old girl.

I'm as liberal as can be, but I don't see anything liberal in condoning this kind of violence against women, even if the perpetrator is a great artist. In fact, I find the idea that there is a class of people who are exempt from the rules of society absolutely abhorrent. All I can think is that this Hollywood petition is a result of narcissism. If you already think you and your ilk are better than other people, how much of a stretch is it to say that the law does not apply in this case?

Ugh. It's too easy to let people get away with equating defense of Polanski with liberalism. To say that the people urging his release are speaking from a liberal perspective or worldview is to insult our belief system! We can't let 'em co-opt our word, or our values. Let's all agree -- those agitating for Polanski's freedom are speaking from a place of bad judgment, not liberalism.

Great post.

Oh, come on, girlfriend.
What's wrong with letting wealthy, white male pedophiles, perverts, and white-collar criminals off the hook? It's the American way!

As long as we pardon the occasional wealthy minority male for violence against women, dogs, and other minority males (and then cheerfully continue to attend his concerts and/or football games), no one will ever even notice!

Love it, or leave it, honey!
(100% Sarcasm. In case it wasn't obvious.)

Oh Wes Anderson, no!

This may not be a typical starfish post, but it's incredibly informative ... AND RIGHT ON!!! It's no wonder the rest of the world thinks Hollywood is morally bankrupt and responsible for corrupting our youth (certainly one man has done more than his part in corrupting the life of one young girl).

Bravo!! It is great to hear women speak out against Polanski. What a creep.

I want a list of e-mail addresses of those who signed the petition, and along with other articles, I want to send them a link to this. Amazingly well put, f-bombs and all.

I CANNOT understand how anyone would petition for his release. It INFURIATES me, so much so that I use caps lock because I can't scream in my office!

And Natalie Portman? She was also my biggest disappointment. What a sad, scared (of Harvey Weinstein) fool.

I don't get Natalie Portman, she's so judgamental and conceited about publicity campaigns, about hollywood, about EVERYTHING. And then she supports Polanski.

Great morals, girl.

Oh, one of Socrates' charges was pederasty (the true one as we know from his pupil Plato). So which of both should we do: Acquit Polanski or remove the sculptures of the small ugly convicted (pedo?)phil(osopher?) called Socrates from our universities?

Elizabeth-- Exactly. Well said.

Les-- LOVE the sarcasm.

Jeanne-- They're makin' us look bad!

Jillian-- I know. Natalie Portman is the one that gets me, too. I mean, she's always promoting micro-loans for women in developing countries. How can she do that, and then put her name on anything that doesn't actively CONDEMN Polanski? I don't ge tit.

Cha-- See above. I think I like Natalie Portman more than you, but it's seriously surprising no matter how you slice it.

Young Poland-- I have a hard time taking questions like this seriously, but I'll try. Here's what I'll say: the fact that there are Socrates statues in universities, has no bearing whatsoever on the Polanski case. He should be tried in a court of law, be sentenced, and serve his time.

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.

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..


really fantastic post! This case hasn’t been getting as much attention in Australia as it undoubtedly is in the US, but it has baffled me every time I’ve heard of it. Since when did running for a long time have an influence on whether you should be held responsible for a crime? Bravo, well written.

I have said this to so many people....read the transcripts. I can't believe anyone can read them and not rush to erase their names from that petition.

I'm Canadian so I don't really understand all of the Liberal/Conservative stuff most of you are talking about but I am shocked and appalled that such a petition exists let alone that people ACTUALLY signed it. I am so angry right now that I cannot come up with any words to express how angry and horrified I am.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Books (with Elizabeth Craft)

  • 'Bass Ackwards and Belly Up' and 'Footfree and Fancyloose' tell the story of four best friends who commit the ultimate suburban sin: putting off college to pursue their dreams.

    Publisher's Weekly said: "Full of romance and adventure, laughter and tears, the story is a reminder that veering from the straight and narrow road doesn't always lead to a dead end."

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter
    Blog powered by Typepad

    What is Starfish Envy??

    • L.A. 2009. I’m stuck in traffic on the 101 freeway, listening to Isabella Rosselini on NPR. Isabella, for some reason, mentions that starfish are one of those rare species that can reproduce asexually, and I realize that if I could do that, I wouldn't have to worry about finding a boyfriend/husband. I wouldn’t have to internet date! I wouldn't have to figure out if I want to/can/should have a baby/adopt a baby/child on my own. I wouldn't have to stress about things like FSH levels, or weigh my feelings on in vitro versus adoption. I would just have a baby. Thus began my starfish envy.
    small twitter icons
    Happiness Project

    Google Analytics