Does the Brotherhood of Fame Endow You With a Lifetime Exemption From Accountability?
When I saw the petition protesting the recent arrest of Roman Polanski in Switzerland was signed by some of my most cherished artists -- the likes of Pedro Almodovar, Ariel Dorfman, Costa Gavras, Jonathan Demme, Sam Mendes -- men who I believed to be champions of women's and human rights, frankly, I was shocked. It made it distressingly clear to me that all our years of work have not yet penetrated or changed the culture so that it understands that rape is a legal crime and a crime against the soul. As a survivor, I can attest to the fact that rape forever changes your life, robbing you of dignity, self-worth, agency over your body, and comfortability with intimacy and trust, while also escalating a pervasive sense of isolation and shame.
After 11 years of traveling the world and meeting with rape survivors across the planet I can say that the long-term consequences are multiple and far-reaching, ranging from homelessness, drug abuse, and eating disorders, to imprisonment, suicide, and early death.
The petition defending Polanski doesn't even address his crime. Instead, it calls it a "case of morals." That expression -- a "case of morals" -- takes the anti-violence movement back about a hundred years. Rape is not a question of morals. In fact it's not even a question.
Let's review the facts:
1. A 13-year-old girl is lured to a house by promise of a job by a famous and powerful director.
2. She finds herself in a hot tub.
3. She has an asthma attack.
4. The director says he will help relieve her asthma attack and offers her (unbeknownst to her) half a Quaalude as a remedy.
5. Once the Quaalude takes effect and the girl is sufficiently pliant, he rapes and sodomizes her without consent.
6. When charges are pressed, the director later pleads guilty to "engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor."
7. After spending 42 days in prison, the director flees the United States to avoid the threat of further imprisonment.
What about this clear-cut case isn't criminal? Does Roman Polanski's undeniable brilliance as a filmmaker somehow not make him a rapist? Does his talent give license to violence? Does the brotherhood of fame endow you with a lifetime exemption from accountability?
No one is arguing the genius of Roman Polanski, or even the pain and tragedy of his difficult life. But in the end, that has nothing to do with the crime he committed. Being an artist does not make any of us exempt from the laws of humanity -- in fact, it actually makes us more responsible to them.
Eve Ensler is the author of "The Vagina Monologues" and the Founder of V-Day, the worldwide movement to end violence against women and girls.
![What I Want My Words to Do to You [VHS]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51N3BXQEE2L._SL160_.jpg)
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
I think Polanski should probably do time, but that doesn't negate all the movies he's done - and yes, he has made some truly great ones. Chinatown is a masterpiece.
But in any case, I seem to remember that the Vagina Monologues has a monologue that glorifies the statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl... of course it's different because the perpetrator is another woman...
Nobody is negating the movies he's done. It is not the movies that are fugitives wanted by the justice.
That last part is an extremely good point.
I do not understand why people are siding with Polanski! In the United States there is an age of consent, morally and legally. Roman Polanski was the adult in the room and he should have acted accordingly. He is the responsible party not the 13 year old child. When the mother acted as she did and allowed this to take place she too is responsible. But, when she did not protect her child by using her then Polanski should have taken on the adult's role and sent the girl packing or called child welfare services.
He skipped out of the country and should face the music by being brought back to the United States and the legal system should deal with him as the criminal he is. As far as him having had a rough life, that is tough it doesn't give him the right to make life tougher for a 13 year old girl.
Absolutely right! I am disgusted at the way hollywood directors, athletes, entertainers and others seem to be given special treatment when they commit heinous violent crimes. Roman Polanski should have been extradited, tried, and if convicted, sent to prison for a long, long time. But he wasn't. He was allowed to roam about Europe, free as a bird. Then there's Michael Vick, who ran a horrific dog fighting operation and personally tortured and killed helpless animals. He's playing football again and even doing commercials for Nike.
It makes me want to puke....
Here is an example of "class" distinction. The Hollywood crowd favoring a break for Polanski evidentially believes he is of more value the victim. Pathetic!
Actually, the victim wants the charges dropped.
You might then want to ask yourself about your own favoring? Is your outrage of more value than the victim's wishes?
Unfortunately double standards exist across the political spectrum and the implied sense of entitlement can be found in many of these situations. Hollywood liberals are against the arrest of Roman Polansky? It is not a surprise. No group wants to stare at a realization that one of their own has committed such crimes. The same is true for conservatives (and even politicians of all leanings) faced with the truth that George W Bush and Dick Cheney broke laws when they authorized torture. It is part of the human condition. Power doesn't corrupt automatically, it corrupts when the powerful decide they can rationalize and indulge in their impulses.
Polanski's worked in Hollywood, but he's hardly a "liberal."
That should have read Hollywood "liberals", denoting the characterization of Hollywood by Conservatives rather than a designation of anyone's political philosophy.
Thirty years of conservatives framing of the debate with sound bites and repetative phrases creaps into the language.
It was the American justice system that facilitated this situation. How can someone accused of rape just post bond and walk out of jail? As you can see Swiss have no such provision. I think it's little bit too late for justice to be served. This, now grown woman, has moved on with her life and the last thing she needs is to relive the trauma.
How would you know how one would feel all these years later? Are you a survivor of rape? Maybe, just maybe, this now grown woman would be relieved that Polanski is brought to justice. It was 33 years ago for me, and to this day, I would stand up to trial against my perpetrator if given the chance.
I hope you get the chance.
But in this case, the victim HAS stated that she wishes the case dismissed because she wants to move on. It may not be your or my decision, but this is her stated wish.
All this whining about injustice from a country that has been cutting social services for decades. Look at research: people needing social services were overwhelmingly physically,emotionally and/or sexually abused as children. Not to mention plain old fashioned poverty brought on by business practices that have left wages flat for 30 or so years. The minute these children turn 18 they become repsonsible for making up for the discrepancies. usually while being put-down for being poor or not successful enough.
See Joan E. Dowlin's Profile
Yes, Eve. I agree. And the fact that she was 13 makes it doubly worse. How would any of those "supporters" of Polanski feel if it were their daughter being raped? There is definitely a double standard here. He needs to be brought to justice.
Why don't you ask Samantha Gailey's mother who dropped her 13 year old daughter off unsupervised?
Sure, Polanski made a big mistake here, but the so-called American justice system demonstrated it was just as bad in the ethics department. The latest is that the district attorney wants to TELEVISE a new trial. Brilliant. Let's turn everything into That's Entertainment.
The mother didn't drop her off, she was picked up at her home without the mothers knowledge and as soon as her mother found out about what happened she called the police leading to the arrest's of Polanski and Angelica Houston the other adult in the house when the rape occured...
It's boring to read all these blogs about the same thing. Definitly americans have an issue with this taboo: throw out sodomy, 13 yrs old, rape OMG OMG etc... and you get people totally fired up. But there are many questions that would be interesting to raise with this affair, that no one blogs about:
-fairness of the american justice system
-if similarly other countries wanted to arrest american citizens (like a criminal corporate manager or army personel, or say, Dick Cheney), how would the usa react (bhopal disaster anyone? Warren Anderson, does that ring a bell?)
-Why don't the usa ratify the International Criminal Court?
-in general, what good does jail time make to the victim after 30 yrs. Blind repression system vs system that tries to reach a better society, and help both the victim and the criminal.
-How many people involved in racist crimes before the civil rights have been and are punished?
The U.S. doesn't subject it's citizens to an international court because often times, as I have experienced in my travels, it's no different than a lynch mob in the 50s and 60s. People around the globe hate Americans... some Americans give us a bad rap abroad... but we can not allow our fellow citizens to be subjected to hate-influenced judgments across the globe.
In this case, I wonder why the United States' abhorment of a 40 year old man's forced sexual intercourse with a 13 year old girl is any different than the entire world's abhorment of the American people as a whole.
Actually, it isn't about protecting innocent Americans; it's about protecting GUILTY Americans.
What are you saying, exactly? Because some racist crimes stayed unpunished, let's leave the rape crimes unpunished also?
Is that your point?
My points are:
-the mob mentality here in the US is disturbing, and I can see why France doesn't want to surrender the guy. How would the affair evolve with all the media bashing/entertainment etc...
-the fact that this affair takes so much space and the same points are always raised maybe show american obsession with sex / hollywood
-punishment may not be the end goal. What good does it to the victim after 30 yrs to stir up the case again, and have all the media attention? Sometimes, maybe, ( i m not affirmative, this is a question) forgiving/forgeting and rebuilding is better than repressive frenzy, as long as the criminal has recognized his crime (like in south africa apartheid)
-cases like this could generate many discussion about justice in general, all it does sadly is people vociferating to send someone in jail or expressing disgust. Which is fine, but limited.
Well actually Americans get riled up about all sorts of things.
What on earth does this topic have to do with racism?
Is your point that it 's not a crime if it's white on white, or what?
Everalone, if you think the topic is boring who is forcing you to read it?
Or make such off the wall asssociations with it.
-gala1
Good point about Warren Anderson. If we refuse to extradite people for fear of a politically-driven trail, we should understand other countries' reluctance to do the same.
As for the larger question of justice, it would be a healthy discussion to have. I frankly do not see how justice was served by pardoning Oliver North for his heinous crimes in Nicaragua. He is personally (and literally) responsible for the deaths, rape, mutilation and dispossession of thousands of Nicaraguans. He is unrepentent and has never had to be confronted by his victims. In fact, he has actually profitted from his malfeasance and has landed himself book deals and media spots.
Your facts posted are close but not what happened according to her Grand Jury Testimony...
She faked the asthma attack hoping he would leave her alone and take her home... The qualude was given before she went into the hot tub.... She knew it was a qualude and had taken them a couple of times before...
I am not sure where you got your facts but they are not accurate to her testimony...
There is one fact people seem to be glossing over in my opinion and that is the "fact" he was also engaged in taking nude photo's of a 13 year old girl he had drugged...
semantics dude. he f----cked a 13 year old girl! 13 year olds can not consent to sex legally therefore it is RAPE STUPID! you apologists disgust me!
Posting rumour. inuindo and hearsay as facts only stregthens the cause of the apologists that disgust you...
The Vagina Monologues robbed women of their dignity.
Interesting thesis. How so?
A French citizen, a great artist, is arrested in Switzaland on 30 year old "morality" case.
This is what petition states. This is what people who signed it support. To suggest that artists who signed it support rape is disingenuous.
Additional important issue raised in the petition by international artists who signed this petition---Who is next?
How about an dissident artist from Iran? Will someone will be able to deport him/her back for trial on some botched 30 y.o.case?
I suggest Ms. Ensler reads the petition again.
Because the justice system in the US and the justice system in Iran are totally comparable.
And how exactually is raping a 13 year old a "morality" case? In France, is it okay to rape tweens?
To say the 'artists' who signed the petition did so because this is a 'morality' case is ridiculous. It's quite well known this is a 'rape of a child' case.
There is nothing moral about forcibly having sex with a 13 year old child. Nor is there anything moral about getting lucky and being able to plead to the mere charge of 'unlawful sex with a minor'. Nor is there anything moral about running away from the consequences of your actions.
You know it just occured to me. Even if she was over the age of consent, the giving of drugs etc - wouldn't that be date rape. Of course it is horrible it happened to a 13 year old but wouldn't it still be horrible if it happened to an 18 year old.
Morality? Hardly. The victim filed a complaint.
Does the brotherhood of fame endow you with a lifetime exemption from accountability? It absolutely shouldn't.
But unfortunately the brotherhood of fame grants you access to potential preys.If the guy hadn't been Polanski, the famous director,would this mother had carelessly let a 43 year old man pick her 13 year old child at her home, take her for photo sessions without her supervision?If a total unknown offers to take photos of your child without your presence, you just run the other way.
When you read the transcript, at night, she received a call from her child and when her offer to pick her up is answered by a simple no, she just hung up,waiting for a stranger (but again a famous one) to safely bring her home. For real??
I hope that the brotherhood of fame doesn't endow you a lifetime exemption from accountability, but I'm afraid as long as the common people suffer from the starstruck syndrome,lured by the perspective of membership (I'm obviously referring to the mother here not the poor child), this brotherhood faces no risk of shortage of preys.
Apparently the "brotherhood of fame" includes at least a few notable women. Of course, that kind of goes against Ensler's thesis.
I agree that Roman Polanski should pay for his crime, and am shocked that anyone would excuse the rape of a child. In a society in which 1 in 6 women will be raped, 60% of rapes go unreported and only 6% of rapists spend a day in jail, I am not surprised.
What floors me are the celebrities who are supporting Polanski, many of whom also lend their name in the fight to end terror, oppression and violence in far corners of the world. It is a tragedy if we let the raping of children occur in Darfur, but okay if it's "one of us" in Hollywood?
However, as a rape survivor myself I need to question this statement that you made:
"As a survivor, I can attest to the fact that rape forever changes your life, robbing you of dignity, self-worth, agency over your body, and comfortability with intimacy and trust, while also escalating a pervasive sense of isolation and shame."
Being raped was a horrifying thing. However, it did not rob me of my dignity - rather, made clear to me that the violent actions of others are a reflection of them, not me. It did not rob me of intimacy and trust, rather showed me the true value, power of it. Nor do I feel shame.
I ask you to remember that there is no unilateral voice of "the rape survivor."
Polanski, and everyone else who signed the petition, should be feeling shame.
The American justice system is a joke. In fact, both the prosecution and defense at Polanski's trial didn't blame him for leaving the country. Who wouldn't? Judge Rittenband, presiding the case, was a corrupt judicial windbag more interested in publicity than justice.
And why is Polanski the center of so much attention after 32 years?
And Ensler, if you really want to go out on a limb regarding rape, maybe you might start with the thousands of boys raped by Catholic priests. Priests that are still at large.
Why is it if someone makes a statement about an issue or takes on a cause they are critizized about the other issues or causes they didn't take on?
You know, it really doesn't surprise me that a large segment of Hollywood responded in this way. I mean, these are also the people that regularly allow movies depicting rape to get an R rating but consensual sex gets an NC-17 rating. Violence is okay but no depictions of healthy sexuality please. It's digusting these people have so much control over the culture in America.
It is equally disgusting that Americans thrive on the violence that gives them so much control of the "Culture"... If they were to stop supporting it in terms of Box Office sales and DVD rentals there would be less of it... They are in a For Profit Business and are only giving the "American Culture" the violence it craves to make that profit...
Thank you for your thoughtful and insightful comments.
You are one of the few who is a healer as well as a survivor.
Lots of people read this blog and I'm sure your perspective will
bring some to a new level of understanding themselves and what they have experienced.
While there are many useful points made in Miss Ensler's article, having the author of "The Vagina Monologues" argue a case against Mr Polanski is a bit too obvious.
Many people support the man, and I understand why. Several are repelled by his actions, and I also comprehend their position.
In the end perhaps the question ought to be: How should the scales of justice weigh this man's offense (as well as its circumstances) against his life and works?
"How should the scales of justice weigh this man's offense (as well as its circumstances) against his life and works?"
A person's life work should contribute something more than artistic entertainment. Did Polanski work to help other rape victims deal with the damage wrought upon them? Did he use his fame in a constructive, humanitarian act for the betterment of all?
Or did he just make good movies?
The rapist's act is one of power over the victim, it is never one of sexual desire. Polanski is a RAPIST and he should be dealt with as such.
Your last sentence completely baffles me. Are you saying that if one commits a crime, runs from punishment, goes on to have a good life and contributions to society that he is now to be absolved of his crime because of his life and work? Let the common man try that one. Commit a crime, avoid sentence, and then do a lot of worthwhile things in exchange for the crime.
"How should the scales of justice weigh this man's offense (as well as its circumstances) against his life and works?"
Easy, they shouldn't.
His life and works don't come into it. The scales of justice should weigh his offense against any extenuating circumstances relating directly to that offense.
The strongest case made by defenders seems to be on the basis of judicial misconduct. If there's merit to this claim, it should be made in court by witnesses testifying under oath and on the record, not just by people talking to HBO, not under oath and not on the court record.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
