Who's Afraid of Harvey Weinstein?

The Roman Polanski case has more twists and turns than a Scorsese movie. One aspect that hasn't been examined is why no one in Hollywood has come out against the petition circulated by Weinstein, Scorsese and other Hollywood fat cats advocating for Polanski to get off scot free for drugging and raping a 13-year-old when he was 43 years old. (Side note: Woody Allen signing the petition would be laughable if it weren't so repugnant.)

How can Hollywood, a culture that decries rape in the Congo, protests crimes in Sudan, advocates for education of girls in Afghanistan and says we must never forget the Holocaust, say that we should forgive and forget the rape of child by a middle-aged man? Also, for the record, it was rape -- really "rape-rape." See the police report on The Smoking Gun. It would never be appropriate for a 43-year-old to have sex with a child of 13 even if that child was "willing." A 13-year-old does not have the mental and emotional development to make appropriate decision about sex - that is why 13-year-olds are not allowed to drive cars, buy cigarettes, alcohol or vote, and need parents signatures on their report cards. The victim was drugged, said "no" to Polanski's advances, repeatedly tried to leave, even told him she had asthma and had to go home and get her medicine (a lie in attempt to get away) -- a plea he ignored. Jack Nicholson, who owned the house which was the scene of the crime, has been silent in this brouhaha. Could it be that Nicholson, now a father, knows how deeply abhorrent Polanski crime was, and regrets his unwitting role in it? I hope so.

Again, back to the question: Why aren't any Hollywood stars speaking out against Polanski? I can't imagine that everyone in Hollywood thinks a.) It is OK to rape a 13-year-old, or, b.) Polanski should be absolved on grounds that he is a talented director and the crime took place a long time ago. Contrary to popular belief, Hollywood has its fare share of good, decent people that really care about women and children. Lisa Ling reported on the horrors of rape in the Congo, Oprah fights against child predators and talks about the lasting effects of child sexual abuse, Susan Sarandon supports several worthy women's causes, Angelina Jolie advocates for Refugees and Orphans, Lucy Liu is the UNICEF Ambassador for child trafficking, and the list goes on. Countless actors and movie moguls have used their platforms to be a voice for marginalized populations, and put considerable time, effort and money into helping a number of worthy causes. Given this groups proclivity to decry abuse and speak out against injustices present and long past, it is very curious that there is no counter petition against Polanski.

Could it be that courage does not come as easy when it is time to oppose someone who might give you your next movie role, or you might be doing a deal with soon? The warlord in Sudan, rebel soldier in Congo or the Taliban cannot kill a Hollywood career. The sad fact is that many people in Hollywood probably think that what Polanski did is reprehensible but lack the real courage -- putting your livelihood and status on the line -- to go against Harvey Weinstein, Martin Scorsese and Woody Allen, so they just keep their mouths shut and hope the story dies soon. Any actor, agent, director, makeup artist or craft services person who spoke out to disagree with the kingmakers would instantly be dead to "the industry" and everyone knows it. Where is your moral outrage and big voice now Hollywood?

To all the deafeningly silent movie stars, agents and studio heads: Who will speak when they come for your 13-year-old daughter or son?

The opinion above does not reflect that of any organization the author has been affiliated with past or present.

Comments

[Jennifer Delaney - Huffpost Blogger]

Chris Rock had a great point. I also wonder if/how Polanski would have been supported by the powers that be if victim had been a 13 year old boy? I don't know the answer.

[ailbhe]

His supporters would be screaming homophobia.

[mydwyf]

Unless he was hemorrhaging or something, in that place and at that time a 13 year old boy
would never had said a word. We still as a society have no idea of the widespread reality
and ramifications of sexual abuse of boys, it is one of the very last taboo topics. Granted,
we do recognize at last that it exists, but what it does to boys . . . people don't want to go there.

[Jennifer Delaney - Huffpost Blogger]

You are SO right.

[Bulbul]

Bill Maher on his previous show also spoke up against Hollywood supporting Roman.

[ailbhe]

Chris Rock and Kirstie Ally are the only people with the courage to speak out.

Chris is the only person in Hollywood I've ever admired anyway. I'm glad he's got balls. We need more men like him in the world.

As for everybody else, who on earth would take them seriously? We can take their silence for either approval or cowardice, they have no moral authority. The average person on the street is better than them. All they have is money, when that dries up so to will the hangers on who serve only to indulge their egos. They repulse me. In future they should stick to making movies and keep their mouth shut because they really don't care, it is all just publicity and preening with their fellow fakes.

[Secularist]

The media attention has made Polanski the poster boy for sex crimes. To argue for his pardon is seen as somehow condoning his crime and shielding molesters. To speak out against him is to stand up for all victims of sex crimes around the world. However, to give Polanski such symbolic status is misguided, and even suggests a superficial understanding of the case.

There is a case to be made that there was judicial misconduct which caused Polanski to flee, and after serving time too (if he was released early, it wasn't because he released himself); that the plethora of extreme traumatic events in his life messed with his head; that a lot of time has passed, and he is now a different man who feels sorry about what he did, has settled with the victim, and poses no threat. You may find this case for leniency to be unconvincing, but it is not like it doesn't exists. And while some Hollywood defenders made poor arguments or foolishly downplayed the seriousness of the crime, that does not mean that we should confuse forgiveness and arguments for a pardon with a condoning of sex crimes and obstructing justice. Considering that Polanski now sits in prison in a country whose bank accounts are being used by actual criminal organizations that continue to make their money in sex trafficking, it would be wise for all to keep things in perspective.

[Jennifer Delaney - Huffpost Blogger]

It does not matter in which county's jail he sits.

Whether you recognize it or not, this case is symbolic, it needs no help from me to elevate it to that status. The fact that it is a legal issue does not preclude it from being symbolic.

"To argue for his pardon is seen as somehow condoning his crime and shielding molesters.­"

Yes, aguing for his pardon does send a message that child rape is OK if you can get away with it, and since it was a long time ago, should be fogiven. Even looking at the case in pure legal terms, the argument to let him off is flimsly and murky at best. The wish to NOT examine this case with a broader lense including both a legal and social context reveals underestimation of the impact of this case. This is has been one of the most hotly debated topics on the web, clearly it has hit a nerve with millions, to say that only the legal aspect of the case should matter to anyone is simplistic and unrealistic. While it will be decided on a legal basis the impact of the decision will be much broader.

Also, sure you can make a case for Polanski, or for any one, but just becuase you can make a case does not mean the case has merit.

[tkondaks]

I was very sad to read Natalie Portman signature on one of those "free Polanski" lists.

This is what a Harvard education gets you?

[bugsbonzai]

Cowards, all of them. Careers are more important than justice. And nothing Woody Allen, Martin Scorcese or Harvey Weinstein ever says, does or creates will ever be worth a nickel in my eyes. They just revealed how reprehensible and lacking character they truly are.

[Bulbul]

Good article. At least Oprah is not saying anything, I can`t say the same about Whoopie, Ford and others. What is their problem, some movie deal is going to slip away ? Sadly all the above you named have made it, should be about time they take a stand against a rape of a minor , a child by a middle aged man, which is actually a rape-rape.

[Jennifer Delaney - Huffpost Blogger]

But don't you think Oprah and others SHOULD be saying something? She has had shows on the lasting impact child sexual abuse has on people long into adulthood, and prides herself on how many child predators her show has caught. I truly admire her for this, and all of the other A listers that speak out about womens issues and rape.

This is a moment where A listers and the heads of the big children's orgainzations could send a message that child rape is not OK. But, everyone is silent becuase of their relationships with Hollywood - no one wants the blowback on their career or orgainzation. I totally get that and sympathize with it having been the head of an orgainzation, but I still wish someone would say something.

[Bulbul]

Touche...
Yes, Oprah should have said something, I was comparing her with the Fords, Allens etal....

[williamwilliam]

The facts of the case itself are depressing enough.

But in a way, no less troubling is the long list of artists and thinkers who
have signed a letter of protest against simple and open justice.

In the case of Scorsese, one is perhaps not surprised, since he gained
a certain notoriety in recent years for championing the 'rehabilitation' of
Elia Kazan. In that instance also, he was unable to distinguish the art from
the man. (No, the respective moral crimes- rape and betrayal- are hardly equivalent,
but the gravity of both crimes seem in Scorsese's case to be occluded by the same blind spot).

Yet when I see the names of serious and respected writers and philosophers on
this petition lining up as apologists for a child rapist, I am stunned, and there I
guess I reveal my own blind spot.

Politicians, priests, bankers, butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers I can understand, (though not condone).

But the names on this list belong to people who's business is the human condition. For what is art, literature, and philosophy but a critique of cruelty and ignorance, and a bid for the angels.

That such people - from the bottoms of their hearts- are fully prepared to condone Polanski's crime, is a bad sign for our general chances as a functioning society.

In other words, judging from some of the names on this list, it seems our problems go far deeper than a motley gang of rabid neo-cons with delusions of royalty.

[tkondaks]

There was nothing to "rehabilitate" regarding Kazan. He was a champion for standing up to the cowards who protected the American Communist Party. More should have named names.

[nodadchad]

It's too bad all those voices were silenced. Maybe we wouldn't be in the state we are if some different and more reliable forms of governing could have been debated.

On the case, I dont think that anyone is saying it is OK what Polanski did, it is the way the trial was handled. Still people should pick their battles wisely.

[MM5]

Good article - thank you for writing this - has Oprah said anything? If she is staying mum, that would be really lame given that she has recounted abuses in her past and made prevention of child abuse a central theme on her shown(at least in the past).

[zenlotus]

There is this boycott attempt:

http://promotingawarenessvictimempowerment.wordpress.com/

Here is the Salon.com article that discusses it:

http://bit.ly/ciyg7

[Gonzaloo]

Jennifer, Ive had the same question,
These are the only folks I seen in "the Industry' that seem to have a little
Compassion, Courage and Common Sense:

Women
Kristie Alley, Jamie Curtis

Men
Chris Rock, Stanley Crouch, Arnold Schwarzenegger

[piul05]

"The sad fact is that many people in Hollywood probably think that what Polanski did is reprehensible but lack the real courage to go against Harvey Weinstein, Martin Scorsese and Woody Allen."

I agree, in part, with your statement. I also believe some were dumb enough to sign the petition without bothering to know the full facts.

Whichever way, it's disgraceful.

[fabucat]

I'm not shocked that most of Hollywood is supporting Polanski. Most of Polanski's defenders probably have engaged in this same activity.

[Jennifer Delaney - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks for the kind words. I am glad that Kirstie Alley had the guts to say something and hope that others will to.

No, I don't know Jeff Norman, we've never met.

Christopher Hitchens wrtote a great piece on Slate titled:

Save the Children:Thinking about Roman Polanski's vile child rape in a global context.

http://www.slate.com/id/2231463/

[TheBlackCat]

Thanks for the link...gre­at article.

. I have seen so many comments which state (assuming the sex was consensual) that it is silly that if a woman hits puberty, she is sexually mature and capable of consenting to sex as any other woman is. These people often point out how men in many countries are allowed to marry girls as soon as they hit puberty, and we were allowed to do this everywhere in the world until a scant century or so again.

I'm a medical anthropologist, and the idea that puberty= sexually maturity is ridiculous. The point Hitchens brings up is how dangerous it is for very young mothers to give birth. Complications from child birth for both the baby and mother are so much higher when the mother is a young teen than an adult woman or even a late teen. The idea that puberty means you are ready to have sex and all the things that can go along with it is a scientific falacy.

Also, men being allowed to marry barely pubescent women is a symptom of societies in which women and children have little to no rights. These laws are in place in times and places where it is also legal to have children as young as 5 work 7 days a week in places like mines and factories. These are not the kinds of societies we should look upon for guidance on how men are expected to behave here and now.

[TheBlackCat]

sorry that second line should read, "it's silly to say that if a girl hits puberty, she's still a child."

[Jennifer Delaney - Huffpost Blogger]

Thank you! You are so right. Hitchens also does a beautiful job at talking about this in his Slate article referenced above. There is actually a prevention of child marriage bill going though Congress now. Young girls forced to "marry "have high rates of depression, are more likely to be abused, not educated and when become pregnant - have a high health risk, and high rate of infant mortality. Additionally, after the baby is born there is also a high risk of developmental issues as in may cases the young girls are not mentally or emotionally equipped to care for the child. This correlates to levels of education for the child, which is an indicator for overall economic development.

[Catherine1234]

There has been allot of talk about what is and what is not rape; is what Polanski did "rape-rape" or some lesser act. So what is the definition of rape?

See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape#Law_by_jurisdiction

“Rape is an assault a person involving sexual intercourse of another person without that person's consent.” The severity of the punishment is based on the use of violence, the age of the victim and whether drugs or intoxicants were used to override consent.”

Categorizations for rape under federal law:
Rape using violence or the threat of violence to override consent
Rape by causing fear in the victim for themselves or for another person to override consent
Rape by giving a drug or intoxicant to a person that renders them unable to give consent
Statutory rape involving an adult perpetrator

If looked at in the most favorable light to Polanski (ignoring the testimony of the victim entirely) the victim was only 13 years old, and so both legally and morally was unable to give her consent. Therefore

Polanski had sexual intercourse without consent: he raped her.
If you do look the victims testimony he also used drugs, and fear to override her unwillingness, again, and to a more severe degree, it was rape.

For a great discussion of the arguments presented in favor of freeing Polanski see here:

http://johnshore.com/2009/10/05/hollywood-go-polanski-yourself/

[bnyb]

I have yet to read a single comment suggesting he *didn't* rape her. I fail to see the purpose or point of your post.

[TheBlackCat]

open your eyes. There are several people on this very page saying he didn't raped her. I have seen dozens of comments elsewhere stating this, including comments by women.

[TheBlackCat]

As I stated in a previous thread, my guess is that Roman Polanski honestly believes it wasn't rape. Aside from the age issue, many people think if the woman wasn't kicking and screaming, it was consensual.

In the girl's testimony, she describes saying no, stop, over and over again. But she never actually fought back physically, because she was afraid.

In college, a boy tried to rape me. I also did not try and fight or scream. Yeah fighting sounds all well and good, except for one little thing...wh­at if he fights BACK? He was already trying to rape me, I had every fear that if I fought him, he would hurt me even worse.

When I read this girl's testimony, it was so close to my own experience. Me just saying over and over I wanted to go, stop, please, no, and him just not stopping. Then he went for a condom, and while he was distracted, I jumped up and ran. And I'll never forget the look on his face as I headed for the door. It was just utter confusion and disbelief. And I realized, this guy honestly did not think he was trying to rape me. To him, me saying "no no no" was just me being coy. I actually DID want to have sex with him, I was just playing hard to get.

Polanski probably thought the same thing. The scariest moment of that girl's life was nothing but a game to him.

[Fudgefase]

Great post - and great insight.

[rzan1]

the only actor who has m ade a strong response against Roman Polanski is Kirsti Alley, at least to my knowledge. I admire her courage. I hope that others will become as outspoken as Kirsti.

[alsm9]

Chris Rock did on the Jay Leno Show.

[TheBlackCat]

yes he did.

Also, though Bill Maher has not spoken out on this case particularly (to my knowledge), he has previously said when discussing a separate but similar case, that he thinks any adult man who sleeps with a young teenage girl is a sexual predator and deserves jail.

[rzan1]

I'm glad to hear it.