This week it's Ryan Gilbey, the film critic for the New Statesman, who seeks to minimise Polanski's responsibility for raping a child because Polanski makes 'great films'. I suppose we should be grateful that Gilbey actually mentions the fact that Polanski raped a child. The British Film Institute managed to forget that piece of information when planning their retrospective on Polanski's work. They also tried to claim it was irrelevant when challenged on the issue.
Now, I'm sure Polanski's films are brilliant. I've only seen the Piano so I can't really comment on his artistic merit, however making good films does not negate the fact that Polanski drugged a 13 year old child and then sodomised her. A child of 13 is not competent to consent to sex. They have never been competent to consent to sex.
An adult man who puts his penis in the body of a 13 year old is a rapist.
But, Gilbey would like everyone to forget the fact that Polanski raped a child, or at the very least, seeks to minimise it by suggesting it was "historic" and "ambiguous":
He also spent a spell in prison and then under house arrest in 2009 and 2010 on historic rape charges dating back to 1977. A thorough documentary, Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired, examines the case and its ambiguities.
There is no "ambiguity" to what Polanski did: he raped a child.
The fact that the justice system in the US, as with everywhere, is incapable of dealing with the rape of children effectively does not make rape "ambiguous". It means we live in a Patriarchal-Misogynistic culture which privileges the male right to put their penis wherever they like without consequence.
Polanski drugged and raped a child.
Those who seek to minimise Polanski's act of rape are just as guilty as those who ignored Jimmy Savile's sexual abuse of children.
Those who seek to minimise Polanski's act of rape are guilty of perpetrating and perpetuating rape culture.
You are the problem.
Ryan Gilbey, you are part of the problem.
0 comments:
Post a Comment