Dear Cannes Film Festival, Roman Polanski is a Child Rapist.

 Dear Cannes Film Festival,

Roman Polanski is a child rapist.

I know I've written this exact same letter before, although last time it was to the British Film Institute. I'm sure you are bored of hearing this. I'm certainly finding writing this over and over and over again somewhat tedious but people seem to be struggling with this issue. Still.

So, for the record, Roman Polanski is a convicted child rapist who is also a fugitive from justice.

It doesn't matter how many "good" films he makes, or how many stupid people make excuses for him because he's an "artiste", Roman Polanski will always be a convicted child rapist.

Roman Polanski gave a 13 year old a quaalude in champagne and then vaginally, orally and anally raped her.

I know Polanski has trouble understanding the fact that raping children is a despicable crime for which he should still be in prison. After all, there are no end of rape apologists telling him that it was completely okay for him to rape a child [see: the entire audience the night he won the Oscar for the Pianist].

There is a reason he's blithering on about equality for women being a bad thing and the birth control pill "ruining romance". Polanski does not want to take responsibility for the child he was convicted of raping nor does he want anyone to question the clearly illegal sexual relationship he had with Natassja Kinski when she was only 15 years old.

Every single person who pays to see Polanski's films is supporting rape culture.

Every single actor who appears in a Polanski film is supporting rape culture.

Every single organisation that gives Polanski awards for his films is supporting rape culture.

Every single person who uses the word "historical" to refer to Polanski's rape conviction is supporting rape culture.

Every journalist who does not mention Polanski's conviction for rape is supporting rape culture.

Roman Polanski is a child rapist who fled from California because he did not want to go to prison.

Roman Polanski gave a 13 year old a quaalude in champagne and then vaginally, orally and anally raped her.

He should be in prison; not receiving awards at your Festival.

Louise Pennington

Read More

Posted in #celebrityculture, #rapeculture, Child Rape, Male Violence Against Women, Misogyny, Rape Culture, Roman Polanski, Violence against Women, War on Women | No comments

#DickheadDetox : Jack Nicholson

Until now, the only thing I knew about Jack Nicholson is that he dates very young women [hello creepy] and it was in his house, whilst he was present, that Roman Polanski raped a child. I think it's safe to say he's not a nice man. I've read rumours linking him to domestic violence and sexual assault. He's also pro-life.

Yesterday, @smashthep tweeted a link to a Guardian article in 2000 detailing a lawsuit alleging a physical assault by Nicholson on a prostitute:

That aging Lothario Jack Nicholson has been hit with a lawsuit alleging that he promised a prostitute $1,000 for sex and then assaulted her when she asked for the money. Catherine Sheehan has already received a £32,000 settlement from Nicholson, but now insists that that sum is insufficient and that her injuries from the incident are "actually killing her."

According to the lawsuit, the star invited Sheehan and a friend to his home on October 12, 1996. He offered each woman $1,000 to wear "little black dresses" and engage in sex acts with him. But Nicholson later became "loud and abusive", commenting that he would never pay anyone for sex, as he could "get anyone he wanted as a sexual partner." Sheehan claims that Nicholson promptly grabbed her hair, thumped her head on the floor, and then threw her out of his house.

Justifying the complaint, Sheehan's lawyer Ira Chester says, "about a year after she received the original payment her injuries and the damage to her brain stem got worse than originally thought. Now the injury is actually killing her. She has no vision at times and finds it hard to cope with the pain... The medical bills have already reached $60,000, but if she is to survive she needs an important operation... The original settlement isn't enough."

The lawsuit joins a long list of complaints filed against the hell-raising 63-year-old - the oddest of which saw Nicholson accused, in 1996, of rupturing a woman's breast implants. 

So, Jack Nicholson definitely a contender for the #dickheaddetox

Read More

Another Day, Another Man Minimising Rape.

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. 

Read More

This Week in Missing the Point Completely: BFI on Roman Polanski

The BFI is currently running a retrospective on the films of Roman Polanksi. When questioned on their decision on their Facebook page, this is the British Film Industry's response:

Thank you for all your comments and feedback, we’re listening and acknowledge your strong views. Showing these films has been planned for over 18 months, mindful of Polanski’s 1977 US conviction. The BFI takes its responsibility to audiences very seriously and we fully appreciate that recent events have heightened awareness, however, our focus is not on the director, but the films, none of which are autobiographical or reflective of Polanski’s conviction. We recognise the important contribution Polanski’s films make to world cinema and film culture and we want to ensure that new audiences get the opportunity to see them on the big screen. By presenting his films in this way the BFI is not condoning or making any judgment on Polanski’s personal past history.

Yep, by showing Polanski's films, the BFI are "not condoning or making any judgment on Polanski’s personal past history" and the only reason anyone could possibly be raising this as an issue is because "recent events have heightened awareness". It isn't at all probable that people have been raising the issue of Polanski's conviction for drugging and sodomising a child since it happened. Us feminists only remember things like child rape exist when other famous men are discovered to be child rapists. If it hadn't been for the discovery that Jimmy Savile was a paedophile, none of us would remember that Roman Polanski is currently a fugitive from justice having fled the US to avoid a prison sentence for raping a child. 

Obviously, I'm being facetious here [and I'm telling you I'm being facetious because it is actually amazing the number of people who don't seem to understand] but, this separation of male violence from the men who commit the crimes is destructive. It silences victims whilst simultaneously creating a hierarchy of abusers with Roman Polanski being a "good" abuser because The Piano won him some Oscars. 

The "he's an artiste" defence comes up every time these issues are raised and it remains utter garbage. Being an "artiste" has never been an acceptable excuse for an adult male to abuse a child and it never should be. It doesn't matter if the "artiste" in question is Roman Polanski or Anthony Kiedis [who brags about "having sex" with a 14 year old in his biography Scar Tissue]. Both men have traumatised childhoods, Polanski is a Holocaust survivor whilst Kiedis was the victim of physical and sexual abuse as a child, but these traumas aren't excuses for their behaviour as adults. 

The moment we condone the abuse these men commit because of their status as "artistes" is the moment we stop holding them accountable for their crimes. It does not matter how brilliant their films are or how much we love their music. We can not separate the art these men produce from the violence they inflict on vulnerable women and children. 

Read More