Wednesday, September 30, 2009

Stretching My Feminist Muscles...It's Been Awhile.

I am feeling more confident today about my ability to catch up on school and TV. I only have a couple shows left that I’m behind on and only one thing for school due tomorrow to stress about. The rest of it isn’t due for a couple of weeks. Tonight is trivia night so I am on my fruit and veggie diet until I can get my hands on the beloved potato wedges. I went for a walk last night and the weather was really amazing. I think I will skip exercising in the morning since I will be up late and go for another walk tomorrow night. Fall is by far my favorite season and it is starting to FEEL like fall...finally.
I know I usually talk about weight loss and sometimes I even complain for several paragraphs. I actually complain more than I talk about food sometimes but I digress. I wanted to take a moment to discuss this Roman Polanski thing. Now, I don’t really want to talk about whether I think he should have been arrested or whatever. I wanted to comment specifically on the comment many people have been making (Whoopi Goldberg and Sharon Tate’s sister to be exact) that what happened between Roman Polanski and that woman wasn’t “rape rape.” From what I understand, 30 years ago Roman Polanski took a 13 year old girl, drugged her and had sex with her. Many of the arguments have revolved around the fact that it was “consensual.” I think that making a distinction between statutory rape and what has been called “rape rape” is a dangerous sentiment. When the line is blurred that way, it demeans victims of rape. Those comments belittle young women and children who are molested every day. He knowingly had sex with and drugged a young girl. The fact that he may not have been sure how old she was is irrelevant. You’ve seen the pictures of her...she was a child. Again, this isn’t necessarily about Roman Polanski or the fact that as a society we are quick to forgive celebrities for their indiscretions. I think it’s interesting that most people still detest Michael Vick for harming dogs (for the record, I still don’t like him) but want this Roman Polanski thing stopped because it wasn’t “rape rape.” What if it were your child? What constitutes as a “rape rape” anyway? What does that mean? Does violence have to occur? Does there have to be breaking and entering? No, we aren’t talking about an 18 year old and a 17 year old....if you are 30 years older than a child and you drug her and have sex with’s rape. I am just shocked that people still excuse sexual misconduct towards women and children. I don’t know, maybe I am being too dramatic but I know that as a father would have a hard time accepting a 40 year old man having sex with me at 13 as anything but “rape rape.” God, that sounds so stupid. I am so disappointed in that term. Again, I don’t care about Roman Polanski...he means nothing to me and I don’t know all of the facts of his punishment but I will say it’s interesting that one of the people giving him major support is none other than Woody Allen...hmmm.
I want to know the opinions of others on this matter. I hope everyone has a great afternoon!

1 comment:

  1. I think you're right about it being rape. Any sexual act that isn't consensual is rape. And, someone of his age doing anything to a child is rape. I don't feel like there is any way around that or any excuse. I also think if you drug someone and then take advantage of them, that is clearly rape.

    There's my opinion.

    Hope you have a great afternoon too!


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.