Well I feel sorry for both of them. I feel sorry that she was subjected to all of this in the first place.
I feel sorry for him because he's a tormented, broken man who needs help.
"Well I feel sorry for both of them. I feel sorry that she was subjected to all of this in the first place. I feel sorry for him because he's a tormented, broken man who needs help."
Do you feel sorry for all rapists, or just those whose films you like?
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/22/03
I just don't want to be a part of a culture in which somebody can have an outlandish opinion, as the one quote attributed to Debra Winger above is, and that means they can never speak about any issue again. It's just hyperbolic, reactionary, and as outlandish as the statement it was reacting to.
People lose credibility with others all the time. And they can then work to regain that. Or not. I just think the sort of thing JohnBoy wrote adds nothing to the discourse. Three years of reading what he writes has left me with an opinion that he's about 25% credible.
Marquise--many of us have been tormented. Many of us have even been broken. But we haven't drugged and raped 13-year-olds.
Losing your family to Hitler and your wife to Charles Manson doesn't entitle you to drug and rape children.
Neither does directing Rosemary's Baby and Chinatown.
He should have dealt with the legal ramifications then. Having evaded them, he must do so now.
If a court or the governor chooses to pardon him or commute his sentence, that is their legal right. And it is the right of the Hollywood people to sign petitions, as tasteless as those petitions may be to us. And it is the right of NYAdgal to not see any of their movies.
But I agree with Namo: it demeans the discussion to say that Debra Winger has no right to have an opinion--"EVER!"
but she should be drugged and anally raped while espousing that opinion. right?
Broadway Legend Joined: 7/22/03
Absolutely.
I haven't read the deposition. Was the victim penetrated anally or are they using "sodomy" as the catch all for oral sex, as is the wont? And noooooo, it doesn't make the crime any less criminal, but as a gay I understand how that loaded term is tossed around for a very good reason.
The way I read JohnBoy's statement, and the reason I agreed with it, was that, in making the choice to support Polanski, Debra Winger (and others) has lost credibility with many issues concerning the rights of women and children as victims.
I hope that she is held to a high degree of scrutiny in her future statements and that she is called out on her hypocrisy.
As anyone who supports Polanski, in this situation, should be.
Again, I don't believe anyone loses the right to an opinion. But, we all have to be held accountable, and she will have to be held accountable for her words.
no, namo. sometimes sodomy means sodomy. according to the grand jury testimony when he found out she wasn't on the pill, he helpfully suggested that he would "come in from the back." she declined his generous offer, but he knew what she really wanted and proceeded to give it to her.
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/3/05
"I know it wasn't rape-rape. I think it was something else, but I don't believe it was rape-rape."
"He pled guilty to having sex with a minor and he went to jail, and when they let him out he said 'You know what, this guy's going to give me 100 years in jail. I'm not staying'. And that's why he left."
I'm reading these statements as attributed to Whoopi Goldberg, but there's no mention of where or when they were made. Does anyone know if they were made on The View, or even if they were made at all?
From the article Marquise posted:
"His crime was graphic, manipulative and heinous, and he got a pass. It's unbelievable, really, that his soft-headed apologists are rooting for him to get another one."
Agree!
The Hollywood apologists can go to hell.
According to this link, Whoopi made her incredibly stupid remarks on The View:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/culture/lucyjones/100003657/whoopi-goldberg-defends-roman-polanski-it-wasnt-rape-rape/
they were made on the view. i was talking about this with a friend this morning. we think we might stone her.
Whoopi is simply misinformed. She thought it was consensual sex and not, "rape rape." Sorry, Whoops, it was rape rape.
What the F*CK is 'rape-rape'?!
The girl was RAPED.
Rape is a crime of power and violence.
I am so disgusted and angry by this.
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/3/05
Thanks, JG2. The way it's being presented is that her 'I know it wasn't rape-rape' is her opinion, but that clip shows me she was clarifying the charges made. It's very misleading the way it's being presented.
Q, she did say it on THE VIEW, from Monday's show, I believe.
Here's the clip
Broadway Legend Joined: 11/3/05
Ok, what am I not seeing or hearing in the View clip? It seems to me she's just trying to get the facts of the situation straight, not offering an opinion about it.
what he did was rape. yeah, he pled to unlawfully anally penetrating a 13 year-old girl, but what he did was rape. but there's rape and there's rape rape and y'know, the world doesn't all see rape the way we do. i mmean them enlightened folks over there often let 8-10 year old girls be married off to 50 and 60 year old men. who's to say we're right in not letting 40 something men anally penetrate 13 year-old girls against their will? i mean if we're saying they cannot give consent, we're saying they cannot really know if they do or they don't want it, so it really falls upon the man to decide that for them. which roman kindly did here.
She is trying to get the facts of what he was charged with. What they are probably not telling her in her earpiece is that the little girl said no, repeatedly. I think Whoopi is speaking on the assumption that it was consensual sex. Then she said that they were already having sex when he gave her the quaalude and champagne. That is not the case.
She should have done her homework before speaking on national TV. It's not that difficult to find the facts of this case.
Why the eff doesn't she get the facts straight BEFORE she goes on the air and starts running her mouth about it.
so the case is being made that she is not a dugusting failure as a human being, but merely an utter and total moron who has no understanding of the case about which she is making proclamations?
Videos