Roman Polanski: BRILLIANT film maker or DISGUSTING criminal? Or, BOTH?

116 posts / 0 new
Last post
G. Muffin

I don't think I have ever seen any of Polanski's films.  Could somebody tell me how women or girls tend to be portrayed in them? 

remind remind's picture

People do not get to choose whether or not their attackers who break the law get charged, or not, nor should they.

Stating such is a red herring.

This thread, and its forerunners, are not about Polanski's rape victim, it is about Polanski and his movies, and people's defense, or non-defense, of him and them.

There was never any indication it was about her, ever, and in fact there does not have to be any discussion about her.




G. Muffin

remind wrote:
People do not get to choose whether or not their attackers who break the law get charged

I think they do in the sense that they can choose not to testify against someone.  Sometimes a victim's testimony isn't required, I know. 


Fucking right a victim's voice gets to be heard. I'm tired of this bullshit remind. You are not the fucking morality police. You care so much, but not a bit for the what the victim wants? No. This thread is supposed to be about YOU dictating to me (along with "I'll out feminist the feminist women" Martin) to us what we can and cannot say. How we should and should not feel. Then you two have the audacity to pile up on those who may have watched a couple of his films. 

This thread is all about YOU and how YOU decide things should be framed. I am tired o the fucking witch hunt. Not on Polanski, but on me and anyone else who dares mention he had a fucking good film.

Her wishes are not a "red herring" remind. They are HER wishes.

You do not get to frame the discourse into a fucking witch hunt. Which is what you are doing. This thread reminds of the puritans calling for book buring. You are not the fucking thought police. You are not the sole person in this thread and I am seriously tired of your holier than thou attitude as to what is and is not important.

You should have a good reflection on why the hell you are so fucking angry and why this case, in particular, is of so much interest to you. In fact, screw the case, because you've already stated you don't give a rat's ass about the victim and what she wants. Sorry but you'll have to play you're games with someone else. I am fdamned sure I am not the only one who is finding this entire thread something that would be on Freak Duminion.





Timebandit Timebandit's picture

Bravo, Stargazer.

martin dufresne

This issue, that of female crime victim's agency or lack thereof in eventual prosecution, has been passionately argued for decades with many valuable arguments on both sides. There is no chance of doing justice to it in the dying embers of a thread. Personally, I am aware of society's selective listening where a female victim who wants her male assailant prosecuted will often be called vindictive, a member of our "pitchfork crowd", perhaps? She will be pressured, often directly threatened by the assailant and his support lobby. She will be informed, of course, that she has no entitlement in the matter, criminal prosecution being entirely at the whim of Crown prosecutors.) However the slightest sign of exhaustion, confusion or disappointment will be hailed by her opposition as a sign that we have been Wrong in trying to apply the law.

I would like to see the same criterion applied to bank or store managers who signal a robbery. Somehow, in their case, society recognizes its own interest in prosecuting and doesn't leave it up to the victim to carry the brunt of this process in a deeply sexist (in)justice system, that has her twist in the wind rather than really confront batterers and rapists with available evidence other than her repeated testimony.


martin dufresne

It's somewhat ironic to see book-burning invoked by those who choose to shout down their opponents with personal attacks.



Pot, meet kettle.

remind remind's picture

Never said her voice should not be heard, not even once stargazer, another red herring twist of my words.

I said this thread was not about her. And it isn't!

Big fucking difference there, eh!

Victims do not have to get discussed, when their victimizer and the deed and outcomes are being discussed.

Why you would try and hold it so in this case, I do not know.

BTW, I can frame my discourse however the hell I want to, you do not get to tell me what I can, or cannot, say.

Not once have I tried to silence your voice, nor anyone else's. Nor made personal attacks, the way ya'll have against me.

If anyone should look at why they are angry perhaps it is you, flinging about Freedominion acusations and all.

Also, I am not angry, I am merely holding the postion I have held for over 30 years on this case.

And it is not my first time at this ism rodeo, either. It  has been a common factor in discourse occuring, whenever a Polanski movie has been released, and he gets another new "award" and more allocades and money.


YOU made this thread about anything but her remind. Not me. You did. Red herring huh? Jesus.


You are making personal attacks, as you continue to equate anyone watching or enjoying one of his films with supporting the rape culture and THAT is a personal attack. Which you continue to do. You do not own the corner on how any rape victim (survivor) gets to intepret things. You do not get to tell me, or anyone else that we're chosing pleasure over rape. That's bogus, uncalled for and incredibly hurtful. Yet you continue. Instead of just saying your piece you try to hammer me over the head with your take, which I do not subscribe to.


Funny, because in my entire time on Babble I haven't heard you mention him ONCE.


Pogo Pogo's picture

Wow look at that post count...

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

martin dufresne wrote:

It's somewhat ironic to see book-burning invoked by those who choose to shout down their opponents with personal attacks.


Only if you equate asking someone to own their own actions with personal attacks.

remind made some ugly allegations and attempted to silence opposition via smear.  Then she said she didn't mean it.  Then she turned around and demonstrated that she did, actually mean exactly what she originally said.  remind's not being called out for not reason - she started it. 

Nobody has said that remind isn't entitled to her opinion - some of us draw the line at being smeared with her bullshit because we don't toe her line.  She seems to have a pretty big problem with opposing points of view.

martin dufresne

Stargazer: YOU made this thread about anything but her remind. Not me. You did.  

What are you talking about? remind didn't come in before post #16 and it was to ask that the thread be closed after Alka-Dong took Sven's bait and whined about "self-righteous howling". The whole issue has always been about accountability from Polanski, not what tidbit of his victim's words could be leveraged against such accountability, on the advice of the pro-Polanski camp.


remind remind's picture

Did ya read the thread title stargazer?

Did ya mention her at all stargazer, before you decided to bash me with not mentioning her in a thread about Polanski?

The issue of Polanski has been around longer than babble stargazer. Much much longer.

And by that very same token YOU DO NOT get to own the corner on interpretation. And if you think I want to, then you yourself do too, on an actual personal bashing scale even.


I also boycott,  and promote the boycott of, redneck comedians because they are racist and sexist fuckwads, and think that people who support them, are furthering the intrention of sexism and racism, should I not be doing this either?



I'm closing this, though either Michelle or I may want to comment a bit on it when time permits a more thoughtful post.  Lets please not start a new one.  I think people need to cool off for a bit.  I'm not suggesting that passion isn't appropriate when I say that, but at least right now it's unproductive and destructive.


Topic locked