Just wondering: How many teen girls has Polanski raped?
posted at 7:31 pm on October 2, 2009 by Allahpundit
An important question to ask, no? Not necessarily for the sake of justice — as a 76-year-old, he’s unlikely to be prosecuted again — but for the sake of determining just how much child molestation a masterpiece like “Chinatown” entitles you to. By my count, we’ve got one confirmed incident (a rape-rape, in Whoopi Goldberg terminology, not statutory rape) per the guilty plea that he entered in L.A. in 1977; we’ve got a likely statutory case via his, ahem, “romance” with 15-year-old Nastassja Kinski; and we’ve got this charming anecdote dug up by Mark Steyn, which pre-dates both of those incidents.
Jonah, in my weekend column, I quote Robert Towne, the screenwriter of Chinatown, who says he found it hard to concentrate during writing sessions at Polanski’s place, what with “the teenyboppers that Roman would run out and take Polaroid pictures of diving off the f***ing diving board without tops on. Which was distracting. With braces.”
I guess “teenybopper” could encompass a range of ages, although I don’t know many 18-year-olds to whom that term is normally applied — and who, at that age, are still having their teeth straightened. But kudos to our genius auteur for being able to maintain his focus on a cinematic masterwork while snapping presumptive spank photos of pre-pubescent girls. Clearly he’s earned a comfortable retirement in a Swiss chalet for that.
Anyone think this sort of behavior ended cold turkey after Kinski, incidentally? And anyone think his L.A. victim is the only one he agreed to pay hush money to?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
There are a lot of parents that need their a@#es whupped for letting that perv near their daughters. I would never let some man hang out with my daughters.
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 7:36 PM
Is this a math quiz!
canopfor on October 2, 2009 at 7:36 PM
initial approximation is three (a 13, 15, and 17 year old).
unclesmrgol on October 2, 2009 at 7:36 PM
“Shhh… We won’t be able to keep all the underage girls around if you keep this up.”
- Hollywood directors
faraway on October 2, 2009 at 7:36 PM
Again, my understanding is that child molesters are among the highest repeat offenders.
Meric1837 on October 2, 2009 at 7:36 PM
The man is a pedophile…
… plain and simple.
Seven Percent Solution on October 2, 2009 at 7:37 PM
For future reference: http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=spot_the_pedo
Content warning.
Meric1837 on October 2, 2009 at 7:37 PM
Alexander Payne (director of Election and Sideways) was on the “I support the child molester” list also.
aquaviva on October 2, 2009 at 7:38 PM
Best. Dragnet. Schooling. Ever.
portlandon on October 2, 2009 at 7:38 PM
So she’s sort of forgiven him. The article indicates that she hasn’t been paid, and Polanski has accrued over $100,000.00 in interest on the $500,000 settlement.
One wonders why his US assets have yet to be attached in payment. Is Hollywood doing more than lip service in shielding him?
unclesmrgol on October 2, 2009 at 7:39 PM
Put his a%s in Gen Pop at Pelican Bay as a “Child Rapist”…
… Justice served!
Seven Percent Solution on October 2, 2009 at 7:39 PM
That’s ok, ACORN is still in business.
Generally, guys who go after one underaged girl do go after others.
rbj on October 2, 2009 at 7:41 PM
Well,there was some german girl named Nasty,I think she was 15,in which I’ve read!
canopfor on October 2, 2009 at 7:41 PM
“Chinatown” itself is a dreary, depressing film in which an incestuous rapist ends up getting away with his crimes and adding his own granddaughter to his list of “conquests”. Nicholson gives a good performance, as usual, but why the film is considered a “masterpiece” is anyone’s guess. There’s absolutely nothing redeeming about it. It’s sick and wrong – just like Roman Polanski.
packsoldier on October 2, 2009 at 7:41 PM
Luc Besson, who directed The Professional (Leon), with Natalie Portman as a 12-year-old lolita.
Hmm.
John the Libertarian on October 2, 2009 at 7:42 PM
Nice!
Griz on October 2, 2009 at 7:42 PM
The Steyn piece has hit the presses…
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/polanski-rape-world-2591230-one-roman
BTW, that anecdote came from here…
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3588310/Genius-on-the-run.html
Steyn was the first one to really find it… there was literally only two google hits for that quotation, steyn at the corner and this at the telegraph…
ninjapirate on October 2, 2009 at 7:43 PM
Glad I haven’t seen it.
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 7:43 PM
Yep, and Hollyweird is just fine with that.
Fletch54 on October 2, 2009 at 7:44 PM
I used to live in LA. It’s sad to say but there are far too many parents that would send their daughters, sons, puppies, whatever to “that perv” if they thought it might lead to a role in one of his movies.
highhopes on October 2, 2009 at 7:44 PM
You’re better off for not having seen it, I assure you.
packsoldier on October 2, 2009 at 7:45 PM
Dum de Dum Dumb…just the facts.
d1carter on October 2, 2009 at 7:46 PM
seriously, Allah. I gave you an answer to this question yesterday. Look into his history with Emmanuelle Seigner, starting when she was 14.
I_C on October 2, 2009 at 7:47 PM
T minus 5 minutes until ThackerAgency comes on to tell us how much Polanski has already “suffered” by paying a “fine” and being “exiled.”
Polanski is (not WAS) a pedophile.
And anyone who supports him is just as sick, evil and reprehensible.
Religious_Zealot on October 2, 2009 at 7:47 PM
But the Nicholson character at the end is devastated. It’s a devastating ending that punches the viewer in the stomach.
The Faye Dunaway character is trapped, she can’t escaped.
Sure, the topic is appalling and disgusting but the acting is brilliant.
So much for my movie expertise.
SteveMG on October 2, 2009 at 7:48 PM
Heh.
According to the article AP linked to in regards to the hush money (not a “fine”)…
…it doesn’t appear as if Polanski ever PAID the settlement figure.
So much for suffering.
Religious_Zealot on October 2, 2009 at 7:49 PM
As if he didn’t do enough damage by encouraging the production of crappy Pinot in the wake of that bad movie.
highhopes on October 2, 2009 at 7:50 PM
I was wondering if evidence of more girls would come out. Pedophiles don’t usually stop after one or two.
4shoes on October 2, 2009 at 7:52 PM
I just read the Wikipedia entry on the book Lolita. It is listed as one of the best books of all time. It is about a perv and a 12 year old girl. How can that be one of the best books ever? What’s wrong with To Kill a Mockingbird?
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 7:52 PM
Yeah, that is some terrible suffering. Sign me up for that, but with women who are adults…
mcassill on October 2, 2009 at 7:54 PM
If you want to spend 2+ hours of your life enduring an interminably dull, bleak movie only to get kicked in the cojones at the end, I highly recommend it. Thanks Mr. Polanski, you’re a genius!
packsoldier on October 2, 2009 at 7:54 PM
Whether there are any more rapes of underage girls that this vermin, Polanski, committed, what he did in this one case is enough for me to wish him the worst possible punishment, including the death penalty.
That said, how interesting it is that Michael Vick, who I agree did horrible things to dogs, has not enjoyed the compassion shown to Polanski from the Les Miserables of the left.
I mean, where’s the love?
Oh, yeah, the child rapist is rich and white.
TXUS on October 2, 2009 at 7:55 PM
Okay – time out before we go nuts here. Both my first and last girlfriends were teenaged, of-age, and wore braces. Heck, I had a high school teacher who was wearing braces. Unless you’re in Saudi Arabia or Egypt, someone being teenaged alone isn’t enough to make sex a crime. (Yes, this is ironic considering Aisha, but those countries aren’t exactly famed for their moral consistency.) A 13-year-old and a 19-year-old are not equivalent.
Also not every jurisdiction has the same statutory rape laws. You might find a middle-aged man having an orgy including a 15-year-old among other older teenagers morally repugnant, but there are plenty of places in the world where this is perfectly legal — the 15-year-old is allowed to give consent — and I suspect that Polanski wouldn’t have written about it had this not happened in one of those places.
Let’s concentrate on the one case that actually was subject to a court of law, shall we? He was a pervert, yes. Whether he was a criminal is another matter entirely, and that’s the matter at hand here. His guilty plea and dwhat it implies should be what damns him, not tales of personal decadence.
calbear on October 2, 2009 at 7:56 PM
I gotta cure for this problem, 7.62X51
M-14 2go on October 2, 2009 at 7:56 PM
I have found that liberals tend to care more about animals than humans.
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 7:56 PM
They’re both great books. With respect to Lolita, it is a great piece of literature and Humbert Humbert and Claire Quilty both come to inglorious ends in the book. Don’t forget that the Old Testament has some pretty sordid stories as well.
aquaviva on October 2, 2009 at 7:56 PM
Juan Williams said it best the other night on Hannity: “If he tried that on my daughter, I’d kill his @$$.”
Nice to see bi-partisan support for a change.
AaronGuzman on October 2, 2009 at 7:58 PM
What’s wrong with To Kill a Mockingbird?
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 7:52 PM
TXMomof3: Theres nothing wrong with To Kill a Mockingbird!
And,I haven’t seen Chinatown movie either,I think
I never will!:)
canopfor on October 2, 2009 at 7:59 PM
I thought Justice was Blind? Unless you are a liberal hollywood type?
WyoMike on October 2, 2009 at 8:00 PM
Since he believes that EVERY man lusts for tender morsels of innocence, my guess is…dozens?
disa on October 2, 2009 at 8:01 PM
So was Palanski the FIRST ACORN CUSTOMER?
PappaMac on October 2, 2009 at 8:02 PM
I personally don’t see what the age of consent in different areas has to do with anything. An old man should not be sleeping with a young girl, anywhere.
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 8:03 PM
If I’m correctly reading the Telegraph piece, this happened in France where the age of consent is indeed 15. If you think that’s bad, before 1945, it was 13 (thank you Allied Forces) and in the 70s there was a movement to drop it altogether. As always, no matter how bad you think things are, they could always be worse.
calbear on October 2, 2009 at 8:03 PM
Oh, that clip was wonderful!!
disa on October 2, 2009 at 8:05 PM
It didn’t sound to me like the young lady in this case consented to sodomy, under the influence of whatever he gave her to…ahem…loosen her up.
disa on October 2, 2009 at 8:07 PM
You know, this slimeball probably thinks that sex with animals is OK, too.
disa on October 2, 2009 at 8:07 PM
Considering the general population of Hollyweird let another child rapist off the hook, Mikey Jackson, and a murderer, OJ, I’m not surprised that the elite think it’s cool to be Roman. I’m wondering if there are a bunch of supporters in the ranks of Roman’s that would parse over by way of quotations in the media to these other knuckleheads? And of course we’ve got this week’s headlines regarding Kevin Jennings, an Obama Tsar, turning the other cheek when a 15 year-old tells him of an adult affair, when he, as an adult and school official, should have called the cops. And the liberal media yet again isn’t thinking anything much about it. What will it take to get the libs to flinch? Sex with infants? This is all beyond repulsive. It seems that the inmates are in charge of the asylum.
Robert17 on October 2, 2009 at 8:08 PM
Well, in the story about Kinski, he says he had sex with her friend who was 17. He thought the friend was the younger one and that’s who he ended up with. Coincidence, right?
MamaAJ on October 2, 2009 at 8:08 PM
There are more. The man is clearly a predator.
Emily M. on October 2, 2009 at 8:08 PM
OT:
Rove is GOING OFF on Juan Williams over Fannie/Freddie Obama ties on O’Reilly.
John the Libertarian on October 2, 2009 at 8:09 PM
Brietbart was hinting at the embarrassment to Hollywood “when” more of his victims come forward.
Gutfeld asked if he was giving a hint and Brietbart coyly abstained from answering.
mattshu on October 2, 2009 at 8:09 PM
Neither should a person lie maliciously, gamble away someone’s financial future on risky investments, cheat on a partner, have sex with a prostitute, or have an abortion. But there are plenty of places those are legal and will not result in jail time. If we concentrate on “This guy likes ‘em young; he had sex in France with a 15-year-old among other girls,” we lose sight of the fact that “This guy plead to statutory rape of a 13-year-old.” Already disa seems to have confused the two cases. The 13-year-old is the one that matters.
calbear on October 2, 2009 at 8:10 PM
Now, if he did it to a dog, Hollywood would freak and lynch him. Funny how they prioritize.
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 8:10 PM
They seem to give Tim Robbins a pass. 8 O
thomasaur on October 2, 2009 at 8:13 PM
The pictures here http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWQ5NTBlYjdlNTQzMmYyMmI3ZmFiMzdmODQyM2VkNjg=
tell me a lot. The first two eh. That last one… EECK! He is totally coming on to her. That a bar move there.
UnderstandingisPower on October 2, 2009 at 8:14 PM
Religious_Zealot on October 2, 2009 at 7:47 PM
Wow, it’s been too long since you’ve singled me out again. If this keeps up, I might need to take out a restraining order on you.
You can misrepresent all you want. I never said he ‘suffered’. But apparently you are eager to have the victim suffer again by testifying on the stand to the most horrific time in her life. You can’t wait to TIVO it for your own entertainment and edification.
I’m glad he’s not in America. This person means nothing to me, and I’d like to keep it that way. I don’t want to know anything more about this incident, unlike you who are eager to have the victim replay the details through her tears.
Seriously, if you have a problem with me, you can contact me with my link, Mr. Anonymous bomb thrower. I’m sure you are a cowardly tough guy though. If you’ve got a problem with me, I’m right here. . . where are you?
ThackerAgency on October 2, 2009 at 8:15 PM
But that’s okay because he’s a genius, and geniuses don’t have to obey any normal rules like the rest of us peasants. I think, overall, that may be the theme here… jetting to Copenhagen for a few days of wining and dining is a “sacrifice” to the elite that they make on OUR account and we should be oh, so grateful and not question. Same with Hollyweird geniuses. After all, this elite has sacrificed enough, and look at what he’s done on our account, and we should be oh, so grateful and drop this silly matter…
UnderstandingisPower on October 2, 2009 at 8:18 PM
I don’t trust Wikipedia for anything, but I know the reason the left adores Lolita so much.
The movie, based on the book, was very much a breakout movie for Hollywood, where barriers of decency were crumbled.
It was their first real step into cultural destruction, all in the name of art, that years later led them to the recent Brokeback Mountain hideousy.
Likewise, To Kill a Mockingbird was a breakout movie, too, but of the kind that moved souls, not loins. In fact, it was that book and movie that led a lot of us into law, for the right reasons.
TXUS on October 2, 2009 at 8:19 PM
What kind of rape are we talking about here?
Rape like the fun kind or Rape-Rape like Whoopi was talking about?
How “young” are we talking about here? Like 15 which is almost legal or 12 or 13 which would be well Hollywood legal?
And were any of these people on his staff (Letterman style)?
Did any of these gals ever date Levi Johnston? My bad they would have to be older…..mmmmmm, did any of them date Larry King?
Could someone find out if any of these then 13 year olds have ever hosted “THE VIEW” or might be hosting Good Morning America now?
Roman…..if you’re looking for definitions of sexual stuff you might check with Bill Clinton (he’s good at defining terms like that).
PappyD61 on October 2, 2009 at 8:20 PM
I’m not sure about the youth factor, but I definitely would expect that he continued to be very aggressive and unpleasant sexually.
AnninCA on October 2, 2009 at 8:22 PM
ThackerAgency on October 2, 2009 at 8:15 PM
Then why have a justice system at all? After all, is there a trial where the victim testifies that DOESN’T bring up all the sordid details and make them relive it? You’re right. Welcome to the free for all after all we certainly don’t want victims to suffer–as if by not bringing the criminal to justice makes that suffering less.
(And just so you know, I feel TERRIBLY for this girl, now woman. These “incidents” don’t go away for a victim. EVER. Even healed and forgiven, they are still there.)
UnderstandingisPower on October 2, 2009 at 8:22 PM
Lolita was pornography for the literary set: ornate language about a pedophile.
It allowed the elite to revel in a sordid story while telling themselves that this is real literature. Actually it is crap. Mickey Spillane was a better writer and more moral.
Dhuka on October 2, 2009 at 8:25 PM
The saddest thing about Polanski is that he wasn’t there when Manson was.
Spiritk9 on October 2, 2009 at 8:27 PM
Anyone remember that odd libel case a few years back?
Roman Polanski Sought Solace in Sex
VerbumSap on October 2, 2009 at 8:27 PM
To Kill a Mockingbird had an impact on me as well. It’s a Wonderful Life is one of my favorite movies.
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 8:27 PM
Maybe Hollywood doesn’t want use to know how many familiar faces started their career on the casting couch.
pedestrian on October 2, 2009 at 8:28 PM
Hey Allah, did you catch SNL last night? They actually went after Whoopi and Joy Behar for supporting Polanski: http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/clips/whoopi-and-joy/1162660/
Yossarian on October 2, 2009 at 8:30 PM
Uh oh, I just heard a bell. Got your wings yet?
TXUS on October 2, 2009 at 8:33 PM
Allah tweeted about you. He said you had the HA comment of the year!
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 8:35 PM
This is a good question-I am certain there are many young girls in Polanski’s life. After his wife and son’s horrific deaths, I am sure he had to feel victimized, perhaps to the point where he just felt what he was doing was “ok” because he is the victim, not the girls…and anyone who was exposed to the quaalude scene years ago knows that a person under the influence of quaaludes usually dropped all moral safeguards and behaved in ways that were not the users normal behavior. Add alcohol to the mix, and you have an individual who is often sexually out of control. It was probably during that period Polanski lost his moral compass, and today he is still in denial, having run away from facing the damage he did to many young girls along the way…especially the one in California. He needs to come back to California and face her, and face up to his crime.
djn on October 2, 2009 at 8:35 PM
Pedephiles ALWAYS repeat their crimes.
Meantime, here in Cal, this guy gets more time for abusing the car of an ‘elite’, than Polanski gets for raping ‘unimportant’ little girls.
Freddy on October 2, 2009 at 8:36 PM
That sounds like a justification of his perversion. He cheated on his wife. I cannot blame her slaughter for him being a sick b@stard.
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 8:38 PM
Luc Besson, who directed The Professional (Leon), with Natalie Portman as a 12-year-old lolita.
Hmm.
John the Libertarian on October 2, 2009 at 7:42 PM
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
That’s a great movie… primarily because the girl had some emotional/sexual confusion (her whole freaking family had been killed in front of her eyes, she doubtless was confused about a LOT of things) but The Professional held strong as her father figure (and only that). There’s no indication that Luc Besson f**ked Portman, so… what’s your point…?
fabrexe on October 2, 2009 at 8:44 PM
You’d find few published writers agreeing with your claim about Spillane’s writing ability compared with Nabokov. Most commentary on Lolita views Humbert as a monster, either literally or symbolically.
dedalus on October 2, 2009 at 8:44 PM
Coming soon: Platinum edition re-release of Chinatown.
amkun on October 2, 2009 at 8:47 PM
I’m sorry, pedophile supporter, did you say something?
Oh yeah, that’s right:
Compare and contrast:
and
Religious_Zealot on October 2, 2009 at 8:47 PM
No telling what I said. Since I don’t “tweet” or “Twitter” — I still like women you know — can you edify me on this flash of brilliance or profundity about which I was so kindly “tweeted”?
TXUS on October 2, 2009 at 8:51 PM
You act as though a trial is coming – at least on the charge he already pled to. All that is needed for that is sentencing – her testimony is not required. As for the charges of fleeing the jurisdiction – she won’t be needed for that either.
However since this was the most horrific time in her life – in your own words – should the man who inflicted that suffering upon her pay for his actions?
RDuke on October 2, 2009 at 8:52 PM
Something about praying daily for him to swallow the barrel of a shotgun. Why would I think you didn’t still like women?
TXMomof3 on October 2, 2009 at 8:55 PM
It is degenerates and their publicised stories which make it such that no man can ever be alone with a nonrelated child of either gender without risk of accusation. The dateing world is only a little bit safer. The fear on all sides is widespread, and yet NAMBLA members still walk the streets. If we would deal with the reprobates swiftly and justly, peace might have a chance in the rest of society.
AnotherOpinion on October 2, 2009 at 8:58 PM
Justice has not time contraints. 32 yrs. ago or now, it does not matter. It must be served.
JAM on October 2, 2009 at 8:59 PM
Dear Daedalus
Actually I was paraphrasing an essay by Kingsley Amis in which he made these points both about Lolita and Mickey Spillane.
Have you read Mickey Spillane? Try it, you might like it.
And actually I really don’t care what most writers think; having been a writer myself, I have seen how brainwashed most writers are
But anyway thanks for your comment.
Dhuka on October 2, 2009 at 9:00 PM
Polanski’s raped quite a few, I would imagine, given that he had the child molester’s patter down pat. According to this excerpt from the child’s testimony.
SilentWatcher on October 2, 2009 at 9:05 PM
It’s one thing to describe a young teen as physically well developed – it’s often a simple fact. It’s quite another to describe one as “sexy.”
“Sexy” means “sexually attractive.”
No 13 year old is emotionally or mentally capable of being totally in control of whatever sexual impulses she may have. Why? Because she’s still a child.
Thacker says 13 year olds can be sexy.
Thacker says children can be sexy.
Thacker is a despicable creep.
splink on October 2, 2009 at 9:12 PM
C’mon all you libs, like AnninCA–How does this work for your defense of Romie?
C’mon! Show all us conservatives how smart you all are!
Liam on October 2, 2009 at 9:12 PM
Yeah, I know I know…I got ‘em off last month.
:)
Bob's Kid on October 2, 2009 at 9:13 PM
And more from Thacker:
Where are you, Ann?
Liam on October 2, 2009 at 9:15 PM
Oh, that, was something I said earlier on this thread, I think. I was telling Allah how that now that he’s no longer in denial about being a clinical Candy Ass, I’d STOP praying for him to swallow the barrel of a shotgun… at least for now.
As to your question, I think any guy who Twitters or tweets, which I don’t, needs to question himself…
On a lot of levels. -_*
TXUS on October 2, 2009 at 9:17 PM
I told you guys that there was more to this than just one child. Makes me wonder if this is why France and Poland are backing off their support. Maybe they did a little digging around, too.
bloggless on October 2, 2009 at 9:22 PM
Some girls about that age are sexually attractive and are paid a lot of money to be photographed for advertisements that sell a variety of products.
It would be natural for boys about their age to pursue them. It is wrong for adult men to do so. As you point out, they are children regardless of how well developed their bodies are.
dedalus on October 2, 2009 at 9:27 PM
We know for sure Rapeanski committed one rape wayyyy too many
I say JuanWilliams him.
Gang-of-One on October 2, 2009 at 9:31 PM
I must disagree. PRESENTED to be sexually attractive…PERCEIVED by many to be sexually attractive…yes.
But they’re still children. To be sexually attracted to one is to be sexually attracted to a child. The logic is inescapable.
Sorry to be so blunt but I’ve good reason to be inflexible on this.
splink on October 2, 2009 at 9:32 PM
Worse yet for the young girls, when they get involved with pedophilic older men, it messes their heads up. A lot of them turn promiscuous. They can’t handle their nascent sexual urges, and instead of dealing with older men as family friends or father figures, they present themselves as sexual objects. It’s a lot of work to bring them back under control once that happens.
SilentWatcher on October 2, 2009 at 9:33 PM
Paging AnninCA…Paging AnninCA…
Liam on October 2, 2009 at 9:34 PM
So what? A 16-year-old is a “child” too and most men would have no problem finding a girl that age to be sexually attractive.
In the grand cultural scheme of western civilization, it’s really a modern, recent phenomenon that girls in the 12-14 age category are considered absolutely “off-limits”, sexually speaking. It wasn’t long ago that 13-year-old girls were being married off to men much older than themselves.
Being sexually attracted to a very young teenager and sexually attracted to a 5-year-old are not even remotely comparable.
mr_B on October 2, 2009 at 9:40 PM
First, many examples of evil can be pointed to in history, things that once were accepted as normal but are, in fact, abhorrent. Or should be considered so, if one is in his right mind.
Second, to my knowledge you’re the first one here to mention anything about even the concept of being sexually attracted to a five year old, you stupid sick F.
splink on October 2, 2009 at 9:45 PM
Ditto for knife-fighting. so what?
Chris_Balsz on October 2, 2009 at 9:45 PM
Depending on what age you define childhood as ending it is very possible for adult men to be naturally attracted to a child–say a girl close to 18–especially if he doesn’t know her age. It could be wrong for the older man to act on that attraction for any of several reasons.
Any adult male with a 13-year old should be considered criminal regardless of circumstances. However, the girl may be sexually active and it is difficult to figure out the cutoff age for males where it becomes criminal to be with her. Maybe 16? I’m not sure.
dedalus on October 2, 2009 at 9:45 PM
From Mark Steyn’s article: “….who was then 15, which in Polanski years puts her up there with Barbara Bush.”
Elizabetty on October 2, 2009 at 9:46 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »