Roman Polanski’s long-overdue arrest is already paying great dividends in celebrity stupidity. And when it comes to Dee You Em Bee That Spells Dumb, you can always count on Whoopi Goldberg:
“I know it wasn’t rape-rape. It was something else but I don’t believe it was rape-rape… When we’re talking about what someone did, and what they were charged with, we have to say what it actually was, not what we think it was.”
Well, Whoopi, a grand jury thought that what Roman Polanski did was giving a drug to a minor, committing a lewd act upon a person less than 14, rape of a minor, rape by use of a drug, oral copulation, and sodomy. Polanski made a plea bargain, and the charge was reduced to engaging in unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. He pled guilty and was convicted, but then skipped the country before he could be sentenced. So it seems like what he did and what he ended up being charged with are two different things to begin with, even putting aside his flight from justice. At the very least, “what it actually was” was statutory rape. That’s if you’re sticking to the terms of the plea bargain he made and then violated.
But who are we to say what we think it was? If only Whoopi had been famous back in ‘77, and Google had existed so an intern with a laptop could blurt stuff into her earpiece (assuming that wasn’t just one of the voices in her head), she could have explained to all those silly Standard English-speakers that hey, it wasn’t rape-rape. Sure, okay, the girl was 13 and he had sex with her against her will after drugging her. But that’s not rape-rape. Fine, so he fled the country after being released under the terms of the plea agreement he made, with the understanding that he wouldn’t, y’know, flee. Big deal, who hasn’t? Doesn’t make it rape-rape.
To give you an idea of Polanski’s mindset, here’s a snippet from the Washington Post on February 3, 1978 (courtesy of the Roman Polanski Media Reports Archive, maintained by novelist and child protection attorney Andrew Vachss):
Film director Roman Polanski arrived at his Paris apartment yesterday (after a stop in London) having fled the United States just hours before he was to have been sentenced in a California court for his admitted unlawful sexual relations with a 13-year-old girl last March.
Polanski, 44, a French citizen, was said by friends to be exhausted by the 42 days he spent undergoing psychiatric tests.
Polanski’s probation report said he was profoundly affected by the brutal murder of his wife, actress Sharon Tate, in 1969. Court sources said the film director, imprisoned in Auschwitz by the Nazis during the World War II, was repelled by the thought of possibly serving more time behind bars.
The British Broadcasting Corp. quoted Polanski as saying by telephone, “I’ve been tortured by this for a year and that’s enough.”
Got that? Roman Polanski had been punished enough, declared Roman Polanski. After all, when a guy has endured both Auschwitz and the Manson Family, doesn’t he deserve a little rape-that’s-not-rape-rape?
Update: As Jezebel points out, Whoopi’s own daughter got pregnant at 15. So that might have something to do with it.
Update: “Can we take a moment to think about the fact that Polanski pled guilty to unlawful sex with a minor before we start talking about what a victim he is? Because that would be great.”
Update: HuffPo Goes All In to Defend Polanski, Readers Revolt
Related posts:
- Bill O’Reilly Sends Producer to Stalk Critic of Rape Comments Bill O’Reilly might want to explain this before I start...
- Focus on the Family Sicko Arrested for Attempted Child Rape A Focus on the Family employee just got busted, To...
- Roman Polanski: What’s a Little Pedophilia Between Friends? In 1977, when Chinatown director Roman Polanski was 44 years...
- Feminist Leader: Roman Polanski Has Been Through Enough Presented without comment: Some of the [entertainment] industry’s most prominent...
- This Just In: Roman Polanski Still a Creep By now you’ve probably heard that a bunch of celebrities...
I want to know who the idiot who offered him the plea bargain was.
@Tal,
Probably someone that actually wanted him to spend time in jail rather than using all that money and power to find lawyers to keep the court tied up in litigation for years.
Better to scare him into pleading guilty and get a light sentence than to let “Hollywood Justice” let him off scott free.
I am so glad Whoopi made her point. Now I know the difference between “Rape” and “Rape Rape”; a Liberal mind with a twisted view of facts.
Whoopi is now on my “I hope she live a miserable life” short list.
Has Whoopi ever been raped? She knows absolutely nothing about how it affects each individual person who has been.
And no matter what the circumstances of Polanski’s past, he is responsible for ALL of his actions.
Okay so it’s Whoopi, and her rape-rape thing, and the other one, the fat black one, who up until recently -no joke- wasn’t sure the planet Earth was round. Yet everyone makes fun of, and hates the cute one, Elizabeth Hasselicantspellit. Just so I’m clear that’s how it is right? Right.
If you watch this show you deserve to be punched square in the face.
Maybe Whoopi can define “Rape-Rape” to Polanski when he meets his new cellmate Bubba.
I actually watched this episode when it aired (I only get ABC. Also, I am a masochist.) At the time, when I heard Whoopi make that statement, I got that she wasn’t necessarily defending Polanski, she was just saying “Hey, let’s stick to the facts”. Then of course through the magic of the internet I learned that people WERE sticking to the facts and she was just being weird and nonsensical. This is what makes watching The View so torturous and hilarious. A few women who kind of used to maybe do some acting/something-or-other all sit around, talking over each-other and spouting their opinions. Since they are on t.v. they can pretend like they actually know what they are talking about instead of being upfront about what their show really is, which is basically a televised version of myself and a few buzzed friends talking about things as if we actually know what we are talking about.
What a sick cold-hearted bitch! No compassion for the victim whatsoever. “I KNOW it wasn’t a rape-rape”. How do you “know”? Were you there? And what was it then if it wasn’t a rape (or a “rape-rape”)? What more did that bastard need to do to that child for it to be a “rape-rape”? I don’t know why this woman is allowed to appear on tv at all. I bet she scares the crap out of most people.
**licks pencil tip, writes on note pad**
…avoid Katy’s house.
TOUBROUK…..I was going to say something of the sort, but I feel you aced it. Thank you!
Cara, Like minds think alike.
Sane ones too!
Thanks for the thumbs up!
So, let me get this straight- we’re supposed to forgive Roman Polanski for drugging, raping, and sodomizing a 13 year old, then skipping the country and NOT being punished whatsoever, but someone like Michael Vick who admitted his crime, served his time in prison and did public service afterward, should be ostracized from society. I <3 the justice system.
Odd but isn’t it liberals who talk about womens liberation and standing up for a woman’s rights?
What the hell. I used to sort of like Whoopie-cushion because she seemed to have a heart. Now I know better. She’s just another sex-assault-tolerant-lefty. Hire her at ACORN where they help people set up taxfree, under-aged, foreign-child, cathouses in America. What a piece of work. Let’s make the sound of her name in her general direction: pbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbpbppbpb!!!!!
:-p
Let’s not make generalizations on which party is rooting for each side on this issue cause I know plenty of people on both sides who are for and against Roman Polanski.
I know that some publications lean a certain way and are trying to make themselves heard, but I just sort of feel like when we point fingers at certain parties about this issue we quit focusing on the issue (which is really important) and start to focus more on past transgressions of each party.
I can’t express my delight that the various DNC mouthpieces like the Huffpo, etc have chosen “Poor Roman Polanski” as their topic with which to differentiate their party.
It doesn’t get any simpler than “drugging and raping children is not okay”.
Plus the more press Polanski gets, the more opportunities for questions to Robert Gibbs, who can not touch this topic with a ten foot pole without encountering the possibility that someone in the media *who doesn’t wear an Obama button) will rebut with a question about Obama’s brother being arrested for sexual assault on a thirteen year old girl
(in case you missed it, Samson Obama kicked out of Britain for sexually assaulting a thirteen year old girl)
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/world/europe/13samson.html?_r=1
Just so you know, your second update has a broken link. I agree with it completely.
I used to be totally neutral towards Whoopi Goldberg. I am now going to boycott anything she puts out. What a disgusting view.
….THE WORLD DOES NOT SEE THIRTEEN YEAR OLD GIRLS TAKING DRUGS AND BEING FORCED INTO SEX AS NOT BEING RAPE-RAPED!
What the good holy Christ, what the hell planet does Whoopi live on?!
So let me get this straight:
Feminists have been telling us for years that “no means no”. A woman can say no at any point during a sexual encounter, and it means no. Otherwise it is rape. (A man can also say “no” at any point, but then he’s a man, so the feminists don’t think he counts.)
So this 13 year old girl said “no”, and it’s not a “rape-rape”? Does she have to say “no-no” for it to be a “rape-rape”? So now a single “no” doesn’t really mean “no”? Or perhaps “no” means “no”, but it doesn’t mean “no-no”, therefore it’s not a “rape-rape”?
Whoopi, go f*ck yourself. But then since you seem to enjoy speaking in doubles, go “f*ck yourself-f*ck yourself”.
Liberal reasoning on display here. Nothing to see here. Move along now…..
Also, that clip totally doesn’t explain to me what rape-rape is. I still think Whoopi thinks it’s only rape if four guys hold a gun to your head in a deserted alley in the middle of the night.
She should be put in a large cage with child molestation and date rape victims. Child molestation and date rape victims with bats and golf clubs. Is that a “beating” or a “beating-beating?”
Now I know why I’ve been getting punched in the face more than once around the same time of day. Thanks 4 the heads up Pasta.
It does appear that there was some judicial misconduct in that, with the plea bargain, he should have completed his sentence and not be subject to a new sentencing. Having said that, fleeing the country is not the way to handle it. You go to court, take what you get and then appeal. It’s not as though he is innocent. He did rape a little girl and admitted it. His excuse for fleeing at the time, that he had been through a “year of hell” & he was “afraid of jail”, does not mitigate the fact that he raped her. He thinks a year of hell is enough for that? Everyone is afraid of jail and, just because you were imprisoned by the Nazis, you don’t get a free pass on jail time for the rest of your life. Yes, he had a terrible past with the Nazis and Sharon Tate, but that does not give him the right to visit his demons on others and then feel he has paid “enough” because he was famous & was publicly humiliated. If you don’t want the humiliation and the hell that comes with it, don’t rape a little girl.
Yay I knew the second article would link to Kate Harding’s Salon article. I have a girl crush on her.
I already loathed Whoopi Goldberg with an incandescent hatred. This cements it, but it was impossible to add to it. She’s obviously dumber than a box of hair.
Here are a few more comments the suffering artiste had on what he did:
“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f—ing, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f— young girls. Juries want to f— young girls. Everyone wants to f— young girls!”
Yes, every pedophile does.
I initially found KanyeisGarbage’s quote so outrageous to be suspect, but it is apparently true and excerpted from an actual “interview Polanski gave to the novelist Martin Amis in 1979, the year after Polanski went on the run. The interview originally appeared in Tatler and is collected in Amis’s excellent book Visiting Mrs Nabokov.”
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/michaeldeacon/100011795/roman-polanski-everyone-else-fancies-little-girls-too/
Oh my sweet cookies……..he actually SAID that?????
And there are people out there arguing in his DEFENSE?????
Jeezum pete…talk about going to hell and skipping the handbasket. Just strap some rocket powered skates on.
….I….can we put him in the cage with Whoopi and the molestation/date rape victims with bats and golf clubs? Please?
Honestly, I want to push him in front of a bus.
I’d like to agree with Ducky- this has nothing to do with “liberals” or “conservatives”. I don’t know why so many people on here are blaming liberals of being sympathetic to Polanski. My guess is that maybe certain sites that are sympathetic to Polanski have a liberal readership; this doesn’t mean that ALL liberals are similarly sympathetic (just the ones who follow that site maybe).
For the record; I HATE labels like “liberal” and “conservative”, but if pressed I would have to identify myself as the former, and yet I find Polanski’s behavior reprehensible and he deserves to spend extra extra time in jail for skipping out.
Any time someone points a finger at those evil “liberals” or “conservatives” throws all credibility of their argument out the window for me.
And Vince: feminism =/= not valuing men or their opinions.
End of rant.
Well, in Whoopi’s defense, I think what she meant was that it wasn’t the sort of rape where a woman is dragged into an alley by a guy holding a knife to her throat. Not to imply that drugging underage girls and having sex with them isn’t really “rape.”
But as posters above have noticed, feminists can really get into hairsplitting excuses when someone they like commits a sex crime. Remember how sexual harassment was such a huge and terrible problem in the ’80s and ’90s? And that even consensual sex between a boss and and an underling was by definition harassment because of the “unequal power relationship” or whatever? And remember how when Clinton got caught in 1998, that argument just disappeared overnight? Gloria Steinem (!) even wrote an op ed offering the “one free grope” excuse for his behavior with Paula Jones. The hypocrisy was mind-boggling.
No less a source than the historically accurate about John Edwards National Enquirer is stating Elizabeth “Cherubim” Edwards will be divorcing John “Breck Girl” Edwards.
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/john_edwards_elizabeth_53_million_dollars_divorce_other_mistresses/celebrity/67405
This just goes to show celebrities are not like us – thank God. Just what does someone have to do in order to be shunned in Hollywood?
Just have to share this one with you all…
At IMDB in the trivia section for the upcoming childrens’ movie the Fantastic Mr Fox:
“Mr. Fox is seen implanting knockout drugs into blueberries for unsuspecting guard dogs to consume.”
The movies’ director, Wes Anderson, has signed the petition demanding Polanski go free.
It’s funny that the same liberals defending Roman Polanski wanted to jail those lacrosse players.
That Salon article is incredible! If you haven’t read it, please do and pass it along. The writer deserves a Pulitzer, imho!
If she didn’t want to have sex with him and he proceeded to have sex with her anyway, it was rape. If he drugged her so as to make the non-consensual sex easier for him to have, it was rape. If she was thirteen and he was a middle aged man, it was rape.
Am I crazy for seeing it this way? I agree with Pearce, she didn’t really define “rape-rape” as opposed to just “rape” but I figure even if he didn’t “rape-rape” her and just “raped” her that its still a crime.
I think it’s funny, because if he wasn’t a celebrity, these pundits wouldn’t mind him being thrown in prison, and probably would have referred to it as “justice.” But, since he makes movies that people like, it’s a travesty.
Go figure, Woody Allen, a guy who married his own daughter doesn’t have a problem with Roman Polanski’s behavior.
Who’s next, Jaycee Lee Dugard’s kidnapper Phillip Garrido?
After thinking this over, that a**hole needs to be tossed off that show.
But Pastafarian… that’s… racist! lol
Sure. And just look at all the celebrities who didn’t sign that petition.
Mr. Polanski is a pedophile. He stacked and feed drugs and booze to a thirteen year old girl and then raped her. He plead guilty to these charges and then realized that the punishment maybe more the standard Hollywood “community service” and ran away. He lived well in France and continued making money at his chosen career, showing no remorse or sorrow. He has been caught again and should be punished. I think he should be locked away, preferably with a very large, very aggressive, very violent homosexual so that he can enjoy the anal rape he performed on a thirteen year old girl.
Liberal reasoning- having a moving set of moral principles that can be applied to fit the situation as needed.
We see this in their idea of the Constitution being a living document, easily changable to fit their needs. We see this whenever a Republican politician cheats on his wife and gets raked over the coals but it is acceptable for Dems all day long (it was only a bj). We see this in the constant preaching about global warming as they fly in their private jets all around the world. And on and on……
One wonders if Ms. Goldberg would send her 15 year old daughter to an empty house with Polanski for a photoshoot.
Jenna, it pisses me off beyond belief when people dismiss rape just because it wasn’t what they consider “violent.” If you drug someone and have sex with her, regardless of age, that’s rape – you have removed the person’s ability to consent. If you continue in your actions after the other person says no, that’s rape. And on top of that, if you have sex with someone under the age of consent, that’s rape.
Attitudes of “rape-rape” vs. “rape” are the reason sexual assault is so under reported.
Be a conservative. Or defend a conservative. Well, that or be fat. But only if you’re a fat conservative.
*** I’m pretty sure Polanski sodomized the child…..um that IS painful, that’s #1.
#2 from what I gathered in Polanski’s autobiography, (mind you I read it back in the late ’90’s) but he was never imprisoned rather put into a ghetto – which true, is an imprisonment of sorts, but not a camp as is implied. He slid out under the fence (age 5) when the gestapo came to take the Jews to a camp,. He then lived in movie houses among other places, thus bringing about his lifelong love of film. His mom, pregnant with his sibling, did die in the camp, his father made it out.
#3 I recently read Tatum O’Neil’s autobiography and in it she describes an “uncomfortable” incident she had with Polanski, when she was about the same age as the vic, when she visited him in France with an 18yr old Melanie Griffith where he showed them dirty porn films.
The guy is a perv.
Oh and I can’t tell you how many lib’s at my kids school get “all up in my grill” about my stance on the legalization of marijuana across the board to which I’m pro, yet they are “cool” with sex offenders getting out??!!! They argue to get them castrated. Not to mention “forgiviness?!?! It behooves me completely.
Win the presidency.
Become a congressman from California.
Head up the NRA.
Leave acting to serve the state of Tennessee, then leave Law & Order to run for president.
Leave comedy to host a nationally syndicated libertarian talk radio program.
Coin the term “9/11 Republican” and speak at the RNC.
Become governor of California.
Follow up a top rated Comedy Central game show with Fox News punditry.
Star in An American Carol
Host The Price is Right and report for PJTV at the same time.
Slam Obama in a Washington Times op-ed.
He is a monster and for some reason, I suppose his celebrity status, so many people seem to have taken the “Well, yeah, that was like, a totally sucky thing to do, but you know, it was like, SO LONG ago. And his movies are cool” stance. It absolutely baffles me. He suffered through two terrible tragedies, things most people wouldn’t ever have to deal with let alone doubly, but that doesn’t mean he should be excused or forgiven. I believer it was rape, pure and simple and that he should sit in a cell until he croaks, preferable while getting daily love from an angry gorilla.
So there’s rape, and there is politically useful non-rape. Got it… unequal under teh law and all that. How very continental.
dude…so let me get this straight…
Giving a 13 yr old Booze, Qualudes, and taking naked pictures of her before you have anal sex with her…is not Rape-Rape?
I gotta run…
From an interview Roman Polanski gave in 1979:
“If I had killed somebody, it wouldn’t have had so much appeal to the press, you see? But… f*cking, you see, and the young girls. Judges want to f*ck young girls. Juries want to f*ck young girls. Everyone wants to f*ck young girls!”
http://patterico.com/2009/09/29/polanski-in-1979-everyone-wants-to-fuck-young-girls/
My standard working hypothesis (“Most Hollywood stars are idiots”) seems to be holding up really, really well. It may become a theory.
Hurricane “Republican politician cheats on his wife” gets what he deserves, especially if he is preaching family values. All of this started with Clinton & then the Republicans continued to out more Democrats (which they deserve also, although they are not preaching one thing and doing another). As soon as the Dems started outing Reps, then it is suddenly picking on the poor Republicans. They certainly can dish it out but can’t take it. Funny that you would label this “liberal reasoning”. It appears that only the Republicans can have moving values. Cheating is not a crime but condemning others for doing what you are doing and preaching against it as a sin is pure hypocrisy. Stop making this a liberal/conservative issue. Yes, many liberal Hollywood people signed the petition, but MANY, MANY more did not. I don’t agree with them any more than I agree with 2 faced, lying politicians. Do the crime, face the consequences.
Huh, BB.
I didn’t realize that free whistle pops were an official plank of the Democrat platform.
Pearce, I agree. It’s outrageous, absolutely outrageous. Something similar happened to me when I was fourteen (except I wasn’t drugged.) I didn’t tell my mother or anyone because I didn’t think it “counted” as rape. I won’t go into details, but only recently have I considered what happened to me as rape, and I’m not sure how many people would agree with me. It comes back to the whole stupid “rape rape” vs “rape” idea that so many people seem to have and that Whoopi endorses.
This whole thing makes my skin crawl already, and all these people defending him just boggles my mind.
Someone here has mentioned the victim’s testimony (before Grand Jury) posted on smokinggun, so I went there and read it. Oh. God. How can anyone in their right mind defend this rapist let alone sign any petitions on his behalf? When you read the girl’s testimony not only does it break your heart, it also becomes evident that the creep (Polanski) was planning it (the rape) for days if not longer. It wasn’t a crime of opportunity, it was clearly premeditated, he was planning to assault that child all along. Those who defend him are as sick as he is. But why it’s all blamed on the so-called liberals or leftists is a mystery to me.
[Please watch your language. -- MGMT.]
Clearly, Goldberg was molested as a child. And I mean molested-molested. She has such a twisted take on reality it can only be because she suffered some childhood trama. You know how kidnap victims start supporting and defending their captors!? She’s clearly looking at molestation or date rape as acceptable behavior. What a disservice to girls and women that someone like her is allowed to voice these views on national television. Oh yeah, and she was the one defending Michael Vick, by saying animal cruelty (dog fighting) is common in the south. It all makes sense to her somehow. Bye-bye Whoopi-Whoopi.
I kind of want to know how everyone is defining “feminist.”
What’s the matter, Anna Molly? Did I strike a nerve?
There seems to be some misunderstanding about the “publicity hungry” judge in the Polanski case. Polanski apologists – Lord help us, there seem to be some – suggest that suave Roman had to cheese it because the judge was going to go back on the plea bargain.
If you read the transcript of the sentencing hearing, you will find this:
Mr. Gunson: Your honor, may I take the plea?
The Court: Yes. Before you do so, however, I must advise the defendant, under Section 1192.5 of the Penal Code, that the approval of the Court to the plea is not binding on the Court; that the Court may, at the time set for hearing on the application for probation or pronouncement of judgment, withdraw its approval, in light of further consideration of the matter; and three, in such case, the defendant shall be permitted to withdraw his plea, if he desires to do so.
So Polanski and his legal brain trust knew that the judge was not obligated to honor the plea agreement. They could read the writing on the wall. Suave Roman scarpered off to save himself from a long vacation in the greybar hotel.
Crap, Jenn, now I can’t take my nephew to see “Mr. Fox”! Oh well, thanks for the heads-up.
If Polanski gets convicted he won’t be going to jail-jail anyway, he’ll just be going to Hollywood jail. :-p
The reason so many people, myself included, use ‘feminist’ as a four letter word is that their ’spokespeople’ (notice I used ‘people’ not ‘man’ because that would be sexist!) are opportunistic harpies. It’s pretty much exactly what happened with racism – the people who were supposed to be speaking for the movement became so utterly insane with hatreds of their own that everyone wrote the entire movement off.
Apparently there is an issue here about people making this partisan? Why exactly? We’re not the ones who made it partisan. It became partisan when the feminist movement made it completely and utterly clear that they were more concerned with a person’s party affiliation than their actions. Clarence Thomas gets hung out to dry, but old Billy Boy gets a pass for not only cheating on his wife but being accused of unwanted sexual advances against more than one woman over the years.
“maybe you should actually talk to some feminists and realise rape is rape no matter what sex the victim is-most feminists think that!”
Well, you might wanna pass that on to the so-called leaders of the movement there kido, cause as of right now they don’t appear to be operating on your play-book.
Scott, you said that better than I ever could.
Feminists don’t want equality. They want special privileges. They don’t want to end rape, as evidenced by Whoopi’s definition of “rape-rape”. They want to redefine the term to suit their own purposes.
They don’t want to end domestic violence. If they truly wanted to end it completely, they would have to look into the issue of battered men, as well. (But they are content to repeat the myth that women make up 95% of DV victims, thus they get a free pass to overlook men who are abused.)
They don’t want to end genital mutilation. If they did, they would have to condemn the routine genital mutilation of baby boys. But that’s not convenient for them. Only vaginas matter to the gender-feminists.
They don’t want to end the subjugation of a gender. If they did, they would call for an end to male-only Selective Service. But “feminists” are silent on men being forced to register for the draft. (Oh, they’ll say that the draft is no more, ignoring the fact that men having to register for it keeps the possibility of its being re-enacted a possibility.)
They don’t want equal work for equal pay. If they did, they would demand that women put in an equal amount of hours in the workplace. (No more maternity leave for you, ladies! After all, companies don’t pay you to have babies, they pay you to do a job. Give birth on your own time.) For that matter, they would advocate that women do as many dangerous and/or messy jobs as men, such as construction, garbage pickup, etc… But they are curiously silent. You want the “clean” and “gentle” jobs minus X number of hours, for the same pay.
Feminists don’t want equality. If they did, they would call for equal funding for prostate cancer research. (Since prostate cancer kills approx. as many men as breast cancer kills women, yet receives only a fraction of the funding.) But all I hear from the feminists is silence.
If they wanted equality, they would demand equal access for men to DV shelters, since male taxpayers help fund those very shelters. But that’s not convenient for them. After all, there are sooooooooo many male-only private businesses and clubs that they can attack. Who cares if a PUBLICLY RAN SHELTER is turning men away? Those male taxpayers don’t count, anyway.
So, Anna Molly, take your faux-sense of outrage and go shove it where the sun don’t shine. No, I don’t think I’ll shut up. As long as it elicits outrage from feminazis such as yourself, I’ll keep on keepin’ on.
And yes, Anna Molly, if you choose to respond, I’ll respond in kind. I can keep this up as long as you can. After all, you’re my equal. I have no reason to treat you with kid gloves. You’re not the gentle, delicate flower that feminists and chivalrous manginas try to portray you to be. You’re not the “fairer sex”, as there appears to be nothing “fair” about you.
You are woman, are you not? Let’s hear you roar.
ARE YOU Serious Whoopi? Really, there is a difference in rape and rape, rape. How disgusting to even make that comment. SHE WAS 13, BY LAW IT WAS RAPE OF A CHILD! He had to get her drunk and drug her, HELLO! And you want to sit there and try to justify it with terminology…OMG, absolutely ridiculous. YOU and any other celeb idiot who supports this child raper is boycotted by me. And I have heard a lot of others say the same…lets see you come back from this one. Sick.
Check out this awesome satirical piece from the Village Voice today:
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/09/polanski.php
I might have a slight girl crush on Allison Benedikt now.
There is an article in on latimes.com by Steve Lopez. He researched the court transcripts and it is a very good article with word for word transcription. You can comment there also. As I did!
Wow. What the hell did Vince say to elicit so much cobra spit?
Anna Molly, set down the flamin’ brassiere and re-read his original comment (#19).
You’re so far off kilter here that you might want to consider upping the meds.
Tina: How many movies has Vick made, its all about movies, that’s why OJ isn’t in prison, he did a couple?
Hurricane:”Liberal reasoning” is an oxymoron.
Vince: I agree with practically everything you say, although likely less irate, there are a lot of groups out there who have had their leadership co-opted for radical agendas.
Meanwhile, I’ve got a completely chaste but major crush on Vince going on over here.
Beige,
Not fair….you can type fast than me. I read Vince first. I wanted to claim my crush first.
But I also have to admit to a girl crush on Allison Benedikt.
Wow, I went and graduated from college and nothing I say comes out that good. The best I get is “because I said so.”
Vince, companies give both maternity AND paternity leave. And both types of leave are the same amount of time. Just have to point that one out.
In addition, circumcision is not the same as the genital mutilation practiced in other countries, often without anesthesia, often not performed until the girl reaches puberty, and often leading to death due to blood loss or infection. Female genital mutilation is also much more invasive than circumcision and is generally performed to keep the woman from being able to enjoy sex so that she won’t be tempted to cheat on her husband later. Because women enjoying sex is bad or something. Just another thing I have to point out.
Aside from those two issues…I guess I just don’t get the whole “feminist” thing, and it might be generational. To me, domestic violence DOES affect both genders, and it’s terrible that men report it even less than women – an old roommate of mine, I later found out, ended up beating the crap out of her boyfriend on more than one occasion. Rape affects both genders. Both men and women have a choice when it comes to working vs. being homemakers/staying home to care for children/etc. My boyfriend and I are both on the same wavelength on these and many other social issues that seem to have affected older generations – they’re essentially non-issues to us as far as gender, race, sexual orientation, etc. are concerned.
So the feminist vs. whatever acrimony confuses me.
(Which isn’t to say that they’re non-issues…but more to say that they’re issues that can affect anyone, completely regardless of demographic, just to clarify.)
Pearce,
You would be correct on the whole circumcision issue except that you’re overlooking an important fact: Not all female circumcision involves the major cutting-and-mutilation that the media has led us to believe. There ARE procedures of female circumcision which involve just removal of the clitoral hood. (Which is equivalent to removal of the male foreskin.) The feminists decry any and all cutting of female genitalia, but conveniently overlook equivalent cutting of male genitalia.
And, I might add, male circumcision often is performed without any anesthesia, as well. (And was originally introduced to the USA to prevent masturbation, thus a way to “curb” a male’s sexual pleasure.)
At this point the feminists will respond “But male circumcision lessens the risk of HIV transmission!”
What they overlook is the fact that it is unethical and immoral to perform unnecessary cosmetic surgery on one person to benefit another.
As for paternity leave, whether or not a company offers it is irrelevant to the discussion. What is the issue is whether or not men and women put in an equal number of hours on the job. If one group puts in a greater number of hours, then that group should receive pay relative to the number of hours put in. Companies don’t pay you to have babies, they pay you to do the job they hired you for. Period.
But again, maternity and paternity leave are the same.
Also, arguing that more hours means more pay only actually applies if one works an hourly job. There are plenty of people who put in 60 hours a week and are paid the same salary as those who put in 40. They aren’t being paid an hourly wage. Those who work more hours may be promoted or may be spared in layoffs, but not every job is hourly.
Male circumcision, as far as I know, was not introduced in the US to prevent masturbation; male circumcision has been performed on newborns for a very, very long time, often for religious reasons which, at the time, could have also resulted in better health. Some claim it has benefits; some don’t. I don’t have the anatomy to make a judgment on that, so if I have a child, I’ll defer to the father’s wishes on that end of things.
I’m with Nova yos Galen. Methinks the lady doth protest too much.
Though she allegedly denied it this morning on her show, I think Whoopi Goldberg was sexually molested or raped as a child. I watched the tape this morning and she had some very strange facial microexpressions and was almost clowning for the camera.
Very bizarre, almost gallows humor, and certainly not a good public apology.
She was obviously molested.
The scumbag and his apologists disgust me. When I read or hear the crap they put out, I become apoplectic with rage. What has to be wrong with someone that they think that sexually assaulting a child is acceptable or forgivable? I was already boycotting films that anyone who has worked with Polanski is involved in, looks like I need to expand the list to filth that consider him above common decency.
You know there is one really GREAT thing about this hollywood petition to free Polanski:
Makes is easy to know who’s films to boycott.
Goldberg dont you ever do any kind of fund raiser for the homeless, helpless or clueless ever again—no dime of mine will ever find its way to anythhing you ever touch, endorse or have your name on.
And lose that hobby of yours, collecting “White Only” signs—Jim Crow died when you were about 2 years old, and you lived in NYC at the time, they didnt practice White Only nonsense…and why you keep marrying White Men only? Whats up with that?
So you wouldnt mind if we raped one of your grandaughters? It wouldnt be rape/rape, just rape—oh wait your daughter was 15 when she had her first kid, so your grandaughter got to be what, like 30 now? You have a lot of nerve for trying to tell the world what rape is and what rape/rape is not.
Sponsors take note…
Pearce,
I understand completely that some jobs are salaried while others are hourly. That’s not the issue at hand. The issue is which gender puts in more hours, resulting in the greater likelihood of getting raises, promotions, etc… (And no, it’s not just limited to maternity vs. paternity leave.)
http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=6864
As for the circumcision issue, all the reasons you stated (religion, health benefits, etc…) can also be stated for female circumcision. The people who practice it make the exact same claims. So if you’re going to turn a blind eye to a baby boy having his foreskin cut off without his consent, be sure to turn that same blind eye to a girl having her clitoral hood cut off without her consent.
Sorry that the thread has gotten sidetracked away from Whoopi. I think we all agree that Whoopi is a deranged nutcase.
I didn’t SAY it was just maternity vs. paternity leave. I said that if you’re salaried, you’re paid the same if you put in 40 hours a week, 50 hours a week, or more. Also the “jump” in women’s salaries vs. that of men’s could be attributed to any number of variables. I’m sure I can find plenty of websites that claim that St. John’s Wort is more effective than Prozac in controlling depression. That doesn’t make it true.
I never said I turned a blind eye either way. I said that it wasn’t something I felt I could decide, not having the same anatomy and not having all that much experience with penises in any other capacity.
I don’t see why you’re getting stuck on these two issues; I’ve stated multiple times that I don’t subscribe to the “feminist” view with which you seem to take an unnecessarily aggressive issue. I do disagree with you on certain points. These seem to be extremely sore points with you personally. Why, I don’t know. Let’s agree to sort of but not really disagree.
But Whoopi is insane, and apparently she can’t pin down the difference between “rape” and “rape-rape,” but she’s sure that there is one, whatever it is. Come out and say it, Whoopi. You’ve already implied that 13 year olds are acceptable sexual partners in other parts of the world; why not go that extra step to spell it out? It’s like Chris Brown referring to “the incident” instead of “the time I beat the crap out of my girlfriend.” But you know. All them that’s hatin, they jus been haterz.
Pearce,
As Vince mentioned, although circumcision has gone on for a long time, the reasons can change even if it accomplishes all historical reasons regardless of the reason at hand. Sort of like sex can be, generally, both pleasurable (I’m told) and for procreation. Some people do it for one or the other, but that doesn’t mean the other aspect isn’t still potentially there. Now, I don’t like American history as much as older history (basically anything before Columbus and a little bit of the initial conquest of the new world) so I can’t say with certainty if the reason Vince mentioned is true, but I can say that it’s at least plausible as there had been a trend away from circumcision for quite awhile before it began being seen regularly in the Americas and when it did show up again I can say with a fair degree of confidence that it wasn’t based on religion and, medical knowledge being what it was at about that time, probably wasn’t for health issues either since it was fairly widespread and only small pockets of doctors would have been professing against the norm.
But anyway, I mostly just wanted to answer your pondering about benefits of circumcision. Like most such procedures, it does indeed have benefits, but also risks. Mostly, if done it does keep things more sanitary down there in general, but in most modern societies it’s fairly easy to keep the same level of cleanliness without trying very hard at all (note, there still has to be at least some attempt. The sort of people who never really bathe are going to be better of circumcised). In less developed areas of the world though such as Africa, it’s rather beneficial. The risks are pretty much the same as in any surgery. Again, in most developed areas those risks are rather mitigated, but not so much in less developed areas. Basically, the risks and benefits are both least in developed areas and both greatest in lesser areas. Like most such things, parents should weigh both sides for themselves, make a decision, and know that although there were points in the opposing direction, there were just as many in support, so no matter which you choose, remember to tell people who oppose your decision to f— off. In an informed and educated manner, of course
When I was in college, there were all these “If she says no, it’s rape” buttons. My first three thoughts were:
1. Um, not if someone’s doing a rape fantasy…
2. Why is it they only focus on women getting raped?
3. Just how dumb do they think we are?
Well, apparently these people are dumb enough.
1. The safe word is banana!
2. Because people are stupid and assume that men don’t have that problem or can defend themselves. Random note – it also makes me feel icky when people talk about prison rape. That’s an entirely separate issue, but *shudder*.
3. Sadly, there are many people out there who are that dumb.
But according to Whoopi, if I’m reading her response correctly, we’re all sexually repressed because we don’t think 13 year olds should be sleeping with 40 year olds after being given liquor and drugs.
Pearce:
WORD… You are now officially my role model, as well as my objet de crush.
PEARCE – Love you and your comments! Unfortunately, it is difficult to argue with irrational people who believe they are somehow “better” than you and I just because they were born male. I don’t have a feeling one way or the other about circumcision but if Vince is so adamant that it be stopped, I don’t understand why he isn’t out on HIS bandwagon trying to stop it. I suppose that he is too lazy and too busy sitting around pointing fingers at others for what they DON’T do that he doesn’t have time, the guts or the energy to DO ANYTHING himself.
Scott F: “Clarence Thomas gets hung out to dry (sexual harassment is ILLEGAL), but old Billy Boy gets a pass for not only cheating on his wife (NOT ILLEGAL!) but being accused of unwanted sexual advances against more than one woman over the years.” Clearly you think IMPEACHMENT is considered “getting a pass”. Clarance Thomas is a Supreme Court judge. Yes, there is OBVIOUSLY a double standard here, only just the opposite of the one you stated! You seem to use feminism as an excuse to bash women for simply having an opinion. Apparently, you think women should be seen and not heard, and, if they have an differing opinion than yours, they are considered “opportunistic harpies”. Totally strange since WOMEN seem to be the group MOST offended by the rape & think he should pay for his crimes.
VINCE “Feminists don’t want equality. They want special privileges.” SINCE WHEN???? We still only make 72 cents on the dollar compared to men in the same profession and THAT is considered “special privileges”? I don’t want anything SPECIAL. I want to be judged on my PERFORMANCE not what is between my legs. Unfortunately, men like you only think with your crotches and believe that, since all of your intelligence comes from your penis, women can’t possibly have any. Last I heard, those things don’t have any brains at all.
Also, feminists don’t overlook male battering. If 95% of men were being battered and only 5% of women, you can be certain that not only would the women be overlooked, they would be called liars (as the men currently are called now along with wimps). I agree that ANYONE being battered deserves attention but, as you well know, the 95% majority generally gets the focus. This problem is EXTREMELY one sided due to men’s physical superiority. I can only assume that you believe that, since 5% of all men are battered, they are MORE important than the 95% of women because, of course, they are women.
“They don’t want equal work for equal pay. If they did, they would demand that women put in an equal amount of hours in the workplace.” I HAVE NEVER HAD A BABY NOR TAKEN TIME OFF FROM WORK. So, do I deserve less pay because some other woman had a baby?????? I already have to work extra hours when either the mother or father stays home with sick children or attend a baseball game. I should be judged on MY PERFORMANCE ALONE, not what others of my gender do. That would the same as saying that your male coworker committed an offense and your pay was cut for his behavior.
“Feminists don’t want equality. If they did, they would call for equal funding for prostate cancer research. (Since prostate cancer kills approx. as many men as breast cancer kills women, yet receives only a fraction of the funding.)” Yes, this deserves research as well. Men get boner pills from their insurance companies and women can’t get birth control funding to keep them from getting pregnant from those boners! The sluts! How dare they have SEX?? Women die 2X more from heart disease due to the lack of research done on women and the fact that most doctors don’t understand that the warning signs are different. Women are much sicker when they are diagnosed due to the male focused research and are more likely to die quickly. I think this deserves more funding too. WOMEN AND FEMINISTS do not control who gets funding but women seem to be better organizers and breast cancer receives much more private contribution due to their advertising efforts. Maybe MEN could take control of THEIR OWN health as well and start advertising for donations too instead of being jealous that women have been good fundraisers. You now want WOMEN ignore their own health care issues to take up MEN’s because it’s just not fair. Why should men have to do anything for themselves?
BB – I could go into a whole long diatribe again, but that seems to be your spiel and I wouldn’t want to be accused of using my evil Penis of Death(tm) to repress you.
Clinton was impeached for LYING about what he did, not the act itself, you’d think after more than a decade of repeating that at least some of you would understand it. At any rate, we’re not talking about the consequences these men faced, but the reaction feminist groups had to them, which if you’ll remember, is the entire point here. Clarence Thomas was hung over the fire by these groups, they actually made excuses for Clinton. I bring that up because it’s a clear and unarguable example of the fact that a person’s political affiliation is more important to them than their crimes.
“Apparently, you think women should be seen and not heard, and, if they have an differing opinion than yours, they are considered “opportunistic harpies”.”
See, this statement says a lot more about you than it does about me. I never implied women shouldn’t have a voice. I called the feminist movement’s head honchos opportunistic harpies, not all women. But as a feminist (I’m just assuming here, but you seem slightly irate) that is the base assumption right? That it’s the goal of my entire existence to find new and more exciting ways to repress you? Your entire world view would just crumble if you realized that the reason I address you and others as such is because I do in fact see you as an equal, and I won’t pull any punches with you that I wouldn’t with a man.
“I want to be judged on my PERFORMANCE not what is between my legs.”
So feminists have decided to drop that whole ‘women can do anything a man can do’ thing then? Cause if we’re judging performance, I can think of a whole lot of physical labor jobs that are about to become male only again. Since all we’re worried about is performance, and not equality, I don’t expect I’ll hear any bitching from you on the matter.
“Men get boner pills from their insurance companies and women can’t get birth control funding to keep them from getting pregnant from those boners!”
::coughs:: Bullshit! My ex-wife went through three different insurance carriers during our marriage, every one of which covered her birth control pills. They also had options to cover patches and even IUDs.
And lastly,
“Unfortunately, men like you only think with your crotches and believe that, since all of your intelligence comes from your penis, women can’t possibly have any.”
Congratulations, you just made my entire point. Did Vince or I go off on a tangent making comments about how women are less intelligent than men? Nope. But since we disagree with you, we’re only thinking with our crotches? Yet you have the gall to accuse me of saying you shouldn’t be able to voice your opinions? In psychology we call that projection – where you project your own biases to others in order to make yourself feel better about being bigoted.
Then again, it could just be my crotch of repression trying to take over the world again.
BB- I want to take your side here…but you dodged the facts and threw up a bunch of Strawmen…
Scott pretty much owned you here…sorry.
I’m trying to post a response, but each time I click “submit” it’s not showing up.
Well I’ve tried to respond, but each time I click Submit, nothing happens.
Anyway, Scott answered BB probably better than I ever could.
Whoopi Goldberg is just another filthy, disgusting hollywood whore. Harrison Ford, too, and all the rest, may they rot in hell.
Thanks for the love, BB, although we do disagree on a few points.
I’m still waving my Scott F. pom-poms, though. I loves me some Scott F.
My insurance won’t cover birth control…I believe it’s a state-by-state thing.
Pearce: I think a lot of guys are abused not because they can’t defend themselves, but because they are conditioned to not fight back, because “you don’t hit girls”, which is a policy I follow but doesn’t cover self-defense. As a side note, is anyone else surprised that Pearce isn’t a guy?
BB: “I HAVE NEVER HAD A BABY NOR TAKEN TIME OFF FROM WORK. So, do I deserve less pay because some other woman had a baby??????” – Sadly yes, especially if the job needs some training, if an employer has 2 groups of people doing the same job and 1 group is more likely to take leave/quit and need to be replaced then that is a fair factor in determining pay, equal pay for equal work is a valid argument for day laborers, but in long-term employment if the boss knows that the odds are more likely that Joe will be with the job longer than Jane it is valid to pay Joe more since Jane’s replacement will need to be trained which can be costly in money and/or time. And to reiterate the Clarence Thomas/Bill Clinton point, feminists attacked Clarence Thomas based simply on accusations and tore him up without any proof, whereas they ignored similar accusation about Clinton from multiple women over years and when it was finally proved he had sexual involvement with an intern, which is something the feminists had screamed about between bosses and employees for years the then insisted that it was unimportant this time, separate rules for people based on political affiliation obviously played a part in these and MANY other incidences, and it is PURE hypocrisy. While the core of feminism consisting of far treatment/protection under the law is a noble goal your leaders/spokespeople have turned the word feminist into a dirty word synonymous for “opportunistic harpies” more interested in gaining power and control than in actual equality, that isn’t due to men oppressing you, that is the fact that you allow radicals to speak for you and take partisan stances, that’s not my, or my penis’s, or men in general’s fault, that’s on you. I look at feminists similar to Catholics, they both have gotten bad reputations because of the acts of a few people, but the group as a whole didn’t distance itself from those few and so the public paints them with the same brush.
Here is the petition as of today…idiots…boycott those bastards!
Woody Allen
Wes Anderson
Darren Aronofsky
Jonatham Demme
Stephen Frears
David Lynch
Martin Scorsese
full list:
Fatih Akin, Stephane Allagnon, Woody Allen, Pedro Almodovar, Wes Anderson, Jean-Jacques Annaud, Alexandre Arcady, Fanny Ardant, Asia Argento, Darren Aronofsky, Olivier Assayas, Alexander Astruc, Gabriel Auer, Luc Barnier , Christophe Barratier, Xavier Beauvois , Liria Begeja , Gilles Behat, Jean-Jacques Beineix, Marco Bellochio, Monica Bellucci, Djamel Bennecib, Giuseppe Bertolucci , Patrick Bouchitey, Paul Boujenah, Jacques Bral, Patrick Braoudé, André Buytaers, Christian Carion, Henning Carlsen, Jean-michel Carre, Mathieu Celary, Patrice Chéreau, Elie Chouraqui, Souleymane Cissé, Alain Corneau, Jérôme Cornuau, Miguel Courtois, Dominique Crevecoeur, Alfonso Cuaron, Luc et Jean-Pierre Dardenne, Jonathan Demme, Alexandre Desplat, Rosalinde et Michel Deville, Georges Dybman, Jacques Fansten, Joël Farges, Gianluca Farinelli (Cinémathèque de de Bologne), Etienne Faure, Michel Ferry, Scott Foundas, Stephen Frears, Thierry Frémaux, Sam Gabarski, René Gainville, Tony Gatlif, Costa Gavras, Jean-Marc Ghanassia, Terry Gilliam, Christian Gion, Marc Guidoni, Buck Henry, David Heyman, Laurent Heynemann, Robert Hossein, Jean-Loup Hubert, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, Gilles Jacob, Just Jaeckin, Alain Jessua, Pierre Jolivet, Kent Jones (World Cinema Foundation), Roger Kahane, Nelly Kaplan, Wong Kar Waï, Ladislas Kijno, Harmony Korinne, Jan Kounen, Diane Kurys, Emir Kusturica, John Landis, Claude Lanzmann, André Larquié, Vinciane Lecocq, Patrice Leconte, Claude Lelouch, Gérard Lenne, David Lynch, Michael Mann, François Margolin, Jean-PierreMarois, Tonie Marshall, Mario Martone, Nicolas Mauvernay, Radu Mihaileanu, Claude Miller, Mario Monicelli, Jeanne Moreau, Sandra Nicolier, Michel Ocelot, Alexander Payne, Richard Pena (Directeur Festival de NY), Michele Placido, Philippe Radault, Jean-Paul Rappeneau, Raphael Rebibo, Yasmina Reza, Jacques Richard, Laurence Roulet, Walter Salles, Jean-Paul Salomé, Marc Sandberg, Jerry Schatzberg, Julian Schnabel, Barbet Schroeder, Ettore Scola, Martin Scorsese, Charlotte Silvera, Abderrahmane Sissako, Paolo Sorrentino, Guillaume Stirn, Tilda Swinton, Jean-Charles Tacchella, Radovan Tadic, Danis Tanovic, Bertrand Tavernier, Cécile Telerman, Alain Terzian, Pascal Thomas, Giuseppe Tornatore, Serge Toubiana, Nadine Trintignant, Tom Tykwer, Alexandre Tylski, Betrand Van Effenterre, Wim Wenders.
EDIT: new names
Isabelle Adjani
Antoine Aronin
Paul Auster
Morgane Beauverger
Candice Belaisch-Goldchmit
Yamina Benguigui
Pascal Bruckner
Jessika Cohen
Philippe Corbé
Jean-Paul Dayan
Katarina De Meulder
Arielle Dombasle
Nathalie Faucheux
Corinne Figuet
Pierre Forciniti
Louis Garrel
Albert Gauvin
Johanna Gozlan
Davide Homitsu Riboli
Taylor Hackford
Isabelle Huppert
Neil Jordan
Thierry Kamami
Milan Kundera
Gaelle Lancien
Claude Lanzmann
Bernard-Henri Lévy
Sam Mendes
Camille Meyer
Patrick Mimouni
Yann Moix
Mike Nichols
Sandra Nicolier
Marie Nieves Perez Neël
Salman Rushdie
Carine Sarna
Ysabelle Saura Del Pan
William Shawcross
Olivier Soares Barbosa
Steven Soderbergh
Nil Symchowicz
Danièle Thompson
Eugenia Varela Navarro
Diane von Furstenberg
Scott Foundas
Margaret Walker
Elsa Zylberstein
drm, I agree. Men are generally conditioned from a young age as to how to behave toward women physically. The most physical “self-defense” tactic I’ve heard as “acceptable” for men is holding onto the woman’s wrists or arms or something similar. Which….is very unfortunate to say the least. Add in a large size difference between the two, as is often the case, and the man feels even worse about doing ANYTHING in self-defense.
*LOL* And a lot of people assume I’m male where the Internet is concerned; I’m used to it.
Well, I just had to make SERIOUS alterations to my Scott F. action figure prototype. Stupid Raging Crotch of Oppression. I’ll never get this thing stocked at Toys R Us; it’s R-rated now.
Beige wins. As usual.
Still selling Scott F. t-shirts!
I demand my Scott F shirt now
Please do not confuse Whoopie’s idiotic babbling with a “liberal” point of view. If she were an informed individual, she would understand that Polanski’s rights, as the accused, were not violated. As a liberal, it is important to me to see justice administered in an even-handed fashion without prejudice to a person’s class, race, occupation, etc. The fact is, Polanski did the crime and he must serve his time. Like most accused of this type of crime, he was offered a typical plea– one that spared the taxpayers the cost of a lengthy trial and the possibility of The People losing. That is business as usual for most American, state, CJ systems. The fact that he accepted the plea means he owes still owes The People of California his sentence from 1978. The fact that Polanski fled means he must answer for that action too. Do not buy into the myth that liberals are soft on crime. Like our forefathers, we seek “justice for all” not “justice for those who can afford to buy it.”
Does the action figure have kung-fu grip too?
I already knew Pearce wasn’t a guy, she’s told that before but then I’m a degreed rocket scientist….but nobody here thinks it…LOL…gotta love internet personas.
Got my Scott F t-shirt, but hubby said no way to an action figure with a Raging Crotch of Oppression.
I believe this topic has gone beyond epic proportions.
I want my action figure to also have Roundhouse Kick Action.
Pearce, I hate to tell you this, but the Raging Crotch of Oppression and the Roundhouse Kick Action are mutually exclusive.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! WHY CAN’T HE HAVE BOTH?!
Also Koka, my ex is a rocket scientist. If you ever run into him, dump some holy water on him for me. I need to test my theory that he will burst into flames.
Sorry gals, the Raging Crotch of Oppression only comes with the Psychotic Ex-Wife Expansion Pack, for reasons I’d rather not get into.
I don’t know why, but I thought Pearce was a guy at first, too. Maybe I’m associating the name with “Hawkeye Pearce” from MASH. Poor Pearce, we’ll have to get you some pink fonts.
Nine and a half years ago, on my senior trip to DC (which would have been exciting if I didn’t live 20 miles away), we visited the Capitol building. Protesting on the steps (which is how you know it was pre-9/11), was the Society Against Male Circumcision (or some name similar to that). Guess who all the guys got a picture with? Guess what picture made it into the school paper? There are people out there arguing about it. Not sure I have an opinion on it, but I grew up without brothers, so I tend to be ignorant on such matters.
As for abuse towards males, it is a bit of a catch-22. If a guy defends himself, she can turn around and say he hit her, and he will get the blame and prosecuted harder, even if witnesses say she started it and confirm the self-defense. He also has to deal with the stigma and verbal abuse from people about not being able to handle his woman and getting beat up by a girl. If he doesn’t defend himself, the abuse continues. Think it’s easy to get away if you’re a guy? Abusers will act just like a stalker, and manipulation is not confined to one gender. I have an uncle who is verbally and was (is?) physically abused by his wife. It is a complex situation, but people probably take it less seriously and are less concerned than they would be if the genders were reversed.
The true question: can women have raging crotches of oppression, or do only men get that distinction?
@AllyKat: Good point (about the difficulty a guy has in escaping an abusive situation). I’ve seen friends of mine try to break up with bunnyboilers, only to have the boilers dream up something to complain to the police about, just to keep the contact going. One guy I knew who was dating a single mom broke up with her when he realized the screaming, cursing, and hitting was never going to stop otherwise. She turned around and filed child-molestation charges against him, to get even. All she needed was an accusation; evidence was really beside the point. His life is never going to be the same, despite the fact that he went to great lengths to avoid being alone with her kid, to prevent such accusations. That stupid cow actually thought that was the way to keep a relationship going.