Filmmaker Roman Polanski Has a Few Things to Say About the #MeToo Movement (Is He Right?)

Filmmaker Roman Polanski Has a Few Things to Say About the #MeToo Movement (Is He Right?) May 9, 2018

Let’s just start this out by saying: Dude, you drugged and raped a 13-year old girl.

Now with that bit of knowledge, right off the top, we can address the mewling protestations of kiddie toucher filmmaker, Roman Polanski.

Polanski is the 84-year old director of some pretty decent films. My favorite would probably be 2002’s “The Pianist,” with Adrien Brody.

That doesn’t absolve him of what he did.

Polanski was in Poland last week, speaking with the Polish version of Newsweek, while promoting an upcoming film.

Wouldn’t you know it? He targeted the #MeToo movement – a movement aimed at exposing the intimidation by and sexual misconduct of powerful men that has long been suspected, but actively covered up through the years.

To date, the movement has run roughshod across the entertainment, media, political, and business worlds.

It has razed the strongholds that have long stood to protect some of the worst offenders, beginning with movie mogul Harvey Weinstein, and eventually enveloping men like NBC’s Matt Lauer and casino magnate, Steve Wynn.

I’d say it was necessary to force this ugliness to the surface, but has it gotten out of control?

I’ll agree that some who are now beginning to grumble their objections may have a point.

And I’ll say this: If a man holds a door for me, or compliments my new hairstyle, I don’t feel the need to call a press conference or fall into a screeching fit of feminist hysteria.

Because I’m sane. I actually appreciate that stuff. I know how to say, “Thank you,” and go on with my life.

But back to Chester the Molester Mr. Polanski.

On May 3, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences voted to strip Roman Polanski of his membership, something he’s maintained for almost 50 years – including through the time he was accused of drugging a 13-year old model and taking advantage of her, in 1977.

Even after he fled the country to a non-extraditable country, to avoid prosecution.

Even after years of Hollywood elitists praising his body of work, knowing he was a fugitive from justice.

The #MeToo movement forced them to adjust their public face.

The interview Polanski did for Newsweek was conducted before the announcement of the Academy that he was being ousted.

I can only imagine what he said afterwards, given what he said before.

In his interview Polanski said that to him, #MeToo is a “collective hysteria of the kind that sometimes happens in the society.”

“Everyone is trying to sign up, chiefly out of fear,” he said, comparing it to North Korea’s public mourning for its leaders when everyone cries so much that “you can’t help laughing.”

“To me this is total hypocrisy,” he said, but did not elaborate.

He’s not entirely wrong, but let’s not forget:

You drugged and raped a 13-year old girl.

There may come a time when #MeToo runs its course. And I actually get the frustration of those who feel that something that started out as necessary has become an intimidation tool.

I’m about at my end with the whole “girl power” thing. It feels like overcompensation, and that’s not an honest appreciation of the contributions of women.

Men and women were created to complement each other, to work in tandem. Now it’s all about beating down the men, pretend women are superheroes, with no limitations or things they would actually need a man’s help with.

Neither of those options are rooted in reality.

Polanski’s attorney, Jan Olszewski, has described Polanski’s reaction to the news of his dismissal from the Academy as “indignant.”

Yeah. I guess so, but –

He drugged and raped a 13-year old girl!

Olszewski told The Associated Press that stripping Polanski of his Academy membership bore signs of “psychological abuse of an elderly person” for “populist goals.”

I don’t even know what that means. Sure. He’s elderly, but he’s also a fugitive from justice, and had he done the right thing years ago, none of this would be on him, right now.

As for me, I’m hoping to see balance return, where men are more respectful and women don’t feel the need to march with something they call “pu**y hats” on, or in vagina costumes, while also expecting to be taken seriously.

Men and women can actually have rational, respectful conversations without histrionics. Let’s aim for that, and everything else will fall into place.





"I can confirm that your translation is accurate.I have learned to speak "liberal" (though I ..."

STRESSED: Trump’s Morning Twitter Rages Take ..."
"That's a reasonable strategy, though I have a very violent gut reaction to it as ..."

POLL: Majority Are Looking for a ..."
"From Susan:To be fair, every other news network did pretty much the same thing, but ..."

Disloyal: Trump Mocks His Top Sycophant ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • IllinoisPatriot

    Good article, but might I make a few suggestions and observations ?

    Let’s return to teaching and living by the teachings of Jesus Christ in the Bible.

    The Bible is the most accurate and useful “handbook” of “social science” (the study of societies) ever written. The Bible teaches what you describe in this article – that men and women were made to compliment each other – as partners not superior/subordinate. To violate this principle leads to the Harvey Weinsteins and Roman Polanskies on one side or radical feminists like Gloria Steinem and Lena Durhams on the other side.

    The Bible teaches respect for all men and women. To violate this principle leads to intolerance and us .vs. them mentalities.

    The Bible teaches us to recognize and refuse to listen to false teachings. To violate this principle leads to believing anything we are told regardless of our own common sense – even that a man can be come a woman and vice versa.

    The Bible teaches us that diseased trees cannot produce healthy fruit nor thistles fragrant flowers. To violate this principle leads to electing “leaders” like Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump when our false teachers tell us that we should ignore the spiritual diseases of those in the WH, Congress and the news media and yet for some reason we should still eat the poisoned poisoned fruits produced by the spiritually diseased trees.

    The Bible teaches us that men should not lay with men nor women with women. To violate this principle leads to increases in STDs – many of which were incurable in Biblical times. As a special incentive, we also found out about AIDS which now seems confined primarily to the homosexual/bisexual/transgender rebels against Biblical teachings and for which we (with all our advanced science) STILL have no real cures).

    The Bible provided for many other health-related issues that we now know how to avoid: prohibitions against pork because insufficient cooking leads to ringworms and other infestations. preparing chicken had specific “rules” that (accidentally?) prevented salmonella, prohibiting shellfish prevented adverse allergy conditions and illnesses from improper cleaning or cooking – issues we still have today – even in 1st world countries (though not at epidemic levels).

    The Bible teaches us that man and woman should BOTH contribute to raising children in a family setting. Our “social scientists” today acknowledge that the science of “sociology” is still in its infancy, but it appears that once again the Bible is correct as children raised in single-parent households (or worse – homosexual households) are FAR more likely to have serious social and mental issues, be far less productive and much more unhappy in life when compared against their peers raised by two parents in single-family households where they can see the role-models of both mother and father working as a team: father to provide, protect, provide discipline and boundaries and mother to nurture, teach, comfort and show compassion with both showing love in their own ways and spending time with the children providing boundaries for safety and “safe space” to learn from mistakes as children instead of having to be punished for the same mistakes made as adults.

    I think it’s significant that Trumpers tend to be the “occasional” or “drive-by” Christians or Atheists or “Humanists” while Democrats tend to be Muslim or Atheist or whatever “Agnostic” really is, but NeverTrump tends to be practicing Christians that have studied and learned the Biblical lessons about human nature and human interaction in societal settings and that have chosen to live for Christ, following his teachings and seeing first-hand the rewards of Biblical living and the punishments that the Humanists and Atheists bring down upon themselves because they refuse to open their hearts to Christ.

    Perhaps one day the “science” of sociology will mature and provide “scientific proof” – backed up by whatever passes for proof in a purely subjective field – that the Bible has been right all along in its teachings – including that Mankind is biologically wired to believe in a higher power. Without Christ to believe in, Atheists and Humanists are trying to substitute government but cannot seem to agree on what form that government should take since they cannot admit that self-government by an honorable people is truly the most productive option (key objection being to the concept of: “honorable” as “honorable” conflicts with their narcissistic world-views).

  • GotMyLoveGlassesOn

    I agree.

  • Alan Drake

    I disagree on almost every point.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Moat Atheists do. That does not make them (or you) right and me wrong.

    However if you have a better approach to fixing our society and our familes that does not involve attempting to repeat what has already been proven to be a complete failure, I’m sure we would all like to hear it.

    As to the Bible being correct on so many points of health and predating our “scientific understanding” by over 2000 years, the point is not really one that’s up for debate any more than the Laws of Gravity or the Laws of Physics are up for disapproval “by consensus” or by act of Congress or of SJW wishful thinking.

    The facts are not on your side on this issue and any facts you make up would not be considered “factual” in the real world.

    Disagreeing in the face of obvious factual proof and assertions such as I’ve provided is a sign of willful blindness abysmal judgement and intentional ignorance – in other words a sign that you’re probably a Trumper, a Regressive Democrat or an Atheist.

    Tell us, in your reality is the Earth flat ?

    What solutions do YOU have to propose ? (Remember – repeating or doubling down on the failed concepts of the past is NOT an option).

    Please also state which “points” you disagree with and WHY I’m wrong on them – don’t forget to include the CORRECT answer (according to your world-view).

  • Alan Drake

    I am not an atheist. I am a recently convinced Quaker.

    Like a majority of Christians today, and all Christians in the first 15 centuries after Christ, I am not solo scriptura.

    I rejected solo scriptura (and Southern Baptist Convention) because of the evil it leads to them supporting. I have come to think that solo scriptura worships a book, a fine book, but not worshiping – or getting guidance from – the Holy Trinity.

    I was lead to the Quakers. A large part of the attraction was that the Light of God aka Holy Spirit revealed first to them several moral revelations.

  • Sarah Flood

    And why, oh why, are you giving a child molester a platform to speak about abuse victims? If you think #metoo has gone too far, there are a lot of other non-child-rapers you could reference. In my personal opinion, once you rape a child, you never, ever ever again get to have any opinion on what is a right and proper way to address sexual abuse because, among other things, you obviously don’t have a proper view of what is right, and you obviously have a vested interest in minimizing any claims of abuse. Let me repeat: ROMAN POLANSKI HAS A VESTED INTEREST IN SHUTTING UP THE METOO MOVEMENT.

    It is time to listen to victims, most of whom are solidly behind the #metoo movement (which is just women finally feeling free to speak of the abuses they’ve endured: my own past includes a rape and multiple instances of sexual harassment from strangers, friends, and coworkers), and stop listening to abusers. Of course they want us to see #metoo has having gone too far. It may cost them. And it SHOULD.

  • Sarah Flood

    AIDS is not even sort of primarily confined to LGBTQ people. It is to an extent in the US, but in Africa, for instance, it’s largely the result of heterosexual practices and women not getting treated adequately for their own infections and thus infecting their babies, generally at birth. Many of these women are infected by their husbands. Who may also have been infected at birth. I suggest you do a little more reading on STDs (which are almost entirely preventable through condom use, regular STD testing, and prompt treatment) and HIV/AIDS (which is highly treatable, though not curable as yet). For instance, two women in a committed, monogamous relationship are not going to spontaneously get an STD if they didn’t have one already. STDs are caused by contact with infected bodily fluids, not gay relationships.

    Also, ringworm is caused by skin contact with the fungus that causes it, not by eating pork. Perhaps a minor gripe, but accuracy makes your argument more viable.

  • GotMyLoveGlassesOn

    I don’t disagree.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Time for you to pull your head out of your fourth point of conact…

    Ringworm is most commonly due to ingesting pork that has been insufficiently heated to kill the larval forms. It is not obtained through “skin contact”. As to your rant about Africa, had THEY lived by the rules of Christ, the men (or their parents) would not have contracted AIDS in the first place.. Supposedly (best Scientific guess), AIDS was originally contracted by bites from infected monkeys through fluid exchange in the saliva, then passed among humans through promiscuous sex – you know – adultery, sex outside of marriage, promiscuity, etc. Currently in the US, approx 55% of AIDS reports are among the < 3% of the population that is homosexual.

    You fool no one when the facts are actually known.

    Perhaps if you would learn the science and truth behind the propaganda you believe, you'd be a bit less gullible.