Roman Polanski did something terrible to a child in the 70s and then he ran away from his agreed-upon consequence. I'm not French, I'm not Swiss, so I can't speak to what they were thinking to not extradite him until now.
I don't know what people are thinking when they shake Roman Polanski's hand or say that his achievements and contributions to 'art' should weigh against his crime. When they applauded his Oscar win at the Academy Awards. Of course, he couldn't accept it in person because he can't come to the US without going to prison for sexually assaulting a child.
He makes good movies. Whoopi Goldberg is not pleased that he may go to jail, apparently. I'm not an actor, and I'm sure as hell not Whoopi Goldberg, so I have no idea what she's thinking.
I don't know what sexual assault survivors are thinking when they see that happen, either. They likely also don't understand what is essentially inexplicable - applaud a guy who plied a 13 year old with drugs and alcohol and then had sex with her. This guy (Polanski) did it, and all those important/famous people know it, and are applauding him anyway. How does that work?
I don't care how old he is, I don't care how good his movies are. What do I know? He sexually assaulted a kid - I wouldn't shake his hand, I won't watch his movies, I don't think his contributions to art or anything could outweigh his crime. Justice doesn't work that way. I want him in jail.
/bethan rant
Showing posts with label age of consent. Show all posts
Showing posts with label age of consent. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Sexting - Bethan is on a tirade
From Wikipedia:
Sexting (a portmanteau of sex and texting) is the act of sending sexually explicit photos electronically, primarily between cell phones. It is practiced primarily by young adults, though it is known to occur amongst children as young as middle-school age.
MSNBC Article on Sexting: Teen ‘sexting’: Youthful prank or sex crime?
When you're thinking about sex crime legislation, especially with regard to how it may apply to minors - take a minute to contemplate how you would feel if it was applied to your child. We know our kids, and most of us are not compulsive apologists for our beloved sociopathic offspring - we can be honest about theoretical situations, right?
So, theoretically, your kid, Jane, gets caught at school with a naked picture of 17 year old John on her phone. What's a reasonable consequence for Jane? Prison? 25 years of mandatory offender reporting, potentially having to move out of your house because your other children are minors?
Applying child pornography laws to consensual sexting is ludicrous. Because - remember, please- we have laws that say teenagers within a certain age range of each other CAN consent to acts committed with each other, so long as they are both unimpaired. If those laws can apply to the actual act of sex, then they should apply to a teenage girl sending her boyfriend a naked pic via text message.
We need legislation to reflect the spectrum of stupidity represented by sexting, rather than apply consequences that were written for something entirely different.
Because child pornography is different than sexting. In my opinion, charging someone with possession/distribution of child porn for consensual sexting is a gross misrepresentation of justice, and diminishes the horrific criminality of those who have actually sexually exploited children for profit.
When is sexting something other than sexting?
Technology is wonderful thing, and there's no doubt that it's changing society. There are some things that have not changed, however, and I'd like to list them here:
Common sense. That's what we're going for. Technology is a wonderful thing, and it's developing at a remarkable rate. Parents really need to keep up.
Check out Linda Criddle's website, Look Both Ways.
Sexting (a portmanteau of sex and texting) is the act of sending sexually explicit photos electronically, primarily between cell phones. It is practiced primarily by young adults, though it is known to occur amongst children as young as middle-school age.
MSNBC Article on Sexting: Teen ‘sexting’: Youthful prank or sex crime?
When you're thinking about sex crime legislation, especially with regard to how it may apply to minors - take a minute to contemplate how you would feel if it was applied to your child. We know our kids, and most of us are not compulsive apologists for our beloved sociopathic offspring - we can be honest about theoretical situations, right?
So, theoretically, your kid, Jane, gets caught at school with a naked picture of 17 year old John on her phone. What's a reasonable consequence for Jane? Prison? 25 years of mandatory offender reporting, potentially having to move out of your house because your other children are minors?
Applying child pornography laws to consensual sexting is ludicrous. Because - remember, please- we have laws that say teenagers within a certain age range of each other CAN consent to acts committed with each other, so long as they are both unimpaired. If those laws can apply to the actual act of sex, then they should apply to a teenage girl sending her boyfriend a naked pic via text message.
We need legislation to reflect the spectrum of stupidity represented by sexting, rather than apply consequences that were written for something entirely different.
Because child pornography is different than sexting. In my opinion, charging someone with possession/distribution of child porn for consensual sexting is a gross misrepresentation of justice, and diminishes the horrific criminality of those who have actually sexually exploited children for profit.
When is sexting something other than sexting?
- Guy takes a pic of his girlfriend when she's sleeping, and sells copies of the image to his friends, or in any way distributes it to a wide group of people, texting or otherwise.
- Minor girl decides that selling naked pics of herself is a better way to make money than the local fast food place, and uses her phone to distribute the images.
- Younger or impaired minor is photographed by significantly older person, or non-impaired peer. Younger/impaired person is not able to provide consent, so this is exploitation.
Technology is wonderful thing, and there's no doubt that it's changing society. There are some things that have not changed, however, and I'd like to list them here:
- They're teenagers - they will, in some way at some time, be indiscreet, juvenile, and maybe even brutally mean. It will almost certainly pass.
- The cell phone is one more tool, in an age-old list of tools, with which teenagers will be stupid.
- I can't find privacy mentioned in the Bill of Rights. This may be an indicator that your kids don't have a right to privacy, especially where their ability to wreak massive amounts of havoc are concerned. Let them know you will look through their phone and internet records. And then - look through their phone and internet records. Really.
Common sense. That's what we're going for. Technology is a wonderful thing, and it's developing at a remarkable rate. Parents really need to keep up.
Check out Linda Criddle's website, Look Both Ways.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Age of Consent
What do you think about Age of Consent?
Watch some of these episodes from 20/20's series, Age of Consent: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/AgeOfConsent/
What do you think - should a 19 year old who has intercouse with his 15 year old girl friend stay on a registry forever?
Watch some of these episodes from 20/20's series, Age of Consent: http://abcnews.go.com/2020/AgeOfConsent/
What do you think - should a 19 year old who has intercouse with his 15 year old girl friend stay on a registry forever?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)