Polanski writes from "my chalet in Gstaad, where I am spending the holidays with my wife and my children," to thank his supporters for "messages of support and sympathy" which were comforting during his "darkest moments."
The darkest moments of two months of imprisonment? That's less time than the father of "Balloon Boy," who got 90 days.
The support of rape apologists is also a "source of comfort...in my current situation." Oh, right, that situation where he can't leave his chalet.
His 19,000 square foot chalet, where he can be with his friends and family and have parties.
Meanwhile, 2.3 million people in the US are imprisoned. Like, for real, not at a fucking resort. Based on the most up-to-date population stats I could find, that's one out of every 134 people.
One out of every 134, who didn't get to spend the holidays with their families, who don't get to host glitzy parties, who are stuck without access to basic medical care, who are subject to widespread abuse, who are basically forgotten about by the rest of society.
One out of every 134, who are disproportionately African American (40%) or Hispanic (20%), who frequently are imprisoned for nonviolent crimes (about half) including drug offenses (like people serving the 5 year minimum for crack possession under 5 grams).
I do not believe anyone, anywhere, should be abused, regardless of crimes committed. Basic human rights should apply in all cases. As horrific as our prison system is, though, I am more horrified that we just assume that people of means, or education, or whiteness ought to be exempt from it - that idea reinforces the function of the corrections system as a weapon against the working-class and people of color. It reinforces institutionalized and subliminal racism and classism. It reinforces the immunity of the rich and otherwise privileged, which is largely what the Polanski-rape-controversy is all about.
The state of the prison system in our country is relevant because reading about a rich, white rapist whining about how tough it is to be stuck in his palace makes me sick. It's relevant because of the commentary and the petitions. It's relevant because the L.A. times calls Polanski's crime a "child sex case," it's relevant because they're not the only ones who don't call it rape.
It's relevant because we are comfortable, in the U.S., to treat incarcerated persons as throw-away people. We are comfortable drawing a hard, fast line between the law-abiding us and the miscreant them.
Well, mostly. We're not quite as comfortable with it if they're rich, but most of them aren't, or if they look like us, but most of them don't.
Less than half of rapes are reported to the police, and only 13% of rapes that ARE reported in the US lead to convictions. 25% of college men have committed sexual assault, and 8% have attempted or committed rape.
Eight percent. Statistically, that's someone you know. Someones, possibly.
Is that the problem? Is it so overwhelmingly pervasive that people can't process it as a "real" crime? I mean, of course it's bad, but it's not like smoking crack or being poor or something like that. Right?
It infuriates, befuddles, and nauseates me that Levy has been provided space anywhere to "present a different "voice," one that contrasts with the howling of the pack." A different voice? Really?
It's not that different.
It's not that different from the story we're sold by the media, the legal system, the status quo. It fits perfectly into the dominant misogyny. You're not being revolutionary, Levy. You're trying to sell the same damn shit. It smells of elitism, privilege, and victim-blaming. It smells like the product of a dominant culture of oppression, a steady diet of entitlement to whatever-the-fuck-I-want, and a nice side of fear, that if the "pack" objects to one rich white guy getting away with horrific crimes, we might object to more, that those objections might get louder, and that they might eventually change something.
