Natalie Portman’s hypocrisy
I feel it important to preface this with two points. One, I am a vegetarian and two, I am a fan of Natalie Portman. But recently, an article she wrote in support of Jonathon Safron Foer’s book Eating Animals was brought to my attention by SU’s own Kelton Sears. In the Huffington Post, Portman says that the book challenged her, changing her from a vegetarian to a full blown vegan. While I respect her point of view, and find her article particularly fascinating, I was bothered by a point she attempted to make. It appeared, though probably not her intention, to equate eating animals to rape. Portman writes:
“He [Foer] posits that consideration, as promoted by Michael Pollan in The Omnivore’s Dilemma, which has more to do with being polite to your tablemates than sticking to your own ideals, would be absurd if applied to any other belief (e.g., I don’t believe in rape, but if it’s what it takes to please my dinner hosts, then so be it).”
The feminist in me is deeply disturbed by the allusion that the free choice to eat meat is in any way comprable to such a vicious and invasive act as rape. Her point, of course, is just because dinner guests want meat, vegans shouldn’t acquiesce to their demands. Of course, to even go so far as to say if dinner guests want to rape someone (an illegal act), one should acquiesce is absurd and her point loses the validity she garnered throughout her essay.
She further loses validity because of her support of Roman Polanski, who pleaded guilty to rape and then fled the country in the 1970s. Recently, Polanski was arrested and hundreds of Hollywood alums signed a petition entitled “Free Roman Polanski!” Whether you believe Polanski should be free or not is not the issue. He has pleaded guilty of raping a 13 year old girl. And Portman’s support for him, in light of her attempt to condemn both rape and eating animals in her essay, is highly hypocritical. She can’t support a rapist, because he happens to be a brilliant friend, but then condemn rape, and further write something so drastic as to equate the act to eating animals. She reveals herself as a hypocrite. And that is a sad reflection an otherwise brilliant talent.
He pleaded guilty to unlawful sex with a minor, not ‘rape’. Statutory rape is not the same. It’s sex with a minor who cannot give consent even is she would. Ergo, he’s not a rapist in the legal term. Get your facts right. That’s why Portman supports him, since she, unlike yourself, sees the significant difference.
There is no hypocrisy in forgiveness. Polanski pled guilty and served his plea-bargained sentence. His crime was evading a corrupt judge who renegged on his own orchestrated agreement, as acknowledged by both the defense and prosecution. The victim wants Polanski free. There is no evidence that Polanski ever reoofended so it is not on behalf of any future victims. It is not his job to meet the conditions of your vindictiveness,
HYPOCRITE is just another word in the dictionary.
American people know the meaning of that word very well because they recognize their
own personally in that one word.
So even if NATALEE PORTMAN is a hypocrite , so what ?
Isn’t EVERYBODY ?
Even i am a hypocrite , and i don’t care because it’s just another w…….
I Would like to buy a t-shirt FREE POLANSKI.
I Did the exact same thing when i bought a t-shirt FREE WINONA , after Winona Ryder
was arrested for shoplifting and American people hysterically crucified her as if she was
a serialkiller.
Americans have the bad habit of turning a fly into an elephant.
They do that all the time.
Why don’t they clean up their own mess ?
Whatever Winona Ryder , Roman Polanski or Natalee Portman is/are is nobody’s business.
Live your own lives.
@D Clapp He never served his sentence. He fled. I respect the victims desire to have Polanski free and the charges dropped, for her mental and physical health. I’ve said my piece on what should happen in that instance. My point simply was, you cannot condemn rape in one instance, and condone it in another.
@Marshal Under California Law, Unlawful Sex is how statutory rape is defined in the penal code. Most laws don’t specifically call it statutory rape. So yes, I did my research. My point, as I said above was I don’t understand how you can condemn rape in one instance and condone it in another. If someone can explain it to me, I’d love to hear it.
My feeling is that given a choice most will opt for being raped than being murdered. People who eat meat are responsible for murder of lots of animals. I have seen that vegetarian women who ate meat-eaters try to defend meat-eaters whenever they get a chance and that is understandable an I hope that is not the case for you. There is no denying that murdering animals is much worse than raping if one cares for animals.
Regarding Polanski’s case, all I have to say that millions of ‘underage’ people are having sex everyday in the USA. Many of them with ‘adults.’ Are all of them rapes because law defines it that way. I guess in some states since oral sex or anal sex was illegal even between married adults, people who did them should all be thrown to jail.
@D Clapp Well put. Couldn’t agree more.
YEAHHHHHH CONTROVERSY
Hello everybody.
Is everybody aware of what porn-actrice TRACI LORDS has done in the mid 1980s ?
Everybody was having sex with her in all humanly possible positions for the production
of porn movies , BUT SHE WAS A MINOR.
She was only 15.
And do you think that anyone went to prison ?
FORGET IT !
And that girl was massively sexually abused.
I Know that Traci Lords lied about her age , but the people who were working in the
porn industry never cared to check it out how old she was.
Make some comparisons here and there.
You’ll figure out that your high blood pressure is reaching the sky for nothing.
The collection also includes styles that are suitale for business meetiings and everyday wear.Many of these styles are designed with leather and suede and can make quite an impression at the workplace.It is possible to find Gucci shoes discounted to make them more affordable if you take the time to search for some of these exclusive design.
wait a minute. didnt the guy drug up the girl and give her alcohol, and then have sex with her? sounds like rape to me.
@D Clapp
It is not vindictiveness to want accountability for a middle age man drugging and having sex with a 13 year against her will (or even with her consent). People who do this have a high recidivism (Polanski, while not charged continued in relationships with young teens). So in addition to the safety of other potential victims, future and present victims need to know that there is justice even if their attacker is rich, powerful, or a celebrity.