A friend wrote up a Facebook poll asking whether Mel Gibson or Roman Polanski deserved jail more. The query sort of asks: “is it worse to be a drunken, racist girlfriend abuser or a child rapist?” I tend to lean towards the latter, as intimate partner abuse is terrible but adults have a better chance of escaping mistreatment than 13 year olds who have been given alcohol and pills and left at the mercy of a powerful person on whom their career aspirations hinge.

So I responded to this facebook inquiry by pointing out that Mel Gibson’s career is deader than Gary Coleman’s. For him to resurrect his movie stardom would require a movie so ingenious and loveable that Wall-E looks like Not Another Teen Movie. As such, he is suffering repercussions for his assholeishness, whether he ever gets jailed or not. Polanski, on the other hand, has people who actively defend him and even argue that his body of work should mean leniency for his personal crimes.

It’s kind of the opposite of politics, where your personal adventures (legal or otherwise) might spell the absolute end of a career, even if you’ve been doing a fine job.

This Polanski case, re-opened due to his recent release by the Swiss government (on the thinnest of arguments) after the fugitive was nabbed last fall.  To remind those who don’t know, Polanski didn’t just hook up with an underage girl, he gave a 13 year old booze and a Quaalude, took naked pictures of her, “instructed her to get into a jacuzzi naked, refused to take her home when she begged to go, began kissing her even though she said no and asked him to stop; performed cunnilingus on her as she said no and asked him to stop; put his penis in her vagina as she said no and asked him to stop; asked if he could penetrate her anally, to which she replied, “No,” then went ahead and did it anyway, until he had an orgasm.”

Hey everybody, I’d like to introduce you to child rape! Child rape, here’s everybody.  Oh, also child porn. Fun! This is gonna be some game of “Never Have I Ever.”

Some have pointed out that there are blah-dee-blah-blah details like the attention-seeking judge in the case meaning something about the trial being unfair. You can read all the legit details from the reporter who has covered the story from the beginning and decide if you think the argument holds water.

Others have pointed out that the young woman victimized by Polanski has said she doesn’t want Polanski to be legally pursued. Her argument though, is not that she now thinks the sex was consensual. Even back in 1977 she said she didn’t want the stigma of the trial to ruin her life forever. After all, she ended up with Polanski for a photo shoot as an aspiring model and was still hoping to make something of herself.

She certainly wouldn’t be the first sex crime victim who didn’t pursue a legal case in an effort to reduce the amount of trauma experienced.

True, even if Polanski somehow got busted in a country that extradited to the US and was returned to serve his sentence, things wouldn’t be set right for her. But we as a country have to stand up and say. “Nope, you don’t get to make child porn, rape kids and then go gallivanting around the globe surrounded by beautiful people as though it never happened. You don’t get to flee sentencing and then refuse to come back, like some little punk ass.”

And more importantly for us as individuals, “you don’t get public adoration and personal success when we all know you’re a total douche rocket.” This should be one of those reversal-of-fortune, triumphant moments at the end of a teen movie where the villainous rich kids finally get busted in front of the whole school and everyone knows they are toast from then on, and the main character can date their ex and live happily ever after.

So what can you do? Boycott his movies, for one. And for another, remember March 10^th, 1977. Remember the 13 year old girl who wanted to be a famous model and went along with the big Hollywood director for a shoot that could change her life and was used like a ragdoll and discarded. Sex crimes are not to be diminished and the heinousness of them does not dissipate with time.

Timaree Schmit, M.Ed., Ed.D. Cand., is a sexuality educator and fitness instructor in Philadelphia, the founder of the Human Sexuality Education Student Organization and sex columnist for the Philly Gay Calendar. Questions? Comments? Violent Reactions? Email Timaree at sexwithtimaree@gmail.com See more at SexwithTimaree.com

Last night I appeared on Joy Behar, along with Reverend Jesse Jackson, to discuss Rev. Jackson’s remark that Dan Gilbert behaved like a “slave master” in his remarks about Lebron James. Also, in the second segment, I discuss Mel Gibson’s most recent racist remarks.

“Liquor make you tell the truth.”

My Aunt Sarah used to tell me this whenever someone in the family would try to apologize for getting drunk and hurting someone’s feelings. Her point was that, despite our attempts to “blame it on the alcohol,” the state of inebriation doesn’t prompt us to say things we don’t really mean. Instead, spirits simply remove the inhibitions that suppress our innermost thoughts and feelings. As a result, we should not put much stock in the subsequent apology, which has more to due with embarrassment than remorse.

This has certainly proved to be the case for Mel Gibson.

In 2006, an intoxicated Gibson was pulled over for speeding on a Malibu highway. As the police attempted to take him into custody, Gibson went on a lengthy and vicious anti-Semitic tirade, blaming the Jews for everything from global warfare to Bobby Brown leaving New Edition. Fully aware that such moves are a severe occupational hazard, a sobered up Gibson quickly issued a public statement in which he expressed regret and shame for his antics. More importantly, he expressed disbelief at the anti-Semitic venom of his own comments, assuring the public that his drunken rant was not reflective of his true beliefs. To underscore his point, Gibson quickly checked into a rehabilitation center, sparking a new celebrity trend of using rehab as means of wedging space between their hate-speech and their individual character.

Soon after the incident, Jewish leaders like Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League, made it clear that they were unwilling to accept Gibson’s apology. Simply put, they didn’t believe him.

The mother wit of my Aunt Sarah aside, there were multiple reasons to believe that Gibson was less than contrite. Despite numerous attempts, Gibson failed to unequivocally reject his father’s claims that the Holocaust never happened, instead choosing to sidestep the question with fancy rhetorical footwork. Also, The Passion of the Christ, Gibson’s record-breaking film, placed exclusive blame on the Jews for the death of Jesus at the expense of Roman accountability. Additionally, Gibson had made a career of uttering equally vicious public statements against other groups, such as women and the LGBT community. Surely, all of these issues weighed into the ADL’s decision to reject Gibson’s dubious apology.

Now, in the wake of Gibson’s most recent outbursts, they have been proven right.

According to several published reports, Gibson has been caught on tape and e-mail making equally offensive comments during an argument with his ex-girlfriend Oksana Grigorieva. In the midst of an intense argument over custody of their 8-month-old child, Gibson repeatedly called Grigorieva a “b—-,” “c—,” and “whore,” promised to burn down her home, and threatened to sodomize her. Gibson warned his ex that her appearance would get her “raped by a pack of niggers.”

Apparently, they didn’t cover racism and misogyny during his last trip to “hate rehab.”

For the rest of the story, click here.