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

If you’ve been on the interwebs in the last week you’ve likely seen the following video where a small dance troupe of incredibly talented seven year olds completely dominates a performance of Beyonce’s Single Ladies. In case you haven’t had a chance to check it out, or just want another view:

Little Girls- Single Ladies

The first time I saw this video was when it was posted by a former student of mine who is a professional choreographer. She actually judged the girls’ performance at competition last week.  She remarked that when she saw them, they were even more polished. The comments added to the video post on this choreographer’s wall were largely of awe and amazement at the skill of the girls. The command of their entire bodies, their strength, agility, flexibility and rhythm are impressive, to say the least.

So that’s what dancers thought of this dance performance. But what about the rest of the internet?

-“Were there no adults around to tell them to do something suitable for 7-year-olds instead of doing this? Yikes.”- Buzzfeed post that garnered hundreds of comments from upset viewers who rated the video as “ew” and “trashy.”

-“Little Girls Tackle Single Ladies, make me extremely uncomfortable”- headline to article that goes on to remind us, “I’m glad these gals are “Single Ladies,” because seven is far too young to have a boyfriend.”

- “I feel like Beyonce had on more modest attire when she did this number. Who buys negligee for their kids?”- random (but oft repeated) sentiment on the Book of Face.

Even my partner responded by saying, “I feel like I just inadvertently committed a crime.”

I was aghast at this judgmental reaction. Here these little girls had just done something incredible, something I hope they are proud of for the rest of their lives and Jane and John Random, who would certainly never be able to full off such a feat at any age, met the video with tongue-wagging judgment about the costumes.

They reacted like someone had called the Modesty Police with the Bat Signal.

There’s no point in arguing that little girls wear swimsuits that cover less of the body. Or in pointing out that dance outfits must be form fitting to be functional. Or in reminding viewers that, as a dancer, I can tell you it’s a hell of a lot more comfortable to perform in a bare mid-drift top than in a constricting onesie that is about 20 degrees warmer under bright stage lights.

That’s far from the point. The point is that objectification and sexualization are relative. What makes your argument about these girls’ outfits any different than a conservative Imam who says women must be covered head to toe in order to protect them from the lustful gaze of men?

It’s not the girls who are being overtly sexual, it’s the adults who are projecting upon them. We worry about little kids being preyed upon, yes. So teach them not to get into vans with strangers. Don’t take away their freedom to dance in cute outfits. If the beauty of childhood is the freedom to be innocent, then let these kids be innocent. They’re just dancing. You’re judging it to be sexual.

A few weeks ago I met with an administrator who was concerned about introducing Flirty Girl fitness into my schedule at the gym. He expressed great concern about the objectification of the students who would attend such a class. I had to bite my tongue to avoid saying “simply because something is female and flirty doesn’t make it obscene or objectifying.”

bart everly's little girls

Females doing something physical that makes them happy is not the gateway to imprudence, no matter how many centuries of paternalistic virgin-whore dichotomy we’re force fed. Dancing is not a sin, wearing cute and frilly two-piece outfits will not cause anyone to become promiscuous and all your leaps to lump this performance in with a culture of prosti-tots will not take away the impressiveness that is this work of athletic art.

But I welcome your arguments to the contrary.

Questions? Comments? Violent Reactions? Email Timaree at sexwithtimaree@gmail.com See more at SexwithTimaree.com

Yay! DC votes to allow same-sex marriage! Uganda bans female circumcision! Now, if only they’d stop trying to execute gay men.

Go green and support prostitutes? Actually the best climate control is population control.

Hilarious video about a world where women are as horny and objectifying as men; and an 80s-era instructional video on how to talk to men. At least it’s better than these tips for single ladies from 1938.

Straight woman auctions off freedom to get married on EBay to support LGBT organizations.

The mating rituals of Jersey Shore. And MTV’s ambivalence on violence against women: the Snooki punch.

The latest report on 20somethings and their knowledge of contraception. It’s scary.

Oh that rascally Lindsay Lohan: doing NSFW photo shoots again
Archeology reveals people didn’t use to be so uptight about sex
“Keep quiet and let them finish,” a mother reported tells her daughter as she is gang raped in what is probably the most upsetting thing you’ll read all day. On that line of thought…Why calling girls sluts is even worse than you thought.
Doing naughty things and don’t want Aunt Ethel to find out? How to protect your privacy on the Book of Face.

Questions? Comments? Violent Reactions? Email Timaree at sexwithtimaree@gmail.com See more at SexwithTimaree.com

Maybe he got the idea from the movie Role Models: Tiger Woods and Ambien sex. The first mistress, Rachel Uchitel, gives her side of the story.

In response to the controversy around people having sex in public, San Francisco officials have suggested “sex tents.”

In HIV news….Unfair: protests against ban on gay men’s blood donations. Horrifying: HIV positive man injects wife with his infected blood as she sleeps so she won’t leave him. Hope: Is mass circumcision a good idea? Uplifting: help raise funds for a camp for kids with HIV with one click.

International news….“Six Meter Long Schlong” becomes center of political battle in Germany. Chinese government opens gay bar.

One woman’s fascinating tale about what having a baby can do to your sex life. What depression can do to your sex life. And things learned after 4 year of unintentional celibacy.

More insights into asexuality, the 4^th orientation.

The latest hypocritical Republican: calls gay sex “deviate” but chokes and beats his girlfriend mid-coitus.
Rachel Maddow owns a guest who claims he can treat homosexuality.

Can they do that? Rights group renames the female hymen.

In media….Douchebags are reaching maximum saturation. The realities of teens and sexting

10 reasons to use condoms you may not have heard of yet!

Questions? Comments? Violent Reactions? Email Timaree at sexwithtimaree@gmail.com See more at SexwithTimaree.com

Perusing an article about how Tiger Woods’ little Whoopsie Daisy moment(s) and how his affairs are distancing him even further and further from Black people, I couldn’t help but be struck by the weirdness. The man, after all, is mostly Asian.  But when it comes to a minority group, one that must make identity a major issue in order to survive, you take heroes where you can.

Another minority group that comes to mind is, as always, the gays. LGB folks have to march up and down the place demanding to get the right to enter the sacred union Tiger so blithely tossed aside. And while it was probably his fame, athletic prowess and billionaire status, rather than his heterosexuality, that granted him the sense of grandiose entitlement one must feel to have not one, not two, but a whole harem of mistresses (10 at this writing), it’s another slap in the face of loving, committed couples who just fucking want to file their goddamn taxes together.

Then there’s the allegations made by some of his side gigs that he was only in the marriage for the façade, along with the latest leaks about his attempts to buy some more time with Elin. It appears the guy never really wanted to be married in the first place: it was the thing he had to so he could pursue the career he wanted and get everyone off his back.

Because that’s what marriage is, both historically and to this day: an economic contract, a financial agreement between parties to secure a better position for both individuals and their respective tribes.

A friend of mine related a story from a documentary he had seen. He said the members of an indigenous tribe was taken to New York City (for some reason or another) and at one point was asked about marriage between same-sex individuals in their culture. They quickly replied that this would never happen, as marriage was for babies.

The openly gay New Yorkers assembled in the conversation were a little nonplussed: disheartened by this apparent prejudice but wanting to be good hosts. A tribesman noticed the reaction and quickly clarified the tribe did not, however, put rules on love.

And if two people wanted to be together and they were the same sex, that was totally fine.

And this is because the tribe understood the clear differentiation between marriage as a contractual arrangement and marriage as a union of souls in love. One is the concern of the governing body of a tribe (or a country) and one is a matter between two people.

What opponents of same-sex marriage fail to recognize is that their battle is hardly different from starting a legislative referendum to mandate that First Communion must be in 2^nd grade.

What Americans are becoming increasingly aware of is the damage done to marriage by greed, selfishness and entitlement. It’s philandering, abuse and neglect that tarnish the beauty of a union of lovers, not both people having outies or innies.

At  the very least, if Tiger Woods and his drama are in any way our business to discuss and we can draw any peace from this, he isn’t one of those hypocritical conservative jackasses against gay marriage. Golf fans, take note.

Questions? Comments? Violent reactions? Email sexwithtimaree@gmail.com. See more at http://sexwithtimaree.com