"Ah, ha! so you thought you had only to do with a set of slave-women! You did not know the ardour that fills the bosom of free-born dames."
-Aristophanes, Lysistrata, 410 BC

Feminism is a work in progress. As modern woman continues to push for equality and respect and to be seen as something more than an object of beauty or piece of property or second class citizen, she also struggles with her changing role as mother and sexual being. Some women agonize over the decision of when and if they want to start a family that interrupts their career while too many women on the planet are still fighting for the right to an education or the freedom to come and go and think as they please. But what all women have in common is the reminder that the fundamental difference between human beings is not religion or race or culture or nationality, but sex. Man versus woman. And the most primitive way a man can control a woman is through sexual dominance or rape.

The media outlets are littered with stories of sexual predators abusing, manipulating and terrorizing their prey. Often the casualties are young and are equally male or female. Pedophile priests being protected by their church as they abuse child after child. Registered sexual predators who take advantage of an overwrought and underfunded legal and penal system that allows them the opportunity to find more victims. Religions or cultures that condone the practice of girls under the age of 16 to be forced into arranged marriages to men that are old enough to be their fathers, grandfathers and great-grandfathers. And the dark and rampant world of the underground sex slave trade that finds a never-ending supply of fresh innocent beings that are too poor and powerless to protect themselves.

These stories fall into a mostly clear-cut, black and white area. There are obvious victims, naive and underage, who need the help and protection of their communities.

But then there is the grey area. The stories of women who may or not be of the age of consent, and claim to be intimidated or overpowered by someone in a position of power.

Politicians talking dirty to and playing with interns. Star athletes or celebrities engaging in sex with multitudes of women. Teachers having sex with students. It's difficult to always define who is the victim and who is the perpetrator when both parties are adults or on the verge of adulthood. It's not simple siding with women who put themselves in a vulnerable position with men they hardly know simply because of the man's elevated status in society.

However the example that seems to incorporate all of these themes is the highly publicized sexual assault case involving film maker Roman Polanski.

Drugs, sex, the lure of fame, dominance of young women, and the misuse of power are all wrapped into one.

Roman Polanski was initially charged in 1977 with "rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious acts upon a child under fourteen and furnishing a controlled substance to a minor." He was 43 and the victim, Samantha Geimer, was 13. He pleaded to a lesser charge of statutory rape, served 42 days in a psychiatric ward and then fled the United Stated out of fear that the judge, who was looking for publicity, would not honor the conditions of the plea bargain in which Polanski and his lawyer agreed to probation rather than jail time.

For three decades, Polanski has lived in France and never returned to the U.S. All six of the original charges are pending against him because he fled the country before his original sentencing. He is currently in Switzerland, fighting extradition to the U.S.

Polanski has many supporters and detractors. Some believe he has been punished enough, that putting him in prison now serves no purpose and the Los Angeles District Attorney is using the publicity to make a name, and that his lifetime of artistic contributions to the world should count towards his character. Others believe he raped and abused a 13-year-old girl and should pay for the crime no matter who he is and what he has done. Rape is rape and should be punished. He has become a martyr and a monster in the arena of sexual politics.

This is where the grey zone begins.

In 1975, two years after the U.S. Supreme Court upheld a woman's right to an abortion, Susan Brownmiller published her seminal work, Against Our Will, about the history and sociology of rape. Her book shed light on the systematic socializing and institutionalizing of sexual acts against women, how the perpetrators were often not unknown boogeymen, but trusted community members, and how the standard of a victim remaining silent was the status quo. The rule of silence reached over to other sexual crimes such as incest and pedophilia. These acts were the victims shame, not the abusers.

While she defends the concept of "NO means NO", she also feels that women have to learn to overcome a deliberate and destructive feminine conditioning that keeps them passive and not depend on legal systems alone.

"Obvious offenders will be punished, and that in itself will be a significant change, but the huge gray area of sexual exploitation, of women who are psychologically coerced into acts of intercourse they do not desire because they do not have the wherewithal to physically, or even psychologically, resist, will remain a problem beyond any possible solution of criminal justice."

While Brownmiller argues that women have to reshape their roles in society to combat the inequities against them, the act of rape is squarely placed at the door of man. Author and scholar Camille Paglia puts the responsibility smack center in the lap of women.

In 1991, Paglia wrote a controversial essay called "Rape and Modern Sex War" in which she discussed the war of the sexes and the role women play in their own rape, focusing on the concept of date rape. Paglia believes the feminist movement has made rape a crime in which young women are no longer responsible for their actions.

"Every woman must take personal responsibility for her sexuality, which is nature's red flame. She must be prudent and cautious about where she goes and with whom. When she makes a mistake, she must accept the consequences and, through self-criticism, resolve never to make that mistake again. Running to Mommy and Daddy on the campus grievance committee is unworthy of strong women."

Paglia essentially argues that if a woman meets a man and has only known him for a short while, and she goes to his apartment or takes him home, she is sending the message that they will have sex. The idea that a woman is expecting a man she barely knows to be honorable is a misleading and dangerous estimation promoted by leading feminist groups. She goes on to conclude that "the only solution to date rape is female self-awareness and self-control."

So what does any of this have to do with the 43-year-old man, Roman Polanski taking advantage of the 13-year-old girl, Samantha Geimer?

I have always taken issue with an older person engaging in a romantic or sexual relationship with someone who is many years younger. When someone is not fully formed or aware of themselves they are not in a position to give an informed consent and I question the motives of that older individual. I remember how adolescent in life I was at 17 or 18 or my early-twenties. Why would a supposedly mature and educated man of 35 or 40 or 50 have an interest in me? It's for the youth and beauty and sex. It's for the malleable nature of the inexperienced being, easily manipulated, eager to please. It's for the role of the mentor.

Are there exceptions? Of course. Who am I to question a love or a mutual connection or admiration between two people no matter the age? But generally speaking, once a person has moved into their late 30s, they hopefully have a much broader and more developed sense of the world that would make having an interest in someone 20+ years younger a rather juvenile act. I find 20-year-old men and women to be similar to small children. They lack impulse control and life experience. They haven't read as much as me. They have bad taste in music. I am not attracted to children.

Of course the age gap is less of a gap when that younger person is older. So a 30 or 35-year-old woman is on a much more even playing field with a man who is much older. Society may still judge the participants in these relationships as having shallow agendas, but what consenting adults do with each other is no one's business.

So while we can look at Polanski, who was also rumored to have slept with other young women in the 15-year-old range at that time in his life, and label him a pervert or a degenerate, where is the responsibility of the girl?

Well, in this case, the girl is thirteen. Polanski claims Geimer responded to everything he did favorably. She claims she was too drugged up and scared to do more than say "NO" faintly throughout the incident.

Geimer was definitely too young to defend herself physically or psychologically and was not in a position to know better. But her mother did know better.

The mother of Samantha Geimer is the person who shoulders the culpability of her daughter's abuse as much as Polanski. (I would say the father too, but from all reports I have read of this case, the mother appeared to be the primary custodial parent). She is just as guilty as he is. She was her daughter's pimp.

The girl was brought to a famous Hollywood director, who wanted to take photographs of her, under the auspices of her model/actress mother. Not once, but twice. And the second visit, that took place in a famous actor's home, is now what makes up the 33-year-old case making headlines on CNN.

Since 1977, Geimer sued Polanski and he settled out of court. She has publicly announced that his debt to her was paid and she no longer wishes to see him persecuted or put in prison.

Did Polanski commit an injustice against this girl? I believe he did. But does it serve the public to continue to spend tax dollars pursuing a man who is not a threat to young girls and has been publicly supported by his wife of twenty years and the very woman he injured? No. And yet no one wants to hear Geimer's "NO" this time either. She has made it clear that she doesn't see justice being served by imprisoning Polanski and yet none of the prosecutors or critics are listening to the victim.

I say if you want to throw Polanski in jail, make room in that cell for mommy dearest too. The same goes for the parents of any child that's left alone with someone simply because they are famous. And let me make a point of singling out all the parents of the boys who were left in the "care" of Michael Jackson. The seduction of privilege and celebrity and money is not an excuse for pimping out your kids. A spade is a spade is a spade. Those procreators are fancy men with parental rights.

Recently a British actress named Charlotte Lewis, now 42 years old, came forward to the press with claims that Polanski abused her in his Paris apartment in 1983 when she was sixteen. Even though the age of consent in Paris is fifteen, Lewis claims that Polanski manipulated her in the worse way and that she did what he wanted because he told her that's how she would secure a role in his film. The money was a "life-changing amount" for her and her mother so she felt beholden and desperate. Lewis claims she wants Polanski to "get what he deserves" and hopes her story will be of help to Los Angeles prosecutors in assessing his character.

Was Lewis coerced and manipulated as she claims? Maybe so, but once again I ask, where was her mother? Or father? And what is their culpability in not protecting their own child? It doesn't help her credibility that Gloria Allred is her attorney. A lawyer who takes on clients that are all "victims" (and get her in front of camera) and recently represented some of golfer Tiger Woods' mistresses. Porn stars and prostitutes and famewhores who willingly participated in sex with a married man and now expect him to apologize for "lying" to them. This type of theatrics only sets back the cause of actual victims of abuse.

And women continue to hand over all the power of sex and propagation of violence to men.

Women may not ever be as strong as men physically, unless advancements in science have something say about it, but we don't need a ratings hungry media telling us we're all "prey." I don't like the idea of young women, who don't have full control or understanding of their bodies, having sex with older men, but not all of them are abused and traumatized. I don't condone a legal system that exploits the victim as much as the original perpetrator.

Perhaps women can teach their daughters and sisters that they can choose how they want to navigate their way in the world. Women can take control of when and how they have sex, when and how they give birth and when and how they consent to sex. Women don't have to trust authority figures simply because they have the authority. Women shouldn't accept religious and cultural organizations, schools of thought and practices that do not make men and women equal in everything.

Women can choose to educate their minds. Women can choose to make their own money, garner their own fame and achieve their own power. Women can choose to use their minds over their bodies. Women can choose to take responsibility for their own actions or inaction in their lives. Women can choose the conditions in which they accept for themselves. Women can choose to not play the role of victim.

We are the stronger sex when we take responsibility for own choices.