Balak, you question how it is that a 13-year old girl cannot give informed consent. The reason is that girls of that age are still very much in thrall to adults. They have not yet formed full notions of identity and individuality. We have a good example of this in the earlier sensational case of the man who kidnapped an 11-year old girl and kept her as his sex slave, raping her regularly and fathering two children by her. This girl bonded with her rapist because at age 11 she did not yet have a distinct ego and so was emotional putty in the hands of her rapist.
But we need not speculate. I offer here an article from 2005, BEFORE the current brouhaha, in which the victim speaks candidly as an adult about the case. It’s here:
And here are some illustrative quotes from the victim:
“He took sex from me and my innocence. I don’t think it occurred to him that someone wouldn’t want sex with him.”
“My girlfriend was supposed to come along as my chaperone but at the last minute Polanski said it would be better if she didn’t come. She went home and Mom didn’t realise I was on the shoot alone.”
“I realised I had put myself in a bad situation. I got scared and said I had asthma and couldn’t breathe. I said I had to get out of the tub. As quick as I could get out of that Jacuzzi I got out. He was older and I didn’t think it right we should be hanging out in the tub.”
“He started kissing me, I protested but then just submitted. I’d been drinking and was too frightened to push him off - he was a famous guy, he was intimidating. We were alone and it was pitch-black. I was scared. I knew what he was gonna do - and I didn’t want him to do it.
“All I could think was let’s get through this and I can get home. I just froze up.” Polanski had intercourse with Samantha, performed oral sex and sodomised her. He then drove her home saying: “Don’t tell your mum or your boyfriend, this is our little secret.”
Now, do you still claim that Polanski did no harm to this girl?