Saletan is straining so hard to find a contrarian angle on the Polanski case that he's overlooking basic facts. Yes, the probation report points toward evidence "that the victim was ... willing." The right lesson for us today to draw from that statement, however, is not that we're too prudish for failing to recognize that a 13-year-old can be a sexual being. That's true in the abstract, but it's entirely beside the point when evaluating the facts of this case.

The grand jury testimony makes clear that Polanski's victim was not willing. Every step of the way, she said no. Everything he did to her was coercive. The salient difference between society's attitudes back then vs. now is that back then, the probation officer ignored the victim's actual testimony and substituted his own judgment to conclude that, despite what she actually said, she wanted it.

Where I think today's world differs is that today, I hope, the victim herself would be listened to. The determination of whether or not she was willing would take into account her own perspective, and not just the substituted judgment of others.

Saletan thinks we're at fault for not acknowledging that 13-year-olds can want sex. Where he fails is in forgetting that they're also quite capable of testifying about whether they wanted it or not.