Here is another good distinction:

There is nothing wrong with finding a teenager sexually attractive as long as you don't act on it.

Anyone with a healthy sexual appetite can see a shapely form and go "Wow-za" and then see the face or the context and go, "Whoah, dude -- that's a teenager."

There is something very very very veryveryveryvery wrong with finding a child sexually attractive. If you even think it and never once act on it you still need serious psychological help.

You have to be specifically disturbed to see a seven year old in their bathingsuit and think "Gotta get me somma THAT!"

I didn't even see it and I still want my money back...

Not that I approve, but the legal age here in Mississippi is 16. 27-10=17. Morgan and the girl were well within legal boundaries if the story of when the sexual relationship started is true (big if). Moral bounds? I will leave that up to you and our common creator. From the outside looking in, it would appear Freeman is going through some kind of post mid-life crisis. I hope this relationship is more than old man in search of trophy marries young woman in search of gold. There are only two people who know the answer to that. Time for the rest of us to move on.

As far as "Bucket List" goes, it was no Shawshank, but was a fine film my wife and I very much enjoyed on a date night...

"Do you really think it’s at all possible that he didn’t have any sort of relationship with her other minor children?"

Yes, both Woody and Soon-Yi have said so. Mia made lots of accusations (Soon-Yi was mentally handicapped, Woody was like a father to Soon-Yi, and Woody sexual abused his daughter) during the custody battle and they were debunked. I cannot take anything Mia says as truth, which I suspect you are doing.

Soon-Yi's own words (http://www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,976382,00.html):

To think that Woody was in any way a father or stepfather to me is laughable. My parents are Andre Previn and Mia, but obviously they're not even my real parents. I came to America when I was seven. I was never remotely close to Woody. He was someone who was devoted exclusively to his own children and to his work, and we never spent a moment together. We rarely ever spoke, and were polite but uninterested in one another. The fact is I really had no interest in knowing him better, nor he me.

Salon has corrected the story. It no longer says "over a decade ago" and now says "nearly a decade."

There is no evidence or suggestion by any journalist -- not even from the Enquirer -- that she was any younger than 19 when this sexual relationship began. And 19 is of legal age in every state, probably in every country, even if the partner is over 70.

Can you all drop the pedophilia argument now? Whether or not it is pedophilia for an old man to have sex with a 16 year old, we agree that it is not if she is 19, right?

Obviously, this leaves questions about the nature of their relationship when she was a child, an adolescent and a teen. It leaves questions about the nature of consent and the power dynamics in this relationship. Questions that we can only speculate about, given our near total ignorance of their interactions. But, if you want to speculate, go for it.

However, we have every reason to believe that she was legally an adult when this affair began.

blunderdog: ”Healthy sex, at the very least. Young folks can do that stuff pretty well. I had me some sex at 16, and I had a good time with it.”

ThoughtsofSusan: “Just because you've known somebody since they were a child...doesn't mean you still think of them the same way when they're an adult.”

Are either of you having sex with any of your step parents now that you’re an adult? Right, I didn’t think so. But if that was or is the case, I challenge you to convince me about how much you love it.

trudy b- “Not Pedophilia/Pedophilia” Ok, ok… THIS SMACKS OF INCEST!! Happy now?

ThoughtsofSusan: “It's not our business.” Give me a break. The foibles of those in the news give us all the opportunity to discuss and “flesh out” important issues. If you feel that way maybe you should avoid posting.

Why do I get the feeling that the posters that think this is no big deal are men and the ones who are outraged are women? Please correct me (I’m sure you won’t hesitate) if I’m wrong. And I hope I am. I point this out because maybe these clueless penis brains need to develop some empathy. NEWSFLASH: it’s not about sticking your hard dick into a hot, wet hole encased in a nubile young body of a youngster who thinks you are beyond reproach, it’s about the power discrepancy, exploitation and betrayal of trust (he helped to raise her!). Get my drift now? Better yet, go watch American Beauty.

or get busy committing incest.

As ceolaf just pointed out, we did make a correction to this post. The National Enquirer story states that the relationship has been going on for *nearly* a decade, not more than a decade as originally stated. Apologies for the error.

Yes. It's always a treat to see the English language used correctly, particularly in Salon letters.

If you think that it's at all likely Freeman waited until the girl was grown up, let alone legal, before inappropriateness started you must have been born yesterday. He may have waited until she was legal for the sexual aspect, but grooming and conditioning can go on for years before that. And a man who cannot stop himself from having an "affair" with his granddaughter even though he knows what it will cost him in terms of money, career, and family damage is a man acting compulsively and irrationally. He's sick.