A teenage boy inappropriately touches girls, feels bad about it, confesses to his parents. The parents, who have made their views on chastity very public, intervene resulting in changed behavior and healing for the victims. (The Duggars)
A grown man, 43 years old, gives drugs to a 13 year old girl, then rapes her. He confesses and before being sent to prison flees to a comfortable life in Europe. (Roman Polanski) When he is at risk three decades later of being extradited to the United States to face his conviction, Whoopi Goldberg defends him on The View, saying "It's not like it was rape-rape".
I really don't see hypocrisy for the Duggars or for Whoopi Goldberg. In the Duggar's case, they consistently stand for traditional definition of chastity (see below). In Whoopi's case, she consistently shows tolerance for many forms of sexual expression (including rape-rape, no definition available).
Definitely no hypocrisy, only a striking contrast between what two groups see as sexually normal.
Traditional Definition of Chastity (non-religious)
In spite of his modern reputation as being self-indulgent, Benjamin Franklin strived to build his character by systematically developing 13 Virtues. One of these virtues, Chastity, he defines as
"Rarely use venery but for health or offspring, never to dullness, weakness, or the injury of your own or another's peace or reputation."Venery is defined as "sexual indulgence".