I don't know where to post this: I'd like to kick Woody Allen in his smarmy little

[Maraya1969]

balls! It was horrible what he did to his little girl but then how he abused her all her life and and blamed her mother and twisted the system for his own gains and got accolades from Hollywood for so fucking long!

He reminds me of the last ugly fucking president of the US.

At least his last movie was not released in the US.

All the powerful men who have abused women and children for so many years! It is a virus that needs to die with its latest hosts.

[MaryMagdaline]

1. Amen!

[lucca18]

2. He. Is. Truly. Despicable.

[MuseRider]

3. Not sure exactly what to say so......

[Hoyt]

4. Loved his films until all that came to light. I can't separate music, film,

literature, etc., from the people creating it.

[Rorey]

6. I can't separate either

I won't watch any of his films.

[Demovictory9]

44. i find it hard to separate also

[ProfessorGAC]

121. I Can, Somewhat

For instance, I can still watch Robert Duvall or Eastwood movies.
Woody's "missteps" were way over my line though.
Besides, I think he ran out of gas after "Zelig".
I thought most of his stuff after that was slow paced, self-important crap.
Then, I found about what he did.
Never gave his movies a chance after that.

[TrunKated]

5. I liked his early, funny movies.

[3catwoman3]

7. I have always found Woody Allen to be...

Last edited Mon Mar 15, 2021, 12:43 AM - Edit history (1)

...completely repulsive.

[AnotherMother4Peace]

12. I've always thought he used child like, naive characters to be deceptive

and to justify "naughty" behavior such as having sex with teenage girls. I have always found Woody Allen to be completely repulsive. I never could watch his movies.

[Dave Starsky]

83. Me too. Never liked him or his "comedies". Ever.

I've always thought he was some sort of in-joke prank that New Yorkers were playing on the rest of the world. It seemed obvious to me how weird it was that every single one of his movies featured a shriveled, repulsive lead character (himself) in a thoroughly implausible relationship with an attractive woman no more than a third his age.

[NanceGreggs]

8. Don't you find it amazing ...

… that the only person who ever accused Woody of sexually abusing his daughter was his wife – who made the allegation in the midst of a very bitter divorce?

Mia freaked when Woody left her for a younger woman – a situation Mia would be familiar with, as she herself got Andre Previn to leave his ‘older’ wife for her.

Of course, Mia Farrow later claimed that their son, Sasha (now Ronan), is actually the child of Frank Sinatra. Apparently Mia was sleeping with Sinatra (or some other man) while married to Woody. So she’s obviously truthful and trustworthy, right?

The judge in the case said that the little girl had obviously been ‘coached’ in terms of what to say about the matter.

We all know that pedophiles don’t change their predilection for sexually abusing children – and yet no one has ever accused him of untoward or suspicious behaviour with any other child, before or since Mia’s allegations.

Gee, I wonder why.

[TexasBushwhacker]

10. Sorry. I've thought he was a creep since he hooked up with

Soon-Yi, who was essentially his step daughter.

[NanceGreggs]

13. They never had a father/daughter ...

... relationship - and never even lived in the same house. Soon-yi was adopted by Farrow before she married Woody, so there wasn't even a blood relationship between any of them.

Did you think Mia Farrow was a creep when she hooked-up with Dory Previn's husband? Dory had a nervous breakdown over it, because she and Mia were very close and she often stated that Mia was "like a daughter" to the couple.

[GReedDiamond]

23. "Beware of Young Girls" by Dory Previn...

...posted without comment.

[Percy]

132. OMG. I had no idea she wrote this song.

What a terrible betrayal she experienced. I hope she was able to recover.

[TexasBushwhacker]

30. A stepchild isn't a blood relative

I didn't claim she was. But even though Farrow and Allen never married, they were together since 1980, when Soon-Yi was 10.

By that time Previn was marriage number 4 of 5, and was serving as music director in several cities over the next few years, but none of them in NY. So Allen was the defacto father figure in her life simply because Previn was out of the picture.

While you may consider Mia the homewrecker, maybe Previn deserves some if the blame for cheating on Dory, who already had a history of mental illness.

Allen was quoted as saying his relationship with Soon-Yi was primarily paternal, but fathers are supposed to fuck their daughters.

[NanceGreggs]

46. I never said you claimed otherwise.

Allen and Farrow always maintained separate households - one for him, and one for her and the children. Therefore, the relationship between Woody and the kids was never the kind that would naturally ensue from being a 'family' living in the same household.

My parents divorced when I was seven, and my father was very much out of the picture for the most part. But although my mother had many long-term relationships over the years, and despite my close relationships with many of the men she was involved with, I never saw any of them as a 'defacto father figure' just because my biological father wasn't around.

[Dorian Gray]

73. Did you

end up marrying any of them?

[Maraya1969]

87. The fact that all of them called him "Dad" doesn't matter I suppose.

[Doc Sportello]

106. Did any of them take pornographic pictures of you the way Allen did of Soon-Yi?

She hadn't even dated a boy at that time. Doormen stated that she was coming to his apartment unaccompanied when she was as young as 15. But of course because YOU didn't experience abuse means no one else did either, I guess.

[NanceGreggs]

193. You know NOTHING of my life's experiences ...

... and I'd appreciate your not assuming that you do.

[shrike3]

114. Woody is a rich and famous guy. If he wanted a younger woman, he had his pick. But of all the women

in the world, he had to choose his lover's daughter. The fact that you think it's no big deal says a lot about you.

[Dorian Gray]

72. Still Creepy as fuck.

Mia didn't "break up" Andre's prior marriage. He did that.

Mia choosing to engage in a relationship with an older married adult made a choice that wasn't great. But that doesn't mean that Woody didn't target her daughter for an inappropriate relationship.

And it doesn't mean he didn't abuse Dylan.

[shrike3]

117. Big deal. She was his lover's daughter. Men with even a shred of decency would consider her

off-limits.

[dlk]

125. Mia was 25 and Andre was 41 when they began their affair, a a 16 year age difference

It's a false equivalency to compare Farrow's affair with Previn, and the Woody and Soon Yi affair, whose father/daughter relationship began when she was 10 and he was 45, a 35-year age difference. The fact that it became a sexual relationship, ignoring the incest taboo, is much different situation than the May December relationship between Farrow and Previn, who had never lived in the same household as father and daughter. I'm surprised you don't see the difference between an affair involving a garden-variety cheating husband, and Woody's gross violation of appropriate boundaries within a family system. They are night and day.

[Crunchy Frog]

154. Trying to excuse Allen's behavior by pointing out that Mia's not an angel...

is one of the worst pieces of whataboutism that I've seen.

Yeah, she was a young homewrecker, and that's bad. It's not remotely comparable to being an older adult preying on children or teenagers, some of them in your own family.

Sick and disingenuous.

[NanceGreggs]

176. I am merely pointing out ...

... that Farrow has a known pattern of being deceitful and lying.

She was deceitful when she engaged in an affair with Andre Previn behind his wife's back. She lied when she passed Ronan off as Woody's child, and then said he was Frank Sinatra's child (which the Sinatra family vehemently denies).

So the question is: Why is Farrow, the proven liar, the one who is assumed to be telling the truth?

[Crunchy Frog]

177. It doesn't matter to me whether she's telling the truth about anything.

The business with Soon Yi is indisputable (even if particular details might be debated.

And I believe that DYLAN FARROW, an adult woman in her thirties, is telling the truth about what happened to her.

I've always had great regard for you as a poster, and I think you've just lost me in this thread.

Sorry.

[NanceGreggs]

178. No sweat.

Whatever you think about Woody & Soon-yi's relationship, it doesn't automatically equate to his having molested Dylan.

[Crunchy Frog]

180. I believe that Dylan, as an adult woman, is able to speak for herself.

I'm sorry if you don't believe that women are able to speak for themselves about their own experiences.

I'm done.

[NanceGreggs]

183. If you've been told repeatedly ...

... by your own mother that something happened, you tend to accept it as true.

Memories can be instilled, especially in the mind of a child.

I grew up with a family story wherein I was the child at the centre of a funny incident. I was in my thirties when it was determined that the funny story involved my older cousin, because I hadn't even been born yet at the time it happened.

To this day, the incident is as vivid in my mind as any childhood memory, because it had been described to me by my relatives over many years. But as it turned out, it's a false memory.

I don't think Dylan is 'lying' - but you can't ignore the fact that her mother (and others) could have influenced memories of things that never happened.

[Crunchy Frog]

152. That's what did it for me, and I absolutely LOVED his movies...

as a kid (during his funny period).

And I don't care whether she was "technically" his step daughter, or technically of legal age. It just felt really sick to me.

[Doc Sportello]

11. You are so ill-informed on this

I urge you to watch the documentary series. Your claims here about witnesses to Allen's behavior and what the judge said in their custody fight are absolutely incorrect. The DA at the time wanted to press charges but didn't out of concern for seven-year-old Dylan. This was no hit job on Allen. The hit job was done by Allen on Mia Farrow and continues to this day with a powerful team of publicity agents and legal minds. Saying Mia did this as retribution is just parroting his disgusting claims to try and cover his sexual abuse of a SEVEN-YEAR-OLD girl. The series was well-researched and included professionals from the time and today among its many damning indictments. Try watching it and you'll see how wrong you are.

[NanceGreggs]

14. Yeah, I'll watch it ...

... right after I watch the My Pillow Guy's 'documentary' on how the 2020 election was stolen.

[Maraya1969]

20. Spoken like a man. som

[NanceGreggs]

58. No.

Spoken like someone who's looked at the facts - in other words, NOT someone who espouses the idea of "always believe the woman", which is the same as "never believe the man".

The fact that you think that anyone here who holds a different opinion than yours is "speaking like a man" says it all. Your man-hatred is showing - and it is no different than hatred leveled at blacks, Asians, Jews, etc., who shouldn't be trusted because they're "one of 'those' people".

I'm still waiting for you to cite all the allegations of sexual child abuse against Woody Allen - or are you still going with the theory that pedophiles aren't repeat offenders, who often indulge in sexually abusing just one child over the course of a lifetime?

[Dorian Gray]

74. This is not the hill

I'd choose to die on. lol

[Doc Sportello]

107. He may have had sex with Soon-Yi when she was a young as 15

That's sexual abuse. He may have committed offenses against others and they may have not come forward after watching what he did with Mia Farrow. Also, as he admitted he wanted nothing to do with kids. Dating Mia gave him access to many children, maybe for the first time. He took advantage of that opportunity. If you would watch the documentary you could learn some of the facts, while providing none despite your claim to the contrary.

[NanceGreggs]

175. Just because something is ...

... labelled a 'documentary' doesn't make it proven fact.

"He may have had sex ..." Yeah, there's some proven evidence right there.

[Doc Sportello]

179. Sorry you don't get to make claims about facts when you totally ignore them

You've been given numerous factual points about the situation, none of which you address with anything approaching countering facts or even rational discourse. The documentary used court documents, testimony from different court-appointed investigators who found the claims credible, the CT DA who wanted to press charges, family members, neighbors and baby sitters who had seen his weird obsession with Dylan from an early age. And there is the fact that Allen had been Soon-Yi's father figure for about 8 years before he started taking pornographic pictures of her, something he never denied. Meaning he took pron pics of a girl who looked at him as a father and definitely WAS having sex with her at least at age 18 - a girl who had never dated and who came to this country not knowing English and from a very troubled background. Abusers often look for such things.

All of those facts and more have been laid out for you and when asked why you won't watch the doc, you give a smartass reply. The documentary doesn't claim to be proven fact. Only a court can do that, and the courts never absolved Allen as he claimed, but the judge in the custody case - after hearing all of the evidence - wouldn't let Allen see Dylan. The DA didn't prosecute because he was worried about Dylan. The NY investigator was taken off the case after he found the accusations credible.

More facts you ignore. It's funny how you cherry pick which facts to take on and then ignore the voluminous others that don't fit with your apologists perspective. Very strange for a DU member. You mentioned how your mother had many boyfriends while you were growing up. Perhaps your background plays a role in your current antagonism against a victim of abuse and her mother, who you tried to smear the way Allen did. Perhaps you had a nasty divorce. I don't know. But your digging in your heels and your attitude over this is troubling to say the least.

[NanceGreggs]

181. Here are the facts I rely on ...

Woody has only been accused of pedophilia once in his entire lifetime, and the accusation was made by an embittered ex-wife in the midst of a messy divorce.

That ex-wife has a proven history of deceit and lying when it suits her purposes. Allen has no such reputation for dishonesty, and has never been accused of misconduct with any other child.

Dylan has been raised by her mother, and has had no contact with her father for decades now. So naturally, she has only heard her mother's version of events, and assumes her mother's version is the truth.

Pointing to a one-sided, highly biased 'documentary' as proof of anything is naive at best - just like people who have watched 'documentaries' about Trump's stolen election have been taken-in.

You talk about cherry-picking information - and yet that's exactly what this so-called documentary did.

[ShazzieB]

190. If you haven't watched the doc, you're in no position to claim it is or isn't biased.

I get that you believe it's biased, but you simply can't know that about something you haven't seen.

Believe =/= know.

[NanceGreggs]

192. I haven't seen Mark Lindell's ...

... 'documentary' either - and yet I remain unconvinced that Trump won the election by a landslide, and I doubt that seeing his 'documentary' would change my mind.

[pnwmom]

54. I dare you to watch the 2nd episode, where you can see 7 year old Dylan talking,

on videotape, about what Woody had done to her in the attic.

She sounds EXACTLY like what she was -- an un-coached, honest, little 7 year old.

[NanceGreggs]

64. And you discerned ...

... that she wasn't coached based on what?

[pnwmom]

66. It wasn't just me, though I have an 8 year old granddaughter and Dylan,

at age 7, sounded just like what a girl that age would sound like. But besides my gut feeling, there were three disinterested therapists who were asked by the producer to evaluate the videos. And they all gave specific reasons for finding the videos to be un-coached.

For example, most of the time Mia said very little, prompting Dylan in monosyllables. But there was a question she asked her, to which Dylan said NO. No that didn't happen. The therapist said that a coached child would have been much more likely to go along with the suggestion in the question.

But I don't understand why you're not willing to hear the adult Dylan and the 7 year old Dylan and THEN make up your mind. Why you've let Woody convince you not to even given Dylan Farrow a chance.

[NanceGreggs]

67. Woody didn't 'convince' me of anything.

The facts did.

Just because a seven-year-old sounds like other seven-year-olds proves nothing.

"Mia said very little, prompting Dylan in monosyllables." Mia alone had access to the children after she made her accusations. They only heard her version of events pre-trial.

But I appreciate your candour, and your honest attribution to 'gut feeling' - which can often obscure the facts.

I have heard from Dylan, then and now. But to see her as an unbiased witness, when she has only heard her mother's version of events for decades, seems rather naive.

Pedophiles are known repeat offenders - so I ask the question again:

Is it feasible that Allen is a pedophile who has never, ever been accused of such behaviour - other than Mia's accusations - over an entire lifetime? The man has deep pockets - why hasn't anyone launched a multi-million dollar sexual abuse suit against him, especially on the heels of Mia's accusations, which would lend to give them 'public opinion' credence?

Why is Woody Allen automatically the "bad guy" - when it was Farrow who claimed that now-Ronan was Woody's child, and later claimed that he was Sinatra's child? What kind of mother does THAT shit?

I am truly appalled that people here are basing their opinions on a so-called 'documentary' that is nothing more than propaganda advancing an agenda.

[pnwmom]

80. YES. It's very feasible. It's a myth that pedophiles are always repeat offenders.

The pedophiles who are unlucky enough to be caught and prosecuted tend to be the ones who are stupid enough to molest multiple victims. Eventually they get caught because they took too many chances. But a man who molests the same child in his own family for years is more likely to get custody -- on the grounds of parental alienation -- than to go to jail.

In the case of Dylan, the prosecutor said he believed her, based on all the evidence, and he did NOT believe she had been coached. He would have prosecuted Woody except that he thought a trial, where she would have been required to testify, would have been too hard for her.

Personally, I happen to know two people who were molested as children and both times it was by a family member; and in neither case was the person prosecuted. In both cases nobody reported what happened to them to the police (family members aren't required to report.) But the accused also didn't offend again, as far as the victims know. At least, if they did offend again, it never became a public case.

With regard to Dylan, I had made up my mind long ago, based on the complete court transcripts and the interviews with the prosecutor at the time, and Woody's own writing in his defense. Also, based on Ronan Farrow's statements. The documentary covered much of the same territory, but this was the first time I saw little Dylan in person, rather than just reading about what she said in the transcript.

Woody Allen is the bad guy because this isn't about what Farrow, as an adult, did with Sinatra, another adult. It's about what Woody Allen did to Dylan Farrow.

(Also, Dylan doesn't accuse him of being a pedophile. She accuses him of molesting her for years. Not all molesters are pedophiles, much less serial pedophiles. The differences are explained here:

https://www.ojp.gov/pdffiles1/Digitization/149252NCJRS.pdf

[Maraya1969]

90. Ok Jeffery.

[mountain grammy]

95. That's ridiculous and you know it..

Like comparing Biden and Trump what you just did. The HBO doc was well researched and documented...up to their usual high standards and has shown Woody Allen for who he is. The My Pillow guy is, well, the biggest idiot in America and yet here you are equating the two.

You shouldn't even comment here unless you watch the HBO doc cause you really can't intelligently discuss this until you do, and will continue to falsely compare it to an asinine creature who spouts nonsense.

I was uncommitted. In fact, during the whole sordid mess, I tended to side with Woody. I'm embarrassed for that. He put everyone through hell.

[Doc Sportello]

105. Go ahead and maintain your ignorance

It's understandable considering your other posts. Comparing a well-researched, fact-based documentary to a drumpf apologist isn't as bad as your misogynistic posts here but it does explain the thinking behind them. Being an apologist for a child molester is as despicable as anything Lindell has done.

[Mosby]

16. Moses contradicts his sister Dylan about the Woody Allen sexual abuse claims.

Moses has written a weary and disturbing blog about the physical and emotional abuse he says he suffered as a child. But he claims that the abuse came from his mother, Mia Farrow. He says Dylan was not abused by his father, rather that she was coached from a very young age into making these allegations.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/24/farrow-family-truth-trauma-mia-dylan-moses-woody-allen

[Maraya1969]

18. Yes and all the other children say Moses is lying. And Ronan Farrow said that

Woody Allen told him that he would pay for all his schooling and finance him if he, Ronan would come out against Mia in support of Allen

It is not suggested that Moses has been given money to say these things but if Allen offered it to one of his sons it is not hard to believe he offered it to another son.

[gldstwmn]

42. I'll say it. He took the money.

[shrike3]

115. I agree. I'm sure he did.

[Doc Sportello]

104. Have you seen the documentary?

As it points out, Moses said something completely different at the time. That is in court documents. All of his many siblings also contradict his current claims about his mother, and he refused to be interviewed for this series. Ronan Farrow told how Allen offered to pay for his college if Ronan would make the same claims Moses has made. Those facts are much more compelling than a blog post from someone who may have been made the same kind of financial incentives Ronan was.

It's also telling that Allen arranged and was there during Soon-Yi's big article interview a few years ago. Allen groomed Farrow's children like Moses, Dylan and Soon-Yi, the latter of whom he may have been involved with sexually as young as 15 according to doormen who told about her coming to see him at his apartment unaccompanied; that was years before Mia found pornographic pictures of her in his apartment when she was 18 and had never even dated a boy up until that time. Again, I urge you and others who are trying to do a 'he said, she said' out of this to watch a well-researched, fact based documentary told with many different viewpoints. Those include a DA who wanted to charge Allen, state abuse investigators who were silenced by higher-ups, and baby sitters who witnessed Allen's bizarre obsession with Dylan from a very young age, a fact that caused her to hide from him when he came to visit.

[gldstwmn]

214. He took the money.

[Maraya1969]

29. I am really disgusted by some of the men's behavior on this thread. They didn't

watch the documentary, which you explained was an actual well done documentary from HBO. Maybe they don't have HBO - then they should just keep quiet until they learn more.

[mountain grammy]

97. Agree!

[ShazzieB]

191. Yes!

Some of these posts are really disturbing.

[Doc Sportello]

109. It is disgusting and more evidence of why Allen got away with it

When you see the responses here it tells you why victims of abuse don't want to come forward. They get trashed with what-aboutism, he-said-she-said, and mockery of claims. Misogyny is alive and well including on DU.

[shrike3]

116. I didn't watch the documentary. But here's what always bothered me. Woody appealed the custody

decision all the way up to the NY Supreme Court. He lost. I can accept one judge being in Farrow's pocket. But the whole judiciary? I have a friend who was accused by his ex of molesting his daughter. He demanded, and got, supervised visitation. He was later cleared of the charges and got joint custody. My friend is not a rich and famous guy. Woody is a rich and famous guy. If he was "exonerated" like he says he was, why didn't he at least get supervised visits?

[Maraya1969]

17. You obviously did not watch the documentary. There were plenty of people who

saw Allen's behavior toward his daughter and thought it to be extremely unnatural - including the judge.

And you missed one special person who accused Woody Allen of sexualy abusing his daughter besides Mia Farrow --------

HIS FUCKING DAUGHTER ACCUSED HIM OF SEXUALLY ABUSING HER!!!!!!


TO THIS DAY SHE SAYS IT HAPPENED.

You really need to watch the documentary.

[NanceGreggs]

19. Have you watched the My Pillow Guy's documentary ...

... about how the 2020 election was stolen? It must be true, because there's a 'documentary' about it.

[Maraya1969]

21. You really think your comment is so witty that you need to repeat it twice?

Go ahead and alert me on this. I don't care.

[NanceGreggs]

22. Alert on you for what?

If you want to believe that all 'documentaries' are the unvarnished truth presented without bias, you're free to do so.

[Maraya1969]

26. Thank you for mansplaining this case of a pedophile to us, especially when

you know nothing about the facts. You refuse to watch the documentary just like a republican refuses to see evidence that trump is a sociopath.

You didn't see the therapists reports, the prosecutors reason why he didn't bring a suit against Allen, (hint; it wasn't because he didn't believe abuse took place - he was afraid of what little Dylan would go through in the media circus trial.

You didn't see the numerous witnesses to Alen's behavior. Or even the bellhop's witnesses to Soon-Yi's visits to him while she was still a minor in high school.

But go ahead with your he man woman hating club. Because it is just so attractive and so necessary in today's world that is so hard on men.

[Jakes Progress]

39. Heed your own mantra.

You attack with the phrase "watch the documentary" over and over and over.

When it was pointed out to you that all documentaries are biased, and that you might come to believe trump if you watched the pillow guy's "documentary", you blew off your own advice. Why do you think the documentary you watched is complete and fair while discounting the pillow guy? If Woody finances a documentary about Mia that exposes her as a fraud and pervert, would you decide that it was true because it was in a documentary. You need to watch documentaries the same way you should read the news or watch the network's version of current events. Who has what to gain. They don't make these things and put them on television because they are altruistic. Don't be naive.

I'm not going to watch a film made by one side of the argument that was produced simply for the ratings that come from broadcasting prurient and sensational stories about famous people. It has a built in audience that likes that kind of thing.

I have no idea about the truth of this story. You don't either. I've gone both ways over the years. I'm currently leaning toward Moses and his story. He had the least to gain by telling his side. I've also read Soon-Ye's version of things. Did you documentary talk about that? Or just Mia's side. Allen and Soon-Ye have been married longer than Mia ever was. And not once in the intervening years - or in those preceding the "event" has Allen been charged with or accused of molestation. Do a little research about child molestation. It may take a little more effort than watching a film, but it may help you see the problems with your "black and white" version of things.

Hey. Allen is a weird, creepy dude. He could have done it . And Farrow is a truly disturbed and creepy woman. She could have done all this for spite. You have your views about the story based on a few hours in front of the television. I have no idea what went down. But, without even trying, I've read and seen more about the case that you have. Don't blow off Nance because you disagree. You don't have the inside track on any of this.

[Maraya1969]

89. The documentary showed actual documents. Including therapist reports and

police reports and trial transcripts. Even the prosecutor that decided not to bring charges was interviewed today and met with Dylan Farrow and all that was filmed. He was very torn about not bringing charges on Allen but he was afraid that because Dylan was so fragile by then that she would be destroyed by the trial. And knowing how Allen worked by then you can see why.

Oh and there is a lot of phone calls tapes by Farrow with Allen being threatening and manipulative.

Did they fake all that? And they showed Allen's responses to the media and Allen refused to take part in the film.

[Treefrog]

99. Why are you so wrapped up in this case to the point that you're using personal insults toward

a poster who simply has a different point of view than yours? I’ve noticed several here seem to resort to personal attacks when their point of view is challenged, but insulting someone will not win you an argument.

[Maraya1969]

101. It happened to me. And to many others. And we know more than most what

goes on.

[mountain grammy]

102. A different point of view based on thin air..

and Woody himself who had everything to lose. No this isn't about winning an argument. This is about a creepy pedophile who's wealth and fame bought him out of it.

Hie's a monster. Personally, I'm for insulting and arresting pedophiles and shaming those who defend them when they refuse to look at the other side, which was well documented and credible.

[Treefrog]

123. I still don't get how calling another poster on a Democratic board a 'republican' or 'trumplike'

does anything to bolster a person’s argument.

[bigtree]

129. +1000

...used to be a rule that ops shouldn't be designed to stifle debate or dissent.

Definitely some cheap shots and trashing of posters with different views here, on a charge which hasn't been adjudicated outside of a nondescript custody order, and a one-sided docutorial.

'Mansplaining' was definitely the most interesting one.

[Jakes Progress]

187. Try to be a little more critical in your thinking

about a subject that you seem very close to.

That "documentary" did not prove anything. As you said. Allen was not part of the film. His side was not presented. Nor did they interview any of the dozens of people who have spoken about how manipulative and controlling Mia Farrow is. I've read interviews with people in her building that do not make her the delicate, perfect mother that this film portrays.

I, too, have some experience with this kind of thing. Working in the education dept. of a criminal psych ward, my experience is that child molesters are not "cured" . They are the embodiment of repeat offenders.

Do I know what happened? Nope. Do you? Nope. There are more immediate matters upon which to exhaust your empathy and emotional energy.

[shrike3]

128. Moses likely got money and help from Woody. I remember all of a sudden when Moses came on Woody's

side and was a "budding photographer," touted by Woody's spokesman.

[Jakes Progress]

157. Got evidence?

Of course, If the only thing you need is stories from one side, that does save time.

Look. I don't care. I wasn't there. You weren't there. They are both creepy people. A lot of emotional investment in something we don't know about instead of things we do - like ripping babies from their mothers and throwing them in cages. How about a "documentary" on that?

[shrike3]

158. Well, we kind of have Moses' words. He's all about his mother for so long, then all of a sudden --

gee, what changed? Do you have evidence for the contrary?

If you don't care, why are you responding?

[Jakes Progress]

186. Gee. What a telling argument.

So much evidence and so concrete. I mean, if you think that he was supporting his mother and then "all of a sudden." Golly. How profound.

Yes, we have Moses' words. His words are that Woody didn't do it. But then, you like his other words. Not these words. I guess that's all there is to it. (When you get called for jury duty, tell them how you found this to be solid evidence of guilt. No chance you will be selected.)

I particularly like your defense of your statement that consists of ducking the idea of evidence to support your idea, and demanding that I show evidence. Sort of the same thing that republicans used to defend Kavanaugh.

My response is to the sloppy thinking that goes into falling for a sensationalist documentary that was designed to grab the low hanging ratings fruit from lazy thinkers. I see the same thing when anti-abortion people show fake pictures and images of "LIVE CRYING BABIES RIPPED FROM MOTHERS" to high school kids. The kids get all up in arms about the horrible people killing babies.

People saw a one-sided show that omitted evidence and relied on sensationalist stories for which there is no evidence and fell for it. I despair of us getting rid of the lying republicans is so many here fall for that kind of trash.

[shrike3]

201. Um, Woody's camp was given the opportunity to participate. The producers recently offered to

record a fifth episode giving Woody's side of the story. No response.

Here's some free advice: defending Woody isn't exactly a good use of your time.

[Jakes Progress]

204. Who says?

You mean the people that put the one-sided production together? They said they sought Allen's input and you believed them just as you swallowed their sensationalist tripe.

Let's see. A group working hand in hand with a crazy ex-wife says they want you to say something they can edit and change all they want and you decide that you won't play that game. I guess that makes you smart rather than guilty.

There is plenty of "evidence" exonerating Allen that doesn't have to have him speaking or lending credibility to a sleazy hit job. This group chose to ignore it. I put evidence in quotes because all if it is just as legitimate as the "evidence" the film producers chose to use.

Here's some free advice to you too: falling for sleazy sensationalism and making it a part of your personal mission is not a good use of your time. I'm not defending Allen. Again. I don't know what happened. Again. You don't know what happened. You have made a stupid bit of celebrity fluff your reason for existence.

I'm not defending Allen. I'm saying that Democrats don't need to fall for the same sloppy, knee jerk kind of reporting that enthralls republicans who fall for one sided and incomplete stories about immigration, guns, Christmas, and a host of other lies designed to get ratings. I'm defending thinking.

[shrike3]

205. Somehow I have the sense you're a guy.

https://www.esquire.com/entertainment/a35863925/allen-v-farrow-masculinity-believe-women/

Though I found the documentary less than perfect (read Sophie Gilbert on The Atlantic for an excellent assessment of the series’ blindspots), watching Dylan relive her trauma in interview after interview filled me with shame. And Allen’s words–his own words, from his 2020 audiobook narration, and from recorded phone conversations between the director and Farrow–are enough to make anyone recoil. The way he so plainly describes how he and Soon-Yi had been “just been going through the motions” for years prior to their first kiss, despite the young woman, who’d never had a serious relationship or father figure, who may or may not have even been 21 at the time, being Farrow’s adopted daughter.

I deserve to feel ashamed for how I used to think about Woody Allen. It was almost ten years ago, but I’d defended him. More than shame, though, the haunting experience of watching Allen v. Farrow makes me understand that the question of whether or not you believe Allen abused Dylan Farrow has nothing to do, really, with Woody Allen. It’s not really about Dylan Farrow, either–though she certainly deserves to be validated after all the decades of trauma she’s suffered. It's something about the way Allen defends himself on a 60 Minutes interview, saying, "Be logical about this. I'm 57. Isn't it illogical that I'm going to pick this moment in my life to become a child molester?" And he goes on to insist, "if I wanted to be a child molester, I had many opportunities in the past." It’s something about us–about men and how we are raised to view women. It’s that unspoken agreement we have when all the women leave the table, when we’re a few drinks in, when we nod our heads around that word we use so much to describe them. Crazy.

[Jakes Progress]

208. So all men are despicable?

And all women virtuous truth tellers who never operate with ulterior motives?

You've really let this twist you up. Don't let the media dangle and play with you.

I never said Allen was a saint. I never even said he was decent. I never even said he was innocent.

I said you can't know from a piece of biased and slanted reporting that omitted anything that would disprove or even question their narrative. You've been had.

[NanceGreggs]

40. So now I'm 'mansplaining' ...

... and I'm 'just like a Republican' because I don't agree with your opinion.

We all know that pedophiles are repeat offenders - and yet no one has ever accused Woody of abusing a child, other than his ex-wife in the midst of a knock-down-drag-out divorce.

Is Woody Allen some kind of unique pedophile who only acted on his urges once in his entire life - never before, and never since?

I followed this case in all its gory details when it first hit the news, because I was a long-time fan of both Woody and Mia. Maybe you can womansplain how being a 'pedophile' is something that only allegedly manifests itself once once in a man's lifetime.

I brought up Mike Lindell's 'documentary' because people who have seen it have claimed that it makes it so obvious that the election was stolen. Labeling something a 'documentray' doesn't make its content true.

[7wo7rees]

57. Hey Nance. My father sexually abused me starting at 11.

My mother believed him.

As far as I know he never abused any of my friends. He did however work many late nights and weekends.
There are many pictures of him at work with subordinates sitting in his lap.

I also had strict rules re the time he spent with my daughter and my mother.

Nance, this time, imho, i think possibly you should take a mea culpa.

[NanceGreggs]

62. No mea culpas here.

Woody Allen has a much higher public profile than your dad. I'm assuming that he also has deeper pockets, and an accusation against him could lead to great monetary gain.

And yet not a single accusation has surfaced, other than Mia Farrow's.

[shrike3]

124. My friend was accused by his ex of abusing their daughter. He went to court for, and obtained,

supervised visits. The accusations were eventually proven false and he was given joint custody. My friend is not rich and famous. Woody is rich and famous. He appealed the custody arrangement all the way to the NY Supreme Court. He lost. If he was "exonerated," like he's always said, why wasn't he at least given supervised visits? I can accept one judge being in Farrow's pocket. But the whole judiciary?

[shrike3]

119. Yeah, I'd say you're mansplaining.

[Johnny2X2X]

25. The documentary was extremely one sided

Not fair at all. It was bordering on propaganda how they tried to make Woody’s films as evidence he’s a pedophile because they often had themes of an older man and a younger woman.

But I don’t know what to think. Allen seems creepy, but there was no evidence other than the word of a little girl who a judge thought was coached.

[Maraya1969]

27. You didn't watch the documentary either. Because the judge never said she was coached.

[pnwmom]

75. Did you watch all 4 episodes? It seems you can't have because there was a mountain

of evidence besides 7 year old Dylan's statement. And the judge who heard her custody case said she was NOT coached. And there wasn't only her word. A visitor to the house that day -- another family's nanny -- testified in court that she'd come upon Woody kneeling in front of Dylan with his face in her lap.

And even if you hadn't watched the documentary, this case has been investigated and reinvestigated. Dylan herself has written very persuasively about it, and each time she does, reporters have gone back into the full court trial transcript -- and it is damning. And it's why Woody lost his bid for custody.

In the 4th episode of the documentary, the CT prosecutor affirms that he always believed Dylan, and the only thing that kept him from prosecuting is that he would have had to put 7 year old Dylan on the stand, and he thought it would be too hard on her.

[Johnny2X2X]

86. I did watch it, and I followed the case when it broke 25 years ago.

I'm not going to defend Woody, but that documentary doesn't tell the story even close to fairly. Two separate groups of experts said the abuse didn't take place. This documentary was sensationalized.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woody_Allen_sexual_abuse_allegation#:~:text=In%20August%201992%2C%20American%20filmmaker,has%20repeatedly%20denied%20the%20allegation.

[Doc Sportello]

108. I guess you missed the parts where the doc dealt with those experts

And told how those who did believe the allegations were silenced. And the part where NY state investigators found the charges credible but were silenced by higher-ups. And the part where the Connecticut DA wanted to file charges but didn't out of concern for Dylan. Calling it sensationalized shows the kind of bias you claim they had. I guess you think Ronan Farrow's articles about Weinstein and other abusers were sensationalized and his accusers were coached and lying too.

[Johnny2X2X]

111. Why bring Weinstein into it, he has nothing to do with this case.

The New York State Child Welfare investigated this too for 14 months and came to the same conclusion that the Yale group did.

This miniseries was manipulative, it was easy to pick out their agenda and that agenda wasn't to present a story unbiasedly at all. And painting Mia Farrow as some powerless victim was off too, she's worth $60 Million, she had her own high powered team of attorneys too.

Did Woody molest Dylan? I don't know, but I know when I'm viewing something dishonest, and the filmmakers for this series presented this in a way that was dishonest.

This documentary told 1 side of a contentious story, and only 1 side. And DAs always want to bring charges, that's their job. No court ever found there was abuse, even the custody hearing that is pointed to, the judge rejected the allegation of sexual abuse. That judge also said Mia's filming of her child making the accusations actually hurt the investigation.

Not going to go over every detail, because Woody Allen is still a creep for dating and marrying his step daughter and doesn't deserve an advocate IMO, but this documentary was not fair regarding potential abuse and everyone is owed fairness.

[Doc Sportello]

122. Good grief, it's an obvious connection and your claim about the investigations is false

Dylan Farrow wrote the New Yorker article about Weinstein, a powerful abuser of women who got away with it because of his power in Hollywood. The connection between Allen's power in Hollywood and New York was made throughout the doc. Farrow is Dylan Farrows sister. I assume you understand that connection. He said he didn't want to know about the abuse but when he did start to look at the facts such as court documents he began to believe her. He has total credibility as a journalist, except with you apparently.

Just like the filmmakers who spent three years researching and presenting those facts, which you choose to toss off with a shrug and say they are dishonest, with no proof whatsoever, just your intuition.

And no the NY state investigators did not come to the conclusion that there was no abuse. The main investigator who did find evidence of abuse was overruled by higher-ups. Apparently you missed that part, or did not watch the doc at all, or are being as dishonest as you claim the filmmakers are.

[pnwmom]

168. The judge did not reject the allegation of sexual abuse. He denied Woody custody and even visitation

because of his behavior with Dylan.

I can understand why someone decades ago might have thought the truth was difficult to discern. But with the whole court transcript public, and all the witnesses in the house that day (who testified in the trial), and Dylan an adult now, able to speak for herself, I can't understand why anyone wouldn't believe her.

[pnwmom]

167. Thank you for his good summary! nt

[Doc Sportello]

170. Thanks

I can't believe some of the posts here. I read an interview with the filmmakers today. They had the same impressions about the case as I did and I would say most people did. They thought it was a he said, she said thing and - just like Ronan - as they researched the court cases, and investigators' testimonies they realized Allen had done a great PR job of framing the narrative when the facts told a different story. I'm just glad it is getting out there now, no matter how some want to still whitewash it.

[pnwmom]

184. Several years ago I read the complete trial transcript, and that's when I made up my mind.

And now we can see the actual tapes of little Dylan. How anyone can still be on team Woody is beyond me.

[pnwmom]

166. Enough time has passed that the documentary only has to tell the truth. And the truth

is clearly on Dylan's side.

The Yale New Haven doctors only issued a report, but refused to allow its doctors to testify for the record in court -- and destroyed all its notes and videos of Dylan. So their report is WORTHLESS.

[USALiberal]

76. You KNOW the documentary is 100% accurate??? No!! Nt

[themaguffin]

172. People should NOT make judgements based on a one sided documentary.

[pnwmom]

32. No, his daughter made the accusation herself, as an adult, and so has Ronan Farrow,

her brother, who was there.

Also his current wife, Mia's adopted daughter, was still a teenager when he started to secretly date her. That in itself was a violation of trust.

[NanceGreggs]

43. Soon-yi herself stated ...

... that she was 21 when her affair with Woody began.

As for Dylan and Ronan, they grew up only with their mother's version of events. Therefore, it is understandable that they would accept her version without question - just as most children would.

What about the 'violation of trust' when Mia started an affair with the then-married Andre Previn? Or the 'violation of trust' when Mia declared that Ronan wasn't Woody's child, but was the result of an affair with Frank Sinatra while she was married to Woody, but passed the child off as Allen's?

[pnwmom]

45. Weren't you seven years old yourself? I have very clear memories at that age.

This isn't about recovered memories. Dylan has been saying the same things, to therapists and others, since she was 7 years old. What she said at 7 is why Allen lost his custody suit. The judge believed her.

I can't understand why EVERYONE doesn't believe her now. And it's not just Dylan. Ronan was a witness to some of this, too.

When I referred to violation of trust, I was referring to Allen's violating Soon-yi's trust. He was a father figure in her life, and took advantage of that.

I don't believe Soon-yi, who is still married to Allen. She's protecting her husband. Mia found the nude photos of Soon Yi in Jan. 1992, seven months after Soon-yi had graduated from high school. Ever since then, Soon Yi and Allen say their sexual relationship only began a month earlier. What a crock. They couldn't deny it once those photos came out, so they said it had just started.

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/tv/story/2021-02-21/woody-allen-mia-farrow-dylan-farrow-allegations-timeline-hbo#:~:text=December%201991%3A%20Allen%20adopts%20Dylan,with%20Soon%2DYi%2C%2021.

https://screenrant.com/allen-v-farrow-woody-soon-yi-relationship-age-explained/

Allen v. Farrow features testimony from individuals who claim the sexual relationship started when Soon-Yi was still in high school. On Aug. 17, 1992 Allen publically proclaimed his love for Soon-Yi amidst allegations that he had sexually molested Dylan on Aug. 4.

[NanceGreggs]

49. And we all know ...

... that a seven-year-old cannot be manipulated into believing that an event happened after they've been told repeatedly that it did happen - right?

"Testimony from individuals who 'claim' the relationship started when Soon-yi was in high school" - were they present when this happened? Were they in the room when it occurred?

People 'claim' all kinds of things - that doesn't make them true.

[Maraya1969]

92. Thou protest too much.

[ShazzieB]

194. Seriously.

Some of the comments in here are making me want to scream, not because I don't agree with them but because some of them are so rude and snarky and condescending. I haven't tried to argue much, because I can see hw futile it would be, but Oh. My. God.

As I know you can tell,, I'm Team Dylan, not just because "I saw a documentary," but because the documentary I saw was full of utterly compelling information and documentation. I'm not interested in having some patronizing mansplainer attack my critical thinking skills (which, incidentally, are very, very good, thank you very much), so I'm not going to bother trying to change anyone's mind.

[betsuni]

48. +1

[betsuni]

34. +1

[Dorian Gray]

71. Nope

don't find it amazing at all.

Allen's entire oeuvre fetishizes younger women.

It's his Raison d'arte.

Because Mia was in his art, she may have been blind to it until she wasn't.

You don't engage in a relationship with a child (and marry her) you've known for your whole life as a stepchild unless you have a sordid fetish that you can't control.

[USALiberal]

77. LOL, you mean "Raison d'etre"???

[Dorian Gray]

82. Lol. No I didn't.

It was a play on words. Done purposefully. I know what raison d’etre is.

He was making films. The arts. Hence the pun. Sorry I had to spell it out. Didn’t think it was that tough to see the pun.

[USALiberal]

88. Nice try! Nt

[Maraya1969]

93. Let me guess. Another man.

[Dorian Gray]

150. At what?

[BannonsLiver]

112. Another takeaway from the series is Mia is a total whack job.

[Crunchy Frog]

165. May very well be. Still does nothing to exonerate Allen.

She could be Satan incarnate and it wouldn't make a difference.

And BTW, I haven't seen the documentary. I came to my own conclusions a long time ago, and haven't seen any evidence to make me question those conclusions.

[shrike3]

113. Uh, it was kind of like the child that accused him. Oh, and Mia's daughter is just a younger woman?

I don't know if you're male or female. But I'm sure, if you discovered your adult child was sleeping with your significant other, you'd say, "Oh, you crazy kids. Go, with my blessing." Yeah. Sure you would.

I don't know if Woody molested Dylan or not. But I sure as hell don't blame Mia for being outraged. Women have killed their partners for less than that. He actually got lucky.

[lagomorph777]

133. It looks like Mia can't stop taking vengeance for him leaving.

I don't think her story ever held water.

[shrike3]

135. She's kind of entitled to some vengeance.

He f*cked her daughter. Tell me about all the women you know who'd be cool with that.

That said, I don't know if he abused Dylan and I don't think he'll ever know.

[lagomorph777]

136. She's letting him live in her head rent-free forever.

She's wrecking her own life.

[shrike3]

139. She's got kids, grandchildren, money. How is she wrecking her life? She certainly didn't ruin

Woody's life. He's got plenty of supporters, including men on this board, has had plenty of awards, accolades since the incident happened. He took her daughter away from her. She'll never see Soon-Yi again. Tell me about all the women in your life who'd be able to "move on," and be cool after all this.

[lagomorph777]

140. After 25 years, her entire life is built around vengeance. That is not healthy.

Money can't make up for the misery she lives inside her head.

Resentment is like taking poison and expecting the other person to die.

[shrike3]

145. Her entire life is built around vengeance?????

Farrow became a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador in 2000 and is a high-profile advocate for human rights in Africa, particularly for children's rights. She has worked to raise funds and awareness for children in conflict-affected regions and to draw attention to the fight to eradicate polio.[3] Farrow has received several awards for her humanitarian work[117][118] including the Leon Sullivan International Service award,[119] the Lyndon Baines Johnson Moral Courage Award[120] and the Marion Anderson Award.[121] In 2006, Farrow and her son Ronan visited Berlin in order to participate in a charity auction of United Buddy Bears, which feature designs by artists representing 142 U.N. member states.[122] In 2008, Time magazine named her one of the most influential people in the world.[123][1]

She has traveled to Darfur several times for humanitarian efforts, first in 2004.[124] Her third trip was in 2007, with a film crew engaged in making the documentary Darfur: On Our Watch.[125] The same year, she co-founded the Olympic Dream for Darfur campaign, which drew attention to China's support for the government of Sudan. The campaign hoped to change China's policy by embarrassing it in the run-up to the 2008 Summer Olympics held in Beijing. In March 2007, China said it would urge Sudan to engage with the international community. The campaign persuaded Steven Spielberg to withdraw as an artistic adviser to the opening ceremony. During the Olympics, Farrow televised via the internet from a Sudanese refugee camp to highlight China's involvement in the region.[126]


Farrow speaking to a European Union Force Chad soldier in Darfur, 2008
Later in 2007, Farrow offered to "trade her freedom" for the freedom of a humanitarian worker for the Sudan Liberation Army who was being treated in a UN hospital while under threat of arrest. She wanted to be taken captive in exchange for his being allowed to leave the country.[127] Farrow is also a board member of the Washington, D.C. based non-profit Darfur Women Action Group (DWAG).[128]

In 2009, Farrow narrated a documentary, As We Forgive, relating the struggle of many of the survivors of the Rwandan genocide to forgive those who murdered family and friends.[129] To show "solidarity with the people of Darfur" Farrow began a water-only fast on April 27, 2009.[130] Farrow's goal was to fast for three weeks, but she called a halt after twelve days on the advice of her doctor.[131] In August 2010, she testified in the trial against former Liberian President Charles Taylor in the Special Court for Sierra Leone.[132]

Farrow helped build The Darfur Archives, which document the cultural traditions of the tribes of Darfur.[133] She has filmed some 40 hours of songs, dances, children's stories, farming methods and accounts of genocide in the region's refugee camps that make up the current archives.[134] Since 2011, the Archives have been housed at the Thomas J. Dodd Research Center at the University of Connecticut.[135] In 2013, Farrow criticized President Barack Obama for his lack of address regarding Sudanese genocide during a United Nations General Assembly.[134] In February 2015, Farrow appeared in an episode of A Path Appears, a PBS documentary series from the creators of the Half the Sky movement. In the episode Farrow travels to Kibera, Kenya's largest slum, to share stories from organizations providing education to at-risk girls.[136][137]

Farrow has also participated in environmental activism, in 2014 protesting against Chevron, accusing the oil company of environmental damage in the South American rainforest.[138]

Oh yeah. Vengeance.

[Beaverhausen]

138. I'm guessing you didn't watch the HBO documentary

This was hardly a case of a scorned wife trying to get back at her cheating husband.

The judge in the case said no such thing. In fact in both cases- the abuse case and the custody case.

Mia got custody and the the judge in the abuse case said he didn't want to put Dylan through the trial.

The judge and Dylan recently met to discuss it.

You should watch the documentary. It's very revealing.

[Lucinda]

149. +1

[jeffreyi]

189. Agree.

I am watching the first episode now. It's just a hit job, in my opinion. I don't care one way or another, really, but this piece is very manipulative. Reading a bit on the case, well I won't even go there, the curious can look it up same as I did. Nothing was ever proven, it was investigated (a lot), lie detector tests taken and passed (by Allen, Farrow did not take one), yada yada and so forth. And there is no track record of any bad behavior towards children, before "the day", or since. So I am not won over.

[Doc Sportello]

9. Was going to post something saying pretty much the same thing

Dylan Farrow in the film at age 7 had me in tears with her little pained voice saying "I don't want to talk about it anymore." And then to see her emerging triumphant over this little sick shit at the end had me tearing up again. I too loved Woody Allen for years and didn't know the details of the episode - in large part because Allen and his enablers in the Hollywood community, and his legal and publicity teams tried to destroy Mia Farrow to save his sorry ass with their full-out media assault. So it was also good to see that many actresses and actors have now turned on him. I just wish they and we had known more of this before but you can't blame Mia Farrow or little Dylan for wanting it to go away.

There are many to blame but the one who surely deserves shunning if he can't be prosecuted is Allen. He was a child molester who got away with it thanks to his power and the special privilege that our society has given to powerful men like him and Weinstein and drumpf, and the rest of their disgusting lot. He has destroyed so many people in so many ways. And for those who haven't seen the documentary series, it wasn't told from the Farrow point of view as some argue. It was the product of three years of research and unearthed facts that were unknown publicly or twisted in his favor at the time, and included outside unbiased professionals from the time as well as eyewitnesses to his other inappropriate behavior.

The only good thing is Dylan is now a mom and children's book author who I believe will know happiness in the future while Allen will die before long being shunned by the world whose approval he craves so much.

[mountain grammy]

103. Well said, thank you.

[ShazzieB]

195. Excellent summation.

[Faux pas]

15. Kickin' with disgust!

And

[dlk]

24. Allen was friends with Jeffrey Epstein

Birds of a feather...

[TexasBushwhacker]

35. And his romance with Mariel Hemingway"s character in

Manhattan was based on a real affair he had with a 16:year old actress before the film. When I thought it was fiction, and I was a teenager, I enjoyed it. Now it's just the story of an aging narcissist who's less mature than his 16 year old girlfriend. Ugh

[dlk]

118. He makes my skin crawl

Its so glaringly obvious what he is. He didn't attend Jeffrey Epstein's parties just for the cocktails. When someone shows you who they really are, believe them the first time...

[TexasBushwhacker]

163. Yeah, Mariel said that after they shot Manhattan

he came out to her family's home in Idaho, to convince her parents to let her go to Paris with him. She felt kind of creeped out about it and wanted he parents to say NO, but they encouraged her to go. She was 17, maybe 18..

He stayed overnight at the house and she got up in the wee hours and woke him up. "I'm not getting my own room in Paris, am I?" He said nothing. "I can't go to Paris with you."

He left on his private jet the next morning.

She said Robert De Niro and Bob Fosse hit on her too.

[dlk]

164. Not surprising

I think young women in Hollywood often get hit on or worse, sadly.

[andym]

28. What do you think of Hadley Freeman's critique of the docuseries in the Guardian?

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2021/mar/03/allen-v-farrow-woody-allen-mia-farrow-documentary-is-pure-pr-why-else-would-it-omit-so-much

I think it's worth reading if only to get some perspective in deciding what we think happened, as it tries to counter the series:
Here are some of the criticisms from the article:

"Allen v Farrow is pure PR. Why else would it omit so much?"
Subtitle: "The new HBO documentary in which Mia and Dylan Farrow revisit their 1992 allegation against Woody Allen claims to be an even-handed investigation. But its failure to present the facts makes it feel more like activism"
Hadley Freeman March 3, 2021

"One of those hard questions, which Ziering and Dick work very hard not to answer, could be: is it really reasonable to mention Allen alongside Cosby – and Jackson, Epstein, Harvey Weinstein and other celebrity predators – when the latter have all been charged or convicted of multiple crimes going back decades, and Allen was accused of one incident and not only never convicted but never even charged, and there has never been a hint of scandal around him since? Given how much sterling work Ronan has done in exposing Weinstein and other compulsive predators, you’d think he might ask himself that question, but apparently not. Ziering and Dick seem similarly certain of their case, but it’s hard to believe they have so much faith in it when they omit so many relevant details.

For example, despite the documentary’s claim to go beyond “the tip of the iceberg”, it never finds time to get into the testimonies of Monica Thompson, Dylan’s nanny, who was very much on the surface of the iceberg. Initially Thompson told police that Farrow was “a good mother,” but then retracted it, saying she felt she had to say it or “I would lose my job.” She then gave two sworn affidavits that Farrow had tried to force her into supporting the molestation charge, and said that Allen “was always the better parent and all the things Farrow is saying about him are not true”.

It does, however, have the space to include a New York Times reporter mournfully announcing that he can never watch a Woody Allen film again, which is truly a game-changer of a revelation. The series works very hard to discredit the Yale New Haven investigation and the Farrows dismiss the report’s finding that Dylan had “trouble distinguishing between fantasy and reality”, putting this down to strangers not understanding Dylan’s references. The film-makers don’t include the testimony from Dylan’s own therapist at the time, Dr Nancy Schulz, who said that Farrow and Allen first asked her to treat Dylan because the child “lived in her own fantasy world”.

Dr Susan Coates, another one of the family’s many psychologists, testified that a 1990 evaluation found that Dylan was easily “taken over by fantasy”, even when asked to describe a tree...."

----
Copyright law prevents including the rest of the article, but it's certainly worth reading after watching the documentary.
----
Here is an article about whether Allen has abused his two adopted daughters with Soon-Yi:
https://pagesix.com/article/lives-of-woody-allen-sun-yi-previns-daughers-bechet-manzie/

After reading the counterarguments, if you still want to kick Mr. Allen in his privates as your op suggests-- well he's 85, so you would probably be able to do it should you meet him, though apparently his wife Soon-Yi is very protective of him and might counterattack.

[Maraya1969]

33. He was pretty obviously with his wife when she was in high school. The Doormen

at his building say they saw he coming there while she was in high school close by. He is 35-37 years older than her. She never even had a boyfriend. Woody was her only one.

There were several nannies interviews and they all jived with what Dylan said.

And you are basically saying that you do not believe a woman who said she was molested by her father and still says that all these years later.

That is what you are saying.

[andym]

47. I didn't state my conclusion because I haven't found the evidence conclusive

but I did link to information counter to the documentary that I recently saw. That article actually changed my mind about the documentary as it raised sufficient doubt in my mind for me to be unable to determine what really happened. You clearly dismiss the counter information.

IMO, the possibility of false or implanted memories can not easily be discounted, as it has been well documented to be possible even in adults.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory_syndrome is actually a serious issue that has already been documented to lead to misleading testimonies in many cases.

The existence of this phenomenon makes it difficult to actually prosecute the truly guilty-- typically one of the keys to determining what happened is repeat behavior by the offender, or even better having credible witnesses.

[Johnny2X2X]

126. That's where I'm at too

There isn't conclusive evidence.

Listen, Woody and Mia are both not really worthy of sympathy, but the truth is always worthy of being told objectively. This documentary obviously didn't even try to do that.

Is Woody worth defending? No, I think he's a creep at minimum and he may in fact have done what he's accused of, so Fuck Woody Allen. But this documentary was simply not fair as it told only 1 side of the story and either omitted or warped anything that didn't fit the narrative they were going for.

When I watched the first couple episodes and they started to try to tie the themes of his films into him being a pedophile, my BS meter went off, and I did some reading. The entire thing was slanted to paint Woody as some all powerful icon and Mia as some broke housewife. They are both worth more money than most people can imagine.

Dylan as an adult is convincing and deserves to be heard and have compassion shown to her. But I can do that without falling for this docuseries and its obvious bias.

[shrike3]

130. The Guardian has been running "Woody is innocent" articles for years.

I wonder if they're all by her, or if others get involved. I didn't pay attention to the bylines. But every now and then they run one. They also gave Moses a platform for his allegations.

[Treefrog]

100. I think that you mean to write "jibed."

[pnwmom]

37. This piece is garbage. Dylan was 7 years old when all this started. At the time,

I remember thinking, someday we'll know the truth because she'll grow up and she can tell us.

And she DID grow up and we should damn well listen. And her brother Ronan, who was in the house for some key incidents (Moses was not) remembers it, too.

So I don't care what some reporter from Britain thinks. The papers in CT in the ensuing decade did a much better, much more thorough job of covering the story.

How anyone can not believe Dylan and Ronan NOW is beyond me.

[andym]

50. A 7 year old as well as an adult can be convinced to believe false memories

There is a psychological phenomenon called false memory syndrome. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory_syndrome

Some 7 year-old's testified in the Little Rascal DayCare Scandal if I remember, there memories were implanted as children testified to fantastic occurrences. Still the defendants were all found guilty and sentenced to long prison terms, which were eventually overturned.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/innocence/etc/sum.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Rascals_day_care_sexual_abuse_trial

[pnwmom]

51. False memory syndrome is related to RECOVERED memories. She had no recovered memory therapy.

She told her mother what had happened right after it occurred when she was 7. And the next day she told the doctor, who called the police. She's been telling the same story ever since.

And there were witnesses to other events. Her brother Ronan. A babysitter. A family friend.

I don't know how you can watch those tapes of Dylan at age 7, which she has allowed to be released now -- and not believe her.

[andym]

53. Timing is the key for recovered memories

when did she actually start sharing these memories-- and there is contradictory evidence when she began to tell her story. How many days after the "incident"? AFAIK those tapes were not made on the day of the incident, but later after her mother counseled her and that makes all the difference as to excluding false memories.

[pnwmom]

55. No. Recovered memories are memories that only surface after work in therapy.

That is not what happened. No one hypnotized Dylan. No one planted memories in her mind.

You can watch the actual videos yourself, because they're in the second episode.

[andym]

56. False memory syndrome is far more general than being created by analysts under hypnosis

they can be created just by being interviewed, or chatted with by an authority figure such as a parent. This applies more than to just recovered memories through hypnosis etc.
In general, memory is far more fragile and unreliable than generally believed.

Even repeated experiences can be confabulated.
https://in-mind.org/article/remembering-what-never-occurred-childrens-false-memories-for-repeated-experiences

Here is a research paper on the subject:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stephen-Lepore/publication/226154736_What_Did_the_Janitor_Do_Suggestive_Interviewing_and_the_Accuracy_of_Children's_Accounts/links/546cb2bc0cf267b3bdf71175/What-Did-the-Janitor-Do-Suggestive-Interviewing-and-the-Accuracy-of-Childrens-Accounts.pdf

[pnwmom]

59. The event in the attic happened one day. The very next day, a nanny who had been present

in the house called with her concerns about what she had witnessed: Woody with his head on Dylan's lap. Over the next 24 hours, Mia filmed a series of short videos.

None of the sources you refer to are anything like the situation that happened with Dylan.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-the-shocking-custody-case-court-documents-that-shed-light-on-the-dylan-farrow-woody-allen-saga

On this date, Allen traveled to Farrow’s country home in Connecticut to spend time with the children. At the home was Allen; Casey Pascal (Farrow’s friend) and her three children; the Pascal nanny, Alison Stickland; Kristie Groteke, a babysitter employed by Farrow; Sophie Berge, the Farrow kids’ French tutor; Dylan and Satchel. Farrow had “previously instructed Ms. Groteke that Mr. Allen was not to be left alone with Dylan,” but for about 15-20 minutes in the afternoon, Groteke “was unable to locate Mr. Allen or Dylan. After looking for them in the house, she assumed that they were outside with the others.” But Allen and Dylan were not outside with them, according to Berge and Stickland. At a different point in the day, Stickland says she “observed Mr. Allen kneeling with his head on her lap, facing her body. Dylan was sitting on the couch staring vacantly in the direction of a television set.” When Farrow returned home, Berge noticed Dylan “was not wearing anything under her sundress” so Farrow had Groteke put underpants on Dylan. That evening, Stickland claims she told Pascal that she “had seen something at Mia’s that day that was bothering me,” and told of the TV room observation. The next day, Pascal phoned Farrow and told her of Stickland’s statements.

9. Dylan’s Recollections

After the Pascal call, Farrow asked Dylan “whether it was true that daddy had his face in her lap yesterday,” and this is Farrow’s testimony: “Dylan said yes. And then she said that she didn’t like it one bit, no, he was breathing into her, into her legs, she said. And that he was holding her around the waist and I said, why didn’t you get up and she said that she tried to but that he put his hands underneath her and touched her. And she showed me where… her behind.” Farrow then videotaped Dylan’s statements “over the next twenty-four hours,” and “Dylan told Farrow that she had been with Mr. Allen in the attic and that he had touched her privates with his finger.” Farrow phoned her attorney, who advised her to bring Dylan to their local pediatrician, which she did. Dylan “did not repeat the accusation of sexual abuse during this visit” and on the trip home told her mother she “did not like talking about her privates.” On Aug. 6, when she returned to the pediatrician—on the pediatrician’s advice—Dylan repeated what she told her mother on Aug. 5. Meanwhile a “medical examination conducted on Aug. 9 showed no physical evidence of sexual abuse.”

[pnwmom]

60. The event in the attic happened one day. The very next day, a nanny who had been present

in the house called with her concerns about what she had witnessed: Woody with his head on Dylan's lap. Over the next 24 hours, Mia filmed a series of short videos.

None of the sources you refer to are anything like the situation that happened with Dylan.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-the-shocking-custody-case-court-documents-that-shed-light-on-the-dylan-farrow-woody-allen-saga

On this date, Allen traveled to Farrow’s country home in Connecticut to spend time with the children. At the home was Allen; Casey Pascal (Farrow’s friend) and her three children; the Pascal nanny, Alison Stickland; Kristie Groteke, a babysitter employed by Farrow; Sophie Berge, the Farrow kids’ French tutor; Dylan and Satchel. Farrow had “previously instructed Ms. Groteke that Mr. Allen was not to be left alone with Dylan,” but for about 15-20 minutes in the afternoon, Groteke “was unable to locate Mr. Allen or Dylan. After looking for them in the house, she assumed that they were outside with the others.” But Allen and Dylan were not outside with them, according to Berge and Stickland. At a different point in the day, Stickland says she “observed Mr. Allen kneeling with his head on her lap, facing her body. Dylan was sitting on the couch staring vacantly in the direction of a television set.” When Farrow returned home, Berge noticed Dylan “was not wearing anything under her sundress” so Farrow had Groteke put underpants on Dylan. That evening, Stickland claims she told Pascal that she “had seen something at Mia’s that day that was bothering me,” and told of the TV room observation. The next day, Pascal phoned Farrow and told her of Stickland’s statements.

9. Dylan’s Recollections

After the Pascal call, Farrow asked Dylan “whether it was true that daddy had his face in her lap yesterday,” and this is Farrow’s testimony: “Dylan said yes. And then she said that she didn’t like it one bit, no, he was breathing into her, into her legs, she said. And that he was holding her around the waist and I said, why didn’t you get up and she said that she tried to but that he put his hands underneath her and touched her. And she showed me where… her behind.” Farrow then videotaped Dylan’s statements “over the next twenty-four hours,” and “Dylan told Farrow that she had been with Mr. Allen in the attic and that he had touched her privates with his finger.” Farrow phoned her attorney, who advised her to bring Dylan to their local pediatrician, which she did. Dylan “did not repeat the accusation of sexual abuse during this visit” and on the trip home told her mother she “did not like talking about her privates.” On Aug. 6, when she returned to the pediatrician—on the pediatrician’s advice—Dylan repeated what she told her mother on Aug. 5. Meanwhile a “medical examination conducted on Aug. 9 showed no physical evidence of sexual abuse.”

[andym]

63. Actually far worse than the story about Allen

is possible from false memories as is evidenced by the stories of satanic rituals in the Little Rascals case.

Now the witness' evidence you quote is damning, so that does lend credence to the 7-year-old's testimony in my mind. Is there any controversy about that witness?

[pnwmom]

65. If you're talking about the woman who reported seeing him with his face in

Dylan's lap, no there was nothing in the trial to discredit her -- except for Allen's denial.

[obamanut2012]

68. The reporter is also very TERFy

So, she has some disturbing, bigoted views.

[shrike3]

127. So many Allen apologists make a big deal of the Valentine with a knife through it

He f*cked her daughter. How else was she supposed to react? "Oh, you crazy kids. Go, with my blessing." Can you honestly say any woman in your life would have been cool about what happened?

I don't know if Woody abused Dylan or not. Here's what makes me wonder, though. A friend of mine was accused by his ex of sexually abusing his daughter. He had court-ordered supervised visits from the get-go. Eventually the charges were proven false and he was given joint custody. Woody insists he was exonerated. Okay. I can buy that Mia had that judge in her pocket. But he appealed the decision all the way up to the NY Supreme Court. He lost. Mia had the whole judiciary in her pocket. That I don't buy. My friend is not rich and famous. Woody is rich and famous and has plenty of powerful friends. He couldn't even get supervised visits with Dylan. Why?

[7wo7rees]

31. Ok. I have watched this with trepidation. I still have to get through tonites final.

I was a victim of sexual abuse by my father. It started when i was 11. I was also the 1st daughter/grandchild on all sides and was much loved and doted on.

The part that hurt the most tonite was listening to how thankful Dylan was that her mom believed her.

My mother did not believe me.

My mother also let my father beat my younger brother so badly with a hanger that she kept him home from school. My mother closed his door and said he had the flu.

I did not find out till many years later and my brother blamed me for it.

I don't want to call out a much respected member of DU, but........

Maybe, just maybe........ one ought not go there.

Peace...Ms 7wo7rees

[Maraya1969]

36. I was molested by our church minister. When I finally told my parents my mothers

first words were, "Don't tell anyone because no one is going to believe you"

And for a few years they continued to go, every Sunday to that church to listen to that MF . Finally my grandmother confronted them and they stopped.

But years later, after the priest scandal, (my father was now dead) my mom called me up and apologized to me. She said it was that scandal that made her realize that what I said was actually true. It meant the world to me to be believed.


I agree that having the people closest to you not believe you or not care is almost worse than the sexual abuse. I am really sorry that happened to you. I happens way too often.

[7wo7rees]

52. I appreciate the kind words. I survived and we now live with and take care of my mother.

My father's brother (a cop in Anaheim, Ca, turned bondsman, now dead) threatened my life if I dared to tell my grandfather, he knew my grandfather would kill my fatner. My younger brother (the one that was beaten) also threatened to kill me if I told our youngest brother. Denial is a river........

It's ok for me, i survived. I have a loving husband of 20+ years and we have a blessed and good life..

I am so very sorry for all those that are not heard or listened to.

Someone in this thread was and is way out of line. I'll say no more.

Ms 7wo7rees

[shrike3]

131. I'm very sorry that happened to you. n/t

[pnwmom]

38. I am so very sorry that happened to you or any child. And I believe you, of course.

Just as I believe the now grown up Dylan and her brother Ronan, telling their story about what happened to her.

The other brother wasn't even in the house for the key incidents. I bet he's expecting a nice inheritance from Woody some day.

[gldstwmn]

41. I can't look at

all of the people who stuck up for him the same way. The brother turned against Mia and his siblings for money. It's evil.

[speak easy]

61. 'The brother turned against Mia and his siblings for money'.

Any you can prove that, right?

If you can't, why say it?

[pnwmom]

70. Ronan Farrow says that he himself was offered substantial money by Allen.

Money enough to pay for his private college and beyond -- if he'd come out publicly on Allen's side.

He also said that for years he'd begged his sister to put the past behind her, because he didn't want to be linked with that. But when he finally started reading all the court records he realized he had to support her in telling her story.

[gldstwmn]

161. Moses did exacty what Ronan was asked to do.

He took the money. Not everyone is good at finding their way in life.

[obamanut2012]

69. The same with folks on DU who have always supported him

And basically call Mia a crazy bword. The way folks on DU support Allen and JK Rowling is always bewildering to me.

[betsuni]

78. I enjoyed reading Allen's "Apropos of Nothing" and am now reading Garrison Keillor's

"That Time of Year."

[tavernier]

79. I've known several women who have told me about being

abused as a child by their fathers. None of these men had abused other children, where as a pedophile typically preys on many victims. This leads me to believe that power rather than sex is the driving motive in these crimes.

[alphafemale]

81. The creep tried to seduce Mariel Hemingway He is a pederast to be most kind.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2015/03/woody-allen-mariel-hemingway-manhattan

[obamanut2012]

84. Well, this thread is appalling

JFC. Trashing.

You tried, OP. Thanks for standing firm.

[OneGrassRoot]

110. +1 n/t

[kskiska]

85. Why has Mia Farrow supported Roman Polanski?

In 2005, Mia left her assortment of children, got on a plane and flew to London. The reason? To appear in open court and defend Roman Polanski — by then notoriously the accused rapist in 1977 of a 13 year old — in a libel trial. This was 2005, mind you, 13 years after she accused Woody Allen of attacking her daughter, Dylan.

None of this is included in the HBO doc “Allen v. Farrow” concluding tonight on HBO. Filmmakers Kirby Dick and Amy Ziering didn’t like this part, so they left it out.

https://www.showbiz411.com/2021/03/14/mia-farrow-flew-to-london-in-2005-to-defend-director-roman-polanski-convicted-of-sex-with-a-13-year-old-in-libel-trial

[RobinA]

143. Farrow

in my opinion is nuts. I believed that way before the Dylan/Allen situation. I find people who collect children very questionable. I always have. I met people like that when I worked for Children & Youth Services. There was always something off about them. I also wouldn't trust Ronan Farrow as far as I could throw him. I have no idea what when on between Dylan and Woody. There's no good evidence in my opinion. It's a whole messed up situation with a bunch of adults who have no boundaries and the kids who were unlucky enough to be raised by them.

[shrike3]

147. Woody could have gotten out of this clean if he hadn't decided to do his lover's daughter.

That's unforgivable. He's a rich and famous guy. There were plenty of other women available.

I read the original Maureen Orth article and came to the conclusion neither Woody nor Mia should be parenting children. Not my call, of course.

[Elessar Zappa]

91. He's an asshole and pedophile.

No one should defend that POS.

[theneworiginal]

96. Having worked with pedophiles and victims of trauma

my read is that this guy did it. It doesn't even feel like a close call, based on the statements of victims and family. Add onto that the taboo of crossing the line with your own step-daughter and you have a pretty disturbed guy who survived all of this because of his fame and money. Any Average Joe would have been up on charges.

WA was a boyhood hero of mine with his witty early films. I have not watched a movie of his since the allegations came out. Fuck him. His selfish perversion has forever traumatized the people he was supposed to hold dear.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

94. It's amazing what happens when someone controls their own narrative, and what I always find most

discouraging yet unsurprising is who will rush to defend the abuser, and how they do so. It's fascinating.

[mountain grammy]

98. I agree with you and feeling a bit disgusted with myself.

because at the time, I believed him for a while. Changed my mind after the custody case. It's depressing to see some here still defending the monster, because that's what he is.. I know this sounds self serving, but I never saw another movie after Manhatten.. just creepy.

[Johnny2X2X]

134. There are two sides.

Both sides can be heard.

http://mosesfarrow.blogspot.com/2018/05/a-son-speaks-out-by-moses-farrow.html

[shrike3]

137. Brother Ronan says Woody was always offering money to the children for coming on his side.

Wouldn't surprise me at all if that was the reason for Moses' about face. I also noted at the time he "spoke out" Woody's spokesman was touting Moses' photography skills. Maybe he wanted a career change. That didn't pan out, but there may have been other rewards.

That said, I have no idea what happened. It's very sad, a family was blown up. I think Woody's a complete ass for doing his lover's daughter, but beyond that I'm agnostic. I don't think we'll ever know the truth.

[Johnny2X2X]

141. Agree with this

Woody and Mia both appear to be morally lacking. Woody and Soon Yi is not OK even though it was not a normal parental relationship. Woody nor Mia deserve sympathy. Dylan does, she was a victim of one parent or another, or maybe even both. Sounds like Moses and the other kids had it tough too, 3 of them are dead way too early.

[shrike3]

146. Frankly, after reading Orth's original article on the case, I came to the conclusion neither Woody

nor Mia should be allowed anywhere near children. But that wasn't my call.

[Beringia]

142. What do you mean "Moses' about face". Did he tell a different story at some point

I doubt that money could make a person face an intimidating person as your adopted Mother who seemed to really put a head trip on this boy.

[shrike3]

144. Um, he said nothing for years. All of a sudden, though, he's got a different story.

Hell, I remember him being interviewed. Woody's a terrible person. Until he isn't.

[Jakes Progress]

209. Any proof?

Suppose I said, that I heard Mia say she would kill the children if they didn't accuse Woody? I didn't. But that is just as strong as someone else saying something without proof.

I don't know. You don't know. Those filmmakers played you.

[misanthrope]

169. Normally there are three truths

Your truth, my truth and the whole truth. The last one is typically messier.

[shrike3]

174. Good point. n/t

[obamanut2012]

196. Why does Moses get to speak for Dylan?

Loathsome.

[shrike3]

202. Good point.

[Corgigal]

148. I believe Dillion,

and thank you Ronan for defending your sister.

The nail in the coffin was lying about the train set, but police drew a diagram of train tracks in the attic.

[drbtg1]

151. I hope there is one point everyone here can agree upon.

Whether you believe the story from Mia Farrow and Ronan Farrow, or if you believe the story from Woody Allen and Moses Farrow, Ms. Dylan Farrow was horribly abused in either situation and my sympathies go out to her.

I am offering no opinion on my beliefs in this matter. However, for those that invested 4 hours on the HBO series might want to watch this 2.5 hour YouTube video for the other side.

[AnotherMother4Peace]

153. Any info on the who what when of this video? Documentary? documentarians? 2.5 hr video made by whom?

The who, what, where, when, why of Farrow vs Allen was easily accessed before the showing. It was well sourced by credible people, and I watched it. I would need to know more about this 2.5 hr. video before watching it.

[drbtg1]

160. The information you seek is easily obtainable on your own.

n/t

[AnotherMother4Peace]

162. Never a good idea to click on blind YouTube videos - never.

[maxsolomon]

155. We're right back where we were on this topic 15 years ago.

Skeptics and believers trading anecdotes, no one changing anyone else's mind. There will never be any 100% resolution, as none of us were there. And I say that as a skeptic on these accusations. I didn't want to believe them as I thought Allen was a great artist.

But that doc series was damning. It may be 1-sided, but that side is extremely persuasive. So persuasive that I couldn't watch Episodes 3 & 4, but the women in this house sure did. What was most surprising to me? How guileless Mia Farrow came across. How persuasive Dylan Farrow was. How damning the anecdotal evidence was.

Allen is 84. He won't be around to debate this much longer, and his legacy is now sealed.

[shrike3]

156. Crimes and Misdemeanors is still one of the best movies I've ever seen. More than a few artists,

unfortunately, do loathsome things. To my mind, Woody Allen was loathsome enough for doing his lover's daughter. No man with a moral compass would do such a thing.

I don't know that we'll ever know the truth, but I have great sympathy for Dylan.

[maxsolomon]

159. I agree. He made great films for almost 20 years.

And now they're tarnished. Irredeemably.

It reminded me of a Savage Love (Dan Savage, advice columnist) letter from years ago, where a man wrote in to say he was sexually attracted to children, and he did not want to act on this, but he didn't know what to do about it - he couldn't help himself. IIRC, Dan Savage was stumped.

Sadly, I think there's always going to be a small % of the male population that has these impulses. That will never be just another kink like a Foot Fetish. It's why you see situations like Sex Offenders being kept on MacNeil Island in Puget Sound AFTER they've completed their sentences or been paroled. They cannot control themselves and society has to be protected from them. Is it unfair? Sure, and also, tough shit.

[shrike3]

173. I read an interview with a pedophile who hadn't reoffended in 30 years. (The police confirmed this,

apparently they kept a close watch on him.) He said he had tried every remedy out there, and nothing worked; he still desired children. He'd stayed clean because he'd stayed away from children. All children. If he ever had to go to an event where there were children he'd bring at least three friends with him, and they'd stick to him like glue. How many guys with those urges are going to be willing to do that? An island might be the best option.

I'm not calling Woody Allen a pedophile, because frankly I don't know.

[Jakes Progress]

188. Citation?

[shrike3]

200. I believe it was an interview in the National Catholic Reporter. They used his real name, but it's

been so long ago I don't remember. This was an ex-priest; part of the 12 step program, which he engaged in even though he is not an alcoholic, involved making amends and writing letters of apology to his victims. Some of them actually asked to meet with him. What I quoted was a small part of the interview, but I was struck by the fact that despite undergoing various treatments the desire for children did not go away, and he had to resort to staying away from them. Which I think any pedophile should. Sorry I cannot recall the date of the interview.

[Jakes Progress]

203. Sort of lets Allen off the hook.

He hasn't had a phalanx of watchers or a deep religious calling to keep him from repeat offenses.

[shrike3]

206. If you think that let's him off the hook, bless your heart.

[Jakes Progress]

207. You're not even paying attention to your own posts.

The article that you seem to remember says that pedophilia is a life-long mental aberration, that those who molest children do it over and over for their lifetime, that unless they have a system to monitor them (in the case you cited - several members of the clergy) and a very strong will not to repeat the crime that they admit is a crime backed by a powerful will to self-correct they will continue. You said the individual you referred to spoke of how hard and how much faith it took to avoid doing so.

So. Where are the monitors for Allen? Do you ascribe to him a strong faith in a Devine being that would see him through decades without molesting again?

Or can you point to the large numbers of cases brought agains him for his behavior?

Failing that, you have given the evidence of Allen's exoneration.

You are really deep in this. What that film crew set out to do is exactly what faux news does regularly. I know it is hard to admit, but you fell for it. They dangled you like a toy.

[shrike3]

210. LMAO. I sure triggered you. Wonder why. Guess I'll never know. Have a good day.

[Jakes Progress]

211. You tried. Makes sense they way the documentary triggered you.

Hard to admit you've been used that way, that you put all your heart and energy in a scam.

At least now you know how all the befuddled trumpers feel.

Thanks. I am having a good day.

[shrike3]

212. Woody, is that you?

[Jakes Progress]

213. Good. You now admit you have lost all credibility.

Relying on non-sequitur comment and irrelevant emoji's as argument are proof that even you now see your error.

Or should I say "Is that you, Mia?"

[themaguffin]

171. OH FFS. We. Do. Not. Know. What. Happened. Jesus, don't be like right wingers

[Azathoth]

182. We're living in a post-truth world

Right-wingers are just more obvious about it because they tend to find themselves at odds with objective reality more often.

But objectivity and impartiality are out fashion across the spectrum.

[obamanut2012]

197. Yes, we do -- unless you are accusing the victim of lying

[Initech]

185. Completely agree! What a monster that guy is!

[marble falls]

199. The victim's testimony is not "shit".