FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Excerpt: "In the response, provided to The Hollywood Reporter, Farrow denounced Allen's op-ed - in which he suggested Farrow's mother, Mia Farrow, had coached her to accuse Allen of sexually

Mia Farrow's daughter Dylan has opened up about child molestation claims brought against her adopted father Woody Allen. (photo: unknown)
Mia Farrow's daughter Dylan has opened up about child molestation claims brought against her adopted father Woody Allen. (photo: unknown)


Dylan Farrow Responds to Woody Allen, Her Statement

By Dylan Farrow, The Hollywood Reporter

10 February 14

 

nce again, Woody Allen is attacking me and my family in an effort to discredit and silence me -- but nothing he says or writes can change the truth. For 20 years, I have never wavered in describing what he did to me. I will carry the memories of surviving these experiences for the rest of my life.

His op-ed is the latest rehash of the same legalese, distortions, and outright lies he has leveled at me for the past 20 years. He insists my mother brought criminal charges -- in fact, it was a pediatrician who reported the incident to the police based on my firsthand account. He suggests that no one complained of his misconduct prior to his assault on me -- court documents show that he was in treatment for what his own therapist described as “inappropriate” behavior with me from as early as 1991. He offers a carefully worded claim that he passed a lie detector test -- in fact, he refused to take the test administered by the state police (he hired someone to administer his own test, which authorities refused to accept as evidence). These and other misrepresentations have been rebutted in more detail by independent, highly respected journalists, including this most recent article here:

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts

With all the attempts to misrepresent the facts, it is important to be reminded of the truth contained in court documents from the only final ruling in this case, by the New York Supreme Court in 1992. In denying my father all access to me, that court:

  • Debunked the "experts" my father claims exonerated him, calling them "colored by their loyalty to Mr. Allen", criticizing the author of their report (who never met me) for destroying all supporting documentation, and calling their conclusions "sanitized and therefore less credible".

  • Included testimony from babysitters who witnessed inappropriate sexual behavior by my father toward me.

  • Found that “there is no credible evidence to support Mr. Allen's contention that Ms. Farrow coached Dylan or that Ms. Farrow acted upon a desire for revenge against him for seducing Soon-Yi. Mr. Allen's resort to the stereotypical ‘woman scorned’ defense is an injudicious attempt to divert attention from his failure to act as a responsible parent and adult.”

  • Concluded that the evidence "... proves that Mr. Allen's behavior toward Dylan was grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.”

  • Finally, the Connecticut State prosecutor found "probable cause" to prosecute, but made the decision not to in an effort to protect "the child victim", given my fragile state.

From the bottom of my heart, I will be forever grateful for the outpouring of support I have received from survivors and countless others. If speaking out about my experience can help others stand up to their tormentors, it will be worth the pain and suffering my father continues to inflict on me. Woody Allen has an arsenal of lawyers and publicists but the one thing he does not have on his side is the truth. I hope this is the end of his vicious attacks and of the media campaign by his lawyers and publicists, as he’s promised. I won't let the truth be buried and I won't be silenced.


 

Comments   

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
-113 # nice2bgreat 2014-02-10 07:40
Really???

The daily he said, she said.
 
 
+9 # 6thextinction 2014-02-10 10:26
The thumbs up thumbs down indicators are again not functioning.
 
 
-28 # nice2bgreat 2014-02-10 14:25
Seems to be working for me. I am used to negative thumbs with no explanations, distinctions, or critical analysis, whatsoever.

So when I see -47 for calling attention over this running saga of a traumatized 7-year-old child all grown up, still harboring resentment over an episode that lacks closure, it reveals Marc Ash's insecurities over his questionable initial judgment to publish. I just assume the wagons are circling.

I know, as I consider myself a principled and objective liberal, here at RSN where discussions begin with the irrelevant and work their way to the inane, I constantly have unresolved issues and lack of closure. And would that I like to avoid the proverbial warning over of arguing with idiots, alas, it is usually not to be.

Especially now that election season is beginning, I understand Mr. Ash's desire to stray from the tedium of losing on all political fronts, despite having his choice of President elected.

And why not chew on the implied salacious details of this drama, rather than call out Harry Reid and all who celebrated the limited filibuster reform, which if only done completely 5 or 10 years ago, would have given the complicit Democratic Congress no excuses for their failures. But that's in the past. It's time to look forward, not backwards.

By the way, if by the time you view a comment and read it, without refreshing your screen, several people could have clicked thumbs. That could create the impression that the system is not working.
 
 
-11 # scribe 2014-02-10 07:50
Stop covering this nonsense. I am not a Woody Allen fan, but this story is tainted beyond belief. Mia Farrow has regularly revealed herself to be unstable and vitriolic, and she uses this sort of nonsense charge all the time. 20 years ago it was a regular tactic in divorce cases to accuse the father of sexually molesting children because the charge alone could prejudice the entire procedure. This is not a story relevant to progressive politics, so drop it.
 
 
+68 # Dorcas Black 2014-02-10 08:08
All these people, Woody, Mia and Dylan, need therapy. And it would help if the press stopped allowing them to rehash it in public, rather than in a therapist's office in private.
 
 
+142 # Gooseknoll 2014-02-10 08:09
Thank you for carrying this story. It is important for popular myths like, "these cases arise in divorces all the time when vindictive women pursue their husbands and try to get the kids," to be constantly challenged with the evidence that celebrity aside, child predators come in all different packages--even people who appear to be accomplished in some area. Courts in certain areas of the country are doing better than they did 20 years ago to take these cases as seriously as they should be taken. After spending 25 years working in this area professionally, I applaud Ms. Farrow for having the courage to stand up, yet again, to a pedophile.
 
 
+106 # carp 2014-02-10 09:12
This society always turns a blind eye to sexual child abuse until it becomes public. I find it quite cruel that society requires the weakest to stand up and declare enough of the abuse. Ironic that the mother who is often at the mercy of the abuser of the family is often reviled. It is the victims of the abuse that are forced to make things right. Where is society in these matters? looking the other way until they are presented the facts then it segways into righteous indignation. Worthless societal response. Maybe that is why such abuse continues.
 
 
-46 # brux 2014-02-10 11:45
What society does good or bad in most cases is not really relevant in an individual case ... what is relevant are the facts, all the facts and nothing but the facts.

Sad as it is, if abuse takes place in some way in order to investigate it and respond to it there needs to be proof that will stand up in a public court of law. There just was not in the case, and there are some indications either way depending on who is going to the looking as to which way this leans, but that is no excuse to continuing to bring this up in public in the way Dylan Farrow has done. She has a lot of growing up to do, and it will be probably be more difficult for her to take control of her life as an adult now that she has created a public image of eternal victimhood.

Society in general though, does not turn a blind eye to child sex abuse, but there have been certain cases where those in power charged with investigating it have for their own reasons not done their job. The world is rife with examples of this, but it is not proof of anything in an individual case, and using it as such is simple slander.

By the way Segway is a product, segue is a verb.
 
 
+73 # Malcolm 2014-02-10 12:50
I think another reason it continues is it's damned hard to prove, and the perps are very talented at keeping it secret, often by putting fear of brutal punishment into the minds of helpless kids. Most child abuse is never discovered, according to my friend, former director of a counseling center that helped child abuse victims deal with their issues. He told me that, when caught the first time , a typical perp had already victimized an average of 20 children.

Dylan has my love and support. So do the other children.
 
 
+2 # markovchhaney 2014-02-10 14:22
Does your support for the other children include the now-adult child who has taken a stance in opposition to Dylan and Mia Farrow?
 
 
+8 # Malcolm 2014-02-10 20:43
Absolutely. Thanks for asking.
 
 
0 # thirteenthpaladin 2014-02-18 13:33
what Gooseknoll and carp said ...

http://projectunbreakable.tumblr.com/tagged/grace%27s+photography

http://project-unbreakable.org/
 
 
-35 # fenox 2014-02-10 09:58
So sorry to hear that after 25 years working in this area professionally, you have not a more nuanced view. I regret it for the US justice.
The syndrome of alienation is well known today all over the world, and was already 20 years ago.
To be so sure, as you write , makes me doubt your professional qualifications.
 
 
+27 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 16:48
Not sure who you are talking to, fenox, but it can't be me, since I never specified the # of years that I have been in practice. As for alienation syndrome, that is a defense that was discredited by reputable people over a decade ago. You don't live in the U.S., do you. Most people on this board are aware that what passes for justice in the U.S. is a commodity for sale.
 
 
-14 # rxfxworld 2014-02-10 12:17
The fact that you can be certain to label Allen a pedophile on the basis of questionable data and no personal knowledge makes me question your professionalism . You need to read Simon Critchley's recent article quoting Jacob Bronowski on how absolute certainty (which is the antithesis of science) leads to Auschwitz.
 
 
+39 # Malcolm 2014-02-10 12:54
And YOU need to read this report on the situation by a judge in Allen's "frivolous" custody lawsuit.
http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/205403621

I think it will change your mind. I really do.
 
 
+6 # X Dane 2014-02-10 20:19
Malcolm.
ALL the people commenting here need to read judge Allen's report before they express their view.

TOO many cases are "tried" in the press by people who have not seen ALL the evidence.
It is damaging and WRONG.

It takes some time to get informed, but nobody should perpetuate gossip, for that is what is going on, when a person commenting has not bothered to fully inform him or herself.
 
 
-21 # markovchhaney 2014-02-10 14:21
Congratulations on your intimate relationship with Woody Allen, Mia Farrow, and the rest of their families. I know I can trust your objective opinion. Clearly, Mr. Allen must be a pedophile, because you say it's so. Why should we bother with the legal system, the presumption of innocence, etc.? We've got you.
 
 
+15 # Bruce Gruber 2014-02-10 08:11
"There are many stories in the naked city .." the vast majority of which, unfortunately, never see the light of day. That this one should consume so much tabloid 'entertainment' exposure is testimony to the highjacking of fourth estate legitimacy by profiteers 'opiating' the masses with voyeuristic misdirection to avoid their responsibility to analyze, expose and educate, competing with competence, not titillation.Tha t includes RSN.
 
 
-24 # moafu@yahoo.com 2014-02-10 08:17
Thank you. It's impressive that RSN would publish information the exposes further the decadence of the entertainment world. Just go to YouTube and enter on the search bar the words "pedophilia in hollywood".
 
 
+111 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 08:26
Good for Dylan. And I disagree with scribe; this story is the essence of what a progressive news forum should be covering. Women are an oppressed majority, and this case is a classic example of a white male celebrity using his fame and fortune to avoid taking responsibility for the exploitative and abusive behavior of a minor female.

Trashing the protective parent as having coached the child is a standard strategy on the part of alleged perpetrators. In this instance, it is a particularly disgusting slander of Mia Farrow, who has a distinguished history of service to children, and humanity in general.

False allegations of sexual abuse do occur. What is essential in dealing with allegations of child abuse is to be child centered. Listen to the child, and enlist the protective, appropriate parent, if there is one, as an advocate for the child. Sometimes children are manipulated by adults, which is why it is important that a child be interviewed by a skilled professional in a neutral, safe setting. In my experience, it is extraordinarily rare for a child to make a false allegation, and perseverate in making that false allegation as an adult. And I am a skilled, well educated professional with years and years of hard core experience in this field.
 
 
-29 # brux 2014-02-10 11:54
I agree with you ... that women at the base of human society are THE oppressed minority ... as John Lennon and Yoko Ono ... both non-African/Afr ican Americans sang in their song, "Woman Is The Nigger Of The World".

The question is, is everyone who claims to be oppressed for whatever reason to be allowed to be believed simply on that basis alone.

Does Dylan Farrow's letter do anything to further the discussion or add depth to the subject of women's rights, and by proxy the rights or treatment of all weaker people by the strong.

I doubt it. Dylan Farrow is in a privileged class of people. She was not raped, hurt, mutiliated, beaten, traumatized, expelled from society, circumsized, or whatever other abuse you want to discuss ... like is the problem with the true oppressed minority.

When we want to dismiss and degrade someone we call them a woman or a pussy ... so it's pretty clear there is something about women that is internationally almost universally connected to abuse, and is it the archetype of weaker and less informed.

I am sick of celebrities and the wealthy and powerful using other people's real abuse and misery to ride the coattails of to gain some kind of extra sympathy. I don't believe Dylan, but even if I did, I would not think it beneficial to her to dwell on this forever in public - but it is her choice. She can every day write a letter crying foul of Woody Allen and see what it does to her and to Woody. Ultimately it's her call.
 
 
+30 # Malcolm 2014-02-10 13:00
If you were to read the judge's report, you'd find that Dylan was certainly traumatized, at the very least. I'm all like, how would you like it if an elderly man fondled your genitalia when you were seven years old? The judge rips Allen a new asshole, verbally, for his incredibly bad parenting "skills" and general behavior.

True, we'll never know with 100% certainty, but the judge's judgement in the case says a lot.

Maybe there'll be a libel suit, initiated by either side, and that will give everyone a basis for their judgements.



http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/205403621
 
 
-6 # brux 2014-02-11 07:13
Traumatized and having had Mia put her in a position that demands she say and do things she does not understand ... there was no sign of physical trauma, i.e. rape or molestation.

How I would feel about being molested has nothing to do with the issue. You are arguing that if one would not like to be molested as a child one must find Woody Allen guilty, whether there is evidence of the act or not.

The judge's "judgement" ... i.e., it was not a real judgement because there was not a trial and charges pressed. Do you understand what the legal system is?

It is not the judge, but the DA that brings charges, and if a judge is asking for charges to be filed, that is a biased judge.

I keep asking the question, what specific fact in whatever you read convinces you of Woody Allen's guilt? Because I am hearing nothing but exaggerations, speculation and allegation, but the real facts are missing, there are none.

There is a preponderance of the evidence that when charges are made of child molestion over and over without evidence it is an attempt to smear and damage someone. There is evidence of that, Mia influencing her children, and trying to get other to testify to what she told them to testify to, ie. nannies and others.
 
 
+4 # Malcolm 2014-02-11 07:35
"Traumatized and having had Mia put her in a position that demands she say and do things she does not understand"

"...the real facts are missing, there are none"

Bit of a disconnect. Thirty-three pages of facts condemn Allen, You say there are no facts. But YOU make claims against the Farrows, and suddenly don't worry about "the real facts are missing"
 
 
+5 # Cassandra2012 2014-02-11 09:40
The experience of 2/3 of women, worldwide with molestation needs also to be considered. Males simply do not have this preponderance of experience, especially when it comes to WOMEN's molestation.
 
 
+3 # Malcolm 2014-02-12 09:43
Sorry about the red thumbs. Perhaps there are a few misogynists hereabouts.
 
 
+29 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 17:21
Brux, you have no concept of what constitutes oppression, yet you have been posting at length on his subject for a few days. Some people have a limited capacity for empathy, and it has become obvious that you are one of them.

Are you actually postulating that since Dylan Farrow comes from an economically privelaged background, she cannot be oppressed? The children of the wealthy are just as oppressed as the children of those with moderate or impoverished means. And yes, being sexually abused is right up there with the suffering wrought by being "raped, hurt, mutilated, beaten, traumatized,and ..." ostracized. Yes, sexual abuse is "real" abuse, you ignorant fool. As anyone who has suffered sexual abuse could tell you, being sexually abused often includes the experiences that you consider "real" oppression. Victims of both physical and sexual abuse will often tell you that being sexually abused was far more damaging than being physically abused, and made them feel tainted, dirty, and permanently damaged.

It is obvious that you have never experienced the heartbreak of listening to a child confide in you about horrendous abuse, have never suffered the agony of being unable to provide a child with the protection and peace of mind that they are entitled to. And if you yourself were ever abused, you have so distanced yourself from that event that oppression and suffering are merely intellectual concepts to you.
 
 
+8 # mjc 2014-02-11 06:42
Excellent response, tigerlillie.
 
 
-15 # brux 2014-02-11 07:19
You're another one that is full of it if you can read that and not cut to the facts, of which there are none, about me, or about Woody Allen, you two just believe what you want to believe in this case because of your own lives.

I sure hope no one gets you on any jury since you cannot look at evidence objectively and think you can make up facts on your own because of your deeper insight ... beyond the facts.
 
 
-16 # rxfxworld 2014-02-10 12:23
Your professionalism has obviously not taught you the essentials of skepticism. The developmental neuropsychology literature is replete with evidence of children "making things up". As to memory, those who believe memory is a fixed function don't understand how the human brain works. Read Proust In Sear5ch of Lost Time written in 1923. He was a novelist with a neuroscientist' s understanding.
 
 
+14 # Anarchist 23 2014-02-10 20:20
'He was a novelist...'She was an abused little girl...but of course little girls know nothing compared to masculine genius
 
 
-7 # brux 2014-02-11 07:21
> but of course little girls know nothing compared to masculine genius

What you appear to want is that every accusation of child molestation not be investigated because the whole system is tainted by evil corrupt males who all must be guilty and be punished for whatever happened in your own like to make you feel that way.

Anyone who can read and write ought to be able to understand why the world cannot run that way, and if you want justice you cannot demand injustice in its service.
 
 
+19 # Malcolm 2014-02-10 12:56
VERY well said, tigerlillie! I don't know if you've read the 33 page report written by the judge in the custody case, but it strongly supports what you just said.


Oops; hey your link is important, but I confused it with the link from the custody trial. sorry.

http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/205403621
 
 
-8 # brux 2014-02-11 07:23
Post the sentence with the facts from that report that make Woody Allen guilty ... go ahead, I've been asking it all through this discussion - and you nuts attack me, but no one has posted anything, because it is all speculation.
 
 
+1 # Malcolm 2014-02-11 07:41
"The sentence"? Brux, the entire 33 pages is indicative of guilt. No one here, I don't think, has said Allen has been PROVEN guilty. For myself, I said IF HE IS GUILTY, he deserves to suffer. IF.
 
 
-6 # brux 2014-02-12 23:16
> the entire 33 pages is indicative of guilt

No ... it sure is NOT. The not filing charges story was from one DA who continued against the ethics of his profession to comment on this case over and over and has been criticized for it. It's clear that Dylan was not protected from these charges because they have festered with her for decades. What a pile of nonsense, but someone what someone says out of band, in the media is somehow more important than the the facts and what happens in court.
 
 
+6 # tigerlillie 2014-02-11 16:37
I read the report last night. What a horrible mess was made of investigating little Dylan's allegations. Evidently she was interviewed over and over again, which must have been almost as traumatic as the abuse she experienced. It was well known in the early 1990's that the goal is one conclusive interview, conducted by a skilled practitioner in a safe setting, that is unobtrusively videotaped, to prevent the very debacle that occurred. No wonder the Conn. Prosecutor's office decided not to file charges in order to protect Dylan. Really an appalling and incompetent investigation.
 
 
+20 # bristow 2014-02-10 08:35
tigerlillie
I agree with you 100%. The truth is that Woody Allen is a liar and a predator. He should go to jail.
 
 
-14 # rxfxworld 2014-02-10 12:26
Bristow those fixed conclusions mean you are irresponsibly dangerous and an example of why this should never have been published in the NYT and now by the RSN
 
 
+27 # Margolicious 2014-02-10 08:39
Woody Allen is an example of the rich famous pedophile that will never see prosecution. The accuser is always wrong and the celebrity is a saint. I would not trust Woody Allen with any child. He is absolutely sick, perverted, and totally decadent. He belongs in prison.
 
 
-33 # brux 2014-02-10 11:56
> Woody Allen is an example of the rich famous pedophile that will never see prosecution.

Yeah, I think you are pedophile too, and you just use your self-righteousn ess to attack Woody Allen to draw attention away from your own child-molesting ways, just like Catholic priests use their holiness and images as being godly to evade prosecution. It could not be more clear ... who else would go on and on about Woody Allen being so evil, but another child molester who wanted to evade suspicion.

Get my point?
 
 
+13 # X Dane 2014-02-10 20:43
brux.

You have made so many comments. I am puzzled, as to why you have not bothered to read judge Allen's report.

It was written more than 20 years ago, at the time of the incident. There is testimony from several people, who were disturbed by Woody Allen's behavior.

The relationship Farrow/ Allen was certainly different from most relationships. They didn't live together.

They were not married. But Woody Allen wanted custody of 3 of the children. Why, is far from clear, for he really was not interested in the children. For quite a while Mia's children seemed most like a nuisance to him.

You really really need to read the judge's report before you comment again.
 
 
-9 # brux 2014-02-11 07:04
I read the report, and you are just spinning you wheels. I've asked it before, what do you think is the solid evidence, not just Mia's accusations with backup, that Woody ever molested anyone. What is that report, specific data please, changes anything?
 
 
+7 # Malcolm 2014-02-11 07:44
When you were reading that report, did you happen to be holding your hands over your eyes, or were you simply refusing to comprehend all the damning testimony?
 
 
-4 # brux 2014-02-11 23:09
No, actually when I say I've read something you can just assume I followed the words on the paper and comprehended them. Now, did you comprehend the many times I've asked you to cut and past the lines you think make Woody guilty, or can you just not find any?
 
 
+3 # Malcolm 2014-02-12 09:46
Sorry, brux. The article is in a form which doesn't allow me to cut and paste. Besides, AS I'VE TOLD YOU, the entire article makes Woody LOOK guilty. No one set of lines is more important than all the rest. So, really, did you read every line?
 
 
-7 # brux 2014-02-12 23:13
I read it, and I wanted you to post something so I could post the context and show you where you are taking it out of context and showing someone's opinion or bias. There is nothing at the link that tells of any evidence of Woody having molested anyone, in fact when you look at what the article says about Mia it clearly shows her losing it and reacting wildly, which she still is, and which is very likely to have affected her children.

I don't say she's wrong, or bad ... people find themselves doing thing that do not serve them because they lose their way. Clearly many in this story did that ... but because it brings out strong feelings of affiliation for one side of the other, there are some who because of their own history find themselves using those feelings to attack someone as a displacer to their own unresolved feelings.

You can tell there is a lot of that "hysteria" here, and it is on the Dylan & Mia side. They do not care what Woody did or did not do, they will twist the evidence because they feel strongly that it is right to do so, because they believe the "system" did not work for them.
 
 
+4 # JDurga 2014-02-14 23:36
Brux, there was eyewitness testimony of Woody Allen laying his head, face down, in Dylan's lap, breathing into her private parts. Eyewitness testimony. In an earlier comment you said something that leads me to believe that you don't believe an act is abusive unless there is some kind of physical trauma that a doctor could report from an examination.

A grown man breathing into a child's private parts is sexual abuse. Period. For you to have read that and still be claiming there is no evidence that Dylan was sexually abused discredits any comments you have made here.

I personally have been feeling physically nauseated by the tone of your comments. Such lack of compassion and assumption of ill intent on the part of Dylan while ignoring the findings of the judge in the 33 page brief as being irrelevant is rather inhuman.

I'm happy to ignore you now.
 
 
+4 # Cassandra2012 2014-02-11 09:47
Well, I agree we cannot KNOW if he is guilty, but he certainly is creepy ... and I have been around narcissistic, self-serving, creepy men and I would not allow any child of mine to be near him alone.
 
 
-15 # Headlands 2014-02-10 08:42
These articles are something more apt for the Huffington Post or a full-on gossip site. Yes, child abuse and molestation are gigantic issues, but this in particular is simply fodder for gossip.

Please stop posting articles about it, as if it's as important as the countless other issues our country and world face.

Thank you.
 
 
-45 # Old Uncle Dave 2014-02-10 08:51
Why is Dylan Farrow bringing this up again after 20 years? Looking for a book deal or a teevee show?
 
 
-29 # brux 2014-02-10 11:57
The media spokesperson for women ... because after all, rich urban New York inhabiting, jet-setter Dylan Farrow must speak for all women, right? ;-)
 
 
+7 # Cassandra2012 2014-02-11 09:49
Presumably because it takes this long for women [and men too] to actually process molestation as a child... one does not 'simply get over it' as one is often counseled by the callous.
 
 
-4 # brux 2014-02-11 23:07
None of us "get over" our childhoods even if there is very little abuse ... like kicks the hell out of most of us and we are lucky to get through it ... that's why those who are lucky enough to make it big and have a happy life ought to be progressive liberals and try to help others.
 
 
+2 # John S. Browne 2014-02-11 23:50
#

No, they should be progressive constitutionali sts, not "liberals". Most "liberals" and "conservatives" are full of shit, brainwashed so much by the lies of one end of the political "divide and conquer" spectrum or the other. Both of those sides have some lies, and both of them have some truth; but most people are too brainwashed by "their side" to be able to discern what is true and what is a lie from either side. Most of them are so simpleminded that they just automatically condemn everything the other side says, even if it's proven fact; and arbitrarily believe everything, or almost everything, that their own side says and believes.

Anyway, if they were progressive constitutionali sts, and not "conservative" or "liberal", they could truly help a lot more people. But, as it is with their being deceived by the lies of their side(s), they can help less because they help deceive others with, and help perpetuate, the lies. Since they don't have any loyalty to the best that the U.S. is only supposed to represent, they can't be fully loyal to, or a good representation of, anything else, and are thus untrustworthy. Therefore, I wouldn't trust them if my life depended upon it.

(Continued)
 
 
+2 # John S. Browne 2014-02-11 23:51
#

And people who presume other people guilty and convict them in "the court of public OPINION", with no actual, real evidence of guilt, are some of the absolute worst people on the planet; for, it is their kind that make "witness" mis-identificat ions, etc., and get innocent people sent to prison, destroying their lives. Thus, due to these and other reasons, most "liberals", "progressives" and "conservatives" don't impress me at all. In fact, most of them are a bunch of willful idiots and cowards that I'd barely give the time of day to.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I give everyone the benefit of the doubt, and I'm polite and kind, to everyone who I meet out on the "street", or in the stores or whatever, but most of them burn me because they falsely interpret my kindness as so-called "weakness", feel threatened by my intelligence, and/or make some other unrighteous judgments of me. Thus, I don't even like to go out and deal with most people, because most of them are phony, lying, backstabbing, unrighteously-j udgmental, evil people who aren't worth knowing in the least.

#
 
 
-2 # Malcolm 2014-02-12 09:55
Some of what you say I can agree with. At the risk of getting attacked for being off topic, that's my beef with both Warmists and skeptics. They lack the education and experience to make informed interpretations , but are just fine with parroting their party lines.

I have to disagree with most people being "lying, backstabbing, etc." most people I know-not all, of course-are really awesome. Even the ones I disagree with on many issues. Do you think you might want to find different folks to associate with?
 
 
-5 # brux 2014-02-12 23:07
> I have to disagree with most people being "lying, backstabbing, etc." most people I know-not all, of course-are really awesome.

... then it's probably you that is the lying backstabber.
 
 
-5 # brux 2014-02-12 23:07
why do you always have to run off at the mouth like f-ing idiot ... and always to take away from other people's posts.

You are a real bore, so whatever your political bent, progressive constitutionali sts, or anything else, I want nothing to do with it and I wish you'd just quit replying to my posts in future as well your rambling moron.
 
 
+3 # John S. Browne 2014-02-12 23:56
#

You don't like "competition" for intelligence, and intelligent comments, do you? And your longer comments supposedly aren't "run(ning) off at the mouth", but mine supposedly are? I see that you can't handle the truth just as much as these others here who can't either. I knew I needed to be careful that, though you have been right about presumption of guilt, I don't trust you, because you are, as I already said, not to be trusted.

Now, you have proven me right. You will not intimidate and/or silence me, backstabber. Otherwise, other than on the aforementioned subject, you ought to join "Malcolm" and his ilk on the side of evil, as you have clearly shown yourself to be, though you may be right some of the time, as the side of evil sometimes is, or appears to be, mixing some truth with mostly falsehoods, lies and other evils.

Now I see that "TigerLillie" is right that you do seek to dominate the conversa- tion. And this turning on me is really too bad, because I was "thumbing-up" almost every single one of your comments in this thread; but now, due to your backstabbing, I'm going to have to "thumb-them-dow n" as a matter of course from hereon out, even if what you say in them is right. So, from now on, the first, or one of the first, "thumbs-down" of your comments will be me doing so, as you've more than deservedly brought on yourself, to your own consternation.

(Continued)
 
 
0 # John S. Browne 2014-02-13 01:05
#

But it's nothing new to me; because, as a result of your usually making com- ments in other threads that I don't agree with, I have usually "thumbs-downed" all of your comments as a matter of course anyway; again, even if what you said in them was accurate (which it usually wasn't). I will disagree with you where I disagree with you, whether you think I prove my point(s) too well for your liking, and it makes you feel threatened, or not; because evil in all of its guises must be stood up against come what may, let the chips fall as they will.

By the way, what I said about "competition" was simply a figure of speech. I am NOT competing with you, or seeking to compete with you. I simply state what I believe is right no matter what; and, if some people don't like it, or don't like being called on their wrongs, that's just too bad, because I'm going to tell it like it is anyway; like you believe that you do. Thus, one would think that you'd admire that in others; but, oh no, you can't have other people, even unintentionally , making it look like you aren't dominating the conversation.

#
 
 
+2 # JJS 2014-02-17 17:45
It is getting really stinky in here Mr. Browne. Constitutionali st? I suppose you think that there is no evolution of law. That there is only original intent. That the constitution is written on stone like the 10 commandments. Reveal yourself fundamentalist enforcer!
 
 
0 # John S. Browne 2014-02-18 20:05
#

What a tool. You're just getting more and more absurd in your attacks of me. You've got no real truth to counteract my presentation of nothing but the facts, so you resort and lower yourself to ad hominem attacks because you have no defense against the truth. Take all of your willful idiocy and shove it. Oh, I momentarily forgot, you already have! You've either shoved the truth deep outside yourself, or deep inside yourself, where you refuse to recognize it. Makes the saying about having "stuck one's head up their own ass" become much clearer and/or understand- able. Good luck, ostrich with your head stuck, not in a hole in the ground, but in your own "rear-end pie-hole"! But too bad that luck doesn't exist, because you're gonna need it, lots of it, though it wouldn't do you any good if it did exist. I hope you wake up before it's too late.

#
 
 
-3 # Malcolm 2014-02-12 09:47
Finally you are making some sense. :)
 
 
+50 # The Buffalo Guy 2014-02-10 08:54
WOW!!!! At last a mix of opinions although not in the political sphere as I'd prefer. I did read the whole Vanity Fair report and my conclusion is that I wouldn't allow any daughter of mine at any age to spend time with Woody Allen alone.
A real question and not rhetorical; Would you?????
 
 
-9 # fenox 2014-02-10 10:07
Yes, no pedophile is suddenly a predator. Any woman who has a close connection as Mia had with Allen should have got doubts on his sexual behavior long before it happened after a 12 years affair.
The same as his actual wife and two kids would know it.
 
 
+17 # Malcolm 2014-02-10 13:05
Fenox, please read this: http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/205403621

Ms Farrow DID have doubts, lots of doubts, and dealt with them by making damn sure that Allen was NEVER allowed to be alone with Dylan. Except the person charged with keeping an eye on Allen whenever he was there, whenever Ms Farrow was working, suddenly realized Allen had slipped away with Dylan. For twenty minutes-that's all it took.
 
 
-10 # brux 2014-02-11 07:25
Amazing how the nuts here give you thumbs down for suggesting that someone does not just become a child predator in the middle of a budding romance in his life. The Woody Allen as child molester story because he broke up with Mia Farrow story does not hold up.
 
 
+2 # Cassandra2012 2014-02-11 09:50
And you KNOW this because...
 
 
+18 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 17:30
Buffalo guy, if child sexual abuse is not a political issue, then what does qualify as political in your opinion? Remember the old axiom of the women's movement? The personal IS political, and women are an oppressed majority. And yes, I agree with you 100%, I would not allow a minor son or daughter of mine to spend time alone with Woody Allen. For anyone with any degree of sensitivity to nonverbal communication, the family portrait illustrating this article is absolutely chilling.

Just as an educational aside, the average child sexual abuser is just that..., an average white, heterosexual guy, who often does not discriminate between the sexes when it comes to choosing his victims.
 
 
-4 # The Buffalo Guy 2014-02-10 18:56
tigerlillie! I can agree that it's political in the sense that politicians write the laws. But this is clearly a criminal matter; breaking of existing laws. I think we can agree this relates to a crime and our focus may take different paths after that.
 
 
+11 # lorenbliss 2014-02-10 19:04
After RSN ran Woody Allen's response, I denounced the entire story as "nothing more than nasty celebrity gossip." But now I must eat the crow brought home to roost by your description of the Allen family portrait as "absolutely chilling." For if the image above is "chilling" – and I agree it is – the photo accompanying "Woody Allen Responds to Dylan Farrow" is surely worse. The expression on little Dylan's face brings to mind the look of people rescued from wars, earthquakes or hurricanes – save that her body language says the person holding her is more frightful than comforting.

Yes, I saw those details immediately; a journalist and photographer of more than a half-century's experience, I remain closely attentive to such matters even in the Sargasso Sea of involuntary retirement. Yet I quickly banished my reactions. Why? I too am an abuse survivor – my mother tried to kill me on the Summer Solstice Eve of my fifth year, my father arrived home unexpectedly early and saved me from her knife, but in the divorce-court and insane-asylum aftermath, I was damned and rejected by maternal and paternal kin alike. Those pictures of Dylan reminded me of photos of myself at a similar age, and I could not bear the feelings so evoked.

Thus I conclude Allen is guilty as accused – which if correct elevates Dylan's text to a brave and exemplary essay of consciousness-r aising, hence relevant to RSN's purpose.
 
 
+4 # X Dane 2014-02-10 20:53
lorenbliss.
It sounds like you have been through hell, and I am so sorry for you, but don't just let your intuition colour your opinion. DO read judge Allen's report. It truly is informing.
 
 
+4 # lorenbliss 2014-02-10 23:36
Read the report as you suggested. It is indeed damning in that it portrays Allen -- sexual abuser or not -- as psychologically and emotionally unfit for parenthood.
 
 
+7 # X Dane 2014-02-11 12:02
lorenbliss.

It certainly makes him seem like a very unfit parent if you are charitable, creepy and self absorbed if you are not. But Mia Farrow, although she took measures to never leave Dylan alone with Allen, does not come off as a good enough parent.

If I had suspicion that my boyfriend had designs on my daughter....I would dump him....fast. When Dylan said that Allen had touched her. Mia took her to the pediatrician and HE WAS THE ONE WHO involved the police....NOT Mia Farrow.

But she does not come out looking good at all, since she tried to make a former girlfriend of Allen lie and say that she was under age, when Allen dated her.
There is plenty of blame to go around.
 
 
-1 # brux 2014-02-11 23:06
Good God, the vast majority of parents on planet Earth are unfit. There is blame, but the onus of this public legal shitstorm comes directly from Mia Farrow .... at least that is the way it reads to me. Remember a few months ago out of nowhere she came out with a public statement saying that Ronan, supposedly Woody's son could be actually be Frank Sinatra's child, since she never stopped seeing Frank. This we are supposed to just ignore, or find apologies for because Mia is so hurt and abused?

Get real people.
 
 
+5 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 20:53
YES. You ate very brave to explore such formidable demons.
 
 
-7 # brux 2014-02-11 07:32
Gee what a pity our legal system cannot officially recognize your brilliant ability to look at someone's face and make an objective legal call of the facts and someone's guilt ....

Sorry you had bad experiences, but because you feel bad reading about something like this does not give you any particular insight or understanding of the facts or the ability to judge or decide punishment for others.
 
 
+4 # tigerlillie 2014-02-11 16:39
Actually, brux, research has shown that interpreting nonverbal communication is a very reliable source of information.
 
 
-3 # brux 2014-02-11 23:03
What research is that? I'm nonverbally interpreting that you are full of it tigerlillie.
 
 
+2 # tigerlillie 2014-02-12 02:58
And I am guessing that you don't have much of a background in research. Try it sometime, you could learn a lot. I was introduced to the principles of non-verbal communication 45 years ago in an undergraduate anthropology class. It is an academic field that has been around a long time.
 
 
-5 # brux 2014-02-11 07:30
Can I remind you that the "average" may not even exist, the average is a statistical construction, and does not mean anything in a specific case. You cannot convict me because some group or class that you may want to put me in has some criminal characteristic, you need proof, not inference, that is not even circumstantial evidence. You self-proclaimed feminists are pretty ditzy ... my Mom was a real feminist, and she has a clue, and did not just move thought life motivated by hatred towards men or her own personal experiences, feminism should be more than that, it should intersect with the struggles for all, and not be trotted out to to attack someone legally in the place of actual facts and evidence.
 
 
+54 # Susan1989 2014-02-10 09:05
This is a tragedy. Although I do not know what is true...I find myself deeply suspicious of a man who involves himself sexually with and marries a child of a girlfriend of 12 years. That would mean that Allen was involved in some way in her life when she was less than ten years old. This demonstrates poor boundaries...as well as callousness...a s he knew it would devastate Farrows other children.
 
 
+7 # ganymede 2014-02-10 09:41
This whole affair is getting rather boring. The one thing that does resonate throughout this whole mess is the lack of compassion and, as this commentator puts it, the callousness of Allen in having an affair with his step-daughter when she was probably underage. Such stupidity and ignorance for such a talented person is hard to fathom. Allen's reputation will forever be sullied by this scandal, although he is and will remain a great film maker.
 
 
-14 # brux 2014-02-10 12:02
Maybe ... but I am about 99.99999% sure that if you looked into anyone that has lots of money, and particularly power and/or fame you find they break rules and do what they want, ignore taboos, whatever else - and we let them do it.

We either just plain let them do it and ignore them, or we do not watch them or investigate them.

Woody got caught, but the worse you can say is that he and his of age girlfriend were rude, mean, unfeeling, insensitive to Mia Farrow ... and then when you look at Mia Farrow and her son Ronan, who she just claimed was Frank Sinatra's son ... did just as bad.

But of the two, who is pretending to be self-righteous and who brought up wild allegations at a time when it would be most profitable to her?
 
 
+17 # tgemberl 2014-02-10 10:00
Susan,
I don't know if you can really conclude he was involved with her before ten. The attraction may not have developed until she got a little older. But I agree with you that it's certainly callous to betray your girlfriend that way. If he wanted a younger woman, I'm sure he could've found lots of others.
 
 
+18 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 13:04
Quoting tgemberl:
Susan,
I don't know if you can really conclude he was involved with her before ten. The attraction may not have developed until she got a little older. But I agree with you that it's certainly callous to betray your girlfriend that way. If he wanted a younger woman, I'm sure he could've found lots of others.


He took naked pictures of her when she was 16, a minor. When did it start? How long did it take him to groom her to find posing for him naked acceptable? Hard to say.
 
 
-1 # brux 2014-02-11 07:01
> He took naked pictures of her when she was 16, a minor.

I have not read anything that said that.
 
 
-3 # brux 2014-02-11 07:33
In fact I read the exact opposite, that she was of legal age, 20, actually older than Mia Farrow was when she "dated" Frank Sinatra.
 
 
+1 # Malcolm 2014-02-11 07:47
Would that make you change your mind, brux?
 
 
-1 # brux 2014-02-11 23:02
About what?

Are you saying that if Woody Allen took pictures of Soon-Yi when she was a legal minor that it would "prove" that he sexually abused Dylan and you want me to back that up by agreeing with you?

I don't pretend I don't have my own thoughts about Woody Allen and that I wish this whole thing did not come up every time I hear about him or see his movies, which I like a lot.

However, to be herded by slander, lies, unproven allegations, told that he must be guilty because the legal system never works because men always "get off" .... yada, yada ...

I find none of this is fuel for any kind of rational or good conclusion on this matter, and when I read about it, at the core of it I find no proof. I don't like the idea that I could be wrong, but I come down on Woody's side, that's the bottom line.

When you look at the document so many are trying to say I should read or did not read, there are many actions that Mia Farrow took that were outrageous and unbalanced, hateful and vindictive, and Woody still stands, so this just seems like an escalation of that over time since she did not win, and apparently Mia is used to getting her way.

I've learned in my life that people want what they want. I don't think Woody's relationship with Mia was healthy, and it should have ended a long time earlier, but people are human, and make mistakes especially celebrities of all kinds who people do not say no to.
 
 
+1 # Malcolm 2014-02-12 09:59
"Are you saying that if Woody Allen took pictures of Soon-Yi when she was a legal minor that it would "prove" that he sexually abused Dylan and you want me to back that up by agreeing with you?"

Absolutely not. Read my question again.
 
 
-3 # brux 2014-02-12 23:00
That is exactly what your question implied ... maybe you better read it again.
 
 
0 # tigerlillie 2014-02-12 03:01
But I did read something that said she was 16 when she posed for nude photographs for him. Try the Vanity Fair article.
 
 
+2 # X Dane 2014-02-10 20:57
Susan.
He was not involved in her life as a child for he was not interested in Mia's children. and They didn't live together, they had their own homes, but PLEASE read the judge's report to fully understand the dynamic of that strange relationship
 
 
+13 # Craig Jones 2014-02-10 09:51
William Blake - The Sick Rose

O Rose, thou art sick!
The Invisible worm,
That flies in the night,
In the howling storm,

Has found out thy bed
Of Crimson joy;
And his dark secret love
Does thy life destroy.
 
 
+41 # pauleaston34 2014-02-10 09:56
Why do so many people object to coverage of this? I think it stirs up repressed memories of their own that are too painful for them to deal with. Memories of having been molested themselves, of their own molesting behavior, or of having enabled molestation of their own kids because it was inconvenient to object.

This whole dispute goes back to Sigmund Freud. Freud first found that the neurotic symptoms of most of his patients were caused by having been sexually molested in early childhood, usually by their parents. This provoked a firestorm of protest from polite society. Finally Freud recanted and said these were only fantasies.

In the nineteen nineties there was an epidemic of witchhunts in the US of daycare centers who were said to be molesting the kids in satanic rituals. Thats when I first decided that the US was losing its collective mind. Later events have amply born this out.

Where there is smoke there is likely to be fire. This ouburst of protest against Dylan's story being carried convinces me that molesting children continues to be common among liberals as well as conservatives. This is more than one persons problem. It is everybodys problem. Our tolerance of abusive parenting is behind our tolerance of abusive governing.
 
 
+4 # tgemberl 2014-02-10 10:08
paul,
I don't know if it's really repressed memories. Hopefully pedophilia isn't that common. I think some objections to the coverage are just about not wanting to focus on celebrities. Does focusing on Woody Allen or Michael Jackson really help protect many children from abuse? I don't know, maybe it does help.

Having read Allen's and Dylan Farrow's accounts, I'm not sure who to believe. Not knowing either of them, I am not in a position to evaluate the matter, and it wouldn't be a good use of my time to study it much. But I do believe Allen was insensitive to get involved with Sunyi, his girlfriend's adopted daughter.
 
 
+13 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 13:07
[quote name="tgemberl" ]paul,
I don't know if it's really repressed memories. Hopefully pedophilia isn't that common."

Child sexual abuse is that common. Google the topic. Rehashing issues via celebrities is how our society processes issues; this is much, much more than gossip. Sad but true.
 
 
+2 # tgemberl 2014-02-11 09:58
tigerlillie,
The problem with evaluating celebrity cases is that there's a danger you will prejudge a case because you don't have enough information. There are a lot of weird people in this world who do weird things. You can't assume that just because Michael Jackson slept in the same bed with young boys, he sexually abused them. I have cuddled in bed with a woman I was attracted to without ever having sex with her. Call me weird if you want to. Jackson may just have been a very eccentric person.

It is the job of the jury to decide whether someone's guilty when they get a case. They get the evidence to decide that. It's not our job, and we shouldn't let the media get us focused on the foibles of celebrities.
 
 
-6 # tigerlillie 2014-02-11 16:41
Actually, I have always suspected that Michael Jackson was more sinned against than sinner.
 
 
+1 # tigerlillie 2014-02-11 16:43
Oh, and I am not concentrating on the foibles of celebrities. My focus is on the well being of a child, who as an adult has had the courage to publicly reiterate her allegations.
 
 
-4 # tgemberl 2014-02-11 17:10
tigerlillie,
I'm not saying that Dylan shouldn't have made her statement. That's between her and Woody Allen, Mia Farrow, and the other people who know them. Because Allen is a public figure, there's no way to avoid the statement being public, I suppose.

I'm also not saying I think Allen is innocent. I wouldn't want my children to spend time with him, either. We know he was callous to get involved with Sun Yi. You don't have to be on a jury to know that. But I just don't see how our spending a lot of time trying to ascertain the facts in a case we know little about is very productive.
 
 
+13 # Malcolm 2014-02-10 13:13
I read both accounts as well. But the real eyeopener comes from an objective third party: Justice Elliott Wilk:

http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/205403621

Justice Wilk gives Farrow credit for being an imperfect parent, but says basically, that no parents are perfect, and her biggest failing was to stay with Allen!
 
 
+20 # candida 2014-02-10 12:19
Quoting pauleaston34:
Why do so many people object to coverage of this?


If you take "brux"(who seems a bit unbalanced) out of the discussion , I'm not so sure it's so many people who object. But I agree with you, pauleaston, as to some of the motives for objections. There are others. Mostly, that the experiences of women and children are not seen as legitimate as those of adult males, especially by adult males, which all of the objectors seem to be. Historically in Western society, we have not been seen as fully human but the chattel of males, and that attitude is still, unfortunately, very much alive, as by some of the commentators here who don't even see child/family abuse as a "political issue." To you I say the old feminist maxim (that you should know by now, for god's sake!), "the personal IS political!"

This is WHOLLY appropriate for RSN!! Unfortunately, if it weren't celebrity news, the issue would not make it into public discourse. Look at the predator priests and the Catholic Church whose long history of severe abuse against children hardly scratched the surface of the press compared to the magnitude of their crimes. And don't underestimate the power of denial and ignorance, such as that of tgembrl. Child abuse, including its sexual forms, is far too common.
 
 
+6 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 13:09
Right, brux and a couple of his buds have dominated the discussion until today, and as you note, their point of view has been unbalanced, to say the least.
 
 
-4 # brux 2014-02-11 07:37
I have not "dominated" anything ... you can see that all my posts get thumbs down thanks to people that refuse to use their brains and just reflexively respond with their emotions.

I asked some questions and made some points, to which I still have gotten no response from those like you who attack me, just that I am wrong, but no reason given or rational rebuttal.
 
 
+11 # Eliza D 2014-02-10 14:25
This is the most thoughtful and perceptive response to this horrific family tragedy I have read. There is an old saying that starts: If you want peace in the world, you must have peace in your country. It goes down the line to end with: If you want peace in your neighborhood, you must have peace in your family. Obviously, there was no peace in the Allen-Farrow household, and all the children have paid a terrible price.
 
 
+16 # JJS 2014-02-10 17:21
1. Approximately 5 children die every day because of child abuse.

2. 1 out of 3 girls and 1 out of 5 boys will be sexually abused before they reach age 18.

3. 90 percent of child sexual abuse victims know the perpetrator in some way. 68 percent are abused by a family member.

4. Most children become victims of abuse and neglect at 18 months or younger.

5. In 2010, 1,537 children died of abuse or neglect.•79.4 percent were under the age of 4.
•47.7 percent were under the age of 1.


6. Boys (48.5 percent) and girls (51.2 percent) become victims at nearly the same rate.

7. 3.6 million cases of child abuse are reported every year in the U.S. And the number of children involved in these reports is 6 million.

8. Abused and neglected children are 11 times more likely to engage in criminal behavior as an adult.

9. About 80 percent of 21-year-olds who were abused as children met criteria for at least one psychological disorder.

10. 14 percent of all men and 36 percent of all women in prison were abused as children.

11. Abused children are less likely to practice safe sex, putting them at greater risk for STDs. They’re also 25 percent more likely to experience teen pregnancy.

http://www.childhelp.org/pages/statistics
http://www.safehorizon.org/index/what-we-do-2/child-abuse--incest-55/child-abuse-statistics--facts-304.html
 
 
+4 # Malcolm 2014-02-10 21:10
Horrifying statistics, JJS. It's amazing that such things can happen here in the "home of the brave", and it makes me want to puke.

There's one statistic that I am uncertain of, number 2. I was at a workshop on child abuse at my kids' grade school, long ago, and our sheriff told us exactly that. I was, frankly, suspicious.
He explained the situation. Yes he was correct; however, his definition of "sexual abuse" included such things as a nine year old boy swatting a nine year old girl on the fanny while riding past her on a bicycle.

Most the parents at the workshop felt that lumping such childish behavior trivializes serious sexual harassment/assa ult.

I wonder if you know what kind of activity is included in your statistics re sexual abuse?

I hope you won't think I'm skeptical about your concerns. I assure you that I am not!
 
 
+3 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 21:50
Whatever your local sheriff had to say, he is not resposible for formulating the statistic quoted, and no, to my recollection, incidents such as developmentally normal play, etc., were not considered as sexually abusive for the purpose of compiling the statistic (which most professionals agree errs on the conservative side).
 
 
+3 # Malcolm 2014-02-11 07:50
I admit, sheriff Arnado wasn't the brightest sheriff we've had.

Do you happen to know where I can find the definition of sexual abuse that results in that one in three girls and one in five boys statistic?
 
 
+1 # tigerlillie 2014-02-11 16:45
This particular statistic has been used for decades, and Since I have a bad head ache I am not inclined to track them down. Try Wikipaedia or Google?
 
 
+2 # Malcolm 2014-02-11 20:35
Maybe tomorrow. Hope your head's feeling better soon :)
 
 
-8 # brux 2014-02-11 07:40
It is the child abuse industry that exists in part because of some of the nuts here who need to express their power by participating in an online mob lynching of someone because their own lives are so messed up.
 
 
+4 # JJS 2014-02-13 15:59
Malcolm,
I understand your concern and I agree that there are times when the authorities go overboard in the classification of sexual abuse and assault.
Someone I know, (a teenage person) close to me, was accused of a "sex crime" by police after he "mooned" another group of kids. Indecent exposure, which you can also be charged if you pee in public, or behind a bush. Give me a break. Still, once that mark is on your record you are subject to increase scrutiny and penalties.
I also agree that it trivializes true sexual assault and abuse. It can also give us a false notion of the breadth of the problem. We must also remember that many sex abuse crimes go unreported,
No, I don't know the kind of activity used in the statistics. I had heard of these general statistics on radio and TV media in the past. I've also recently read them and sited the source. You may want to inquire at those organizations.
 
 
+5 # X Dane 2014-02-10 21:12
jjs.

Thank you so much for clarifying the sad, ugly truth, which many people do not want to acknowledge. If you close your eyes and ears, it does NOT go away.
 
 
-6 # brux 2014-02-11 07:38
and because of that Woody Allen must be guilty ... that seems to be the thought process of many of those here.
 
 
+5 # JJS 2014-02-13 16:21
Quoting brux:
and because of that Woody Allen must be guilty ... .


That is not what I said or meant. Many children REALLY, REALLY, REALLY are abused and they REALLY, REALLY, REALLY need to be listened to. If Dylan has more to say now, that she is an adult, I feel we should listen.
Of course, I am all for a court to decide the actual legal guilt or innocence of Woody. Regardless, I will give Dylan my ear.
 
 
+27 # Dennyc 2014-02-10 09:57
If anyone needs to be reassured that child abuse is covered up simply explore the case of the children in the boys' home in Texas. Mass pedophilia and all of it covered up to such a degree that only a fluke brought it to the attention of the 'authorities'. Worse than anyone can imagine? Certainly. This particular series of events was so outrageous that almost everyone would refuse to believe it happened and one of the commenters is correct - pedophiles come in all stripes and colors - most unbelievable.
 
 
-28 # BKnowswhitt 2014-02-10 10:14
Any day now .. enter Gloria Steinem ... here come the judge here come da Judge . her rebuttal to his statement tells me this will go on and she won't go away this time around as an adult .. will be a huge U.S. now 'cooked' news media who love trash stories as ignorant americans love to be inflated and lied to .. or in this case probably true story .. so even better fodder for them all ...
 
 
+4 # BKnowswhitt 2014-02-10 18:57
What the negatives for? I support D Farrow just pointing out how it will most likely go down. It will never go to trial ever. That's how the system works in america ... now if Allen was a poor black man he'd already been 'hung out to dry' ..
 
 
+1 # Cassandra2012 2014-02-11 10:01
Your apparent sexism is alive and well, that's why all the negatives. You seem to have a problem with Gloria Steinem -- ad feminem --because she speaks out onisssues of import to women?
 
 
+5 # JJS 2014-02-13 16:04
BK
Did you mean to say Gloria Allred, rather than Steinem?
Get your "Glorias" straight!
 
 
-16 # fenox 2014-02-10 10:32
I wonder, some people are convinced Allen was the father figure of Mia Farrow's 13 children. Can you really imagine that? He lived in his own apartment and Mia lived in her house with her collection. And at least two nannies. The scenario after Woody fell in love with the daughter of Mia and Andre Previn, taking Dylan in her house to the attic, is difficult to accept in the circumstances of a difficult separation.
 
 
+21 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 13:12
Boyfriends/step fathers with a sexual interest in children seek out women with young children. You don't have to live with someone or be officially designated a father figure to have access to children through your relationship status with the mother.
 
 
+1 # Malcolm 2014-02-10 13:18
That's all well covered here:

http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/205403621
 
 
-6 # writetime 2014-02-10 13:35
As several others have pointed out, your up and down votes are not working. They seem to be fixed for a pro-Dylan Farrow opinion. Is this intended? All of the results should be ignored. I tried other articles and they are all working correctly.
 
 
+5 # Activista 2014-02-10 13:49
Quoting writetime:
As several others have pointed out, your up and down votes are not working. They seem to be fixed for a pro-Dylan Farrow opinion. Is this intended? All of the results should be ignored. I tried other articles and they are all working correctly.

"up and down votes are not working" this system think also that this system is hacked - I have a suggestion - think
1 - Display BOTH - cumulative green red at each comment
2 - ONLY registered votes can rate
It is ethical to comment after the rating
 
 
-8 # Activista 2014-02-10 13:49
Sorry for repeating the message - the response was slow and I clicked the send again - another glitch that needs to be fixed - disable send button after first click
 
 
-3 # Activista 2014-02-10 13:52
"up and down votes are not working" think also that this system is hacked/easy to be hacked -
Please display BOTH - cumulative - both green and red at each comment. -201 and +200 is DIFFERENT information than -1
 
 
+23 # melissa 2014-02-10 16:08
I was sexually abused at about age 6 - a close neighbor:I was enticed by fishes in a fish tank. To this day - I cannot step into any aquarium or look at any swimming fishes. When it happened, I held a "meeting" of all the neighborhood "little' Girls - my age and younger. I did not understand what was going on in the abuse, but I scared them and told them NEVER to go near the man's house for ANY reason. I felt that was my job - to save the children from the experience.I can still remember the circle of girls sitting on the grass within eye-view of the "house". I hope I scared them enough - I think I did. The responsibility was an awful thing to put on a six-year-old! Worse than the abuse! Of course, no adults were told; as far as I understood - thye would not be interested and I did not have the vocabulary to explain things to them!
 
 
+13 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 18:38
What a brave little girl you were, Melissa, with a noble spirit.
 
 
-12 # LML 2014-02-10 16:22
That's it -- I am out of here!!

So long RSN -- and good luck getting back to important political issues!!
 
 
+9 # pushingforpeace 2014-02-10 18:24
This IS a political issue! Childrens rights, womens rights ... is pedophilia in the Catholic church not a political issue? And of course Dylan should go public at this time, when her oppressor is being awarded and she has a public voice. She is brave to speak out and she speaks for many others who are not heard. Many of Woody's movies reveal his narcissism and mealy-mouthed self-absorption , to the extent where he even models some of his female characters after himself, or else they take on his strange persona while filming. Anyone else ever notice this? Certainly the male leads are facets of himself. IMHO he is NOT a great filmmaker, just a great humorist and no doubt, an awful father.
 
 
-5 # The Buffalo Guy 2014-02-10 20:05
[quote name="pushingfo rpeace"]This IS a political issue! Childrens rights, womens rights ... is pedophilia in the Catholic church not a political issue?

pushingforpeace ! You aren't alone in saying this is a political issue. I'm having trouble understanding that point of view. Would you elaborate. What makes it political?
 
 
+4 # tigerlillie 2014-02-10 22:03
Buffalo Guy, I know you asked pushingforpeace , but thought I would try to explain. Women are an oppressed majority; their suffering is often trivialized as personal, and irrelevant to serious, male political issues, such as war or financial crime. When women began meeting together in what now sounds so quaintly named consciousness raising groups in the early 1970's, they discovered that what they had originally thought were individual traumas were shared by other women, and that these abuses occurred as part of the systematic oppression of women. And that systematic oppression included the abuse of children, male and female, as well. Hence the phrase, "The personal is political."

Hope this helps a bit. A society that oppresses women, the givers of lfe, and children, the future, is rotten to the core.
 
 
+3 # The Buffalo Guy 2014-02-11 07:01
Thank you for the reply and I see your point but didn't associate it with this issue. I say often that the problem with any institution or organization is that it has humans in it and government is no exception. But I'm not an abuser and my wife has been my partner of many years. Top that with 20 children, 5 ours, going through our house and that was my focus. Thanks again.
 
 
+2 # tigerlillie 2014-02-11 16:49
Buffalo Guy, there was no need for you to defend yourself as being nonabusive. It never even occurred to me that you were an abusive male. I am sorry if I in anyway contributed to creating a climate that put you on the defensive.
 
 
+4 # The Buffalo Guy 2014-02-12 15:08
tigerlillie! Actually, I wasn't being defensive but explaining how my thinking about an abuse topic, wife child or any abuse, is not often in my mind. I'm rarely exposed to the topic and that's why I didn't see your point about it being political until you explained it. Thanks again for taking the time.
 
 
0 # thirteenthpaladin 2014-02-18 13:30
Buffalo Guy, you may find this site surprising, but certainly informative:

http://projectunbreakable.tumblr.com/tagged/grace%27s+photography

http://project-unbreakable.org/
 
 
+5 # Emily 2014-02-10 19:14
I never could stand Whats his names "humor" or his movies, he always had a gross yucky feeling, a slimy weird feeling yucky nasty woody, no wonder his name is another term for a boner.
 
 
+6 # Jack Hammer 2014-02-10 19:36
I just read this:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/205403621/Allen-v-Farrow-Custody-Ruling-June-7-1993

-And I think that if you're claiming that you have a genuine interest in the case -you need to. There's at least one adult -on record -in court saying that they observed Allen touching Dylan inappropriately -and interacting with her in a way that I can only describe as disturbing.

The looming specter of the holocaust can never rationally be used as a defense against all illegality on behalf of all Jews, in perpetuity.

I'm beginning to think that Dylan Farrow has always been telling the truth -and if she Is then we owe it to her to support her.
 
 
-3 # brux 2014-02-11 07:47
-And I think that if you're claiming that you have a genuine interest in the case -you need to. There's at least one adult -on record -in court saying that they observed Allen touching Dylan inappropriately -and interacting with her in a way that I can only describe as disturbing.

I did not read that anywhere ... if you can, prove it, post it.
 
 
+4 # Activista 2014-02-11 12:46
"There's at least one adult -on record -in court saying that they observed Allen touching Dylan inappropriately -and interacting with her in a way that I can only describe as disturbing."
please refer to URL image below:
htmlimg1.scribdassets.com/5bv9i32iyo3gtwes/images/11-d82b955069.jpg
 
 
+1 # brux 2014-02-11 22:51
I asked you to reproduce the sentence ... I read that, and the comments you claim exist are being misinterpreted by you - that is, they were actually Mia Farrow saying what she said other people had said ... other people who did not go on record to back her up. Go ahead ... cut and past the original text ... I read it. I might have been wrong or missed what you are talking about ... show me please?
 
 
0 # Malcolm 2014-02-11 20:39
It's in that 33 page article written by the judge, in large, friendly letters. The one several of us asked you to read.
 
 
-1 # brux 2014-02-11 22:52
Go ahead ... cut and past the original text ... I read it. I might have been wrong or missed what you are talking about ... show me please? IN CONTEXT WITHOUT OMISSION PLEASE.
 
 
-1 # Malcolm 2014-02-12 10:27
Maybe someone else can cut and paste from that document. I'm unable to, or I'd be happy yo.
 
 
-1 # brux 2014-02-22 23:47
you can run around here popping off pointless one-liners but you don't know how to cut and paste, or make a point? that figures.
 
 
0 # Malcolm 2014-02-12 10:26
Here is the post you asked for.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/205403621/Allen-v-Farrow-Custody-Ruling-June-7-1993
 
 
-1 # Cassandra2012 2014-02-11 10:05
Agree with most of what you say, except for the swipe at Jews, which is tacky and uncalled for.
 
 
+10 # itchyvet 2014-02-10 19:43
WOW ! Incredible, the ignorance of American people is astounding. I'm 64 years old, and I can recall very vividly when this creep moved out with the young Asian girl they had adopted, which he later married, thus she could never ever give evidence against him.
IF, the relationship with this young girl had reached the stage they had to move out, when did it start, and how long had it gone on before he was caught out by his wife ? There is no doubt in my mind, that this creep is a pedophile and has been for a very long time, as a direct result I have been unable to ever watch any of his movies, they all give me the creeps just thinking such person had anything to do with their making.
 
 
-8 # brux 2014-02-11 07:49
Your understanding of this case is as bad as your understanding of the legal system.

A wife may testify against her husband, the protection is that a wife may not be compelled to testify against her husband.

Maybe you are the creep since you think you are entitled to spread your ignorance.
 
 
+8 # tomtom 2014-02-10 20:05
Somewhere in my upbringing I was told to listen to the cries of a victim. I don't know how many innocent people have been executed, but, society, as a whole, is insensitive to those whom suffer.
 
 
+4 # Anarchist 23 2014-02-10 20:24
Considering how the Rethugs and ALEC and the Oligarchs are raping the earth, destroying water for hundreds of thousands of people...maybe this is just a version in miniature of privileged rape.
 
 
+5 # Servelan 2014-02-10 22:52
My husband, who I am divorcing because of his abuse of me, denies he is abusive because he never hit me. He lied to me constantly, manipulated me, controlled me, terrorized me with his raging, undermined and belittled me and generally treated me like crap. I suspect he did the same to his first wife, who also divorced him.

But, because he never slapped me or used cigarettes to burn me or broke my arm, he says he was never abusive.

This is what abusive people do. They view their actions as normal or justified and deny what they did fits the model or definition of abuse.

Woody Allen fits the model of an abusive person; he refuses to see how his behavior violates societal norms and has affected another person because he's a narcissist. The rules don't apply to narcissists; they believe they make the rules, and if someone else complains about the hurt they have suffered, the narcissist will deny all.
 
 
-8 # brux 2014-02-11 07:51
Why did you marry your husband and why did you stay with him?

And what does any of that have to do with Woody Allen.

You sound like you are so broken that you cannot think straight. Sorry, but you have to fix your own life before you can go pushing your misery and pain into the world and affecting others,
 
 
+3 # tigerlillie 2014-02-11 16:58
What a destructive person you are, Brux, but then, that seems to be your style. Servelan points out that Woody Allen's personality fits the model of an abusive person, and shares with us how she came to be acquainted with this personality type. You, true to the model of the abusive personality, then accuse her of being broken and trying to project her misery and pain onto the world, when in fact, the exact opposite is true. You are the living personification of the psychological principle of projection.

Ignore this jerk, Servelan, he is just one more abusive personality, and continue with the courageous business of taking your life back.
 
 
-3 # brux 2014-02-11 22:48
Oh, you mean what she has read about Woody Allen's personality ... seems you cannot distinguish the difference and you think you know someone because you read a bit about them from someone's agenda that sounds like it might appeal to you emotionally. You're mental rigor is non-existent tigerlillie, and that makes it you that is the destructive person. How you get off making personal comments about people you really have no idea about ... but then if I had to guess I's say you were an insulated-from- reality shut in with no other life.
 
 
+2 # tigerlillie 2014-02-12 03:30
If you have read the Allan vs. Farrow custody decree, as you claim, then you know that the judge's assessment of Allan was that he was self absorbed, insensitive, and highly manipulative in a destructive way. That is why he dismissed Allan's suit for custody as frivolous, and made him pay Farrow's legal fees.

Incidentally, what do you know of Woody Allan, or Dylan Farrow, or Mia Farrow, other than what you have read? Yet you have repeatedly offered your commentary in a very authoritative fashion. Why can't other commenter's offer their opinion about Allan based on what they have read, just as you do?

I've followed all your comments on this subject since it was first introduced on RSN three articles ago, and you impress me as a bully who is desperate to be perceived as an expert on a topic about which you are utterly, and transparently, ignorant. I'm done with you.
 
 
+1 # John S. Browne 2014-02-12 16:45
#

Another "liberally ignorant" person talking about themselves again, while claim- ing that what they're saying supposedly "applies" to who they're directing it at. It is you and your ilk who come across as the bullies. You are allegedly so-called "professionals" with years of experience, who have (far?) worse psychological pathologies and/or psychoses than those who you purport to "help", who presume innocent-until- PROVEN-guilty-b eyond-a-reasona ble-doubt people as being "guilty", who probably destroy innocent people's lives, and who are controlled by evil that you falsely believe is "righteous".

Like most people with college degrees and years of experience in their profess- ion(s), you think you're superior to other people, that you have some special ability to tell "guilty" people from innocent people, and that you have the authority to presume people "guilty". But all you are is an, and/or are, unrighteous judge(s) in violation of God's Law in John 7:24.

"It is written, thus says the Lord [God the Father through Jesus the Christ, the Word(s) and Law(s) of God embodied and become flesh, and the Maker / Creator of all things except evil...":

"...Judge not according to (outward) appearance, but (ONLY) judge righteous judgment..."! [John 7:24; etc.; clarification(s ) and/or emphasis provided by me.]

(Continued)
 
 
-2 # John S. Browne 2014-02-12 21:02
#

You have no special discernment, because you likely reject God, or only "believe" in Him in a counterfeit, false fashion, and put yourself(ves) above Him. Therefore, all you can do is far too often (and once is far too often) incorrectly discern and make unrighteous judgments based thereon. In short, like most people, all you are is an, and/or are, unrepentant evil person, and/or people, who falsely think(s) they're "righteous" and superior to others.

But I've got news for you: NO ONE IS SUPERIOR TO, OR BETTER THAN, *ANYONE* ELSE! We are ALL sinners.

#
 
 
0 # Malcolm 2014-02-12 21:38
Please leave your imaginary friend out of this.
 
 
-1 # Malcolm 2014-02-12 21:36
Has anyone suggested you seek help? Recently?
 
 
-2 # brux 2014-02-22 23:46
These boards are peppered with your silly one-liners, what are you 6 years old? How stupid can you be?
 
 
-1 # brux 2014-02-20 23:49
I'm a bully and all you have done is hysterically name call anything your mind associates with child molestation. You question my motives, but where have I done anything but offer facts, and ask for facts to back up your side.

There are many people who do not like Woody Allen, what the judge did or did not do does not equal justice. Only when things go the way you perceive they should do you call it justice, while you question the whole system.
 
 
+2 # tigerlillie 2014-02-11 17:01
PS. Your soon to be ex husband emotionally abused you, Severlan;in fact your description of his behavior sounds like the classic pattern of psychological terrorism. You are a strong woman.
 
 
+4 # JJS 2014-02-13 16:11
I am proud of you, Servelan, for finding the strength to leave this abusive relationship. Stay well and safe. You know what really happened.
 
 
+5 # rose528 2014-02-11 09:54
to all of you who commented that this was a waste of your time or that the woman or women are lying and that old woody didn't do anything wrong I HOPE YOUR DAUGHTER OR SON DO NOT RUN INTO A PEDOPHILE AND YOU HAVE TO PROVE THE RESULTS TO THE OTHERS
 
 
+1 # tgemberl 2014-02-11 16:08
If that danger ever comes up, I hope we will all provide a nurturing home to our children so they can feel supported in telling us if they were victimized, and know we're there to help them any way we can. A protective home where we watch over them and discourage interaction with those who don't seem safe. Those conditions don't depend on whether we decide Allen was guilty in this case.

Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying he was innocent. I wouldn't want my kids to spend time with Allen. I just don't have the evidence for deciding his guilt or innocence, and it's not my job to.
 
 
+4 # rose528 2014-02-11 09:57
OLD WOODY IS A PEDOPHILE AND HE CAN NOT ESCAPE THAT NAME TAG "A PEDOPHILE" so get over it you nay sayers
 
 
-1 # Billy Bob 2014-02-11 10:20
There's an ugliness I'm witnessing, in the comments to these articles, which shows how close we are, at all times, to mob mentality.

I expect to receive 100 negatives for assuming someone's innocence because he was never formally accused of anything. To many, having the Constitutional notion that a person is innocent until proven guilty, is itself, worthy of suspicion.

I refuse to go further into this discussion. It's become abusive and irrational. When that happens, little can be accomplished. I don't see any good coming from the continued back and forth between entrenched sides in this 21 year old he-said-she-said.

Look up Fatty Arbuckle. His life and career were destroyed because of accusations. It was later proven that none of them were true, but not until long after his death. He went from being one of the most famous movie stars in the world to having his name nearly forgotten to history, because of unproven accusations that were eventually proven false.

I don't know who's telling the truth.

AND, neither do any of you.
 
 
+1 # BKnowswhitt 2014-02-11 17:56
Try not to be so harsh. No one likes abuse of a child it is a very very highly emotionally charged issue and i'm sure many of us are just PROJECTING ... our own shit ... Like the big banks .. some public shame for Woody .. but most likely he'll still make movies .. and will cost him dough he can handle losing ... and we all get our panties in a wad for naught ...
 
 
-4 # brux 2014-02-20 23:56
What has bothered me about this is that I liked Woody Allen, and I was really disappointed and sad to learn of this ... then I learn all is not how it was reported sensationally in the media, and there is no solid evidence that Woody was a child molestor or any of this. Meanwhile the story about Mia Farrows actions which I had never heard before were covered as much as Woody's supposed crimes, unproven, uncharged, were not relayed to the public truly.

I am very angry that Woody was slandered and this slander is still going on. I wish I did not have to deal with any of it, but if I thought Woody Allen was a predator I would not watch his movies. For example when I found out about Arnold Schwarzenegger and his sleazy habits with the maids, I decided I would not contribute to his movies or TV shows monetarily. I don't think that is true with Woody, and I should have trusted my gut because though nothing has really been proven there is a lot of indicate this was a very toxic relationship with Farrow that both of them should have got out of, but that Woody did the nasty thing of having a relationship with Farrow's adopted daughter. Not nice, but not a crime. Meanwhile, Farrow was still seeing, and apparently having children with Frank Sinatra?
 
 
0 # shinethelight 2014-03-24 20:44
This message is for Brux: Don't know who you are but very glad for that. You must be PR for Woody Camp or past abuser yourself. All of your comments make me want to purge. How is it a child who is now an ADULT leading a normal healthy life & REMEMBERS her vivid memories of having her genitalia fondled by Woody....While he tells her she might get to be in a Movie?? how is that NOT Valid?? How is that not an action of a SICKO?? Yes he was cleared years ago because of $$ & power & because DYLAN was a child without a valid voice. & Because he was able to distort the truth by reversing the blame to MIA an old trick by controlling manipulators. But now that Dylan is an adult & has memories of this specific sick fondling obsession this should make her points Valid & True. Kind of like someone who gets shot in a partial murder & lives after a long coma to tell who the perpetrator is...the PERP Woody is guilty GUILTY. Someone as destructive & clever to sidestep the truth as you must definitely be a paid member of Woodys PR camp or just plain ignorant, obnoxious or simply a past perp yourself. I'm done with my statement. Your comments nauseate me. I'm just wondering if you are human or if the bowels of the earth opened up for you to write a few blogs.
 
 
0 # shinethelight 2014-03-24 20:57
&Bux just having read all your blogs & comments... It is clear you are obviously the "devils advocate". That is why more & more children are now getting a voice. To stop the perps from sadistic behavior since perps want no accountability- - its having accountability that will make the perps stop pleasuring themselves with little girls under the age of 10. Woody is a clear example of a perp that had no accountability.
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN