Open Letter From Dylan Farrow on Abuse by Woody Allan

[Spiro C. Thiery]

Sheesh I can't believe people here are still arguing about this and in so doing utterly IGNORING the girl herself, and the girl's own account!

And Justdrew, you admit that you are CHOOSING to disbelieve the girls own account because you just don't want to believe that "Woody Allen" would do such a thing. Like you know him!

I don't know anyone who has worked with Woody Allen but I know a lot of people who have worked with another beloved icon of our media culture and they universally say the same thing about him. That he's an in believable dick, a horrible human being, and that he hates kids. Guess who this is: it's Bill Cosby.

Cognitive dissonance runs high and hard, and sucks people in who you wouldn't expect.

You do not know "Woody Allen". Nobody here does. The girl wrote about what happened to her, and you choose to completely ignore it. No, what's important is your feelings for a guy who calls himself "Woody Allen".

And you blame Mia Farrow like it's a crime to get angry at such a grotesque man? A guy who ran off with his common law wife's adopted daughter and who undoubtedly was getting it on with her while she was still a minor?

Have you people no shame?

You defend a sick and dangerous person.

Quit ignoring the victim. It's repulsive.

I suggest you take the superior moral outrage and guilty conscience projection of the sickness of everyone except those you deem worthy of not being sick and deal with it rather than getting upset about the opinions of your fellow forum members.

[kool maudit]

Sheesh I can't believe people here are still arguing about this and in so doing utterly IGNORING the girl herself, and the girl's own account!

And Justdrew, you admit that you are CHOOSING to disbelieve the girls own account because you just don't want to believe that "Woody Allen" would do such a thing. Like you know him!

I don't know anyone who has worked with Woody Allen but I know a lot of people who have worked with another beloved icon of our media culture and they universally say the same thing about him. That he's an in believable dick, a horrible human being, and that he hates kids. Guess who this is: it's Bill Cosby.

Cognitive dissonance runs high and hard, and sucks people in who you wouldn't expect.

You do not know "Woody Allen". Nobody here does. The girl wrote about what happened to her, and you choose to completely ignore it. No, what's important is your feelings for a guy who calls himself "Woody Allen".

And you blame Mia Farrow like it's a crime to get angry at such a grotesque man? A guy who ran off with his common law wife's adopted daughter and who undoubtedly was getting it on with her while she was still a minor?

Have you people no shame?

You defend a sick and dangerous person.

Quit ignoring the victim. It's repulsive.

there are two conflicting claims and none of us were there. that doesn't mean that one cannot have one's suspicions, or believe one and not the other, but it does mean that it's excessive to believe one, disbelieve the other, and proceed with righteous anger as if your belief is the objective truth.

[kool maudit]

this is the nature of rigorous intuition though... some come for the uncovering-of-abuse, some for the occult element, some for the pervasive skepticism. a lot of us come for all that and more, but the diversity of topic-concentrations will result in some issues being differently weighted.

[Project Willow]

I understand the anger. Thank goodness my father wasn't famous, would have to shoot myself.

Dylan's response to Woody's NYT OP ED:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/02/08/showbiz/dylan-farrow-response/

Once 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.

[Nordic]

Sheesh I can't believe people here are still arguing about this and in so doing utterly IGNORING the girl herself, and the girl's own account!

And Justdrew, you admit that you are CHOOSING to disbelieve the girls own account because you just don't want to believe that "Woody Allen" would do such a thing. Like you know him!

I don't know anyone who has worked with Woody Allen but I know a lot of people who have worked with another beloved icon of our media culture and they universally say the same thing about him. That he's an in believable dick, a horrible human being, and that he hates kids. Guess who this is: it's Bill Cosby.

Cognitive dissonance runs high and hard, and sucks people in who you wouldn't expect.

You do not know "Woody Allen". Nobody here does. The girl wrote about what happened to her, and you choose to completely ignore it. No, what's important is your feelings for a guy who calls himself "Woody Allen".

And you blame Mia Farrow like it's a crime to get angry at such a grotesque man? A guy who ran off with his common law wife's adopted daughter and who undoubtedly was getting it on with her while she was still a minor?

Have you people no shame?

You defend a sick and dangerous person.

Quit ignoring the victim. It's repulsive.

there are two conflicting claims and none of us were there. that doesn't mean that one cannot have one's suspicions, or believe one and not the other, but it does mean that it's excessive to believe one, disbelieve the other, and proceed with righteous anger as if your belief is the objective truth.

Sorry but there are not 2 conflicting claims. This kind of apologetic bullshit reminds me of what do many Americans like to say about the Israeli/Palestinian "conflict". "oh gosh, it's complicated.". "these people have had issues with each other for centuries" etc etc etc. when the truth is plain and clear and stupidly blinding.

There is truth, and there are lies. There's no "gosh, maybe they both have a point". No. Either the girl is lying or she's telling the truth. She has no reason to lie, and "Woody" has every reason in the world to lie until he's in the grave.

I am disgusted that there are so many men here on this board who refuse to even consider the girl's own account of what happened and would rather blame everything on the psycho-shrew mother and belittle her for being angry about the horrible shit that happened, and completely ignore the in-your-face evidence about Allen that the victim documents above.

It's just weird as hell, honestly. Y'all are just in some weird weird mental place where you simply don't want to believe the girl, the babysitters, the prosecutor. You're like one of those wives of an abuser who refuses to believe that their husband is molesting their kid. It's seriously fucked up.

And you're all men. Every one of you. Why is that? Think about it.

[sunny]

@Nordic--"There is truth, and there are lies. There's no "gosh, maybe they both have a point". No. Either the girl is lying or she's telling the truth. She has no reason to lie, and "Woody" has every reason in the world to lie until he's in the grave. "

Exactly, which is why I chose to stay out of this conversation. One of them is lying and I choose to believe it's Woody Allen. End of story.

Bill Cosby has been accused of multiple sexual assaults, by the way. In case anybody should forget.

Just over the last few days, George Clooney has been revealed as a boorish, oafish, bullying, entitled frat boy 'prankster' who once smashed Nora Dunn in the head with an apple flung at her from 25 yards using a car antenna. Obviously this wasn't a 'prank' but an assault, but it's treated in the following linked article as if it were just another of Clooney's 'clever' jokes. Akin to that time he took a crap in his friend's kitty litter. Why did he assault his co-worker? Because she was 'heckling' him on the set of Three Kings. People are laughing at this behavior. 'Oh that George, isn't he charming?' He not only doesn't deny it he bragged about the shot he made rather than apologizing to Nora for assaulting and presumably humiliating her at her place of work.

http://www.vulture.com/2014/02/timeline ... nking.html

This is the kind of obsequious star fucker attitude, relentlessly fostered by the media, that allows WA to walk around unashamed after being accused of child rape.

[BrandonD]

And you're all men. Every one of you. Why is that? Think about it.

A significant point, that unfortunately will go unacknowledged by those on the other side of the debate.

[kool maudit]

it remains objectively true that there exist conflicting accounts of the event.

it appears that, for many, one account is certainly accurate and the other is certainly fraudulent. if one does not progress from the initial conflict to this second stage of belief, we can then marshal forces such as patriarchy, male violence, and maleness itself to assign stigma to those who have failed to make the progression: they are on the wrong side of history. they are agents of dangerous and despicable forces. they do not believe because they are either dishonest or malevolent.

when i see this sort of rhetorical structure erected, i become wary.

it has nothing to do with the topic or subject and everything to do with the traditions of this style of discourse.

[Saurian Tail]

it remains objectively true that there exist conflicting accounts of the event.

Everyone acknowledges this. The nature of these sorts of situations is that they take place in secret and are generally perpetrated against vulnerable people. There will always be conflicting stories being told. This sort of "objectivity" is not very objective ...it is a mental blind spot. Objectively, victims get very little support, have very little power, have their own testimony discounted, and rarely report what happens to them.

it appears that, for many, one account is certainly accurate and the other is certainly fraudulent.

Almost certainly, yes. Using logical deduction based on a historical understanding of the issue, almost certainly, yes.

if one does not progress from the initial conflict to this second stage of belief, we can then marshal forces such as patriarchy, male violence, and maleness itself to assign stigma to those who have failed to make the progression: they are on the wrong side of history. they are agents of dangerous and despicable forces. they do not believe because they are either dishonest or malevolent.

Your use of terms like "stigma", "agents", and "despicable" above is prejudicial language. You are imagining what is in other people's minds to bolster the argument in your own mind. You are claiming victimhood rather than using your voice to support someone who is very likely to be a true victim.

My observation is that attempts to try to help people see the situation through they eyes of the victim are mostly met with fierce resistance. People will search diligently for reasons to give the likely perpetrator a way out. Victims are marginalized and their own account of the situation practically ignored.

This response is so universal and predictable that it has been generally recognized to be a culturally created narrative or blind spot. Most individuals are neither dishonest nor malevolent ... but it is frustrating to run into the same brick wall time and again.

when i see this sort of rhetorical structure erected, i become wary.

What exactly is the correct rhetorical structure people should take when defending victims? What sort of rhetorical and legal structures exist to protect perpetrators? What is the relative difference in power between the two? Be as objective as possible.

it has nothing to do with the topic or subject and everything to do with the traditions of this style of discourse.

I saw Project Willow give a very reasonable explanation above of the environment in which abuse tends to occur and then get immediately accused of not being rigorous enough. It doesn't seem to matter if it is said nicely or harshly or with or without the proper statistics, etc ... people hear what they are predisposed to hear.

[kool maudit]

i am glad that this board is so vociferously supportive of abuse victims.

vociferous support has structural problems and i have tried to outline these. nonetheless, as saurian tail points out, it can be necessary in situations of adversity.

with that said, i'm going to bow out of the thread. i don't feel like i have any intuitive sense of the truth underlying this particular conflict, nor do i have any desire to form a meta-conversation to any further degree.

pretty much everyone here in this thread is coming from a place i can respect.

[minime]

It's just weird as hell, honestly. Y'all are just in some weird weird mental place where you simply don't want to believe the girl, the babysitters, the prosecutor. You're like one of those wives of an abuser who refuses to believe that their husband is molesting their kid. It's seriously fucked up.

And you're all men. Every one of you. Why is that? Think about it.

I aspire to be a man. Does that count?

[brekin]

Nordic wrote:

I am disgusted that there are so many men here on this board who refuse to even consider the girl's own account of what happened and would rather blame everything on the psycho-shrew mother and belittle her for being angry about the horrible shit that happened, and completely ignore the in-your-face evidence about Allen that the victim documents above.
It's just weird as hell, honestly. Y'all are just in some weird weird mental place where you simply don't want to believe the girl, the babysitters, the prosecutor. You're like one of those wives of an abuser who refuses to believe that their husband is molesting their kid. It's seriously fucked up.
And you're all men. Every one of you. Why is that? Think about it.

I welcome a critical stance to the scandal and think sometimes anything involving healthy skepticism towards a victim's account can be unfairly shouted down but I do think Nordic may have something here. First, Dylan Farrow is 28 years old and I believe a parent with (one or two?) of her own children. Even if she was "brainwashed" by her mother as a child I think there is a fair chance she could have balanced that with her own life experience at this point. And really who wasn't brainwashed by their parents? Further, if we've learned anything about the children of celebrities living in NY and LA is that their parents can't control them. It is one thing to brainwash your child on a commune in the sticks and quite another to try it in Manhattan. (Not saying it can't be done but it is much harder.)

I just can't see if Dylan was a male of 28 years old, married with children and seemingly on par with Dylan excepting gender that he would be so routinely dismissed as possibly being brainwashed by his mother. Dylan is a woman, not a girl any longer. While the abuse allegedly took place when she was young I don't see why she is frozen in that age. I also can't imagine that it would be allowed to be framed as much as Mia and Woody issue if the accuser was a man and not a woman.

I'm not arguing that Dylan's account trumps everything, but it seems that there may be a strange logical gap where it is somehow Allen's account against the little girl whose mommy brainwashed her. When really it is a woman coming forward saying that she has suffered life long problems because of what she experienced. Not saying that Mia Farrow couldn't be capable of an extended campaign to turn her against Allen and even worse, but I can't shake the feeling that if say Ronan Farrow was making the accusation of abuse by Allen there would be less talk of "the boy growing up being brainwashed by Mia".

[seemslikeadream]

Studies by David Finkelhor, Director of the Crimes Against Children Research Center, show that:

1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys is a victim of child sexual abuse;
Self-report studies show that 20% of adult females and 5-10% of adult males recall a childhood sexual assault or sexual abuse incident;
During a one-year period in the U.S., 16% of youth ages 14 to 17 had been sexually victimized;
Over the course of their lifetime, 28% of U.S. youth ages 14 to 17 had been sexually victimized;
Children are most vulnerable to CSA between the ages of 7 and 13.

It would be nice if all victims got the attention this is getting and there are a whole lot of victims ....most just have to get on with their lives cause they're not celebs or have celebs for parents

I say just get on with your lives like us common folk ....we all suffer and most of us don't have the money for special treatment ...Mia does ...use it and spare us


isn’t celebrity but sex abuse

it's all about celebrity at this point

[sunny]

It's all so sad. Mia is painted in the media as some madwoman brainwasher of her children, Dylan is brainwashed or simply mistaken about the facts of her own life, and WA is given the benefit of every doubt no matter how tenuous.
And the line forms behind the media even here.
So sad.

[Ben D]

Hi Nordic...fwiw, just to raise my hand as a member of the male community here who also intuits that WA is a pedaphile.