to believe, and be heartbroken by Woody Allens step-daughters testimony

[fromparistoberlin]

kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/an-open-letter-from-dylan-farrow/

I read this last night and it just about broke my heart

I believe her, and I am just so saddened by it

How the hell did he not get prosecuted

brave brave girl, and I feel awful as I have watched and enkoyed his films, even knowing of this murky tale in the background

amandamwingle.wordpress.com/2014/02/03/believedylanfarrow-why-your-response-to-dylan-farrows-allegations-matters/

But everyone is still deciding that the oddball man must be the bad guy, must be guilty and that the female half of this story cannot be questioned. Why? because they are women?

None of us know what went on. But to only look at, give credence, to the female, shocking side of the story sets a very dangerous precedent. It also creates a world I have no interest in belonging to, fitting in with.

What if it turns out, incontrovertibly, that Farrow has manipulated her kids and trashed Allen for reasons of her own? Think about it.... all the responses here and across the wider media.... what kind of people are we that we rush to judgment and so nastily condemn a human being with absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

If he did do what he is accused of then shame Farrow and the police for not doing their jobs better.

Do you see where I am going here? Whatever happened, Farrow is herself a key part of how her daughter (and other children) ended up here. She made decisions too! But no-one seems comfortable asking any questions of her actions. Why not? She does not have a spotless, blameless past. Her life choices are a little bit immoral.

Really.... why is it so much easier to condemn a not so good looking, oddball man rather than a frail and pretty looking mother?

"If he did do what he is accused of then shame Farrow and the police for not doing their jobs better.

Do you see where I am going here? Whatever happened, Farrow is herself a key part of how her daughter (and other children) ended up here. She made decisions too! But no-one seems comfortable asking any questions of her actions. Why not? She does not have a spotless, blameless past. Her life choices are a little bit immoral.

Really.... why is it so much easier to condemn a not so good looking, oddball man rather than a frail and pretty looking mother?"

Goodness Nomama, you've got the misogyny virus bad, haven't you?

You manage to blame everyone but Woody Allen in the event that he did do this. You can't trash Dylan's life choices to prove she deserved it as she was only 7 and hadn't made any life choices, so you trash those of her mother instead. So it wouldn't be the perpetrator's fault, it can't be the victim's because she's a child, so let's blame it on her mother. Oh and maybe the police as well, at least if some of them were women police officers.

You couldn't make it up.

God, I still cannot believe that there are women on this site doubting a person's claims that they were abused.

You need to seriously consider what type of person that makes you.

dylan farrow's response to Woody's response

has someone already linked to the Vanity Fair piece?

I believe her

This thread alone shows why children are so often not believed when they talk about abuse. Everyone says in the abstract they believe children, when it comes to the reality, they don't.

I believe Dylan Farrow too.

Anyone who has experienced abuse in childhood will recognise only too well the feelings she describes in her letter. It will stay with her forever.

"God, I still cannot believe that there are women on this site doubting a person's claims that they were abused. You need to seriously consider what type of person that makes you."

In my case, it makes me someone who prefers not to pass judgement on something if they don't know the full facts of the case. Someone for whom being a feminist doesn't mean believing that all women are perfect and never tells lies. Someone who, if they served on a jury, would want to weigh up the evidence carefully rather than assume the defendant's guilt before the trial even started.

I guess that makes me a real cunt.

Hack -
I guess I am a cunt as well.

10 Facts about the case
See the full article here

1. Mia Farrow never went to the police about the allegation of sexual abuse.

1. Allen had been in therapy for alleged inappropriate behavior toward Dylan with a child psychologist before the abuse allegation was presented to the authorities or made public. Mia Farrow had instructed her babysitters that Allen was never to be left alone with Dylan.

1. Allen refused to take a polygraph administered by the Connecticut state police. Mia was never asked to take a lie-detector test during the investigation.

1. Allen subsequently lost four exhaustive court battles—a lawsuit, a disciplinary charge against the prosecutor, and two appeals—and was made to pay more than $1 million in Mia’s legal fees. Judge Elliott Wilk, the presiding judge in Allen’s custody suit against Farrow, concluded 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.”

1. In his 33-page decision, Judge Wilk found that Mr. Allen’s behavior toward Dylan was “grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.”

1. Dylan’s claim of abuse was consistent with the testimony of three adults who were present that day.

1. The Yale-New Haven Hospital Child Sex Abuse Clinic’s finding that Dylan had not been sexually molested, cited repeatedly by Allen’s attorneys, was not accepted as reliable by Judge Wilk, or by the Connecticut state prosecutor who originally commissioned them.

1. Allen changed his story about the attic where the abuse allegedly took place. A top investigator concluded that his account was not credible.

1. The state attorney said publicly he did have probable cause to press charges against Allen but declined, due to the fragility of the “child victim.”

10. Maureen Orth states - I am not a longtime friend of Mia Farrow’s, and I did not make any deal with her.

"In my case, it makes me someone who prefers not to pass judgement on something if they don't know the full facts of the case. Someone for whom being a feminist doesn't mean believing that all women are perfect and never tells lies. Someone who, if they served on a jury, would want to weigh up the evidence carefully rather than assume the defendant's guilt before the trial even started. "

Exactly. I'm happy to join the 'cunt club' too.

I just find mia f too mad and unhinged not to believe she had a part in this

I cannot believe that WA chose his girlfriend over his own children. He had a choice between being a father, or having a relationship with his children's sister which would alienate himself and her from the family. What kind of father would chose a relationship over his own children?

I find it shocking that WA dosen't seem too bothered by the fact that most of his children despise him and want to see him suffer.

Ronan Farrow seems like a very intelligent young man. The way that he speaks about WA is very telling.

WA comes across as an incredibly selfish man and a terrible father.

I don't know who is lying, but I do know who is the better parent out of MF and WA.

Ronan Farrow dealt with the issue of Sinatra possibly being his father well. Although if you were to do a mash-up of Mia's face and a young Sinatra's the result would I think look much like Ronan. He's got the best of both of them, her bone structure and Frank's eyes.

Honestly, I don't know. What I do believe is that there are a number of children who have been emotionally, physically and sexually abused in this vile, dysfunctional family for a number of years. Dylan Farrow is clearly a victim of abuse - whether by Woody Allen, Mia Farrow's convicted brother or another person I'm not sure if we'll ever know.

Moses Farrow claims that his mother repeatedly physically assaulted him and did her best to turn him against his father. Do we believe him?

A horrible situation and one which I don't feel I could ever judge the truth of but I hope the victims of get the help they need.

grennie I haven't read anything that she was subpoenaed for the confessed rapist, just that she flew to London and testified for him, the man who gave her her big break in films. She also wrote a letter in 1977 supporting Polanski after he was indicted, as did some other people in the film industry. Funny that she makes no mention of this and his crimes in her book, written five years after the molestation claims were made. As well as keeping quiet over her sicko brother. Personally I find all this hard to reconcile with her vocal opinions that her daughter was molested by her then partner, which she's maintained for more than 20 years.

You're right that Allen defended him - 'he's paid his dues', he said.

Mothership They are a magazines facts, again we don't know how true they are. A guardian article states that he passed a lie detector test and that Farrow refused to take one.
I am not defending Allen, but as with others, I suspect we do not know the full story and I will not condemn until we do.

It's very telling that some posters equate believing a woman who says she has been raped or sexually abused, to believing that she is perfect.

Very telling.

Yy cunts just about sum it up IMO

Good God AskBasil! How did you get that from what I posted? I don't really understand the misogeny virus bit, I read that as meaning I hate men.... but suspect you mean the opposite!

My post was intended to try to balance the man hating, woman clutching, knee jerk reactions of other posts. I am not trying to defend Allen just trying to point out that Farrow isn't a saint and her daughter may have been abused in an entirely different way.... Allen may be telling the truth! You use words like 'perpetrator' about Allen.... yet there is no proof of that and even at the time of the alleged incident there were grave doubts about Farrow's actions/claims.

The rest of your post about women is just weird. I have no idea what you have read into my words but it wasn't put there by me!

Ronald, not blithely believing a claim of abuse based on 20+ years of knowing about the case, remembering the obfuscation on both sides and having read about the doubts on both sides, I think that makes me th sort of person who refuses to condemn anyone without looking for evidence - and if you read all I posted you would know that I believe Dylan, I am just not sure that her memories are actually hers.

Mothership - it would be easy to link to other magazine articles that state very different 'facts' - indeed they are already linked to within this thread. I don't think it is safe to convict on the say so of Vanity Fayre! That is one woman's take on the facts.

I'll happily stick with the rest of you cunts, if it means that we wait for evidence before condemning anyone!

Am astonished at the amount of people stating 'I believe her' when there is so much evidence for and against both complainant and defendant. How can anyone just state ' I believe her' ? It's as ludicrous as saying ' I believe Woody' . We simply do not know.

I am also shocked at the nastiness being aimed at anyone who dares to say they do not agree with the automatic condemnation of the accused. Dreadful.

dinky - it's all because of the "We believe you' MN campaign. It's badly named imo.