Mia Farrow's son -- Ronan Seamus Farrow -- really creeps me out!

Yikes, indeed...

fuck

Man, that is heavy reading

@NickPinkerton 32s
Good question. I guess my favorite Woody Allen movie is Purple Rose of Cairo. :Tap-dances offstage:

Yeah, I was about to post that tweet. Ugh.

The people on my TL who, still, after this, are like, "it's impossible to know if it really happened!", oh my god. Way to miss the point, dumbasses.

This made me nauseous.

I read it four times. I don't know how my faced looked when I was doing so, but my bf just looked over and asked me "what's wrong?"

@drmabuse
I think Nick Kristof just set up NYT for a defamation suit from Woody Allen on fair report privilege. http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/new-york-defamation-law

I guess I shouldn't be surprised a new media bro like nick pinkerton is cool with making fun of rape victims

yeesh :(

Posted this elsewhere, but since I first learned of this here, and we're talking about it:

As of yesterday, I could say these things for sure: I am a Woody Allen fan. My go-to answer to the question “what is your favourite movie of all time” is almost always Annie Hall. If I haven’t yet decided whether Dylan Farrow‘s heartbreaking open letter detailing her alleged sexual assault at the hands of Allen when she was a child and her ensuing life-long trauma changes all of that, well, I need a little time to process (I just read the letter four times in a row, my stunned horror still not having let up by the final time through). ”Most found it easier to accept the ambiguity, to say, “who can say what happened,” to pretend that nothing was wrong,” Farrow writes, and that is, or at least was, exactly the case. Until now, this case was nothing but ambiguity, or at the very least, a swirl of murky details: a bizarre break-up between two eccentric celebrities involving one’s adult step-daughter, outrageous accusations thrown about in the media (it is here where one is so tempted to play the whole “I don’t pay attention to the headlines” card), charges never pursued–until now, who could really say what happened?

Perhaps it is worth considering that Dylan Farrow not only grew up in a world that showered her alleged abuser with awards and praise, but also in a world of Roman Polanski, Michael Jackson, Phil Spector and R. Kelly–think what you will about each of these (and each case does carry with it its own complexities and, in a few, legitimate grounds for “who can say what happened?”), but it is not as if Farrow could ever be unaware of the capacity of both Hollywood and the public to overlook or “forgive” such scandals. This situation will play out, in the weeks and months to come, with sometimes valuable and sometimes worthless (one asshole has already contributed to some of the latter noise) discussion coming in the form of think-pieces, awards-show controversies and, one might unreasonably expect, some kind of statement from Allen himself. For the time being, though, I think I’ll be watching someone else’s films.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/27/the-woody-allen-allegations-not-so-fast.html

Woodman mouthpiece defense FWIW

worst line in dylan's thing for me is I would hide under beds or lock myself in the bathroom to avoid these encounters, but he always found me.

HATED that Woodman article when it came out. Throwing in Allen-esque asides about "therapy annuities lol" whilst explaining why Dylan's abuse claims are invalid? Ughhhh. I try and keep my knowledge of allegations-against-artist out of my appreciation for their art, but Allen is the one director I have had no problem avoiding entirely. (After 1985, my mom, who works in child protection, had a "no Woody Allen movies in the house" rule.)

I know this has nothing to do with the issue at hand but I just realized how with this and R. Kelly, the resurgence of the allegations are at least partially because of journalists whom I loathe (with this, Nick Kristof and Kelly, DeRogatis). Broken clock, etc.

OK, he's convicted then. wtf

exactly when has the NYT published actionable accusations toward a specific person like this? I am curious to know what their lawyers said.

But not on this thread.

oh lord dude

adieu

please don't come back this time.

who hates nick kristof

how mentally weak-willed do you have to be to have this much trouble accepting that a dude you might be a fan of could possibly be a shitty person

no one is trying to steal zelig away from you

watching people jump through hoops and use shit like "convictions" as if they have the tiniest shred of significance in america is just pathetic

good to know you wouldn't believe the millions of american kids who've been abused and didn't get a conviction out of it; good to know the justice system's history with rape and abuse is the one part of america you have faith in

zachlyon otm, that was also one of my many problems with Woodman's piece.

nice to know that the dumbest suppurating fuckhole on ilx can embrace facetious conservative legalism when it's in the service of a chosen culture hero and against an abuse victim or 'so called' abuse victim as that legalism would have it

who hates nick kristof

― mustread guy (schlump), Sunday, 2 February 2014 00:11 (3 minutes ago) Permalink

I do. His savior pose towards sex workers and the like is loathsome: http://postwhoreamerica.com/nicholas-kristof-half-the-sky-all-the-credit/

i'd like to stab a couple of you fuckers through the heart

Woody Allen IS a shitty perrson, and that doesn't have shit to do with this shit, or hip hop

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/opinion/sunday/kristof-dylan-farrows-story.html?_r=0

"With everyone else commenting, she decided to weigh in as well. (Full disclosure: I am a friend of her mother, Mia, and brother Ronan, and that’s how Dylan got in touch with me.)"

I dont think this is analogous to jackson, pokanski, kelly or spector because a) those all went to trial and b) in most cases there was an established pattern of behavior or multiple victims.

Obviously allen is a shitty person. Has no bearing on his work afaic.

i really need to stop saying "shitty person" when i mean "rapist"

I'm not gonna argue that our justice system is awesome or even fair but I think its slightly better than conviction via internet.

Are u gonna go murder allen in retribution now or what? Let's not pretend that any selfrighteous ilx posts affect anything in this case.

Let's not pretend that any selfrighteous ilx posts affect anything in this case.

conviction via internet

Oh hey Amanda Palmer has an opinion. I'll stop there.

Usually, "self-righteous" is applied to situations where the crime is less black-and-white than rape.

So yeah, I'll be self-righteous and say, yeah, I've never raped anyone, or been accused of it.

hate u ned

shouldn't the person who does ted talks about how you should sell access to your presence because people love your art be the LAST person arguing for "separating the art from the artist?"

Farrow didnt post her letter to ilx zachylon

amanda palmer aside, like, i'm not gonna let go of annie hall either but separating the artist from the art he wrote and directed and appeared in every scene of and based on his own life to the point of seamlessly including old tv clips of himself recontextalized "in character" is not rly all that easy

purple rose or even something like zelig a lil different sure but it's worth mentioning

shouldn't the person who does ted talks about how you should sell access to your presence because people love your art be the LAST person arguing for "separating the art from the artist?"

killin' it here croup

Farrow didnt post her letter to ilx zachylon

― How dare you tarnish the reputation of Turturro's yodel (Shakey Mo Collier), Saturday, February 1, 2014 7:55 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

what she did has nothing to do with "conviction via internet" -- she posted her letter on the internet because it's 2014 and maybe she didn't want to write a 300 page tell-all. she was... trying to tell her story? contribute it to the neverending pile of woody allen stories in the media already? you're just using "internet" to downplay it. it could've been published on fucking twitter and it would still be "dylan farrow talking about being sexually abused by woody allen"

it doesn't matter how it was posted or where it was posted or when, it comes down to whether you believe she's telling the truth or she's lying because mia and ronan brainwashed her or something. what difference does it make being on the internet where this entire discussion is already happening anyway

I was drawing a distinction between what farrow did and what we do here is all

Ie Farrow trying to convict in the court of opinion, and some of us here obliging

oh god won't someone please save woody from the court of opinion

clearly his standing in america is fragile, my god at this rate he might not get a kennedy centers honors tribute

lol

xp

so? imagine for a brief second that she might actually be telling the truth. she's already been failed by a system that wouldn't do anything today if she tried, that wouldn't have convicted him back then if it even went to trial. what else is she supposed to do besides sit idly for the rest of her life? the court of opinion was already giving him lifetime achievement awards, why isn't she allowed to have a say in it. the court of opinions been making its own accusations about her and mia and ronan for years, but there's only one person you're defending itt.

i believe people who say they've been raped more than the decisions of any judge or jury, if that's a problem for you then this isn't worth discussing

I dont think this is analogous to jackson, pokanski, kelly or spector because a) those all went to trial and b) in most cases there was an established pattern of behavior or multiple victims.

Didn't mean to imply that they were the same, just that Farrow (like anyone else) is going to be aware of how easily beloved celebs are "forgiven" in Hollywood even when there are trails/multiple victims. So why should she expect anything to be different in this case?

I don't know if I was one of the people who "ok, he's convicted then" was aimed at or not, but that was not my aim in my post. The question posed by Farrow was "what's your favourite Woody Allen movie?" and I was responding to that through the lens of her letter. Yes, it *does* trouble me that the journalist who broke the story is a friend of the family for the same reason as that piece defending Woody was written by someone who had worked with him in the past. In the Farrow case, though, it implies a level of conspiracy that, if none of this is true, would be every bit as fucked up as anything Woody is alleged to have done.

ugh...never going to watch a Woody movie the same way

Yes, it *does* trouble me that the journalist who broke the story is a friend of the family for the same reason as that piece defending Woody was written by someone who had worked with him in the past.

also very troubling that when Woody masturbates he has sex with someone he loves