If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Hollywood Reporter)   Wallace Shawn says that the Woody Allen sex abuse allegations are INCONCEIVABLE   (hollywoodreporter.com) divider line 138
    More: Interesting, Wallace Shawn, Woody Allen, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, FDR, Soon-Yi Previn, sex crimes, Dylan Farrow, Mia Farrow  
•       •       •

2252 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 18 Feb 2014 at 9:56 AM (43 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



138 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-02-18 06:31:34 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: thefatbasturd: Woody + Soon-Yi

Woody + Soon-Yi is actually the opposite of evidence of molesting a 7-year-old.


Not if they did it together.
Not if Woody nailed her when she was 7.
Not if Woody + Soon-Yi produced a daughter seven years ago and he's now molesting her.

So, opposite not really.
 
2014-02-18 06:36:30 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: thefatbasturd: Woody + Soon-Yi

Woody + Soon-Yi is actually the opposite of evidence of molesting a 7-year-old.


How?
 
2014-02-18 06:38:14 PM  

thefatbasturd: jonnya: thefatbasturd: jonnya: thefatbasturd: it is ridiculous and grasping at straws to say Woody was in NO way any kind of father figure thefatbasturd: Never said he was her father.


Yup. Pigeon chess.

In what farked up world is a "father figure" equal to ACTUAL FATHER?

I was responding to someone who claimed I said he was her father.

Let's do this so simply even a moron like you gets it: Mommy and Daddy get a divorce. Mommy starts dating "Uncle Frank". They hit it off. Adopt a couple of kids. Have another. Even though Daddy is still DADDY, as a male authority figure in a continued presence in the household, Uncle Frank is also a form of father figure, plain and simple. To deny this is I say again willfull ignorance and due to "Woody worship".

Nah, you've got it all wrong, and the moron bit speaks ill of you. You're just making the same irrelevant point over and over again. We all know it's unconventional to end up married to your ex's adopted daughter. We knew that 20 years ago. You don't really need to dwell on that for eternity. This just in- Not everybody is conventional.

The only thing I'm white knighting here rational thought. I'm not a Woody Allen fan at all. It seems blindly judgmental to suggest somebody is guilty of action A because you question their judgement regarding action B, even though action B is legal, none of your business/concern, irrelevant to the accusation, and has played out to be a success story. On top of that, the allegations in action A were already investigated and dismissed.

My rationale here roots from the old "innocent until proven guilty" concept. It's an oldie, but a goodie. I guess I'm just an optimist. I don't want tobelieve that someone is a child molester when all the evidence, investigations, and most people's testimonies say otherwise. Why is that such a problem for you?

And again evading what was actually said. Not Woody + Soon-Yi = GUILTY, but Woody + Soon-Yi = "evidence he lacks judgement and/or impulse control" ...


Yawn. Kind of a non-point.  And you base your  "evidence he lacks judgement and/or impulse control"  on falsities, as noted several times, most recently noted in your moron proof "Uncle Frank" parable.

And how was what you said evaded? I just addressed it for like the 20th time in my most recent post. I think you're having problems with the differences between disagreeing and evading. Hint- they are very different.

And I know this one make you pull out your hair, but why are you the standard bearer of the romantic judgements that occur between two consenting, of age, and obviously intelligent and bonded adults? At first I thought you might be a troll, but now I'm thinking that you just can't see beyond the mainstream of conventionality. We're all entitled to our opinions here, but in my mind it's irresponsible to even suggest that soley because someone defies your notion of what's acceptable, they may be a child molester.
 
2014-02-18 06:42:30 PM  

Fano: jonnya: thefatbasturd: jonnya: thefatbasturd: it is ridiculous and grasping at straws to say Woody was in NO way any kind of father figure thefatbasturd: Never said he was her father.


Yup. Pigeon chess.

In what farked up world is a "father figure" equal to ACTUAL FATHER?

I was responding to someone who claimed I said he was her father.

Let's do this so simply even a moron like you gets it: Mommy and Daddy get a divorce. Mommy starts dating "Uncle Frank". They hit it off. Adopt a couple of kids. Have another. Even though Daddy is still DADDY, as a male authority figure in a continued presence in the household, Uncle Frank is also a form of father figure, plain and simple. To deny this is I say again willfull ignorance and due to "Woody worship".

Nah, you've got it all wrong, and the moron bit speaks ill of you. You're just making the same irrelevant point over and over again. We all know it's unconventional to end up married to your ex's adopted daughter. We knew that 20 years ago. You don't really need to dwell on that for eternity. This just in- Not everybody is conventional.

The only thing I'm white knighting here rational thought. I'm not a Woody Allen fan at all. It seems blindly judgmental to suggest somebody is guilty of action A because you question their judgement regarding action B, even though action B is legal, none of your business/concern, irrelevant to the accusation, and has played out to be a success story. On top of that, the allegations in action A were already investigated and dismissed.

My rationale here roots from the old "innocent until proven guilty" concept. It's an oldie, but a goodie. I guess I'm just an optimist. I don't want tobelieve that someone is a child molester when all the evidence, investigations, and most people's testimonies say otherwise. Why is that such a problem for you?

This is where I'm standing on the issue. Woody may have in fact done exactly what Dylan alleges. But the folks on the side of convicting him are us ...


Ha.I remember that photo issue. But people who clung to that being Sun Yi are to be automatically dismissed and not to be taken seriously at all in kind of thoughtful discussion here, so in a way-it made for an excellent filter in the back and forth....
 
2014-02-18 06:45:51 PM  

Cletus C.: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: thefatbasturd: Woody + Soon-Yi

Woody + Soon-Yi is actually the opposite of evidence of molesting a 7-year-old.

Not if they did it together.
Not if Woody nailed her when she was 7.
Not if Woody + Soon-Yi produced a daughter seven years ago and he's now molesting her.

So, opposite not really.


Absolutely no evidence or claims of any of your ifs.

I'm starting to think you did it.
 
2014-02-18 06:46:21 PM  

jonnya: We're all entitled to our opinions here, but in my mind it's irresponsible to even suggest that soley because someone defies your notion of what's acceptable, they may be a child molester.


What if a woman says he molested her when she was 7? Is it OK to then say he may be a child molester? Because him getting caught with nude shots of his girlfriend's adopted daughter, then dumping the girlfriend for her isn't the sole reason people think he may be a child molester.
 
2014-02-18 06:50:58 PM  

jonnya: thefatbasturd: jonnya: thefatbasturd: jonnya: thefatbasturd: it is ridiculous and grasping at straws to say Woody was in NO way any kind of father figure thefatbasturd: Never said he was her father.


Yup. Pigeon chess.

In what farked up world is a "father figure" equal to ACTUAL FATHER?

I was responding to someone who claimed I said he was her father.

Let's do this so simply even a moron like you gets it: Mommy and Daddy get a divorce. Mommy starts dating "Uncle Frank". They hit it off. Adopt a couple of kids. Have another. Even though Daddy is still DADDY, as a male authority figure in a continued presence in the household, Uncle Frank is also a form of father figure, plain and simple. To deny this is I say again willfull ignorance and due to "Woody worship".

Nah, you've got it all wrong, and the moron bit speaks ill of you. You're just making the same irrelevant point over and over again. We all know it's unconventional to end up married to your ex's adopted daughter. We knew that 20 years ago. You don't really need to dwell on that for eternity. This just in- Not everybody is conventional.

The only thing I'm white knighting here rational thought. I'm not a Woody Allen fan at all. It seems blindly judgmental to suggest somebody is guilty of action A because you question their judgement regarding action B, even though action B is legal, none of your business/concern, irrelevant to the accusation, and has played out to be a success story. On top of that, the allegations in action A were already investigated and dismissed.

My rationale here roots from the old "innocent until proven guilty" concept. It's an oldie, but a goodie. I guess I'm just an optimist. I don't want tobelieve that someone is a child molester when all the evidence, investigations, and most people's testimonies say otherwise. Why is that such a problem for you?

And again evading what was actually said. Not Woody + Soon-Yi = GUILTY, but Woody + Soon-Yi = "evidence he lacks judgement and/or impulse control" ...

Yawn. Kind of a non-point.  And you base your  "evidence he lacks judgement and/or impulse control"  on falsities, as noted several times, most recently noted in your moron proof "Uncle Frank" parable.

And how was what you said evaded? I just addressed it for like the 20th time in my most recent post. I think you're having problems with the differences between disagreeing and evading. Hint- they are very different.

And I know this one make you pull out your hair, but why are you the standard bearer of the romantic judgements that occur between two consenting, of age, and obviously intelligent and bonded adults? At first I thought you might be a troll, but now I'm thinking that you just can't see beyond the mainstream of conventionality. We're all entitled to our opinions here, but in my mind it's irresponsible to even suggest that soley because someone defies your notion of what's acceptable, they may be a child molester.


Because you keep insisting I say ot makes him guiltyand evading what I really said, that it is possible and his past actions point to a lack of character. And you keep falling back on a defense of butbutbut it doesn't mean conclusivelybhe IS guilty so he must therefore be innocent because they stayed together 20 years after so leave 'em alone. Again Woody Allen and Mia Farrow are both douchebags and you, me, noone will ever know what the truth is, do your white knighting of someone you have NEVER met and do not know is as stupid as condemning him out of hand.
 
2014-02-18 07:02:26 PM  

Cletus C.: jonnya: We're all entitled to our opinions here, but in my mind it's irresponsible to even suggest that soley because someone defies your notion of what's acceptable, they may be a child molester.

What if a woman says he molested her when she was 7? Is it OK to then say he may be a child molester? Because him getting caught with nude shots of his girlfriend's adopted daughter, then dumping the girlfriend for her isn't the sole reason people think he may be a child molester.


Well sure-

if the allegations were found to be true by the authorities who investigated them (they weren't)
if more victims came forward and a pattern was established (didn't happen)
If the 7 y/o's Mother wasn't thought to have coached her by the authorities (they did)
If there wasn't plenty of precedent of children who were around Dylan's age also believing they remember things that didn't happen because of parental influence (there is)
If the only sibling in the house at the time who wasn't of a single digit in age didn't say that the mother
was manipulative, vindictive, and fed lies to all the kids (he did- Moses Farrow was 14 at the time, now a family therapist and sides with Woody)
If the Mother wasn't known to be vindictive and emotionally fragile ( she is/was)
And ......wait for it.... if the Mother's brother wasn't a convicted chile molester. (he is)

Kind of makes me think that Mia had molestation on the mind.
 
2014-02-18 07:12:14 PM  

jonnya: Cletus C.: jonnya: We're all entitled to our opinions here, but in my mind it's irresponsible to even suggest that soley because someone defies your notion of what's acceptable, they may be a child molester.

What if a woman says he molested her when she was 7? Is it OK to then say he may be a child molester? Because him getting caught with nude shots of his girlfriend's adopted daughter, then dumping the girlfriend for her isn't the sole reason people think he may be a child molester.

Well sure-

if the allegations were found to be true by the authorities who investigated them (they weren't)
if more victims came forward and a pattern was established (didn't happen)
If the 7 y/o's Mother wasn't thought to have coached her by the authorities (they did)
If there wasn't plenty of precedent of children who were around Dylan's age also believing they remember things that didn't happen because of parental influence (there is)
If the only sibling in the house at the time who wasn't of a single digit in age didn't say that the mother
was manipulative, vindictive, and fed lies to all the kids (he did- Moses Farrow was 14 at the time, now a family therapist and sides with Woody)
If the Mother wasn't known to be vindictive and emotionally fragile ( she is/was)
And ......wait for it.... if the Mother's brother wasn't a convicted chile molester. (he is)

Kind of makes me think that Mia had molestation on the mind.


And if the accused wasn't Woody, cuz "Sleeper" is knda cool...
 
2014-02-18 07:17:27 PM  
thefatbasturd: Because you keep insisting I say ot makes him guiltyand evading what I really said, that it is possible and his past actions point to a lack of character. And you keep falling back on a defense of butbutbut it doesn't mean conclusivelybhe IS guilty so he must therefore be innocent because they stayed together 20 years after so leave 'em alone. Again Woody Allen and Mia Farrow are both douchebags and you, me, noone will ever know what the truth is, do your white knighting of someone you have NEVER met and do not know is as stupid as condemning him out of hand.

This was a tough read. You need to sort yourself out. I don't know that anybody involved is a douchebag, I never met them.  Again, it speaks ill of you to use such language. Takes away from the spirited debate. Or are you really saying that all you're doing is merely  suggesting or  implying that they might be douchebags?

I'm not saying that you flat out say he was guilty- but with the irrelevant Sun Yi stuff you suggest  it in a coy way that implies it. That's my objection. Even implying that someone  might be guilty of something so horrible and child molestaion seems ethically wrong to me, especially when a mountain of factual evidence points the other way.

If you can't admit to it and own your implications here, at this point it'll make you seem very disingenuous...
 
2014-02-18 07:21:57 PM  

jonnya: Cletus C.: jonnya: We're all entitled to our opinions here, but in my mind it's irresponsible to even suggest that soley because someone defies your notion of what's acceptable, they may be a child molester.

What if a woman says he molested her when she was 7? Is it OK to then say he may be a child molester? Because him getting caught with nude shots of his girlfriend's adopted daughter, then dumping the girlfriend for her isn't the sole reason people think he may be a child molester.

Well sure-

if the allegations were found to be true by the authorities who investigated them (they weren't)

The judge in the custody case found proof of the allegations to be inconclusive. He also found Allen's team of therapists who said she was not molested not credible because of their loyalty to Allen. The prosecutor said there was probable cause to charge Allen but Dylan was too fragile to go through the process.
if more victims came forward and a pattern was established (didn't happen) Ah, the one free molestation rule again.
If the 7 y/o's Mother wasn't thought to have coached her by the authorities (they did) What authorities are you referring to, the prosecutor who wanted to bring charges?
If there wasn't plenty of precedent of children who were around Dylan's age also believing they remember things that didn't happen because of parental influence (there is) No other case proves his guilt or innocence.
If the only sibling in the house at the time who wasn't of a single digit in age didn't say that the mother
was manipulative, vindictive, and fed lies to all the kids (he did- Moses Farrow was 14 at the time, now a family therapist and sides with Woody)
Other kids in the house say other things. Dylan says she was molested.
If the Mother wasn't known to be vindictive and emotionally fragile ( she is/was) Tip to molesters, find this sort of woman and you can do whatever you want to her children, it seems.
And ......wait for it.... if the Mother's brother wasn't a convicted chile molester. (he is) This is important because ???

Kind of makes me think that Mia had molestation on the mind.

Kind of makes me think you just want Woody Allen to have not molested that girl.
 
2014-02-18 07:27:59 PM  
What I wanted was a thread full of Princess Bride and Star Trek DS9 references and pics.
 
2014-02-18 07:29:00 PM  

Cletus C.: jonnya: Cletus C.: jonnya: We're all entitled to our opinions here, but in my mind it's irresponsible to even suggest that soley because someone defies your notion of what's acceptable, they may be a child molester.

What if a woman says he molested her when she was 7? Is it OK to then say he may be a child molester? Because him getting caught with nude shots of his girlfriend's adopted daughter, then dumping the girlfriend for her isn't the sole reason people think he may be a child molester.

Well sure-

if the allegations were found to be true by the authorities who investigated them (they weren't) The judge in the custody case found proof of the allegations to be inconclusive. He also found Allen's team of therapists who said she was not molested not credible because of their loyalty to Allen. The prosecutor said there was probable cause to charge Allen but Dylan was too fragile to go through the process.
if more victims came forward and a pattern was established (didn't happen) Ah, the one free molestation rule again.
If the 7 y/o's Mother wasn't thought to have coached her by the authorities (they did) What authorities are you referring to, the prosecutor who wanted to bring charges?
If there wasn't plenty of precedent of children who were around Dylan's age also believing they remember things that didn't happen because of parental influence (there is) No other case proves his guilt or innocence.
If the only sibling in the house at the time who wasn't of a single digit in age didn't say that the mother
was manipulative, vindictive, and fed lies to all the kids (he did- Moses Farrow was 14 at the time, now a family therapist and sides with Woody) Other kids in the house say other things. Dylan says she was molested.
If the Mother wasn't known to be vindictive and emotionally fragile ( she is/was) Tip to molesters, find this sort of woman and you can do whatever you want to her children, it seems.
And ......wait for it.... if the Mother's brother wasn't a convicted chile molester. (he is) This is important because ???

Kind of makes me think that Mia had molestation on the mind.

Kind of makes me think you just want Woody Allen to have not molested that girl.


You're right, we kind of want a girl to not have been molested. Also, ALL prosecutors want to prosecute and think people are guilty. How could the prosecutor not move forward?
 
2014-02-18 07:30:44 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: What I wanted was a thread full of Princess Bride and Star Trek DS9 references and pics.


Mowwestation, mowwestation bwings us together

MUW(molesters of unusual weirdness)? I hardly think they exist
 
2014-02-18 07:31:00 PM  

Cletus C.: jonnya: Cletus C.: jonnya: We're all entitled to our opinions here, but in my mind it's irresponsible to even suggest that soley because someone defies your notion of what's acceptable, they may be a child molester.

What if a woman says he molested her when she was 7? Is it OK to then say he may be a child molester? Because him getting caught with nude shots of his girlfriend's adopted daughter, then dumping the girlfriend for her isn't the sole reason people think he may be a child molester.

Well sure-

if the allegations were found to be true by the authorities who investigated them (they weren't) The judge in the custody case found proof of the allegations to be inconclusive. He also found Allen's team of therapists who said she was not molested not credible because of their loyalty to Allen. The prosecutor said there was probable cause to charge Allen but Dylan was too fragile to go through the process.
if more victims came forward and a pattern was established (didn't happen) Ah, the one free molestation rule again.
If the 7 y/o's Mother wasn't thought to have coached her by the authorities (they did) What authorities are you referring to, the prosecutor who wanted to bring charges?
If there wasn't plenty of precedent of children who were around Dylan's age also believing they remember things that didn't happen because of parental influence (there is) No other case proves his guilt or innocence.
If the only sibling in the house at the time who wasn't of a single digit in age didn't say that the mother
was manipulative, vindictive, and fed lies to all the kids (he did- Moses Farrow was 14 at the time, now a family therapist and sides with Woody) Other kids in the house say other things. Dylan says she was molested.
If the Mother wasn't known to be vindictive and emotionally fragile ( she is/was) Tip to molesters, find this sort of woman and you can do whatever you want to her children, it seems.
And ......wait for it.... if the Mother's brother wasn't a convic ...


Yea, I'm familiar with the that one prosecutor's sympathies, but I'm having a hard time believing that any DA's office would believe they had a celebrity child molestor in their sites for a slam dunk conviction, and then would choose to let him go. That would mean that they're knowingly allowing a dangerous molestor free to roam and do it again. Highly unethical and hard to believe. If overall the department felt he was guilty, they would be obligated to arrest him and go for a conviction. How could they live with themselves otherwise? But yet that didn't happen.
 
2014-02-18 07:33:58 PM  

jonnya: thefatbasturd: Because you keep insisting I say ot makes him guiltyand evading what I really said, that it is possible and his past actions point to a lack of character. And you keep falling back on a defense of butbutbut it doesn't mean conclusivelybhe IS guilty so he must therefore be innocent because they stayed together 20 years after so leave 'em alone. Again Woody Allen and Mia Farrow are both douchebags and you, me, noone will ever know what the truth is, do your white knighting of someone you have NEVER met and do not know is as stupid as condemning him out of hand.

This was a tough read. You need to sort yourself out. I don't know that anybody involved is a douchebag, I never met them.  Again, it speaks ill of you to use such language. Takes away from the spirited debate. Or are you really saying that all you're doing is merely  suggesting or  implying that they might be douchebags?

I'm not saying that you flat out say he was guilty- but with the irrelevant Sun Yi stuff you suggest  it in a coy way that implies it. That's my objection. Even implying that someone  might be guilty of something so horrible and child molestaion seems ethically wrong to me, especially when a mountain of factual evidence points the other way.

If you can't admit to it and own your implications here, at this point it'll make you seem very disingenuous...


And the fact you continue to dismiss it as "irrelevant" when it clearly is is the "willfully ignorant" part. That it DOES speak to his flawed judgement. ANYONE might be guilty of child molestation. You might personally find that distasteful but that does not makeit untrue, sorry.

Whatever Woody did or didn't do to Dylan, he cheated on his SO with her daughter. Sorryn that is something by your own admission he is guilty of. Most people would say that is a pretty big douchebag move. If even half of what Moses says is true, Mia used her kids as pawns with little to no regard to them. Again pretty hard to say that isn't pretty douchebaggy.

Yeah, my points have been directed mostly at Woody. Because nobody has really been stupid enough to White Knight Mia Farrow. However they will come iut in DROVES to say it is impossible for Woody to have done it because " WOW, Annie Hall, dude!"
 
2014-02-18 07:37:18 PM  

Cletus C.: Kind of makes me think you just want Woody Allen to have not molested that girl.


Wait, so you want her to have been molested by him? Just so you can feel right headed about this? That's wayyyy farked. But it also likely addresses the great divide here. Like I said before, I'm an optimist, of course I want Woody, or anybody else, to have not molested her. You thinking otherwise is completely alien to me.
 
2014-02-18 07:42:13 PM  

thefatbasturd: douchebaggy


Douchebaggery, lack of judgment and flawed character are common characteristics of people who don't molest children. Dating your girlfriend's adult daughter is no indication of pedophilia.

You don't like him, you think he's creepy, fine. It's not evidence of anything else.

Your obsession with this, on the other hand....
 
2014-02-18 07:50:12 PM  
"Never go against a Sicilian when paedophilia is on the line!!!"
 
2014-02-18 07:52:17 PM  
thefatbasturd:
And the fact you continue to dismiss it as "irrelevant" when it clearly is is the "willfully ignorant" part. That it DOES speak to his flawed judgement. ANYONE might be guilty of child molestation. You might personally find that distasteful but that does not makeit untrue, sorry.

Whatever Woody did or didn't do to Dylan, he cheated on his SO with her daughter. Sorryn that is something by your own admission he is guilty of. Most people would say that is a pretty big douchebag move. If even half of what Moses says is true, Mia used her kids as pawns with little to no regard to them. Again pretty hard to say that isn't pretty douchebaggy.

Yeah, my points have been directed mostly at Woody. Because nobody has really been stupid enough to White Knight Mia Farrow. However they will come iut in DROVES to say it is impossible for Woody to have done it because " WOW, Annie Hall, dude!"


I'm really starting to lose your logic. You were much crisper earlier. If you just admit you think he's guilty, we can perhaps move on from you saying the same thing over and over again, but losing steam and credibility each time.

I didn't admit he's guilty of anything. All I said about Woody/Sun is that it all went down unconventionally. I'm not seeing where that's a guilty/innocent judgment call there to be made by the likes of of you or me. Two Happily married consenting adults. Not my concern.  Again, in a truly impartial discussion, douchebag is an unfortunate choice of phrase. Damaged, hurting, petty, - words like that are better choices. When you call someone you never met a Dbag, you almost sound like a bitter teabag type. It suggests ignorance.  Unless of course you knew for sure that the person was unquestionably evil and destructive. But you yourself haven'treally come down concretely on either sided of that regarding Woody/Dylan.
 
2014-02-18 07:53:22 PM  

Nina_Hartley's_Ass: thefatbasturd: douchebaggy

Douchebaggery, lack of judgment and flawed character are common characteristics of people who don't molest children. Dating your girlfriend's adult daughter is no indication of pedophilia.

You don't like him, you think he's creepy, fine. It's not evidence of anything else.

Your obsession with this, on the other hand....


Yeah. I have an obsession. I point out "we will never know, but he might have done it. He has a history of poor decisions" and people SCREAM to the heavens ober and over again "butbutbut it's WOOOOODYYYYY!!!!!! I love his movies so I KNOW he couldn't have done it!!!!!" and I am the one with an obsession.

Hey, you realize you NEVER did explain your claim Woody+Soon-Yi = "proof" he DIDN'T do it.
 
2014-02-18 08:01:17 PM  
"Have fun convicting the director!"
"You think it will work?"
"It would take a miracle."
 
2014-02-18 08:01:44 PM  

thefatbasturd: proof


I'm not claiming proof of anything.

Attraction to an adult is not evidence of attraction to children and "poor decisions" is not evidence of pedophilia.

You're about a comment away from being farkied as a troll. No one is really this stupid.
 
2014-02-18 08:07:06 PM  
thefatbasturd:Yeah, my points have been directed mostly at Woody. Because nobody has really been stupid enough to White Knight Mia Farrow. However they will come iut in DROVES to say it is impossible for Woody to have done it because " WOW, Annie Hall, dude!"
 

Also you keep saying that Everyone is white knighting him because they're infatuated with his movies. I've not seen one post that even mentions his movies, except for a few of yours, and I've been logged in for hours. I think I told you twice now that I'm not even a fan of his films. Or do you think I'm lying to serve my agenda, just like Woody, Mia, and Sun did about Woody's lack of involvement  with Sun's upbringing?
 
2014-02-18 08:10:55 PM  
"Finish him your way"
"What's my way?"
"Wait until he's about to collect a Golden Globe, then write an op-ed in the times accusing him of molestation."
"My way's not very sportsmanlike."


"Kristof, you know how much I love watching you work, but I've got a fight against polio in Africa to plan, my next movie to arrange, my daughter to molest and Allen to frame for it; I'm swamped ."
 
2014-02-18 08:17:16 PM  

jonnya: thefatbasturd:
And the fact you continue to dismiss it as "irrelevant" when it clearly is is the "willfully ignorant" part. That it DOES speak to his flawed judgement. ANYONE might be guilty of child molestation. You might personally find that distasteful but that does not makeit untrue, sorry.

Whatever Woody did or didn't do to Dylan, he cheated on his SO with her daughter. Sorryn that is something by your own admission he is guilty of. Most people would say that is a pretty big douchebag move. If even half of what Moses says is true, Mia used her kids as pawns with little to no regard to them. Again pretty hard to say that isn't pretty douchebaggy.

Yeah, my points have been directed mostly at Woody. Because nobody has really been stupid enough to White Knight Mia Farrow. However they will come iut in DROVES to say it is impossible for Woody to have done it because " WOW, Annie Hall, dude!"

I'm really starting to lose your logic. You were much crisper earlier. If you just admit you think he's guilty, we can perhaps move on from you saying the same thing over and over again, but losing steam and credibility each time.

I didn't admit he's guilty of anything. All I said about Woody/Sun is that it all went down unconventionally. I'm not seeing where that's a guilty/innocent judgment call there to be made by the likes of of you or me. Two Happily married consenting adults. Not my concern.  Again, in a truly impartial discussion, douchebag is an unfortunate choice of phrase. Damaged, hurting, petty, - words like that are better choices. When you call someone you never met a Dbag, you almost sound like a bitter teabag type. It suggests ignorance.  Unless of course you knew for sure that the person was unquestionably evil and destructive. But you yourself haven'treally come down concretely on either sided of that regarding Woody/Dylan.


So if I admit to something YOU claim I am saying but am not ACTUALLY claiming, you will have more fun with the argument? RIIIIIIIIIGHT!

I keep repeating myself because you keep repeating the claim I am arguing something I am not.You can play your little games and infer whatever you want about whatever your brain has decided my political leanings are and make all the snide remarks you want, but it doesn't make you right. And frankly it is much more of a "sign of ignorance" than anything you want to accuse me of.

And you say he is in a relationship with his ex-girlfriends daughter. So he is "guilty" of that. Guilty. Means he did it. Not that it's a crime, but that he DID do what was alleged. No way around that.
 
2014-02-18 08:30:15 PM  

thefatbasturd: So if I admit to something YOU claim I am saying but am not ACTUALLY claiming, you will have more fun with the argument? RIIIIIIIIIGHT!

I keep repeating myself because you keep repeating the claim I am arguing something I am not.You can play your little games and infer whatever you want about whatever your brain has decided my political leanings are and make all the snide remarks you want, but it doesn't make you right. And frankly it is much more of a "sign of ignorance" than anything you want to accuse me of.

And you say he is in a relationship with his ex-girlfriends daughter. So he is "guilty" of that. Guilty. Means he did it. Not that it's a crime, but that he DID do what was alleged. No way around that.


Ha. Well then yes, he is "guilty" of farking Sun-Yi, and you are "guilty" of breathing air. Is there a point to this semantic sidebar?

You are a troll. I hope. Go back to my post from 7:17. You're undying concerns over not fully saying you think he did it are addressed In kind. Re-read it, and begin your loop once again....
 
2014-02-18 10:52:31 PM  
They should ask her son Frank Sinatra Jr.
 
2014-02-18 10:57:38 PM  
Simpsons did it.
 
2014-02-18 11:33:01 PM  

jonnya: Cletus C.: Kind of makes me think you just want Woody Allen to have not molested that girl.

Wait, so you want her to have been molested by him? Just so you can feel right headed about this? That's wayyyy farked. But it also likely addresses the great divide here. Like I said before, I'm an optimist, of course I want Woody, or anybody else, to have not molested her. You thinking otherwise is completely alien to me.


You want her to have been brainwashed all the fark up or a liar. Much kinder than believing her.
 
2014-02-19 12:02:05 AM  
So, the child is lying if no one directly saw the act, there is no dna or bodily injury, and the mother of said child might be kooky.  Game on pedos.  You guys remembered to register right?

In cases like this, which I don't know many of, where there seems to be no incentive for the accuser, I tend to side with the victim a bit more.  If Dylan was suing for 30 million or had a book coming out etc, I would be a bit skeptical but probably still lean towards her side.  I don't know, I guess I have a soft spot for people who claim they were abused in a horrific way and it ruined their life rather than side with a multi millionaire who married his friend's acquaintance (fark, we all know he married his farking daughter but his white knights can't admit it).  I don't see this as poor Woody, but poor Dylan.  I'm ok with that.
 
2014-02-19 12:28:35 AM  

BalugaJoe: They should ask her son Frank Sinatra Jr.


yeah, I almost fell out of my chair when I saw a picture of him

www.adweek.com
 
2014-02-19 12:50:56 AM  

Cletus C.: jonnya: Cletus C.: Kind of makes me think you just want Woody Allen to have not molested that girl.

Wait, so you want her to have been molested by him? Just so you can feel right headed about this? That's wayyyy farked. But it also likely addresses the great divide here. Like I said before, I'm an optimist, of course I want Woody, or anybody else, to have not molested her. You thinking otherwise is completely alien to me.

You want her to have been brainwashed all the fark up or a liar. Much kinder than believing her.


Wait, so you want her to have been molested by him? Just so you can feel right headed about this? That's wayyyy farked. But it also likely addresses the great divide here. Like I said before, I'm an optimist, of course I want Woody, or anybody else, to have not molested her. You thinking otherwise is completely alien to me.

You want her to have been brainwashed all the fark up or a liar. Much kinder than believing her.


Huh? You need to back that up with something I've actually said before going around telling me what I want. And I'm not seeing how kindness enters into any of this.
Wait, so you want her to have been molested by him? Just so you can feel right headed about this? That's wayyyy farked. But it also likely addresses the great divide here. Like I said before, I'm an optimist, of course I want Woody, or anybody else, to have not molested her. You thinking otherwise is completely alien to me.

You want her to have been brainwashed all the fark up or a liar. Much kinder than believing her.


Huh? You need to back that up with something I've actually said before going around telling me what I want. The only thing I've directly said about Dylan is that either way she is the victim here. Do it- prove where I say  wanther to have been brainwashed. Why would anybody want that? Really now. So cynical.

Furthermore, how does what (you believe) I want or do not want have any bearing on the this case whatsoever? I'm not quite that self important to even entertain such nonsense. It would be best if you kept your comments to the actual facts.

Look, I get it, child molestors suck. They're the worst.  But are you really so knee jerk in your desire for justice that you can't entertain the fact that occasionally people are falsely accused? Especially when that was the exact conclusion of the investigation, as well as everybody sans Mia who was a part of the case older who was than the age of 8?

I'll give you bonus points if you can reply w/o using the phrase "white knight". That is so lame and only serves as subterfuge. Kind of like a teabag talking point. Let's stick to the legalities and the facts...

Double bonus if you can do it w/o mentioning Sun Yi, which as you know, would be laughably irrelevant in quest for hard evidence that proves Woody molested Dylan.
 
2014-02-19 01:06:52 AM  

Cletus C.: James!: I'm sure in the history of the world some pedophiles have only molested one child, but the majority have a predilection towards children and molest multiple children (Mia's brother for example). You'd like to completely disregard the fact that he hadn't been accused before or since.

So listen up pedos, you get a free pass on one, as long as you don't do it again. Let the molesting begin.


I don't know why people think pedos get caught right away or start molesting in their 20's or something. They don't. My friend's neighbor was married and had a teenage children and no prior convictions, was a super 'nice guy' when the police arrested him in a pedo sting for trying to meet her in a hotel to had sex with her. She told her parents he was being creepy and telling her these creepy fantasies he had about her trying to convince her to do things with him, and they called the police who tapped her phone and recorded him talking to her and pulled a sting. When he got caught coming into the room, he had condoms and her second grade picture with him. But no previous charges or allegations, none at all. But she showed me some of the letters he wrote to her and would hand to her over the fence. Trust me, he was gross.
 
2014-02-19 01:07:38 AM  
Ugh, I should say, don't ALL get caught right away or start molesting early.
 
2014-02-19 05:46:49 AM  

Fano: douchebag/hater: When did Wallace Shawn become an expert on pedophilia?

(This question sorta answers itself, doesn't it?)

Have you ever heard of Townshend, Gadd, Dodgson? MORONS.


I can't believe I was so proud coming up with this quit I forgot the obvious answer: "Truly, he has a dizzying intellect."
 
2014-02-19 05:59:54 AM  
I'm pretty sure that part of the reason abuse continues is because well meaning folks who have no idea what they are talking about feel compelled to come to the defense of the accused.

I admire Mr. Shawn's work, but how can he honestly say he has any insight into what Woody Allen does in private?

I don't think most people have even a clue about the sexual practices of members of their own family, much less the sexual practices of people they have occasionally worked for.
 
2014-02-19 06:20:10 AM  

hestheone: I'm pretty sure that part of the reason abuse continues is because well meaning folks who have no idea what they are talking about feel compelled to come to the defense of the accused.

I admire Mr. Shawn's work, but how can he honestly say he has any insight into what Woody Allen does in private?

I don't think most people have even a clue about the sexual practices of members of their own family, much less the sexual practices of people they have occasionally worked for.


Another, larger part, is because abusers abuse people. Some hillbilly in Podunk isn't weighing that too hard when weighing whether to rape his daughter.
 
Displayed 38 of 138 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report