It's not possible for me to guess at who to believe. Dylan Farrow is a sympathetic convincing person and regreatfully so is Woody Allen. He is silly and funny as a personality/performer. I enjoyed him when it didn't mattered if I believed him. It was just the movies.
I wish they would each take a lie detector test, for the sake of it.
It seems unlikely this accusation will ever pass the point of he said she said.
It was a consolation prize, cracker jack size, to learn that Dylan Farrow has since grown to a polite lady of apparent financial comfort and has been married for a number of years. Not always possible for victims of sexual abuse abuse. In the interview Dylan Farrow's pain was palpable and made me dislike Allen enough not to patronize his films.
I don't exactly doubt her yet I don't exactly believe her either. It's a very strange paradox: I am not 100% certain her recall is correct but I am 100% certain it may be.
The Woody plus Soon Yi affair didn't help Allen's believabiltiy. He came off as a perverted, sneaky, corrupt, dishonest lech. Someone who could easily also have been a child molester. And a flasher. That affair revealed Allen's tawdry side. Maybe having a forever child bride satiated the darker versions of Allen.
Woody isn't a man of honor after that trick. But does it make him guilty of sexually abusing a child.
Likely we will never know for sure.
Which brings me back to the lie detector test...
25
dylan farrow was childishly in love with her adoptive father. he adored her. they spent time together as adults and children will who enjoy a happy friendship. dylan was also jealous of her mother for being allen's partner, instead of dylan. when allen and mia farrow became estranged before they split, when mia farrow was, apparently, having an affair with a former partner, with whom she may have had a child she attributed to allen, dylan farrow was, nevertheless deprived of woody allen's fuller availability because of his romance with a young older woman, mia farrow's adopted daughter (but not his). In jealousy, and with her mother's vindictive approval, dylan, projected her desire for allen onto him, thinking it was his desire for her, now thwarted. and she claimed he acted upon his desire for her. she fell under the spell of her fantasy of his molestation. it allowed her to express both her desire, which she transferred to him and her rage at his frustration of her desire.
is any of this true? how could i know? but it is as possible as any of the other stories going around.
7
Unless you or a family member has been sexually abused, you have absolutely NO right to defend Woody Allen's innocence -- nor that of Roman Polanski's. Young children who have been sexually molested do not know how to lie. They are only capable of telling the truth.
One of my sons was molested by a male caregiver when he was quite young, along with two very young girls who were in his care. I hope that none of you will ever have to experience the pain of watching a two- or three-year old child acting out the sexual abuse. I guarantee that these images will haunt you forever.
A number of years ago, this man was murdered while waiting for a bus in his quiet suburban town. I've always thought he was murdered by a parent of one of those children he abused. Watching that father of the three young gymnasts who were molested by their gymnastic coach attack that man was totally understandable. Although that attack did not remediate the pain that his children suffered, I certainly understood his actions.
I used to enjoy Woody Allen's movies before my son was molested, but now I cannot watch "Manhattan" or "Hannah and Her Sisters" because of the undue attention he showers on the much younger women featured in these movies.
It quite literally makes me physically ill
90
At last! Common sense and common decency. And an understanding of the rule of law. What exactly were millennials taught in school, in between their ritalin doses? No wonder they don't think they should have to repay their loans. The schools seem to have taught them nothing, other than safe places, trigger warnings, cultural appropriation, etc.
103
Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey "are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt"? Have they been charged in court? Or is it just that in those cases you think courts are unnecessary, whereas in Allen's case you think we should look only at what the State of Connecticut decided in 1993?
OK -- I'll allow you that, if you'll allow me the opinion I've held since the 1980s on the basis of his movies: Allen is a creepy misogynist. And regardless of what he may or may not have done to Dylan Farrow, I think actors now are finally feeling more comfortable taking a stand (and/or following a very healthy trend) to say they're tired of kowtowing to powerful, creepy misogynists.
145
Maybe I'm just an obtuse viewer, but I never got misogyny from Woody Allen's films. Quite the contrary.
6
I, too, cringed at that misuse of “guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” The writer gets away with it because their is an op-ed piece, but it is a reckless choice of words. A rape conviction requires that high level of proof — in a court of law — but in the context of “court of public opinion” (aka the Twitterverse) the standard is closer to Preponderance of Evidence. If twenty accusers come out with roughly the same story of enduring a Harvey Weinstein experience, one can assume that the man is what they say he is. Once the pump was primed for moral outrage to flow freely, the standard of proof lowered further, until one accuser could put a man in the virtual stockade.
I am an angry woman of a certain age, with many Me Too stories. Yet even I think the whole thing has turned into a witch hunt. We need to pull back and regroup.
5
"a creepy misogynist" Has he been charged in court? Writing it twice doesn't make it true. He does like woman younger than himself as do most men; but that certainly doesn't amount to either creepy or misogynist.
5
We are in a moment of classic mass hysteria, an actual phenomenon in spite of the ironic root of the word. The cost is greater than that of accusations of depredation against individuals such as Woody Allen, but the political consequences of the focus by the Democratic party of showing they were ultra pure by the drumming out of office of Al Franken.
This negated what should have been a concerted attempt to prevent the vast transfer of wealth encompassed in the Tax Reform and Jobs Act of 2017 which was being passed at the same time, which rather than the best deal for the country in dealing with corporations, gave away the store, at the sacrifice of needed services and rebuilding of vital infrastructure.
Democrats were so engaged in showing their zero tolerance towards any male offense- real or imagined, to have refused to pass a temporary extension of appropriations even allowing the government to close, as we did later over a demand for a DACA law.
Even though Shumer and other leaders admitted in private Franken should have had his requested ethics hearing, he and other leaders refused to state this in public. This was the worst political expediency trumping reason and compassion that I can recall, with the most dire consequences that we haven't yet seen the last of.
363
“Democrats were so engaged in showing their zero tolerance towards any male offense- real or imagined, ......”
I agree with you completely, Al. But in Senator Al Franken’s case, it wasn’t Democrats, it was Senator Gillibrand - my senator unfortunately - who led the charge using Al Franken to vault herself to the forefront - once again. And when the rest of the Democratic woman piled on, senior Democratic leadership was MIA.
I have written to Senator Gillibrand criticizing her behavior. Who is she to deny Senator Franken an ethics investigation? Who is she to decide that he should resign? I have also written my other senator, Chuck Schumer, asking where is his voice/guidance in all this. Finally, I also wrote to Senator Franken, apologizing for Gillibrand’s behavior.
In closing, when Senator Gillibrand comes up for re-election, I am writing in Al Franken’s name.
Life Long Democrat - Christina Robison
7
How is this related to Wood Allen abusing his daughter
2
Totally agree, thank you for posting this.
4
Woody Allen has given his daughter a career, at the very least.
In one version of the story, the prosecutor said he didn't want to put a 7-year-old on the stand because it would "traumatize" her. This explanation runs shallow; either he was a very bad prosecutor, or, more likely than not, he decided he could not succeed with his prosecution even if he had put her on the stand, so he made up this story that has been bandied about how his compassion for Dylan overwhelmed his prosecutorial responsibility to try to put a pedophile behind bars. If you think about it, his excuse doesn't really hold much water.
Moreover, it is very well known that Mia Farrow has such an outsized, tremendous animus against Woody Allen for the Soon-Yi affair that she would go to any lengths to try to take him down and ruin his reputation. That includes brainwashing a 7-year-old. Hell hath no fury...
Add to that the fact that one-time pedophiles are the exceptions to the rule and you have a tragic story of a woman who has wasted her life prosecuting her father for something her mother insisted he did.
Shakespeare would have made a classic out of it.
78
Thank you for this article. Woody Allen may be a little creepy. But Dylan's story strikes me as implausible and more interested in attention seeking and trying to destroy Woody Allen's career. I treat patients many of whom have been sexually abused. There are real victims out there and incredible horror stories. Even if Dylan's story were true, it is not the sort of experience that would cause life-long damage. She has made her entire life about this supposedly severely traumatizing incident. And what sort of mother would let this one incident dominate her daughter's entire life and coach her into a role of perpetual victimhood - which actually probably constitutes emotional abuse of a child who should have been helped to move past the incident if it did occur. There are so many real victims of severe abuse out there, and Dylan should move off the stage. You've had your say, Dylan. We've all heard about it and some believe you and some don't. Trying to destroy Woody Allen's career is not part of any legitimate healing process - it's revenge. There has not been even one other case reported and it's not like you are saving other children from a serial predator. Find another cause. Find something else to do with your life. Please.
1062
It really bothers me this is so highly recommended. Just because you only ever hear about Dylan in relation to this allegation does not mean she's made her entire life about it. And telling a victim, real or not, that seeking some kind of official sanction isn't a part of recovery is absurd. She was literally told she made the whole thing up by the society she lives in. Unless you're prepared to say she did make it all up, I don't see how trying to rectify that 2nd trauma could be called without therapeutic value. Honestly there's a lack of empathy for the "patient" here when you can say even if she was molested, then confronted her whole life by people saying she made it up, lacks the mental capacity (brainwashed by her mother), that she's just out for revenge, etc. then she should just walk it off and be silent during the biggest reckoning of EXACTLY this kind in modern history... I just can't imagine how someone could imagine Dylan being right and still saying this. Especially a professional.
28
Consider if what she says happened (and I do by the way) did happen. Why on earth would she said quiet about it? If I was the the victim of molestation and my abuser was out in the public prospering, I too would want to speak out and make it clear to anyone who listened what he did to me. Because she isn't a powerful award winning white man she isn't entitled to this? She simply has to stay quiet because it makes those who are fond of Allen uncomfortable? Why is this seen as bitter revenge? All I see is a woman speaking her truth. What does it say about society that when we do exactly that we're in the wrong?
8
I'm with you, Danny P. Distressing comment, especially from a "professional" who's neither treated Farrow or Allen, but has only films, news reports, social media, and her own personal values to go by, like everyone else.
Whatever happened to "first, do no harm"?
8
I rarely agree with Mr Stephens, but I am glad he wrote this column. Woody Allen has been the victim of a vindictive lover who has planted lies about him in the media and even worse in the mind of her impressionable, young daughter. The daughter now has a false memory planted in her by her mother when she was just a child. We need to sympathize with her plight, but she needs to see a psychiatrist rather than be allowed to write such articles.
40
The real question is, why are you so sure about this? Either you are actually Woody Allen or someone who was involved in the investigation, a MRA activist, or someone who doesn't want their hero smeared. The only person credible enough to speak with the certainty that you speak with is someone who actually had a role in the investigation.
2
This is all kinds of wrong.
The idea that you must be an offender on a grand scale to be taken seriously is highly offensive. What would you say to Anita Hill? "Meh, there's only 1 complaint against Thomas so I'll give him a pass" That worked in 1992, but now?
What would you say to Mel Gibson's anti-Semitic rant? "Happened once, so he gets a pass." (nvm, looked it up. You didn't give him a pass bit.ly/2H5SzCi )
One offense is plenty. Woody Allen dated & married a young woman who was essentially his daughter. This fact alone is HIGHLY disturbing. The excuses that you & some commenters are making is beyond troubling. Reminiscent of Roy Moore's defenders
Inherent in sexual assault is the fact that it's a he-said/she-said. If a child is the victim, it complicates things even more. No doubt the 'science' of assessing child victims has grown since 1992. Just like the understanding of sexual harassment has grown since Anita Hill. It's quite possible that well-meaning investigators in 1992 got it wrong.
'Presumption of innocence' & 'due process' are for a court of law, not of public opinion. What about public opinion re: Weinstein/Cosby victims. Many lost lucrative jobs or had careers cut short because they were blacklisted. Many were cast in the press as money grubbers/opportunists. Many developed PTSD & had lives ruined. Why is there more hand-wringing over the potential lost careers of the men in these cases and not the women? Maybe it's your existing bias as a man?
15
Q: Why is there more hand-wringing over the potential lost careers of the men in these cases and not the women?
A: There isn't.
This is the only column I've read that said, "Hold on there!" But, as Mr. Stephens notes, there have been numerous 'A-List' actors who have made announcements 'regretting' having worked with Mr. Allen.
And yes, I think it is a valid point to make that there are no other accusations against Mr. Allen aside from this one investigated and disputed one. Contrast that, for instance, with Michael Jackson who clearly seemed to have a fascination for 'young boys' or even Roman Polanski who fled the U.S. over his activities after being convicted.
And yes, 'Public Opinion' has nothing to do with 'Rule of Law' which is why we ought to be careful of using that (even when accompanied by a tearful over wrought victim) as the standard for conviction.
1
Child molesters are sexually turned on by young children. I've never heard of one who did it just once. Since you bring up Roy Moore, once the first victim spoke up there was a cascade of other victims that came forward. This is an obvious case of a mother manipulating her adopted child for her own purposes. Read what another of those adopted children, Moses Farrow has to say about this before you rush to judgement.
2
Oh dear. Why are you defending the indefensible? Is there something in your background that we should know, Mr Stephens?
4
Ms. Dodgson illustrates Bret Stephens' point beautifully. She makes the ugly insinuation that he must be a child molester because he dares to question the guilt and shunning of Woody Allen.
Smearers gonna smear.
2
Points to Bret Stephens for standing up to the prevailing winds in this climate. However just and long overdue, MeToo and TimesUp are in danger of becoming a vicious mob.
15
The new standard adopted by leftist women and men who cowtow to them is that all sexual harassment accusations are true and that such allegations alone are enough to convict without any other evidence. So Woody must be guilty. This is the new dogma. If you are accused of sexual harassment you are guilty until proven innocent. That is the new liberalism, the new civil rights of the govern these disputes. Get used to it.
35
"Leftist women and men who cowtow to them..?" Seriously? I think women and men in general, should be able to agree that harrassment/assault charges of any human being deserves to be taken seriously and examined by our judicial system. I think we can all agree that we are just coming out of the woods on this topic - where women who stand together are actually believed for once! I had a family member brutally raped by someone she knew back in the early 1960's - she didn't tell anyone until she was 53 years old because she was terrified that a)she wouldn't be believed, and b)she would be blamed by her Catholic family. I, for one, am not a big fan of Woody Allen movies, but I have not heard all the facts, and therefore have not come to any decision on innocence or guilt. This is not "new liberalism", this is just a new way of thinking. Period. Keep an open mind and allow the pendulum to swing far enough to provided ALL human beings with safety from attack by other humans who abuse their power -- it will eventually find its center...
8
I'm a progressive person and I don't believe that Woody Allen should be assumed to be guilty. You might find joy in calling this a liberal thing, but it's not. There are MANY progressive people writing comments here who think most likely Mia Farrow is the guilty one. Don't use this as a cheap opportunity to take a jab at progressive people.
2
Thank you Bret Stephens for a little injection of sanity into the Woody Allen debate. The cry of "Me Too" makes some sense when there is an entire chorus of credible "Me Too's" levied against an alleged transgressor (Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, etc.). Me Too makes no sense when you're alone in your accusation- you're not saying "me too"; you're just saying "me." And so, without proof, and without any corroborative other accusers, it is pretty stupid to indict Woody Allen, despite the seeming earnestness of Dylan Farrow. Unless further probative evidence emerges (unlikely) Woody is deemed innocent, which conclusion is in the interest of justice and fairness.
139
Any man that would intentionally hurt his children deserves the worst. In the here and now. And, the sooner or later.
I guess if there is no confession, pictures, videos or multiple accounts from different victims, Allen can not be tried in the court of public opinion. Nothing short of real evidence will get him anywhere near a real court room.
I don't know how he can look himself in the mirror. Maybe he apologizes to himself, for causing his guilt. Maybe he thinks his victims are misremebering what really happened. Maybe he didn't really mean to do it. His step son seems to be keenly interested about the topic of famous people getting a pass, on assault accusations.
It would wrong for me to blurt out what I think should happen. This animal should have removed from society a long time ago. But, when the time comes, I will read the accounts and have accept his justice.
24
Ronan is his son, not his stepson.
Soon -Yi would be in effect his step-daughter. Completely creepy situation.
How many godparents go on to marry their godchildren? I have never met one. Or an aunt or uncle marrying their nephew or niece who was adopted so not biologically related?
The taboo exists not just for biological but for emotional reasons.
5
And maybe he is actually innocent, which allows him to look in the mirror. Maybe he's a gentleman who could have pursued a case against Ms. Farrow but spared her and her children the ordeal.
You are correct that it IS - not would be - wrong for you to write that 'this animal should have [been - your omission] removed from society a long time ago.
6
Thank you.
No one can know what’s in the mind of another person, but I can’t buy Dylan Farrow’s story. There was an investigation, and no action was taken. That’s not proof, but the circumstances of the bitter breakup with Mia Farrow, the intense acrimony, the inconsistent story and the failure to prosecute Allen at the time are important factors.
It may have been shocking for him to have a relationship with the barely-adult Soon-Yi Previn, but another word for barely-adult is adult. And given the themes in his movies in which an older man is enamored of a young girl, Mia Farrow, horrified by Allen’s relationship with Soon-Yi, might have thought that a child molestation charge against Allen would stick, and that it would serve him right.
Dylan Farrow’s memory could plausibly have been altered by the intense atmosphere surrounding the charges, and she may have a perfectly sincere but false memory of the events. It’s telling that her story changed during the initial investigation, but that she’s absolutely certain now, many years later.
Or maybe I’m wrong. If so, I’m deeply sorry. But I’m being asked to give up on Charlie Rose, Kevin Spacey, Al Franken, Louis CK and Garrison Keillor, just to name a few. In a way, I’m starting to feel violated. I don’t want to give up on Woody Allen, and it will take more than an unsubstantiated accusation to make me do so.
1125
Your last paragraph is odd.
You are being asked to give up on anyone. Most of the people you name, have many credible accusers and Louie freely admits his transgressions.
There needs to be honest and balanced review of what occurs in these sexual abuse cases. Women have a right to be outraged by the unwanted, aggressive behavior of men - it comes in various degrees. But it all stinks.
But, what is not discussed is how the perpetrators can show redemptive remorse, make amends when possible and be reintegrated into society.
Take Charlie Rose.
His show was so enlightening on so many topics. Like a mini university course each night.
I'd like to see him be the test case.
He should show that he knows his errors and he should be allowed to do his pennance, (service of some kind) maybe reconcile and ask forgiveness of those he wronged. If possible.
Then, he should be allowed to take on the topic as a focus of a series of shows.
Hosted with a female counterpart it could further the process of education and revelation that we need to prevent the very wrong behavior he fell into.
What is our goal?
Sticking it to Kevin Spacy et all or making sure men of all ages learn the lessons that will alter them and ensure that women don't have to suffer at their hands?
Change is required.
Education.
What is our path to be better humans?
That is paramount.
18
In the end, whether we believe Dylan or believe Woody is far less important an issue than that we face the serious problem we have in this country of "trial by media". Our precious constitutional rights to privacy, presumption of innocence and a fair trial are being trampled underfoot on a daily basis.
28
Franken doesn't belong in that list, judging from all I've heard. Nothing even close to the others.
43
Without my taking a position on Woody Allen's guilt or innocence, I'd like to point out, as a retired child psychiatrist, a phenomenon known as "parental alienation syndrome" in which one parent, having animus toward the other, and usually in the heat of divorce and disputed child custody, convinces a vulnerable child to hate the other parent, and often this is associated with accusations of abuse. The "alienating parent", the one manipulating the child, has leverage in that he/she can communicate to the child that my love for you is contingent on your acting on, and believing this, lie. Not surprisingly, alienating one parent against the other is a form of emotional, or psychological, child abuse.
887
ever read the book: "The River of Consciousness", by Oliver Sacks? great read and very enlightening. Tells very clearly how the human mind can alter and twist memories.
19
Lost my son for four years. Took that long to get him back.
Still here.
Not going anywhere.
5
Thank you for your insight. The situation you describe is abusive not only to the child but to the innocent parent being victimized by the aggressor. The injured adult faces extremely limited options and will hopefully be guided solely by the well-being of the child. Allen's actions fit this scenario, and his position can just as easily be interpreted as heroic rather than villainous.
16
Well thank god he married his wife's adopted daughter and stayed with a woman 30 years younger than him, otherwise it might seem too torrid.
That leads me to my gripe with the line "exactly once." I would hope that we can loosen our sense of outrage from the numerical marker to the idea that a father figure should not use that role as a lead-in to anything sexual. Cauterruci nails it when she declares this quote the most disturbing thing Allen has said on the subject:
"I was paternal. She responded to someone paternal. I liked her youth and energy. She deferred to me, and I was happy to give her an enormous amount of decision-making just as a gift and let her take charge of so many things. She flourished."
I appreciate that Stephens wants to play fast with the concept of pedophilia as though they're just slobbering animals that can't help but indiscriminately attack children, but its nothing like that. Pedophilia is a mental condition, and there are people that realize they have it, struggle with it, take special healthcare precautions, and manage NOT to do that. But that's probably a level of nuance that doesn't come across on an episode of SVU.
But Allen clearly has said out loud that he enjoys a paternalistic relationship. Thats his thing and we have one CONFIRMED example and one alleged. The idea that not being out on a horrendous crime spree is somehow exonerating is actually appalling.
306
Thanks so much for this thoughtful comment that reviews the facts and suppositions without the appearance of prejudice.
I've always found the business with Soon-yi troubling and wanted to respond to Bret Stephen's assumptions here, but your comment is so intelligent you've clarified the problems in a way that sheds light on the subject without descending into condemnation or distortion.
Again, thank you.
88
That's quite a proposition: Allen admits he was paternal with his wife in the early days of their relationship (no statement about what the relationship is now); therefore he's confessed to pedophelia.
Paternalism is not my thing, to say the least. But for a very long time the norm in male-female relationships was in fact inequality and paternalism, and it's still common in a lot of relationships today, especially among men of Allen's generation. So, no, paternalism is NOT evidence of pedophelia. And publicly admitting to an unequal relationship isn't a confession of pedophelia either.
307
@Katherine
You misunderstand. I didn't accuse Allen of Pedophilia. I am denying the ability to trade on equivalency the term pedophile and the act of a father taking advantage of a daughter. Just because Soon-Yi is over the age of 18 doesn't make it okay. And even if Allen molested Dylan, he may still not have the brain condition of pedophilia; it may have a completely different motivation.
I'm attacking the simplicity of just trying to force Allen into "pedophile" or "not a pedophile" dichotomy. Everyone says the situation is complex, but people seem reluctant to let the final conclusion be complicated too.
14
Woody Allen fell for an adult but young woman, Soon-Yi Previn, who was Mia Farrow’s daughter but not his. They married years later, when Soon-Yi was in her mid-twenties. The 1992 allegation lodged by Farrow against Allen of molestation of Dylan Farrow, the natural daughter of Farrow and Allen, came shortly following Farrow’s discovery of the affair between Allen and Soon-Yi, during an epically vicious and very public custody battle between Farrow and Allen (they were not married but within what Farrow obviously thought was a monogamous relationship).
Bret describes the facts of the investigation that followed, which includes the finding that no signs of sexual abuse were discovered on Dylan, and which concluded without charging Allen of any crime.
Nobody knows what really happened, except those directly involved. But, given the known facts of the case, and the vicious acrimony of that custody proceeding, it’s at least possible that Allen suffers from “woman scorned” syndrome (worsened by a sense of betrayal by an adopted daughter who was an abandoned child) and that Dylan has been the victim of a memory planted in the mind of a seven-year-old child and reinforced implacably for many years. There’s no evidence to suggest otherwise, while there’s evidence that Allen did NOT sexually assault Dylan. Child molesters typically establish a pattern of similar behavior over their lives, and no such pattern has been identified at any time during Allen’s long life.
501
If he’s innocent of wrongdoing, then the pain of his daughter, whose custody he sought, harboring such thoughts of him must be intense indeed, and certainly would explain his reluctance to attack Farrow OR Dylan over the attacks these many years.
In short, Bret’s got a case.
78
Reluctance to "attack" is a sign of civility and a shows lack of emotional attachment the accusations. A guilty person would be more emotionally invested and inspired to lash out.
5
Dylan is not Allen's "Natural" daughter. Adopted daughter only. I agree with the rest of your comments though.
3
Mr. Stephens, here is the link to the ruling 1993 Woody Allen custody ruling In its detailed entirety:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/danny-shea/heres-the-1993-woody-alle_b_47...
Go ahead and read it, then write this article again.
There was an investigation in 1992, just like there were investigations of people like Justice Clarence Thomas around the same time.
For the readers commenting on Allen's affair and then marriage with Soon Yi, he met her when she was 10 years old and he was 46. The idea that a man has an affair with the daughter of his wife, the daughter he meets when she is 10 and he is 46 is not okay. There is no meeting of minds or level playing field here. There is something terribly wrong with this picture.
Stop excusing it.
Here is another example of Allen's behavior in a recent issue of NY Magazine, "Why We Applaud Allen's Misogyny":
https://www.thecut.com/2018/01/woody-allen-american-film-institute-diane...
Mr. Stephens and a number of other people don't buy Dylan Farrow's story. Well, I don't buy Allen's story - something doesn't add up, and I'm basing that on his behavior and the judge's ruling.
But, I'll leave the final word to Pauline Kael who noted Allen's peculiar morality in "Manhattan," where the protagonist contrasts the self-centered intelligentsia with a fresh-faced 17-year-old Dalton girl: “What man in his forties but Woody Allen,” Kael wrote, “could pass off a predilection for teenagers as a quest for true values?”
183
Thanks for the links. I read the entire ruling. It seems the judge was very ready to give Farrow the benefit of the doubt on every occasion and to assume the worst of Allen despite the evidence, which included a physical exam of Dylan by a physician, who found no evidence that there had been sexual contact.
Allen is lucky not to have ended up in jail, with a judge like that. I guess, given that the testimony of the medical experts involved found no evidence to support Dylan's story, the judge simply couldn't justify throwing him in jail.
4
@V Thank you so much for your comment and
the links, very enlightening. Especially the first link,
it really struck a chill. The incredible skill of a predator,
3
The custody ruling has little to do with Allen's alleged abuse of Dylan Farrow.
He may well be an unsuitable father but that has nothing to do with the abuse case. Allen and Soon Yi met when she was 10. So what? As far as we know, they didn't have a sexual relationship until she was "of age" and although the situation between the two of them is certainly unusual it is not illegal and I don't believe that any of us has the right to judge. As much as we try to establish rules of behaviour for sexual relationships they are frequently not straightforward or black and white. For you "something doesn't add up" and therefore you see Allen as being guilty. Needless to say I disagree!
9
Woman are savage in their wish to control and conquer and destroy men if they feel they so deserve it. Keep this in mind in every encounter with them. Insidious, the tender trap. Much more likely to harm you then terrorism or nuclear bombs. Full alert. Beware. Danger ahead!!!!
2
wow hate women much? did someone hurt you?
8
Who hurt you, Rich Williams?
7
Mia was devastated by Woody's sleeping with Soon-Yi. Heartbroken and very, very angry. She coached Dylan and convinced her this happened and Dylan still believes it. Ronan is a mama's boy so he supports it as well and has made so many public statements in support of Dylan's claim he'd look like an idiot if he backtracked now. This family was ripped apart by Woody's sleeping with and then falling in love with Soon-Yi. Mia made a horrible, angry decision there is no turning back from once the wheels start rolling. Ronan is his mother's good boy son. The other brother Moses, who is quite sane, says it didn't happen.
8
The smearing of Woody Allen was done a long time ago by Mr. Allen himself when he decided to engage in a sexual relationship with his underaged adopted daughter. Efforts by defenders and apologists like Mr. Stephens to deflect from that fact by attacking subsequent allegations as false do not lessen the contempt and revulsion that Mr. Allen has so richly earned in the first place.
107
Woody Allen, as both filmmaker and writer of fiction and essays, is an American treasure, a bona fide genius. To see him crucified by a pack of ignorant, self-righteous people under the banner of political correctness and the #MeToo movement, is a disgrace.
65
john, Woody Allen is both a genius and a strange duck who married his step-daughter. His professional accomplishments have precious little to do with his private picadillos.
4
Does the name Soon-Yi Previn ring a bell?
36
100% agree. The MeToo movement will fall if it continues to be judge, jury and executioner. Allen's neuroses were always on display, but that doesn't prove he assaulted Dylan, and it is not hard to imagine the excessively neurotic Farrow convincing herself a fiction is real. Farrow admittedly beat Soon-yi, cut up her clothes and lied about her age. I've always felt this case was one of those we'd never really know the full truth about.
67
Sad what a parent will do to their kids to get revenge toward a lover who spurned them. Woody Allen is the victim here.
63
Mr. Stephens is spot on. His subject is bias and hysteria about fantasy. Some NYT reader's comments about Stephens column prove his point. Gary Misch's sarcastic comment refers to the most profound problem of our era, He says, "Please, stop bothering me with the facts!" Bravo!
When it comes to sex, many people seem uncomfortable with the facts. Not all humans use "approved" acts with "approved" partners.
Poor Soon Yi, she got a rich, brilliant, husband who has stayed with her for 25 years. Dirty old man is in the mind. But it is not in Soon Yi's mind.
Notice how some reader's disparage Woody Allen's films also. Maybe they prefer super hero films, video game films, the 107th Star Wars film.
Read what Moses Farrow has to say about Mia Farrow as an adult, out of her Mommie Dearest control before you give in to belief in satanic cults and UFO's.
And to Mary from CA who still believes that kids told the truth about satanic rituals, your level of gullibility is why we have Trump as president. Anyone reading about the McMartin case and how the whole thing started with a psychotic mother making wild accusations, then spread like wildfire like the anti-vaxxer idiocy, the shameless interrogations of kids who denied the absurd satanic tales repeatedly until giving in to stop the grilling and please the moronic adults, instead of cherry picking one piece on their side, like Mary does, needs lessons in analytical thinking.
That is what Stephen's column is about, hysterical minds.
65
Allen's movies speak for themselves. He may or may not be guilty of molesting his step daughter who he let run around without underwear and slept with. But you can still love his December-May romance movies, just as many still love James Brown, who beat his wife regularly, and Michael Jackson who we all know was a pedophile.
11
It's telling how many of these comments give Allen the benefit of the doubt, then go on to blithely assume Mia Farrow's guilt: scorned woman syndrome, "parental alienation syndrome," etc. This is exactly what we are up against: white men are naturally presumed innocent. What a travesty of justice when they aren't given this presumption! How horrible for them! How will they handle it like the rest of us have for so many centuries?!
59
"The heart wants what the heart wants," Mr Allan quotes Emily Dickinson to justify his actions, how convenient. Put another way, "what Woody wants, Woody gets" is another, but not so poetic. Mr Allan has a boundary problem that he and his enablers refuse to acknowledge. Mr Allan began having sexual intercourse with his children's sister. Just let that sink in. Do I doubt Dylans story? Not for a second.
52
I hear that "we must believe the victim.' No, we must LISTEN TO the victim and give the victim both the right and the resources he/she needs to prove his/her case if it is provable. But we must assume that the accused is innocent (unless he/she confesses guilt) until proven guilty in a court of law.
137
Never thought I'd agree with Trump about anything.
"Peoples lives are being shattered and destroyed by a mere allegation. Some are true and some are false. Some are old and some are new. There is no recovery for someone falsely accused - life and career are gone. Is there no such thing any longer as Due Process?"
70
Most people wouldn't feel like marrying a much younger step daughter was even an option. It violates familial taboos, regardless of the biological genetic realities. If nothing else, Woody Allen didn't know how to behave in a family. A lot of rules were bent or broken in the Farrow-Allen-Previn-Sinatra family system. It doesn't surprise me that one of the children didn't feel safe. A. O. Smith wrote a NYT editorial this week that is an interesting juxtaposition to this one. Life imitates art or art imitates life? Either way, how can we know if he is guilty as charged now?
48
I agree that the Rolling Stones didn't ring true and I was relieved when the truth came out. Dylan believes her accusation from when she was a seven-year old, and her mother and her much younger brother continue to uphold her belief. But the evidence was inconclusive and was contradicted by her older brother at the time it was made and since. Now past the 25-year mark, with never an additional accusation, the current persecution of Woody Allen rings false. I hope Dylan and her younger brother find some peace and consolation. I don't think public persecution of the accused, who couldn't justly be convicted in a court of law, will serve them well. Shame may descend upon those actors reacting in dramatic ways against Woody as the dust settles.
79
Deviants tend to stick to their perversion which for Allen is precocious teens and since no other woman stepped forward with a story, and charges were not laid, the public needs to let this rest. Allen did not make jokes about molesting young girls whereas there are plenty of references to early teens. Dylan's claim falls outside of his stated preference and so it is fair to stop destroying him in the media. If he ever was charged he would be out of prison and making films whereas he is currently under a life sentence. The key here is whether he is a danger to other women and I think that under current circumstances he is not; would anyone leave their young female children alone with him? "Manhattan" type of subject matter is not what he has been working with in his recent films and so I hope he keeps on working and creating and finding first-rate actors to bring his visions to life.
43
A much older man having a secret affair with his 19-year old stepdaughter, while still in a relationship with her mother, may not technically be pedophilia, but is tantamount to the same thing. Sorry but no sympathies or credibility for Woody Allen. Yes the writer has a point that there was not a preponderance of evidence to convict him in court, which is why he's roaming the streets. But the public isn't dumb. We also know that O.J. isn't actually looking for the "real killer".
275
I have not read all of the comments, but I have read enough to see that there are a few factual inaccuracies regularly repeated.
1: Farrow and Allen were never married
2: Allen is only listed as the father of 3 children in the household: Ronan, Dylan and Moses. He was never father or stepfather to Soon Yi
Also, He and Soon-Yi have 2 adopted children together. Allen was considered an acceptable parent to these children despite the claims of Mia Farrow. As far as anyone can see, the couple have had a successful long term relationship.
Mia Farrow married Frank SInatra when she was 21 and he was 50. The age difference is not much different than Allen's age compared to Soon Yi's.
343
Let's presume Allen innocent of Dylan Farrow's allegations. Why is it ok to marry an adoptive daughter? Stephens calls it creepy. I call it immoral. I think anyone who worked with him after that is on questionable ground.
123
Is O.J. Simpson guilty of murder? Is Donald Trump a crook? Did Putin interfere in the 2016 US election? In other words, even though "existing biases" need to be "treat[ed] ... with added skepticism", cases difficult to prove are not ipso facto false. When during the Weinstein affair Woody Allen published a caveat against "witch-hunting", some readers might have read into it an intention to taunt his old-time accuser(s), or to flaunt insouciantly his impunity, or even, at the very least, to risk unnecessarily the re-opening of the Dylan Farrow case. Meanwhile I want to see Trump's tax returns.
92
Independent investigations of Larry Nassar by MSU also found that he was not guilty of assault. So why do you put so much faith in the investigation carried out in this case? Believing investigators over girls and women is precisely what enables pedophiles and abusers.
199
We do have rule of law. Woody Allen has denied molesting his children. Whatever one thinks about Allen's marriage to Soon-Yi and how their relationship commenced during Allen's marriage to Mia Farrow, Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi was not illegal. Having said all of that, most cultures, not just our culture, but most cultures have reared females to be polite and passive toward males and that is just now starting to change. Boys will be boys is something I heard around the time my young life was demolished by a felonious act I could not even describe. Once tarnished, girls are often hounded by their peers, their own families and the families of the males who abused, took advantage of or outright raped them. I am listening to NPR's Hidden Brain just this very minute. An audio excerpt from a stage play features a guy saying he wanted to "jump" a woman he liked. I remember being told that I "got jumped" and "jumped" by the "wrong guy" as if there were a right guy to be "jumped" by. Women are just now speaking up about millennia of being objectified by friend and foe alike. Outright rape has been hard to prove and often hard to prove because males are reared to pursue and females are raised to be nice. In his films, Woody Allen sometimes features himself connecting with younger girls as uncle, mentor and sometimes lover. Context matters.
50
Yes, in our current climate, we do need to be wary of false accusations. But how is it possible to "smear" Woody Allen?
Allen was romantically involved with a woman, had children with her, and took advantage of the trust within her family to sleep with the woman's daughter. The fact that he later married the daughter, Soon Yi Previn, does not make it less repugnant.
How can you call this behavior merely "distasteful?" I find it so evil (yes, evil) that I must give credence to Dylan Farrow's accusations.
What an odious individual you have chosen to defend.
163
Dr. Nassar was not prosecuted and many of his victims shared that they were accused of inconsistent stories/ details. We know that Mr. Allen married his step daughter which is reprehensible and consistent with a person who abuses power with children.
100
One of the questions is: In the ten years Allen had known Soon-Yi before he took exotic photos of her .....was he a father to her? Allen started his relationship with Mia Farrow when Soon Yi was around 10 years old and as I understand it, they all acted as a family unit - with Allen taking the kids - including Soon Yi on family outings. As Soon Yi's brother, Ronan Farrow has written: "He's my father married to my sister. That makes me his son and his brother-in-law. That is such a moral transgression... I cannot see him." In this context, it quite easy to believe Dylan Farrow.
128
This piece suffers from exactly the bias the author ascribes to others. He bemoans the lack of facts. Here are some facts: 1) the investigators who found Dylan's story "inconsistent" were hired by Allen, 2) she was never inconsistent in her core claim of molestation, 3) Allen was in therapy re: his behavior toward Dylan at the time of the incident, 4) children may be fanciful about unicorns but not about molestation. What an absurd, ill-informed and insulting notion. Finally, to follow the author's logic to its conclusion -- that one shouldn't rush to smear -- he has done exactly that to Dylan. If none of us knows exactly what happened that day, then neither does he.
123
Really? So marrying your girlfriends daughter, your sons sister doesn't ring any bells? Being denied custody and visitation with your children? I'm not debating that he's made great movies, but culture is changing. And under a new lens Dylan Farrow is being believed. That's not a smear campaign, that's a long over due cultural reckoning.
132
Let's talk damage. Dylan has spent the last 20 years suffering from the trauma of a father figure doing the opposite of protecting her, shredding any sense of security, trust, safety; she's been examined, cross-examined and called a liar more than once. Woody has gone on to marry another daughter, much younger than he, make movies, express himself, make millions, get meatheads like Alec Baldwin (and you) to defend him -- I'd say the scales still benefit Woody Allen. And that is a shame.
104
Mr Stephens strikes a balance in the current openness of sexual abuse of women. I would never defend anyone who abuses a relationship that veers in to unwanted sexual advance. I appreciate Woody Allen's talent but I cut him no slack. We little folks who live outside the world of celebrities, cannot possibly understand their private lives. What we see is not necessarily what we get. We don't understand what lies beneath Dylan Farrow's claim only that her mother and Allen have had a contentious relationship for ever. Maybe we need to let them deal with it off camera and leave the rest of us to contemplate whether Trump will start a nuclear war with North Korea.
16
Well Brett, even your argument has holes in it.
1. You besmirch Rolling Stone Magazine right out of the gate with a referral to another story that has no bearing on this case which has played out across many more news organizations.
2. You seek confirmation of your supposition from a hospital that "found no evidence", even as we all know that many crimes against children leave no evidence.
3. You then ride roughshod over Dylan Farrow who is the primary witness/party to this crime, and you apparently dismiss her consistent report of it over the past couple of decades, for what reason exactly?
As we look at the United States Gymnastics team members' accounts of their abuse, we can see that they were denied but not disproved. Same here.
83
The fact that Allen married his stepdaughter, and his obvious lifelong obsession with young women and girls, as shown in his movies , leads me to believe that he would also be capable of abusing a young daughter. In my mind he does not get the benefit of the doubt
112
I was bothered by the distinction Stephens makes between Woody Allen (exonerated by a single "expert witness" report), and Weinstein and Spacey (where the accusations are "almost certainly true" and despite the absence of court proceedings, "they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,"). How, without court proceedings and a determination by an impartial fact-finder, can you draw such a definitive conclusion about the guilt or innocence of anyone credibly accused of wrongdoing? Then I read the transcript of Allen's custody hearing. I defy anyone to conclude he is wholly innocent of any wrongdoing after reading this. https://www.scribd.com/document/205403621/Allen-v-Farrow-Custody-Ruling-....
76
YES!!!!
Everyone seems to forget the spate of false memories that were bandied about in the late 1980's and continuing into the early to mid 1990's about devil worshipping cults that were murdering infants, and also about "alien abdeuctions".
A whole rash of therapists were found to have unintentionally created those memories due to their questions of the alleged victims.
Memory, especially children's memories that result from turbulent or "traumatic" points in time, are notoriously false.
Heck, even adult memories are notoriously inaccurate, as any lawyer knows. In fact there is tons of evidence supporting this.
Young children whose parents are going through a chaotic event, such as a hostile divorce, do feel threatened by those events, and in idiosyncratic ways.
There is no doubt that this woman feels that something terrible happened, but let's give some credit to the agencies and personnel who conducted the investigation years ago and decided that the evidence was lacking and/or insufficient.
68
This issue is complicated by the fact that -- at least as it appeared to me long before the Allen-Farrow breakup occurred -- she's as eccentric and nutty as he is. It's hard to separate fact from self-justification and the obsessive revenge factor.
52
We don't know the truth here. Either about Woody Allen's relationship with Dylan, nor about Mia Farrow, as Bret Stephens so aptly says. What we do know is that Dylan is a distraught young woman, who sincerely believes she was molested. And we know that Allen had an affair with one step-daughter (aged 19, I think at the time, so not a child) and that they have been married, without visible problems, ever since. In today's climate, if other victims of Allen existed, they would surely by now have poured into the light. So, thank you, Bret Stephens, for the voice of reason here. And for not forgetting to point how vital reportage is, as per the Nasser case. I am a deep believer in the power of #metoo to set the stage for a new relationship in the business world between men and women. I am also aware of the misuses of public forums. I still think women should be free to speak. We should watch the fall-out. But the 265 victims of Nasser stand as a warning that more than air should be cleared in our culture. It is a culture of abuse, and of entitlement that leads to abuse. Of women, famously, and little girls. But also of young boys, via the Church and sports. The criminals are almost always those whom the children have the most reason to trust. So - "Tighten your seat belts," as Bette Davis once said in a movie. "It's going to be a bumpy ride." Perhaps that's as it should be.
28
Reasonable points undermined in the last paragraph. “But someone of being a molester without abundant evidence is also odious...”. Not if you KNOW it to be true, as Ms. Farrow days she does. Victims of crime DO NOT have to gather the legal evidence for the public prosecutor to speak their testimony.
You dance around it, but the fact is that you doubt the veracity Farrow’s story. Such skepticism and searching for convincing and supporting evidence on the part of the rest of us is one thing. But suggesting that she must silence or retract her personal eyewitness testimony bcause you, or even everyone, doesn’t believe it is something else. And not appropriate in a free society.
37
The outrage from the left about Woody Allen (That poor man! Witch hunt! No proof!) reminds me of the outrage on the right about Trump. (That poor man! Witch hunt! No proof!)
The guy made movies where the hero of the film ends up with a 15 year old, and you want to say that had nothing to do with his personal life (where he ended up with a woman he knew since she was 12, and was accused of assaulting a 7 year old)?
Sure, you can believe that if you want to. But it's an act of faith as naive as the Trump followers' faith, and you should be honest with yourself about how much of an act of faith it is.
Where there's smoke, there's usually fire. We can't catch Allen in court, but people are allowed to believe what they want. And Allen's films are the smoke -- look harder at them. His crimes and misdemeanors are built into every one as surely as Cosby's Spanish fly joke.
51
I disagree. Boost of the time our biases are “best guesses” given past experience and what we know about the world. Bias is a shortcut, a survival tool for making decisions and, sure, sometimes our best guesses lead to error and injustice—but most of the time they serve us well. So, if I am biased against creepy looking sex-fiending men who have, on at least one occasion, slept with a person who was in a daughter’s position since she was the daughter of my spouse—and it’s his word against a kid’s word—you betcha I’m gonna go with the kid, particularly a kid who is bright and articulate and unwavering in her position as an adult. He used to bury his face in her lap and breathe in and out—I find that to be very believable because it is such a specific memory.
30
I see we have not yet put behind us the age of apologists for contemptible behavior. When the legal system fails to perform its duties faced with the rich and famous, then social condemnation is what is left. We are, or should be, past the practice of disbelieving children in order to protect abusers.
43
Talk about 'playing into existing biases!' Allen has benefited his entire life from existing biases that women aren't credible witnesses to their own experience. I wish Stephens had examined all of the normative "existing biases" that make the ubiquitous presence of male sexual misconduct 'normal' and the women who speak up about it "crazy" or in the present moment "over-reaching, creating a witch-hunt."
53
I find myself agreeing from timeWW to time with Mr. Stephens, which goes against my “existing biases.” I had never heard of that investigation which “clears” Woody Allen and I follow the news pretty closely. We must be very careful in this current lynch mob mentality to avoid injuring people based on bare allegations.
20
First: Great article, excellent column!
Second: I'm reading all these comments here, thankfully many terrific comments. But there also seems to be many here who claim to know about child molestation from a personal standpoint. For that I am truly sorry. But this is th NYTimes comment section where, most of us know that, we're in a distinct minority of today's American thought process. So what do all these disturbing comments say about our culture overall? Are we looking at this issue, or subject, from a wrong viewpoint considering what type of an animal humans are, and th social order we've committed ourselves to throughout th centuries? The question needs to be asked.
Where's the Margaret Meade(s) and/or Sigmund Freud(s) of today?
5
A pedophile need only act on his or her impulses once to ruin someone's life. It is also quite rare for a person to repeat stories of abuse into adulthood. By the way, I believe that the DA concluded that there was evidence of abuse but declined to prosecute as legal proceedings would be more damaging to the victim.
52
it's just not that simple. The problem with how today's dialogues are conducted is that we are far too all or nothing. The reality is that really talented and really good people sometimes do really bad things. The puritanical base of America makes it impossible to have more nuanced conversations. The way the nation handles tricky topics force everyone into a sort of tribal "us vs them" mentality, complete with pitchforks and torches. Do I think Allen is capable of sexual misconduct? Absolutely. But does this mean that he and others should burn at the stake? Absolutely not. At the same time the survivors of these incidents are within their rights to say what happened to them from their perspective. Less judgement, more listening, please.
9
Woody Allen is losing in the court of public opinion for being a creep and possibly something worse. There is no innocent until proven guilty in the court of public opinion. The man has not been legally convicted of child molestation, there's your "innocent until proven guilty" in action. There's no principle that says the public opinion must adhere to the Court's decision.
27
Come on. The guy had a sexual relationship with his partner's learning disabled adopted daughter 35, 35! years his junior! I'm as devastated as any fan of Woody Allen...But don't forget, we know him--he forced us to know him and his neuroses through his films. Wonderful, beautiful, hilarious films, but then there in the background and oftentimes the foreground, were his personal issues intruding into the story. I suppose it's no different now in real life except for the fact that I don't have to put up with it anymore to experience art. I will seek it elsewhere.
32
It pains me to see how all this develops. Woody Allen is one of the greatest movie makers, being robbed off whatever little time left to him to create, and we all loose in it. Cross from World art history everybody who had questionable moments in personal life, and there would be no art , and no history.
20
From The New York Times:
My Woody Allen Problem by A.O. Scott
Even if he wanted to, he can’t unwatch his movies, our critic writes. The relationship between filmmaker and viewer is as complicated as the one between art and artist. The preponderance of "facts" is NOT in Woody Allens favor. The preponderance of "facts" is, however, found in his own handwriting in his own papers that he asked Princeton University to archive (he is not an alum.)
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/31/movies/woody-allen.html
9
Bret Stephens appears to have learned nothing from the #metoo movement. We must believe the women, men and children who bare all, risk all when they come forward to accuse men, mostly, of sexual abuse. I absolutely, 100% believe Dylan Farrow. I will never see another Woody Allen film. And for my money there is no way that the most handsome Ronan Farrow is the biological son of Woody Allen.
31
Dylan also has motive to lie about her possibly initial lie. There would be great shame and loss of respect and integrity for her if it could be demonstrated that she was not molested. She needs to stick to her (inconsistent) initial claim or she has some serious egg on her face. And it is quite obvious that Mia Farrow, her mother had motive to coach her daughter's as yet undeveloped brain to grow hostile toward her adopted father. And then there is this. Woody Allen agreed during the investigation to take a lie dector's test, and he passed. Mia refused to take the test. Why are we not justified in questioning this whole episode, especially in light of a one-off, lifetime accusation?
40
'If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once.' Once is enough. And by having an "affair" with his daughter's sister, and then marrying her to legitimize it, doesn't that result in more than acting once? A killer is still a killer even if they are not a serial killer. By the way, large assumption on authors part as to what "our" biases are. He has them too.
40
It is a misrepresentation of the facts to say that Woody Allen just "had a distasteful affair with Mia Farrow’s adopted, barely adult daughter," as if he met them contemporaneously when everyone was the age of consent and chose the daughter rather than the mother. Woody Allen and Mia Farrow began a relationship when Soon-Yi was no older than 10. The extent of Woody's parental involvement with Mia Farrow's children is unclear until Mia Farrow has a child with him, at which point Woody becomes indisputably involved; Soon-Yi is no older than 17. In less than 3 years -- the entirety of which Soon-Yi is living in Mia's house as a sibling to his children -- Woody is having a sexual relationship with Soon-Yi.
In sworn testimony in his child custody battle with Mia, Woody said he hadn’t considered how the affair would affect his children.When the judge asked “Wasn't that enough, that you would know that you were sleeping with your children's sister?” Allen said, "I didn't see it that way."
Mia Farrow's indefensible behavior ruined Dylan's credibility forever. But Dylan's claims can never be fully dismissed because Woody has said and done so much himself to validate that he did not behave appropriately or respect healthy boundaries with his children.
I didn't need Dylan's claims to reject Woody. I was there at Soon-Yi.
66
Woody Allen's quote to NPR: " Woody Allen says his 23-year relationship with Soon-Yi Previn worked because of their previous parent-child relationship."
He thinks a parent child relationship can evolve into something romantic. There was enough evidence to bring charges against Woody in the case of Dylan, but it was agreed it would be too much to put her through. Mia Farrow's family had been traumatized when Woody Allen married his "daughter". It's a false statement that Mia Farrow would traumatize her family all over again by creating a story to get even.
Woody Allen is a pervert and I wish people would stop letting him get away with it simply because he's a great director.
62
I believe Woody Allen did not molest his daughter for the simple reason no allegations prior to Dylan's was ever made against him. Simple logic will tell you a middle aged man in his 50's doesn't just wake up one day and think to himself "I think I'll go molest that little girl today." Pedophiles are known to have long histories of abusing or attempting to abuse small children. I believe Dylan was coached by her mother.
46
"Exactly once"? Why does the the Soon Yi Previn affair with his wife's daughter not count as a sort of revolting case of pedophilia? And do his creepy musings in his movies and writings mean nothing? And what about the Connecticut prosecutor in the Dylan Farrow case who still thinks the case had probable cause, but didn't pull the trigger on it because of the age and vulnerability of the victim? I get that a young girl can be twisted in a custody battle, but Mr. Stephens overstates the case that innocent Mr. Allen has been horribly smeared.
40
Annie Hall , Manhattan, Crimes & Misdemeanors, Match Point - great fictional movies.
A man who took naked pictures of his adopted daughter before he married her - NOT so great facts
43
The recurring Woody Allen trope of the brilliant, vivacious, beautiful young woman inexplicably falling madly in love with an older, neurotic, unappealing man is reason enough for me to never see another Woody Allen film again.
43
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once." I don't think you can have watched many of his movies. They are clearly, and disturbingly, external workings-out of his sexual obsessions. Not provable in any legal sense, of course, which is your point, but obvious just the same.
27
You are always going to get "victims" who lie and try to smear or exhort money from innocent people.
I don't know the whole story here and will not make a comment and most victims of abuse are telling the truth.
However, what the press on both sides rarely discuss are the victims co depending and enabling the predator.
Sexual harassment/predation has been illegal since app. 1980. Countless women have fought back sued and won.
I know, I saw many in the large corporation I worked for.
With the exception of the minor, or the immigrant woman who doesn't know the law, there is no excuse not to fight back.
In many of these cases you see women wait many yrs to speak up (Anita Hill), or worse only report it when the roles or promotions stop or the predators cover is blown (M. Streep) or ultra liberal feminists groups who protect the predator because they contribute to their cause (Weinstein and NOW and Hillary).
Yes men do enable and co dependent the predator too but so do many, many women.
It is a different era. Men will not come down on white horses to rescue the damsel in distress. It is up to the woman to do it.
The only thing as bad as a predator is an enabler or co dependent.
10
You're ignoring all of his other actions that point to a sick twisted abuse of defenseless girls. The alleged abuse of Dylan didn't occur in the vacuum that you're implying.
41
I never thought Woody Allen was a pedophile for one simple reason. He is not sexually attracted to children. He is clearly attracted to young women, but not 7 year olds. So, I never bought this story from the beginning. As a social worker, who has worked with children in contentious divorces, children's stories that are inconsistent must be disregarded. They are so persuadable by one parent or the other, and I believe that is what happened when Mia Farrow was very upset about Woody marrying her adult daughter, Soon-Yi. However, there is a time to take a child seriously when they vocalize serious sexual allegations, and that is when their accounts of how they were victimized are consistent over a significant amount of time regardless of who is interviewing them. This was not the case with Dylan Farrow.
60
It reminds me of the O.J. Simpson's case where Simpson was not criminally liable but lost in the civil suit against him over the same case because of a preponderance of evidence. With regards to Allen he was lucky enough to have a wake-up call or a virtual stroke to realize early on that this kind of behavior could literally end his career and eventually he might end up in jail. Hence a dose of medicine of self-restraint motivated Allen to refrain from this kind of alleged behavior again. Who knows what could have happened if this alleged behavior wasn't reported, like the Polanski's cases that have now surfaced. Or for that matter pedophilia cases committed by the same person over time because the initial crime was not reported.
8
How could Dylan Farrow "remember" something that may not have ever happened, especially something so horrific? It's a well-studied problem in psychology. See https://www.csicop.org/specialarticles/show/that_doesnt_mean_it_really_h...
16
Apparently many readers have their minds made up and don't want to be confused by facts.
The Yale-New Haven Hospital examination noted "important inconsistencies" in Dylan's statements, as well as the fact "her descriptions and details...were unusual and were inconsistent." Despite criticizing the investigation, the Connecticut court declined to press charges.
Dylan and Ronan Farrow have launched a publicity campaign based on emotions, in an attempt to counter the lack of medical or legal facts supporting their argument.
They have jumped on the #MeToo bandwagon in an attempt to marshal the support of the public. Failing any objective evidence, facts, or court decisions, the Farrows and their supporters would convict Mr. Allen in the court of public opinion based on emotions and feelings.
The behavior of the dysfunctional Farrow Family, including Mia, trivializes an important and timely issue in an effort to prevail in their ugly family feud. and vendetta against Woody Allen.
It is of note that no one has mentioned Moses Farrow or his account of growing up in the dysfunctional Farrow Family. His description of punishments he endured from "Mommie Dearest" Mia are disturbing to say the least.
I would suggest that those who wish to learn another side of this sordid saga should read "Start to Finish" by Eric Lax or Robert Weide's 2014 essay, "The Woody Allen Allegations: Not So Fast" for the Daily Beast.
There was dark and disturbing behavior in Mia Farrow's family.
61
It may be impossible to untangle what happened regarding the possible molestation of Dylan Farrow, so I will agree that we should not rush to judgment on that, Mr. Stephens. That means we should neither reject or accept the accusations against Allen, but listen to them and weigh them both. However, the evidence that Woody Allen seduced and married his de facto stepdaughter, causing great harm to the people around him, is indisputable. That makes him a repulsive, self-absorbed creep in my book. How about yours, Mr. Stephens?
21
What's left out of all these responses is that Mia Farrow was aware for years of Woody Allen's fixation on his daughter. Pedophiliia is/was not the issue; his fixation on his daughter, was, and it led to the abuse. Allen's own behavior with Soon Y proves that he had no scruples when it came to satisfying his desires. It is entirely reasonable to me that he fixated on this one child and abused her; espeically when confrtonted with the dire conclusions of the judge in Copnnecticut.
14
As long as we're going to bring up Rolling Stone, wasn't The New York Times's prominent coverage of the Sulkowicz-Nungesser story (where the Columbia student subsequently dragged around a mattress, for academic credit) another example of jumping on the bandwagon? I remember the accusations getting prominent and uncritical coverage, but not much attention to later events that cast doubt on the accuser's story. Shouldn't that too be a cautionary tale?
18
The "journalism" on this topic is incredibly soft. Take Dylan Farrow's psychiatric status. There have been various references to her receiving psychotherapy throughout her life starting as a very young child, and she herself describes extreme psychiatric reactions and symptoms. Do any of her caregivers suggest hallucinations or delusions? Are there internal contradictions in what she has told doctors (there certainly were when she was a child, but has this continued)? A pattern of shifting narratives? The answer might be no, and she certainly deserves her privacy if that's what she wants. But media outlets (including the NYT) should not be passing along her story without asking such probing questions.
20
Perhaps Mr. Stephens hasn't read his colleague Nick Kristof's column on the same topic, which read in part:
"That judge, Elliott Wilk, noted that on the day of the alleged assault, a babysitter saw Allen with his head on Dylan’s lap, facing her body. A tutor soon afterward found that Dylan wasn’t wearing her underwear. And nobody has explained where Dylan and Allen went when they both disappeared as the babysitter was searching for them — except Dylan, who says that that’s when the assault happened."
Kristof then cited a Washington Post article which cited Allen's private notes that painted an obsession with teenage girls. http://wapo.st/2CH3xj6?
That obsession is perhaps what led to his marrying his stepdaughter Soon-Yi which you so cavalierly describe as "he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once."
Allen, by marrying a "barely adult" daughter adopted daughter of Mia Farrow, when he was in his late 50s, smeared himself. He deserves contempt, not a sympathetic column, of all places, in the New York Times.
40
I don't know if Woody Allen abused Dylan Farrow or not. It isn't part of the opinion I have of him. My negative opinion of him is marrying Soon Yi Previn, a very hurtful act against Mia Farrow.
21
It is not just a matter of Dylan Farrow's word against Woody Allen's word. I stopped watching this predator's movies when he took up with his step daughter (including the release of naked pictures of her teenaged self). Then their are the reports of Mariel Hemmingway and others. Woody Alan needs to disappear from public life, even if there is insufficient evidence to send him to jail.
27
Emotions are not to be confused with facts. Mr. Stephens is presenting facts. This sad story will never be resolved and it isn't possible for me to "take sides". I fear this MeToo movement is getting a bit out of control.
17
Can we please stop conflating these events? Woody Allen cheating on Mia with a 21 year old, his wife's daughter no less, and being a pedophile?
People find the former immoral and worse - but it is not criminal. One is not proof of the other. As we know, children can be coached to believe things that are not true. See the McMartin trial. I'm not saying that is what happened. I don't know.
The bottom line is we don't know the truth. So holding Mr. Allen accountable for something he was cleared of - it's not right. Put away the torches and pitchforks. If you haven't read what Allen's son Moses claims, you should. Again, we don't know but it was investigated and he was cleared.
I feel great compassion for Dylan - regardless of what happened - she is clearly in pain and this clearly seems to be her truth.
38
The #meetoo movement has turned into a mob, driven by hypocrisy, denial, sensationalism, lust for power and voyeurism. No question we have a predatory male culture. We have elected a misogynist for president. If #meetoo has any value and really wants to change the culture, it has one big prize: Donald Trump. As long as he remains in power, #meetoo is just a fad, a diversion, a hyped, self congratulatory and self righteous movement. Maybe Woody Allen has violated social norms by marrying his step daughter at a young age, but he is not a misogynist, not a serial perpetrator like many man who abuse their power for sexual favors. I am glad this column came to his defense.
25
The same bias is appearing in this article that the writer claims to be immune to. There is no reason to compare Allen to Larry Nassar. Nassar was in a unique position to enable his abuses. Meanwhile, the people who 'act on evil fantasies exactly once' cannot be counted. If readers look to their own circle of acquaintances I am sure they will recall an abuser with only one or a few victims, who were within the family.
7
I recall there was a witness? One of the housekeepers stumbled upon the act? That seems to have been lost in the fog.
11
LOL at the notion that societies "existing biases" is sympathy for victims of sexual assault. If only.
11
And how many girls did "Dr" Nasser accuse of lying about what he was doing to their bodies, and have all of *his* accusations treated as fact?
Hmmm?
12
I don't want to tread too deeply into the extremely odd history of Woody Allen and his family. I'm honestly only vaguely familiar with the details as a passive observer. However, one thing strikes me as odd about an already unusual story. Why would Allen seek custody of his children after the fact if the accusations of sexual abuse were actually true? The behavior cuts against the grain of the narrative.
Far from me to prove or disprove Dylan Farrow's account. Maybe Allen is extremely clever and manipulative. However, I tend to trust the memory of an adult participant in a nasty breakup more than a seven year old's interpretation of her parents' divorce. Speaking from experience, the truth and honesty about family history generally takes a lifetime to unwind.
Imagine putting together a picture puzzle but every piece is photographed from a different perspective. I still only have the image partially worked out. If you asked me what was true in my life at age 7 now, I could only deliver you a fiction pieced together from all the conflicting information, thoughts, and feelings that came afterwards. I certainly have no desire to make that knowledge public either. Just saying.
15
Let's say he did it.
Touched his daughter's private parts that day.
She says it happened that one time.
And let's say he was overly attentive, even attracted to her at times in their brief relationship - till Mia Farrow banished him.
What is the appropriate punishment?
What do we as a society exact as punishment from private part toucher Woody Allen?
What are the rules assuming he is found guilty and sentenced?
Is he incarcerated?
Does he pay a monetary restitution price or do redemptive service to society? To Dylan?
Or does the unending hatred and revulsion never go away?
Would Dylan be better served by a formal procedure to ascertain the truth and then a rational consequence for him?
We like to live in a permanent "umbrage existence" it seems.
How do we resolve these issues?
My girlfriend was abused by her stepfather.
And not just once in an attic. Violence and sexual innuendo.
She moved forward, learned to forgive and freed herself.
She cried at her stepfather's funeral.
When does a person move forward?
15
I applaud the editorial writer for taking an unpopular but very reasonable position. In my opinion, there does not have to be proof Beyond A Reasonable Doubt but there has to be a clear preponderance of evidence to ruin a person's reputation. The previous article I read about the incident was clearly prejudiced against Woody Allen. Media lynching is not my idea of fairness or justice.
27
Growing up in a family headed by Mia Farrow and Woody Allen creates its own dynamic. These two eccentric people waged a war of annihilation against each other for years. Not hard to see the possible fallout from that with the children.
Maybe Dylan's memory is faulty and maybe she was coached.
But to discount her story as Stephens does because it was not prosecuted and/or because some outside authority determined (in a still sealed report?) her account not credible, is extremely problematic. The Nassar case is just one example. How long did this man operate under the noses of intelligent, well educated people who should have read the signs? How long were the complaints of victims discounted, even by the victims' own parents?
Yet, I, too, am worried about baseless claims that can ruin lives. But Stephens presents no alternative to prevent such occurrences from happening. That's an issue we all seem to be struggling with.
4
"Smear the accused, smudge the line, and the truth will never out."?
That's hardly neutral. More like a dueling counter accusation.
8
What, exactly is the point here? A defense of Allen? Or an attempt to smear all women who come forward with stories of abuse? At best, it can be said that the details of this case are murky. But it in no way should be used as proof that all women who come forward should be viewed with skepticism. Yet, that will be the effect of this opinion piece.
16
Stephens raises some good points. In agreeing with his take, many are absolutely convinced of Allen's innocence. Some think he must be guilty. Only one thing is certain: none of us know the truth.
14
This case seems to be a prism through which we exhibit and express our inherent biases regarding the current #MeToo zeitgeist. In this way I think it's important to look at ourselves and dig as far down as we can to find the truth--not the 'objective' truth regarding Dylan's alleged abuse by her stepdad Woody, for we can never really know the facts, sadly, given the super-charged toxic discord within the Farrow-Allen family. This, like many other cases that have spurred on the movement, speaks to judgment, to deeply ingrained cultural attitudes relating to male dominance and female submission and subjugation, to sexual objectification and the blurring of lines between romanticization and fetishization--a running theme throughout Woody's entire ouvre one could say. In times like these, which call for a fundamental social and cultural reset, we see many of our icons and 'heroes' torn down, for the sake of something new, something much more just and equitable. Many will lament these sacrifices, as snap judgments or unfair condemnations, while others may justify them as a necessary settling of scores, for the historical subjugation and abuse of the female of the species. In the middle of all this, I kindle a hope that there is an awakening of sorts, a reaching out to a kinder and gentler world, where we can raise our sons and daughters without inflicting them with the psychic wounds that have been passed down generation to generation to generation.
2
I am amazed at all the comments blaming the author of this piece for giving Mr. Allen a pass on his behavior on the basis of his achievements as a film maker. There is no reference in the article at all to his professional and artistic merit, nor is there any suggestion that his actions should be measured by a different standard to anyone else. Indeed, the whole point is that is everyone - no matter how unappealing - has a right to due process, both in court and in public opinion. I was once molested as a young girl of 10, and 25 years later suffered a very brutal rape. Sexually violent men do not have my sympathy. But my most recent aggressor now serves a very long prison sentence not because I pointed at him and shrieked, but because competent and compassionate detectives heard me out, carefully collected incontrovertible evidence, and presented it to a court of law. By contrast, I still live with the anguish of "letting" my first aggressor go, that he may have gone on to hurt others (I moved away so I don't know). I never got him into any trouble, because by the time I had grown the nerve to speak, I also knew I had no way to prove my claim. None of that takes away by belief that the more odious the alleged crime, the more important it is to be thorough and rigorous in establishing facts. It is horrible to be disbelieved as a victim. It is also horrible to be disbelieved as an innocent person falsely accused of a monstrosity. I do not wish it on anyone.
20
Thanks you for writing this piece. It was needed. Since Nicholas Kristof wrote his first oped piece about Woody and this accusation, which I did read, I have stopped reading anything he has written. I felt it was very unfair of him, as a friend of Woody's ex Mia, to use his position to help her damage Woody with this smear. You did not mention her at all, which surprised me, but as you know, a very important aspect of this accusation story involves the theory that Mia coached her daughter, that there is the possibility that she used their adopted daughter as a tool to harm someone whom she was very angry with. Yet, if this is true, which we do not really know, any more than we know Woody ever did the things he is accused of, she may have done something reprehensible, but she will never suffer the same punishment as Woody has. Consider the facts, as you say, that he was thoroughly investigated and found innocent, yet here in the twilight of a career in which he has brought so many of us some very unique and talented works of humor, he is judged, and found guilty not due to facts, but due to accusations, which is enough in this current environment to destroy a man's legacy. Al Franken "groping"? Really? Never given the chance of an investigation. Garrison Keillor, so many years of great work, a lifetime, done, gone.
23
people can choose to enjoy the results of the work of actors, athletes musicians etc without having to give approval to the artist's personal behavior or beliefs. Giving Woody Allen the benefit of doubt regarding child molestation seems fair in that he is not standing trial and going to jail, but even if he was guilty would it be a bad thing to enjoy his movies? ARE Harvey Weinstein's movies somehow tainted? Woody Allen when a middle aged man married his common law ? stepdaughter. I would think at minimum that is exploiting a step parent relationship, and disgusting behavior by most people's standards, but is it something that should bar him from working in his field. seems to me if people want to work with him and/or enjoy his work they should be free to do so.
2
1. "...social-media whispers can become the ruin of careers and even of lives."
"Social media" is internet media--speeding up the grapevine method of spreading opinion--usually logically uncritical opinion.
It's a variation on "wishful thinking"--itself a variation on "mythic thinking"
It's also the aesthetic (feel good) test for truth--"good story ergo true story." "Good story" depends on personality type and culture (nature and nurture), including god-stories and propaganda.
2. "the story’s moral truth overwhelmed its factual one."
"Moral" here might be "moral of the story"--the "takeaway" or "principle illustrated"--like law's "ratio decidendi"--the principle decided. That could be a variation on verisimilitude (true to life--similar to true) vs true. Good fiction is often reality revealing--regarding true general principles but not specific details.
False accusation based on false memory, due to self deception--motivated logically irrational belief--hardly scores as verisimilitude. It is just travesty--a burlesque parody--however in step with the grapevine--or viral epidemic.
But "moral truths" might also be "true ideals"--which needn't fit reality--the real is rarely ideal.
Rather "moral truth" like "factual truth" can mean logically best ideals--after all the evidence, implication and logical criticism plays out.
Those moral truths don't override factual ones. Lies and false representations of reality are not moral ideals; they are delusional.
3
Why did you leave the facts about the state attorney who believed Dylan and was ready to press charges? He only refrained because he believed that the investigation had been traumatic enough for Dylan and didn't want to put her through a trial. He also felt that the hospital report was inaccurate. These facts put the lie to your claim that there is no evidence against Allen.
18
I have long found Woody Allen, who I once admired wholeheartedly, to be pretty creepy. The thematic obsession with younger women in his films, which since the days of Manhattan, I found unsettling have have now hardened into something beyond unsavory. Once might even argue that Allen's obsessive ongoing return to this hackneyed trope is an attempt to dare his audience to imagine what he seems to be saying, but until now few would want to have considered: that he has acted upon his pederastic urges. Certainly, there is something sordid at work here, but just what that is is hard to know. And an accusation is not a conviction. I have found his films for the past few decades to be lazy, sloppy and tiresome. And will continue to avoid his latest works. But I am not ready to believe without reservations that he committed the acts of which he is accused.
3
Though a lifelong New Yorker, and almost as old as the Woodman, my only personal connection has been to see him on many occasions over the decades on the streets of Manhattan. Sometimes directing a film, sometimes just taking a walk like we millions of other New Yorkers love to do. The vast amount of time I've spent with Woody (I'm on a first-name basis with him though he not with me) has been in some darkened theater watching his films. He has made a lot of films, you know. And so I would calculate I have spent hundreds of hours watching him work.
I have also spent hundreds of hours watching other people work, colleagues of mine before retirement. I got to know some of them outside of work, socialized with some, became friends with some. But that is not the same as when I watch Woody work. Woody's job is different, much deeper. Woody exposes himself through film. Explorations of his psyche can create an illusion I know him well. But I don't know him at all. And most everyone else commenting herein is in the same boat as moi.
All that I've to go by are his films. Some of them are masterpieces. Those are the only things I deem myself capable of critiquing. Everything else pertaining to his personal life is just that, personal. It's hearsay.
By the way, I don't know you Mr. Stephens. Only by your columns and appearances on TV. I'm with Pope Francis. He said, "who am I to judge?" Well, if it's good enough for the Pope...
DD
Manhattan
13
Thank you for your article. I do not know if Mr. Allen is guilty or not, but, as you point out, the preponderance of evidence demands at the very least the presumption of innocence until proven guilty. Whatever Ms. Farrow has been through, she has my sympathy, but, at the very least, logic would tell you to be suspect of the accuracy of her account.
15
Having read the Kristof piece in The TImes, and the Dylan letter, I was profoundly disturbed. Before then, I had never thought the allegations resonated truthfully as Dylan's mother seemed to have so many good reasons to intervene into her young child's memories.
Everything you say is spot on. I fear we are in living, at once, in two disparate realities: one is a time when we can no longer look to our nations' leaders as models of character and fidelity; the other is a time of an ineffable Savonarola. Each feeds on the other.
I will never think of Mr. Allen having married his adopted daughter, although I still love most of his films. That said, "Manhattan" was once one of favorites along with "Broadway Danny Rose." I can never watch the former again. I'd like to think of Mr. Allen, however, more like Danny Rose, who would rather cut off his right arm rather than do harm to another. We will never know what happened between he and Dylan. This tragedy has become a media farce. It should be put to rest for all concerned.
8
I have always loved this artist and the shadow of these allegations has cast serious doubt on the emotional connection I had established with him through his work. Pete Hamill once said in referring to Frank Sinatra, “ he lived an artist’s life, and that is all he will be remembered for,” and it seemed like a truism at the time. But in this case, it will detract from it. I still pray the allegations aren’t true, cause I have an enduring affection for Woody, but if they are, I think it is best for him to make amends before it is too late to save the place he has earned in human culture.
2
Thanks Bret Stephens. We live in an age where all of these words have to be poured into an opinion column to bring the hysteria down. For a few of us who know both law and the difference between art and life, two words suffice: COMMON SENSE!
55
@carrollian, you need to read the court case documents - they are like a small woody allen movie in themselves, for drama and personal exposition. But i think it is clear, Woody behaved inappropriately , as hard as it is for us normal people to comprehend. Here is the link https://www.huffingtonpost.com/danny-shea/heres-the-1993-woody-alle_b_47...
13
@Grace Thorsen: What makes you think I have not read the court case documents? The documents are more rational than the Me-Too movement's logic: they state that they are not able to come to any conclusion regarding abuse. "Inappropriate" and the decision to "protect Dylan" are vastly different from evidence proving rape/sexual abuse. Normal and rational people, like myself and you, should be able to understand and respect this difference however unpalatable it might be. If you can't, then you are a part of the witch-hunt movement.
10
The link provided shows the evident bias of the custody court judge in unfairly awarding sole custody of Dylan to Mia Farrow, but by no stretch does it offer any evidence that Woody Allen acted "inappropriately" in any way. (Rather it points to Mia Farrrow's "shortcomings" as a parent.
9
The writer's logic re the Allen allegation is quite distorted. In long reported allegations against Allen, is that Allen is just too well connected and protected because of his longevity of artistic successes - he wields great power to create stars or not, his liberal industry fears this and do not practice what they bully pulpit us. However, so much smoke means there is a greater reality of fire here. Stop giving Allen a pass because of his legacy films, treat him as any ordinary man who is accused of sexual crimes would be. Write a piece that addresses his accusers claims by investigative reporting, not puff pieces on poor Woody Allen.
41
Stephens’ column is exactly the sort of investigative reporting you claim to want. He finds and cites facts of contemporaneous statements and investigations into the allegations against Allen and, based on those facts, concludes as the investigators did that Farrow’s accusations do not deserve to be believed. It may not be the conclusion some would prefer but it has the benefit of being a conclusion based on objective evidence rather than a single subjective claim.
4
"However, so much smoke means there is a greater reality of fire here". Phrase brings to mind an emergency procedures training course I was once on. Apparently smoke does not always mean there is fire. Don't assume we were taught.
1
"Accusers"? There's one accuser. "So much smoke"? One accusation. "Crimes"? There's one accusation.
3
Twenty five years ago when all this happened, I believed that this was an attempt by Mia Farrow to punish Woody Allen for ending their personal and professional relationships and his relationship with her daughter Soon-Yi. The timing of the accusation, accounts of "inappropriate" behavior – especially one by Mia Farrow's mother – did not seem true. Their reactions and their actions subsequent did not seem appropriate or in the best interest of the child involved. I think Dylan Farrow feels this is all true and is truly troubled. Her anguish appears more as the result of Mia Farrow using her as an instrument of revenge rather than anything Woody Allen did.
109
"Her anguish appears more as the result of Mia Farrow using her" Really now?
I cannot speak for any other adult's emotional state. I can listen to their words, however. I am reminded of our gymnastics sexual abuse survivors and their anguish at not being believed for twenty years . . . now add the greater pain yet of a young child whose father breached her boundaries and sealed her behind his success. And speaking of a father who marries Dylan's sister, his eldest step-daughter ...
6
Do you not see that the most likely explanation is that both are true? That Mia Farrow took advantage of the terrible abuse of her daughter to take personal revenge against a man who had very legitimately wronged her? In no way in any of these cases is Woody Allen a good person. Best case scenario, he’s a man who in his late fifties left his wife for her eighteen year old daughter.
5
I’m in accord with the views Bret Stephens expressed.
I’m fed up with the continuing shrieking accusations of Allen’s guilt, the charges seemed flimsy at the time, and more so in retrospect. If anyone’s to blame for Dylan Farrow’s continuing mental malaise it’s her mother, Mia, whose obsessive hatred of Allen preceded the molestation charge, and perpetuated it.
98
Right, Dylan had so much to gain from her accusation - NOT!! That is the basic fallacy of doubting the accusers - the accusers have NOTHING to gain.
Read the court case documents, and you will change your mind..They are public.
.https://www.huffingtonpost.com/danny-shea/heres-the-1993-woody-alle_b_47...
14
Only a man could use the adjective shrieking in regard to what a woman is saying. Shame on you for playing into sexist stereotypes. I agree that it is likely that Dylan was not abused by Woody Allen. Still in my mind his affair with and subsequent marriage to his barely post-adolescent stepdaughter puts into question his morals. I resolved after that not to watch anymore of his movies. I screwed up by watching “Vicky, Christina, Barcelona”. Somehow I did not realize it was one of his films. I will admit it was a good film. But he will always be tainted by his past as well he should be.
2
Or, her mother sought personal gain by exploiting the child.
The Trump accusers all are in it for the money.
1
Woody Allen is completely repulsive and his repulsiveness oozes from every one of his movies because that is what they are about. How anyone can think otherwise has always baffled me.
32
Please name four or five comedians, novelists or musicians you like.
5
Okay, fine. You don't like him. But that hardly means he did what he's accused of doing. It's always easy to come decide on someone's guilt if you disregard due process and go with your gut. Fortunately, our judicial system doesn't work that way.
11
According to Robert Weide, who has written about this with great detail, says that Mia Farrow asked for 7 million dollars as a settlement. Woody Allen passed a lie detector. Mia Farrow refused to take one. To me, that says a lot.
109
Mia, Woody, Mia, Woody, what about Dylan? That says a lot.
3
Mia Farrow collected child support from Allen for years for their son Ronan Farrow, Mia changed his name from Satchel after she and Woody's breakup. What is curious is how much Roanan looks like Frank Sinatra who Mia admits to having had an affair with during her time with Woody. She has not agreed to DNA testing. If true this is a woman capable of brainwashing a child into believing she had been molested. No proof of any of this, just a curiosity me thinks....
64
She won't take a lie detector test. She won't take a DNA test. I'd like to conclude that she's a liar and guilty, but that would be unfair. Just like it's unfair to say Woody Allen is guilty.
10
Lynn, are you saying that Satchel getting a name change proves that Dylan is making up her allegations? Good grief.
4
Compare a photo of Ronan to a very young Woody Allen. Same nose and lips. Besides, Sinatra had had a vasectomy. I don’t understand why Mia Farrow thought it helped her cause to falsely insinuate that Sinatra could be Ronan’s father.
Woody Allen is a modern day Leo Frank.
10
Huh. 24/7 negative coverage of people who didn’t act soon enough when allegations of domestic abuse by a staff member arose contrasted with this whitewash of an alleged abuser. How long have we been hearing about Allen’s unsavouriness? Oh, I’d say pretty much for his entire career. I get it, Allen’s one of your own. But Trump’s one of your own too. Huh again. Right, ideology. Besides, Trump’s guy did it twice, Woody only did it once. Mulligan. #freewoody!
17
Re: "But since the State of Connecticut declined to press charges against Allen, it is what we have to go on. "
No. We also have his relationship with Soon Yi Previn, the daughter of his then girlfriend Mia Farrow, and a woman 35 years his junior. We know he likes young kids and that he has no respect for normal boundaries -- but, as with the rapist and pedophile Roman Polansky, we're supposed to not care because he is an "arteest." Sorry, no.
55
What bothers me is Mia's continued support for Roman Polanski. I believe she cast aspersions on the reliability of the child-victim. If it is true that Mia wanted to continue the relationship with Woody Allen while Dylan was in therapy, doesn't that cast doubt on her version of events? In no way am I a supporter of Woody Allen.
4
This opinion piece should be retitled, "The Smearing of Dylan and Mia".
67
Why, oh why, Mr Stephens have you taken up this wooly carcass? Friend of the woodster? Thought Annie Hall was the greatest American movie ever? Mr. Allen is way past the point where reputational issues are going to derail his career...his memory perhaps but not his career. The 'case' will forever remain in the he said/she said category unless we get a death bed confession from either of them. Let's move on and tackle more urgent issues such as why are there so many misygonistic wife beaters in the white house? And what's with Trump's hair?
39
Maybe Bret Stephens is writing about Woody Allen because he thinks what is being done to him is a vicious, ugly smear, unmoored from reality, and it turns his stomach, just as it would with any thinking human with a soul.
3
Please, stop bothering me with the facts. Please!
29
The guy is a little creepy marrying his stepdaughter 35 years his junior.
39
Not his stepdaughter.
1
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once."
So according to this writer, it's ok to be a paedophile if only once and only if it was a long time ago. Nice to know the extent certain liberal elites will go to defend someone who without the benefit of directing a slew of rather forgetful films would otherwise be a dirty old man.
28
Wow, Mike, you completely miss his point.The ONE accusation against Allen was made shortly after an acrimonious breakup by a spurned ex-wife. Having been accused only once by a bitter, revengeful ex-wife puts it into a different context than if he had multiple accusations against him (which happens not to be the case)
16
There are different profiles for pedophilia vs. child molesters. (You can read about it if you're interested.) I understand the author's plea for more due process but find it disturbing (and weird) that he implies a critical mass of victims is necessary to make a claim of abuse substantial. The author's not a psychologist with great understanding of incest and molestation so why would he suggest this?
2
What does this have to do with liberal elites? Do you know how many liberals are being savaged for sticking up for Dylan? This has nothing to do with your political persuasions. This does have to do with power and secrets and human foibles, and our willfull refusal to hear uncomfortable truths . . . ask Nassar's victims about that.
It wasn’t so long ago that actors felt that a role in an Allen movie would be the pinnacle of their careers. Now their are regretful? Please.
25
I believe Dylan Farrow. I believe her when she says she was molested while in the care of Woody Allen. There will not be a a court case even though a Connecticut prosecutor states there was probable cause to file charges against Allen. Family members recount that he would climb into her bed and force her to suck his thumb, behaviors consistent with grooming. He took nude photos of Soon-Yi while she was a minor. What we have from Ms. Farrow is a consistent recollection of being sexually molested by Allen. Smear? There is a 25 year long accusation of a criminal act. Choose Allen's story if you prefer it but I believe Dylan Farrow.
81
Incredibly, Trump just (10:33 AM, Sat) tweeted on the power of allegation and accusation and the demise of due process -- in his case concerning Porter. Can it be that this is the one area where the Donald and I agree?
Presumption of innocence seems so passe now, in an era of "believe all women". But Brett (and in this case, Trump) are right -- accusation is not fact and in this country, that's supposed to mean something.
12
Documented black eyes, broken windows, and court restraining orders are hardly 'presumption of innocence' in the case of Porter. Repeatedly crawling in bed with a 7 yr old requiring her to suck a man's finger does not deserve a 'presumed innocence' for Allen.
3
Tim C...dont fall for the hype.
Porter is guilty! Period. IF he was innocent, wheres the fight? (sure he would need to resign to avoid WH distractions) Where? We got no fight from Trump and his accusers. Moore, none. Weinstein, just push-back, but no real fight. Wynn, nada. Etc, etc...
Over and over these creeps claim innocence but they never fight it! That means a whole lot to me.
Porter is guilty.
3
I have refused to watch any Woody Allen movies since he married his step daughter. It’s just wrong and yes very creepy. Why does he get a pass in the me too time when we are believing women who come forward. When we are listening, but not to his accuser? I would like to see a review of the evidence now that we are no longer protecting the men over what any woman or girl says. The results may or may not confirm her accusations. She deserves to be heard. In the meantime, I will continue to boycott his movies. My own little protest.
35
She's been heard. A review of the evidence by the best experts out there sided with Woody: he didn't molest his daughter.
And you can also peer inside the family dynamic thanks to Moses Farrow:
https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out/
8
She wasn’t his stepdaughter. Allen and Farrow were not married and they lived apart. But yes, finding out that your boyfriend is in an affair with your daughter would be extremely painful.
9
Bret, you somehow try to justify your position by referring to the cases involving the sexual abuse of children in daycare centers in the 1980's. You wrote, "The misuse of children’s memories by ambitious prosecutors against day-care center operators in the 1980s led to some of the worst miscarriages of justice in recent U.S. history." Please note that many, many people to not share your opinion of the perpetrators innocence and the children's made up stories in those cases from the 80's, instead we believe that the true miscarriage of justice was that these perpetrators weren't jailed or that if they did receive a sentence, it was unjustly over-turned on technicalities. You are playing right into the hands of the False Memory Syndrome Foundation with this statement. We have got to quit perpetuating the story line that children are not credible witnesses.
I ask you to do your homework...read The Witch-Hunt Narrative by Ross E Cheit and immerse yourself in the incredible amount of evidence that would lead anyone to trust that the children were telling the truth and not just "imaginative and suggestible and innocently prone to making things up."
9
I was a student at U.C.L.A. during the McMartin Preschool case. I have no doubt that some of the children were subjected to criminal conduct. But, as is so often the case, adults got completely over-involved and devastated those poor children's recall, and that fatally wounded the prosecution's case. Legally, I am proud that the Buckey's were exonerated. But the children, and justice, were harmed.
I particularly believed that the children at McMartin saw those witches flying, that they were taken into basements and through tunnels (despite the preschool being in a slab-on-grade building), up in balloons, that they visited the moon, that they were flushed down toilets. Yep, believe the kids who were talking to hand-puppets and given candy the more absurd things they said or agreed might be true.
I've done my homework.
You haven't.
13
I wouldn't want Mr. Allen to be around my children. My heart goes out to those who were around him when they were children. Mr. Allen is creepy and my instinct is that he is guilty of these charges. But I acknowledge that he might be innocent. To be falsely accused is a great injustice, and it is conceivable that Mr. Allen is the victim here. So I won't treat him as a proven child molester or demand that nobody see his art, which is at times genius. But I also won't let him anywhere near my children.
33
State investigative agencies are notorious for getting allegations wrong, especially when dealing with middle to upper class families. I am a social worker with almost 20 years in the field and have had to make those phone calls. Regardless of what state I've practiced in (three, made reports in two, dealt with four different states' child investigation agencies), the middle to upper class families' cases were closed without finding abuse or neglect despite teenage clients being specific about their abuse incidents. I have had limited work with children younger than 13, but those kids imaginations do not include sexual acts with adults or even other kids (aside from "show me yours and I'll show you mine" and even that doesn't seem to happen much anymore, to my knowledge). Woody Allen is a creep with a sexual fixation bordering on obsession. His old screen scripts as reported last month in your newspaper pointed out numerous examples of him (or a Woody-like substitute) with young teen girls as the main protagonists, and the teens girls were always the "seductresses" while the man was "overcome" by weakness for her tempting ways. Shaming Dylan Farrow is just another way of ensuring the patriarchy and "old boys' with their "locker room talk" remain the victims of those tempting kids.
60
First off, the investigation was not done by a "state investigation" agency. It was done by the leading researchers into child abuse at the Yale-New Haven Hospital's program.
At the time, child abuse allegations were common in divorce / custody battles. We can say, oh, well, why believe the experts who interviewed Dylan numerous times? But we should. They are actually really good at their jobs.
Mia Farrow is a manipulative liar. Remember, this is the woman who told Woody he was the father of her son...when she knew all along that Frank Sinatra was Ronan's father. She's the one who destroyed Dory Previn's life.
Woody Allen's films are not unhealthily fixated on sex. There is a lot less sex in Allen's films than there is the James Bond films, and very little of the sex in Allen's films is casual. His films are more about relationships and emotions. You want unhealthy? How about a film about kidnapping someone who cannot speak or write, locking them in a bathroom, then having sex with them. That's film's up for Best Picture. It's called The Shape of Water. Who knew so many folks found beastiality sexy? Or how about poisoning someone to weaken them so that you can emotionally control them? The Phantom Thread.
But you are allowed to believe lies and only see the evidence that conforms to your prejudices. That attitude certainly ended up with a lot of black men hanging from trees during the first half of the 20th century in this country.
3
Nickolas Kristof's recent column supporting Dylan Farrow's story begged for a sound reproach. Bret Stephens gets close here but eventually stumbles with the Nassar comparison - a single incident of sexual assault on a child is just as repugnant and criminal as the hundreds Larry Nassar committed. Mr. Kristof's column easily revived Dylan Farrow's disturbing but unproven allegations simply because Mr. Allen's art and body of work, combined with his marriage to Ms. Farrow's daughter, placed his behavior outside our norm. But that is Mr. Stephen's point: our current #MeToo narrative indignantly dismisses the restraints of the rule of law (Mr. Allen was investigated and not charged), homes in on Mr. Allen's weird and to most repugnant behavior (Nabakov's Lolita is a great read but I'm putting a plain brown wrapper on my copy if I'm reading it in public), and condemns him. It detracts from the power and lasting change of the year of the woman, and its laudable and long overdue effort to give strength and volume to the previously silent voices of women who have been abused or bullied, when we engage in fevered witch-hunts that disregard legal standards.
8
Public opinion in this case in complicated by the films of Woody Allen, films like Manhattan, Alice, etc that confuse fantasy, autobiography, and celebrity in his signature nebbish manner.
These moving images from his psyche loom larger in the public's collective imagination than Dylan's story, and they amplify a perception of creepiness that is certainly anti-Semitic, but also, at some level, reveal a shadow across his work.
There are scenes in his films that come off as misogynist, racist, neurotic, creepy, obsessive, manic, depressive, overly Freudian and downright nasty.
If we compare his oeuvre to say Fellini's, there isn't a film like La Dolce Vita that impugns a lost male, and there isn't a film like Juliet of the Spirits that shows a grown woman coming to terms with her neurosis. Allen's characters often stay neurotic, his women never really come to power.
Compare Blue Jasmine's ending of Cate Blanchett muttering to herself, with the final images from Juliet of the Spirits, where Giulietta Masina walks with a grounded self-identity into the wide world, accompanied by her fully activated imagination.
There is a larger image of Woody Allen's character than Dylan's accusations, his work. And as Heraclitus said "character is fate."
7
The 33 page ruling by Justice Elliott Wilk in the 1993 custody case is available online, posted by Huffington Post in 2014. It cites Allen's "grossly inappropriate" behavior toward Dylan, and questions the credibility of the Yale New Haven Hospital study. The judge chose not to pursue a case against Allen to protect Dylan from the trauma of a trial, not because there was no evidence. I am surprised that the judge's ruling in the case is not cited by anyone commenting on the so-called smear of Allen.
33
Thank you. It's about time called out this smear campaign for what it is. And no, Woody Allen did not marry his daughter. She was not a blood relation and acting as if that's the same thing is just another smear. Accusations against Woody see as valid as the absurd overreaction to Chuck Close.
17
I'll never know whether Dylan Farrow was molested by Woody Allen but I know that I, as a ten year old boy, was repeatedly molested and sexually abused by a neighbor who babysitted for my family.
I'm 50 today. What happened 40 years ago is so deeply embedded in my history, I have no way of separating it from any other part of my past. It happened. A few times. And then, life went on, he moved away, and then we moved away. I never felt the compulsion to call authorities. It certainly damaged me psychologically but never did I once think somehow i need to track this guy down, 10, 20 or 30 years later and make him pay. I'm not justifying what my abuser did (he himself was barely an adult at the time) and could very well regret what he did. I also feel no obligation to society to protect the rest of society from him. He could very well be dead already, who knows. And if he did molest someone else, it's not my fault or responsibility.
As a victim of child sexual abuse, I am utterly indifferent to this so-called "movement" (why is everything a "movement" today? It's sickening) and suspect there are real and lecherous efforts to target and punish certain celebrity individuals. For those who committed crimes, yes they should face consequence. But can we at least admit that we as a society have gone all Dirty Harry in our collective lust for retribution? No, apparently we can't.
11
Once, not long ago at all, the very idea of white male accomplishment was a religion to worship and a nation to swear loyalty to. A white man who did something worthwhile was a man who had earned a lifetime of inflated praise, and there wasn't a whole lot that could put a dent in it, certainly not the measly accusations of a woman whose complaint was that the same man had humiliated her. Why would we care what an already-humiliated already-second-class human said about what a Great Man had supposedly done to the meaningless likes of her? We didn't, and she was made to know about the extent of the indifference in a variety of ways. Her efforts to be heard at all would only mark her as vicious and unfair and out for something dirty. Only his genius could be clean.
That system of automatic aggrandizement of male accomplishment and the expectation of uninterrupted fealty to it from its audience appears to be close to collapse. So of course men who wish to profit from that system are writing in the effort to shore it up. I surely do hope they fail. That system has not only protected all manner of abusers, it has shut out everyone who is not white male from ever being seen as capable of the same level of "genius." Maybe the very idea of that kind of "genius" is on its way out too. Even I would miss it a little, but it's a small price to pay to get the rest of us some justice, not just as victims but as those who are ignored when we do great things too.
9
I have no doubt at all that Dylan Farrow was abused as a child. However, it was not sexual abuse by the father it was mental abuse by the mother. Not mentioned by the author is the evidence given by Moses Farrow - an older brother, who was physically close at the time. He is on record confirming the brainwashing that Mia Farrow attempted with him - initially successfully.
I have great sympathy for Dylan Farrow. Unfortunately, I think she now really believe she was abused by Allen. The pain of that belief is probably greater than the pain that would have been caused by any genuine abuse. But the cause of that pain is not Allen's direct behavior. (One might argue that ror choosing to get involved with a woman who was mentally unstable, and provoking her by entering into a love affair with her adopted daughter, he is partly, indirectly responsible.)
I am very pleased to see this article in the NYT. I have lost a lot of respect for Kristoff in the past few years because of his blind defense of Farrow and attacks on Allen.
44
It’s hard to accept what Dylan has said - and likely believes - without wondering what the certainly less than balanced and very angry Mia had to do with it.
23
Many of the commentariat seem unfamiliar with the notion of "innocent until proven guilty", at least when the alleged crime touches us as deeply as child abuse. Bedrock principles don't always fare well in the face of emotional reactions. Thank you to Mr. Stephens to be willing to consider and publicize some additional information, such as prior investigative and legal actions.
47
So, would you be fine with OJ Simpson trying to date your daughter or female friend? He was acquitted of those murder charges after all...
9
If anyone I cared about were dating OJ I would be concerned about their personal safety. Why? Because I think he killed his girlfriend. Notice I don't say "I know" he killed her. He had his day in court and was found not guilty. The point of my original comment was to (a) acknowledge (and support) Mr. Stephens' presentation of perhaps-unfamiliar information and (b) support his pointing out that there was a value to "due process", especially when core societal norms (like child abuse) are an issue.
3
One cannot read the courts decision on his divorce from Mia Farrow, and not conclude Allen is guilty of inappropriate behavior. For that matter, IMHO, last time I saw Manhattan I saw it as a poem to the beauty of Mariel Hemingways young body, as a reason to stare at her..Nothing more..
Here's the link to the court case
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/danny-shea/heres-the-1993-woody-alle_b_47...
21
Child sexual abuse is very hard to prove, unlike adult/adult abuse involved in the Harvey Weinstein accusations. To say those accusations are real b/c they have "proof" doesn't mean Farrow's accusations are not true. If 10 more children came forward would it all of a sudden be proof? Incest is an unspeakable thing and it's appalling to see once again these victim's accounts are more highly scrutinized. Think of all the girls who were sexually abused by priests. It was only news when it happened to boys. For the first boy who came forward - was he a liar until many more boys came forward? It is worrisome that the NYT needs to publish a defense of Woody Allen guised as "fairness". The mindless backlash has already begun.
11
Grace, there was no divorce because he was never married to nor lived with Mia Farrow.
8
Still, it's YOUR interpretation from reading th court's decision. Nothing more.
3
Greatly appreciate this column. I am a progressive female defense attorney living in an extremely “”blue” community (Berkeley, California) and it’s great to read someone actually using the facts- as we know them- when discussing this issue. You said it all well Mr. Stephens- again, much appreciated.
115
"Defense" attorney. 'Nuff said.
10
Randy did you know the prosecutor said there was probable cause to charge Allen?
11
Yes I did and I also know that probable cause is an extremely low burden for a prosecutor to meet. It can be satisfied by a scintilla of evidence, including the child’s statement alone. If the prosecutor had enough evidence to take the case to a jury he would have filed charges. I don’t buy his statement that he didn’t file in order to protect the child from having to testify- that sounds much more like something said to pacify an angry Mom.
7
No sooner had I finished reading the title of this article had I predicted the level of outrage it would spark in this comments section. I think most of the commenters whose posts share related articles and opinions on the subject of Woody Allen's 1990's sexual misconduct cases are fundamentally missing the point of the article: it's not really about Woody Allen. It's a commentary on the potential dangers group-think and mob-mentality. While I applaud those who are brave enough to speak out on events that have caused them much pain in an effort to expose sexual misconduct, I agree with the underlying thesis of the article: the standard of evidence regarding an accusation that has the potential to harm the accused ought to be high. The first reply to this comment might be something on the lines of "how could you not see that Woody Allen did this?! Is Dylan's testimony not enough?" I'm not saying he didn't do these things; I'm saying I don't know. I think if more people required a high level of evidence before they bought into ANY claim, be it from politicians, entertainment, friends, family, etc., it would be more difficult to have a net negative outcome on society writ large. If more people would humble themselves with the words "I don't know" than with the sanctimonious cries of "lock them up!", many of the cultural problems we're experiencing would be muted and, certainly, more manageable.
87
Sexual abuse in childhood is often remembered and narrated inconsistently--trauma does that. Expecting young children to adhere to your evidentiary standards in order to be believed is ridiculous. Those of us who have been abused sometimes remember it years later--memories are repressed, and emerge in strange ways. I don't even remember the face of my abuser. I remember what he did.
But, people like you are exactly why I feared telling anyone. Allen's willingness to transgress social/sexual boundaries by photographing the young stepdaughter he would eventually marry suggests deeper pathologies.
In order to ensure that abusers are protected, you urge that we pretend this is not relevant. And your comparison with Nassar is vile--once is all. Once is enough. Do you need a football team of people making the same statement before you believe one individual?
55
"...memories are repressed, and emerge in STRANGE ways."
So, when in doubt believe th accuser and ruin th life of th accused?
8
Only if that individual is a white, powerful man.
4
You're right, Clio. All we need is an accusation. And if he's not guilty? Well, ooops!
7
The comments to this article are disturbing where they express self-righteous indignation and condemnation about things that are not knowable. One consistent comment puzzles me, however: the assertion that Woody Allen's films show obsessive preoccupation with very young women. The only film I can think of where the heroine was super-young is Manhattan. His other heroines, as I remember, are fully adult women. And Woody Allen made a lot of movies, including many good ones. Perhaps his critics (some of whom seem to be victims of child abuse, and perhaps not entirely logical on the issue) did not actually see his movies.
Allen's starting an affair with Farrow's adopted daughter, Soon Yi, showed bad judgment, insensitivity, maybe even cruelty. It doesn't show he abused Dylan on one occasion when she was age 7. Those who "believe" he did apparently want or need to believe he did. Too many ambiguities to get on any moral high horse.
76
In Annie Hall, one of the adult male character complains to Woody that Woody's phone call had just forced him to leave having sex with sixteen-year-old twins. Ha Ha. Wasn't that a funny one? The guys a creep, people. You don't marry you step-daughter unless you are a creep.
11
It's also a good thing that they didn't read Lolita. If they had, Nabokov would still be in hot water...and he's dead!
7
The most unfair and incompetently run court is the court of public opinion.
84
Public opinion, on the macro (and granted more case focused) level of a jury of one's peers, is the bedrock of the court system within a democracy.
4
A conviction in a criminal case requires a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court of public opinion is happy with a preponderance of evidence or perhaps even reasonable suspicion. Only two people truly know what happened on the day Ms. Farrow says she was molested, and their versions of the events in question are diametrically opposed. It's something of a stalemate, legally. However, my bias is to believe the victim. Is that unreasonable?
17
Being a "pedophile" does not suggest a long pattern of behavior -- raping just one child once qualifies. I know a thing or two about sexual abuse of children, and the little details of Dylan's story ring so true that my stomach turns over every time I revisit it. Her story may have had inconsistencies (she was a very small child at the time), but has since then remained rock solid. Allen's story also had inconsistencies, but he was under deep enough suspicion to have been denied time alone with Dylan when the rape occurred. Allen used vicious attacks against his accusers to intimidate them, and suggested that if the case went to trial, he would go even more nuclear. Intimidation complete. The Connecticut refusal to prosecute was based on their sympathy for Dylan, not their doubts about Allen. Testifying against one's father in court is a deeply traumatizing experience -- it's a judgment call, and after making the same call in my own life, it might have been better to put her through that one-time trauma than a lifetime of demeaning attacks. Marrying your adopted stepdaughter (though he and Mia were not married) is not illegal, but bespeaks a fascination and attraction to very young women. Maybe Soon-Yi was just second best.
34
And keep in mind he and Soon-Yi have young daughters.
At Last! Congratulations to Brett for forcing the rest of us to look at all sides of this. I have a good memory, but I've caught myself "remembering" events exactly backward. Thanks
41
Nope. Heard about this decades ago through family members. Power and awe and worship let this stuff slide by.
11
Sir William Blackstone said that "It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer".
Al Franken was never allowed his day in court. His accusers have all gone back into the woodwork, it appears. And Woody Allen was NOT charged in his only "day in court". His accuser continues to make accusations against him with no new evidence.
Sentencing someone who was never given their day in court is the ultimate crime against the accused and our society. It is unconstitutional and makes a mockery of our judicial system - a system that has been admired by all peoples around the globe and hated by dictators (like our current occupant) throughout the ages.
46
Mr. Franken chose to resign. He is the one who has gone "back into the woodwork."
Allen wasn't "sentenced" as he was never charged. OJ Simpson was declared not guilty, but many are not convinced of his innocence. Farrow has every right to make her claims. If he wants to sue for liable and prevent her from continuing to proclaim her perceived truth, that avenue is open to him. Life is messy. The way in which we conduct ourselves usually provides some insight in to how people percieve one another. Allen has made movies in which an older male is not only infatuated with a young female, but acts on it. Allen says he did not and the State of Connecticut chose not to prosecute, so he is free. Darrow states it did happen is free to make her claims.
2
This is not legal sentencing; it's public censure. The public is entitled to decide that they will not watch Woody Allen's movie's based on personal opinions that his past behavior shows a tendency toward pedophilia. Public opinion should never be shut down because a court decide there was insufficient evidence for a trial.
5
Finally a courageous, level headed piece the subtext of which addresses a lot of the current hysteria. Since when could a person's career be ended without a day in court? What happened to due process and evidence? I could go online right now and smear 3 people and likely end their careers. Where is the justice in that?
61
These days, when anyone uses the word "hysteria," I immediately wonder about their arguments. It's one of Sean Hannity's favorite words. You know--all the "hysteria" about Trump and the Russians. Look, a little girl was raped. You bet I'm hysterical. That's the proper emotional response.
9
Mr. Stephens might have a shred of credibility if he'd said anything like this during the rush to judgment against Senator Al Franken. I don't recall a peep out of him about even waiting for the results of the ethics investigation HE REQUESTED.
Sorry, zero credibility.
25
What does one thing have to do with the other?
5
There are enough bits of evidence, testimony and reports about this case for anyone to believe anything they want to and feel they're fully grounded in the facts. Is Dylan Farrow right or is Moses Farrow? Anyone who says "read this you'll be convinced I'm right" can be contradicted by another person with another source. Woody and/or Mia may have abused or manipulated their children. After too many hours I've settled on a 1/4-1/2 chance that they both did. Bye, no more time for this.
11
If we’re going by “facts,” we could list some here:
-Allen was in therapy for inappropriate behavior toward Dylan before the allegations ever surfaced
-Allen refused to take a polygraph administered by Connecticut state police
-Allen subsequently lost four exhaustive court battles wherein he alleged that Dylan had been coached by a vengeful Mia Farrow. A judge concluded there was “no credible evidence” to support that claim
- The judge in Allen’s custody suit found that Allen’s behavior toward Dylan was “grossly inappropriate,” and that “measures must be taken to protect her.”
- Dylan’s claim of abuse was consistent with the testimony of 3 adults who were present that day, including a babysitter who saw Allen with his head in the child’s lap, facing her body, while the child stared vacantly at a TV
-the Yale New Haven Hospital w
60
The point of #metoo is not the discovery of truth, rather, the catharsis that comes from making accusations. Instead of dealing with the trauma to find some way to live with it in the rear view mirror, to move past it, even to forgive #metoo proudly parades the pain in the form of a humiliating outing of the alleged perpetrator. The humiliation, then, is the primary goal.
What #metoo is telling us is that there is no getting over the trauma and that men both individually and collectively are on the hook for these outright and alleged abuses.
The point of #metoo is not healing. Its point is to hurt back and hurt back hard. I'm not judging it for that stance--simply describing exactly what is happening...
16
I’m not sure about that. Are you? The point seems to be about finding the strength and voice required to speak against the abuses of power. I’m not ready to guess at all the consequences of the #meetoo movement. People who should have been able to prevent Weinstein's pervasive impact on the women he marginalized, did not prevent anything. We all know why, too. So don’t be too quick to label and judge the #meetoo movement. We will have to consider the names of those accused carefully and as objectively as possible. But, it’s time for this to happen.
2
Right on!
4
Woody Allen may or may not be innocent, but he did make a movie that addressed (his?) pedophilia. It was called Manhattan and it was about an older man (him) who has relations with an underage girl. Right in plain sight.
18
You do not seem to know the meaning of pedophilia. In "Manhattan" there is an intergenerational age difference and sex with a sexually mature woman who is not yet 18 but very close to it. She is not a child, which would constitute pedophilia. At worst legally it may be a statutory rape which I do not condone but there are also different ages of sexual maturity in underage women or men. The law does not see it that way (and it does allow for exceptions of all sorts) and the law can and probably should be be questioned (these ages are different in different countries which shows that other legislatures recognize the possibility of sexual maturation and consent before 18), but nowhere in his films Woody Allen promotes sexual abuse of children. And "Manhattan" is the work of art and not a proof about Woody Allen's personal life.
6
Good point. But I still think the film points to his desire for underage girls.
2
There is a consistent thread of preoccupation in all of Allen’s films, after Annie Hall, with underage girls. Even in Annie Hall, the Tony Roberts character, floats about being in bed with 16 year old twins. Almost every film he has done since Annie Hall, shows an inappropriate relationship with an underage girl. It’s impossible to separate that out from Dylan Farrow’s accusation. Finally, there is the explanation, “the heart wants what it wants”, in response to his marriage to Soon Yi.
2
Why in the world would the writer want to give Allen room for excuses? Why would he?
19
Why? Just take a deep breath and re-read the article. The protection of due process in an environment prone to hysteria is "why."
6
maybe so but his lifetime body of work shows me he is a cretin. Google his lovely speech about diane keaton last week(with a vile reference to he being a fellatrix) and his "marriage" to the child bride. Not to mention his countless movies where is the the apple of every twenty something's eye (in his dreams)...no redeeming qualities at all and not funny
12
Is there a movie made in Hollywood that doesn't feature a young, physically alluring female lead?
2
So now twenty something is also off limits? Perhaps America should pass a law that everyone must marry someone of exactly their own age. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some states do this
4
The Soon-Yi thing is enough for me. He groomed her for years when she was a minor.
37
I stopped going to Allen's movies when he had an affair with Soon Yi. Clearly he crossed the line with her.
33
He turned me off too. Not a good moment.
5
The harsh fact is that rightly or wrongly women and children are disproportionally more credible than men. This is not to say that women and children are always good and men are always bad. It says men are always at a disadvantage when an accusation is made against them. It is also no secret that Woody Allen's ex-partner Mia Farrow has nothing but hate for him and that she very likely filled Dylan Farrow's head with poisonous garbage against her father. As a man, I have a few times been falsely accused by vindictive women. The accusations have nothing to do with sex or violence but they are no less painful or damaging nonetheless, so I can relate to Woody Allen's plight. Finally there are too many women in the #MeToo movement who have this attitude that this campaign is worth destroying a few innocent victims. I predict very soon the long-awaited backlash against the #MeToo campaign will be strong and hard.
12
Having served as an expert witness in divorce cases, I can tell you that when accusations arise in that context, women are absolutely, positively, not more credible than men. I would say that the fact that the adult Dylan still thinks she was abused is credible, but not dispositive.
10
Women/children are more trusted than men? What world are you living in? How many women had to accuse Cosby before anyone trusted them? How many women were told that Weinstein's abuse was just Harvey being Harvey and to let it go? How many women in society have been told "this is just how the world works"? Are you really this out of touch?
3
Since the investigation is sealed, and, Mia Farrow was granted custody, and, nobody cares anymore,
Why is the NY Times out there defending the accused perpetrator? Why call the kid a liar? We really don't know, as you so clearly point out in your article.
A real puzzle that one.
11
A few things have bothered me about this case since the beginning. First was its timing, arriving coincidentally with society’s moral panic regarding sexual predators which led to many wrongful convictions.
The second was its timing coincident with Allen’s relationship with Mia Farrow’s adopted daughter. Stephens touches on these points but here are a few other aspects which I find troubling: Mia Farrow’s repeated lying. The biggest lie was her repeatedly assertions that she gave each of her many kids equal time. Like, when she drove little Ronan back and forth to Bard College everyday (90 minutes each way) and stayed with him there through the day. I guess at least some of the other kids got their “equal time” by serving as maids in a too large household. And when she went to Africa to represent UNICEF or some similar goodwill agency, she took her little blond boy Ronan along while the others stayed home to maintain the house, cook, or whatever a large number of adoptees needs to do on their own when mother takes off to another country for a spell.
Another lie was Mia’s repeated insinuations that Frank Sinatra was Ronan’s real father. If true, why take Allen’s child support? But Farrow knew it wasn’t, because Sinatra had had a vasectomy.
Third, Farrow pressured her other kids to go along with her version of events about Dylan, to the point she is now estranged from at least one of them (Moses) who could not agree to witnessing events he did not witness.
23
Who gets the benefit of the doubt and why? Insufficient evidence to prosecute is not the same as exoneration. Because some facts are unclear or disputed does not make believing them a "smear job."
And the judgment of the public is not the same as the judgment of a jury of peers in a courtroom. Allen's artistry is undeniable, and it remains a problem in this and other cases as to whether and how to separate the art and the artist.
12
The NYTimes case coverage ("Connecticut Prosecutor Won't File Charges Against Woody Allen,"9/25/93) opened "A state's attorney in Connecticut said yesterday that he had "probable cause" to prosecute Woody Allen on charges that he sexually molested his adopted daughter, but had decided to spare her the trauma of a court appearance." In light of that, the current article should be titled "The Smearing Of Dylan Farrow."
42
The prosecutor's excuse for failing to prosecute it phoney. If he had the evidence, he would prosecute and Dylan would applaud.
7
Every prosecutor has a probable cause. Does not mean that would have been proven in court.
4
I think it's quite possible that Mia poisoned Dylan's mind against Woody and convinced her of something that is not true, it often happens in bitter divorce/custody cases . In light of the Soon-Yi, Woody affair it would have been saint like for Mia not to.
I also think it"s quite possible that Woody had sex with Soon-Yi before she was 18 and ridiculous to think he did not have sexual feelings for her long before she was 18.
7
I don't get it. Instead of being presumed innocent until proven guilty, Woody Allen was investigated, never charged, and presumed guilty anyway. I believe it's more than possible Mia Farrow is a reprehensible individual who either convinced Dylan she was molested by Mr. Allen and/or somehow feels obligated to help Mia inflict eternal revenge on Allen for publicly humiliating her. Mia Farrow is not a saint or a martyr. Dory Previn recorded a song about how a two-faced Farrow befriended her, destroyed her marriage, and stole her husband. As far as Allen marrying Farrow's adopted daughter, Soon-Yi Previn, why does everyone focus on what Woody Allen did instead of asking what kind of a mother adopts and raises a daughter who feels so little regard (or so much resentment and hostility) that she runs off with the mother's husband?
16
It is not unusual for an 18 year old to rebel against a parent. Under normal circumstances a reconciliation would be possible.
1
Woody Allen, Mel Gibson, Roman Polanski, Harvey Weinstein, Roger Ailes, Charlie Rose, Matt Lauer and Bill O' Reilly were blessed to be "smeared" while privileged and powerful misogynist white male in Donald John Trump's America. Any "smearing" interpreted from the beneficial relative perspective heart and mind of their fellow white male beholder manufactures explanations and makes excuses for all of them.
12
"Nobody else has come forward in 25 years with a fresh accusation of assault against him. If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims."
...I'd just like to invite others to pause and reflect on the fact that Stephens wrote these words, and then submitted them for publication.
21
Thank you for pointing this out - "acted on his evil fantasies exactly once" makes it ok, or a lesser crime? About a man who married his 18 year old daughter?
Unbelievable Stephens, what are you thinking?
5
Yup. That was where my head nearly exploded, too. I'll certainly never give this guy the benefit of the doubt again on any question related to women's well-being or rights. Allen's probably jealous of Nassar. Sure, the guy has to go to jail now, but he got to have his fun sticking his fingers in girls barely in puberty for decades. Allen tried for the most part - and in the end, unsuccessfully - to sublimate his urges and translate them into "art."
3
Perhaps we react this way because eloping with your mistress' barely-legal daughter is creepy.
35
And that is all it is - creepy. Leave it alone. We don't know the family dynamics and Mia's role in all of this, though much of Mia's behavior in the relationship and towards the other children is known to be reprehensible. Allen was called for a hearing and the evidence did not amount to a trial. As Stephens writes, we can believe and want to support Dylan - who is in pain - but not think that Allen abused her. But when it all comes down to it, it is very, very murky. Leave it alone.
4
It is creepy, but unrelated to pedophilia.
5
Mistress? Allen and Farrow had a 12 year relationship. Neither was married to another person at the time so I don't see how you can call her his 'mistress'. Also, Allen and Soon Yi have been married for 20 years. Also, what is the regular marriageable age down there in Tennessee?
2
At this time of ever increasing frenzy concerning allegations of sexual abuse it is reassuring to see one person at the New York Times bravely standing up for justice for both accused and accuser. Bret Stephens is primus inter pares at the national paper of record.
14
There's something sleazy and creepy about that entire family, Bret. Stop wasting your time writing and concentrate on more important topics.
9
Of all the adopted girls in all the relationships in the world, he had to pick his wife's to fool around with. Say it ain't so Woody.
12
Oh yes, this is a cause. The tragedy of Woody Allen. Dear God.
Bret Stephens consider reflecting a bit more deeply, coherently and with greater breadth your terribly serious concerns, worries and fears regarding the idea that the #metoo and #timesup moments may be going too far and poor men like Woody Allen (Woody Allen!) might not be getting a fair shake. Consider that the movement is a millisecond old in the scheme of things. Consider the fear and stress females have had to carry every day since the beginning of time. Seriously, try it. Woody Allen doesn't need your help or your big microphone. However, there's a lot of real good you could with this powerful platform you've been given. The smearing of the women who come forward, for example. Now there's an intractable problem that could benefit from the privilege of your position. If you want to worry about something, a facet of this issue, if you must wring your hands, wring them for the lot of female people the world over.
33
Thank you. Woody Allen was not sent to jail, so what is the problem? We are all of us entitled to our opinion of him. Even Dylan Farrow is entitled to her opinion of him.
4
This is a very upsetting perspective and headline.
Do readers know that in many cases of child molestation there are no other “reported” victims?
To assume a “smear” and announce it in the mighty NYTimes citing lack of hard molestation evidence, shifting detail, and lack of hundreds of other victims does not show an understanding of the nature of the crime nor its perpetrators.
In my many interviews with victims of child molestation there were “no other accusations” and no hard evidence against the perpetrators and blurry details in the minds of the victims—yet I assure you — and the victims can assure you—the crimes happened.
Absence of other victims DOES NOT PROVE A SMEAR against the perpetrator.
I am sickened to see you righteously — and with this fact-suggesting headline—choose to stand with the accused perpetrator when you could just as arbitrarily have chosen to stand with the alleged victim.
Time to wake up.
42
Notice the extreme gender divide in the comments. What a surprise.
13
You are missing the gender of some commentators who don't reveal it. I am an Asian woman, for instance.
2
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims." Faulty comparison. The two are unrelated.
18
Dude, he married his wife's daughter.
29
This makes him guilty of exactly what?
6
No one also wants to listen to Dylan Farrow's brother Moses who disputes her claims as well. Sometimes the truth is hard to swallow and that her story just maybe made up. We will never know since its clearly a he said she said story. If Allen was that sick I'm sure he would have molested others.
13
When I was 7, I remember being at the shore and my friend's father asking me what my father did for a living.
The beach was filled with Jellyfish. I said he made jelly out of jellyfish, and made up a story, and the Dad went along with it. I remember pointing, and him asking, "Are you left handed?" and saying "yes!". I remember my friend's brother was slow because he ate a nickel when he was a baby. I remember the bathing suit I was wearing, it was low tide and I had a pink pail and we were making a dribble castle. We were walking to get more water. I remember I was lying. I knew my dad was an insurance broker and one of his clients was the Jersey Turnpike.
I remember because it was a flashbulb moment, because my Dad did not play. This Dad was listening to me. It was distinct.
I don't know what happened between Woody and Dylan, but this article is biased and smearing Dylan. It's a fallacious style of arguing, New York Times, please get a critical thinker on staff. The writer is saying since Rolling Stone Magazine printed a false story, that Dylan must be lying, because experts, who could be suffering from confirmation bias - were they hired to defend him? - could not confirm she was telling the truth. Maybe the other children were younger than seven. It would be a mistake to molest a seven year oldie you didn't want them to remember. We're concrete operators by then. It would be a flashbulb moment, too. You don't want us to believe her is all I know for sure.
Shame on you NYT.
19
When your young daughter, granddaughter, niece, nephew , son, grandson or neighbor is raped and sexually abused by someone famous and you trust I hope you change your tune. Or will we hear your acceptance of the verdict of those in awe of the rapist?
17
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims."
This will not end well for you. Nor should it given this vile framing.
16
This has to do with foreign policy or domestic politics how? Perhaps you should stick to your lane. We do, indeed, have "little to go on" - but ask yourself, who benefits from lying in this story? Certainly not Dylan Farrow.
11
How about Mia Farrow? And don't underestimate the mob's desire for blood, especially the blood of a famous person
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims." - I cannot even believe I am reading this.
41
I cannot believe you cannot believe you are reading it.
3
Fathers day must be very confusing at Woodys..
13
Amen! Thank you!
5
Thank you.
4
You might have added that Moses Farrow contends Mia Farrow, bitter and angry in the wake of Woody Allen's betrayal, brainwashed her children to believe this story. This makes her Dylan Farrow's abuser.
16
I'll encourage your readers, especially the torch-bearing bigots, to read Lucy Caldwell's short story , Poison.
2
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims."
If OJ Simpson is indeed a murderer, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Richard Ramirez or Ted Bundy.
See what a bad take this is?
35
faulty comparison. Almost all murderers do it only once. there is one person who drives them to it. the recidivism rate for murder is close to zero. The exception is serial killers like you name but they are an extremely small number. While pedophilia is a continuing obsession, that is why we have special rules for the incarceration of some sexual offenders even after their sentence ends. There is no more powerful obsession than that of sex. so ironically you have proved the opposite point.
5
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims."
So...child abuse is only a problem the second time around?
28
A very bad analogy. History is full of murderers who kill only once. Pedophiles tend to be serial offenders.
5
This is a good column, but this part is stupid:
“If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims.”
If you murder one person you are a murderer and likely will get a life sentence. If you murder 265 maybe you will get 265 life sentences. Same punishment.
17
Did you know Mia Farrow's famous rival, Dory Previn, wrote a song called, "Daddy in the Attic" in 1970, about her childhood with her own father? Look it up. It's clearly where Mia came up with the story she told then and which Dylan now tells, about Woody in the attic. The train Dylan says she was forced to play with was originally a Shirley Temple doll. Coincidence? Not possibly. Dory must have felt robbed a second time by Mia--first her husband then her song and story.
And that one day Mia and Dylan say this molestation in the attic happened was supposedly during a half hour Mia "needed to go to the store" with a houseful of servants and children. Nothing rings true about any of it. But don't ask me, ask Moses Farrow, who was there that day and who says Mia coached them to tell the molestation story. Why does no one print his statements? It's all over the internet if you care to look.
This goes beyond just what the courts said. This is common sense. I abhor sexual violence or exploitation of any kind as well as false accusations, and this is outrageous. Mia Farrow used that child for her own vendetta.
I think what Woody Allen did dating her daughter, even though she was an adult, was obscene. Clearly both he and Mia have tendencies toward a narcissistic entitlement. But he and Soon-Yi have been married 22 years and Soon-Yi is now almost 50 years old. She should be allowed to be married to whomever she wants at this point in her life.
29
Has someone suggested Soon-Yi should not be "allowed" to be married to someone? And what exactly do you find odd about "needing to go to the store"?
2
I was introduced to the wonderful singer/songwriter Dory Previn back in the early 70s by my best friend....who was herself a victim of sexual abuse and child molestation by her father.
My friend identified strongly with Dory Previn, because SHE TOO was molested and in an attic. I suspect being taking to a remote location like an attic (or basement, garage, etc.) is pretty commonplace for child victims of sexual abuse.
Dory was hardly "famous" at all but a pretty obscure singer/songwriter in the early 70s -- she had 2 albums and then pretty much disappeared.
Dory had every reason to hate Mia, for stealing Andre Previn away -- she wrote a song about THAT, too -- but Mia would not have had any reason to hate DORY. It is also pretty hard to imagine Mia Farrow hearing Dory Previn's 1970 ALBUM and then keeping it around -- ON VINYL!!! -- for the next 22 years and then using a story FROM THE ALBUM for her own child.
I guess you think that absolutely nobody else has ever been molested by a parent? or in a attic? or written about it? FOR THE LAST FORTY EIGHT YEARS?
If Mia Farrow intended this as a vendetta, she certainly failed. She lost Allen and certainly got no money or anything as a result. At least one of her adult children is estranged from her. Allen has gone on to a glorious career, with award-winning films like Blue Jasmine & Vicky Christina Barcelona etc. Farrow is a retired, forgotten former actress.
Nobody is remotely asking Soon Yi Allen to divorce Woody Allen.
2
Of all the women in the world that this rich, influential director could get, he picks his barely-legal (and by many accounts emotionally stunted) adopted daughter. I’m sorry but this guy is a creep.
34
No doubt a creep. But, does that make him a child molester. If Woody Allen did molest his daughter, he would be in a class all his own as a sexual predator. He shouldn't be allowed to die till we can examine him and write a book out of him. He'd be a Plebophile who dated older women for most of his life, while fetishizing young teenage women in most of his movies and art and writing. Then, he acted on his plebophilia (having done so on a few occasions with groupies), and began a relationship with a 19 to 21 year old who he again committed to, and married. Now, on top of all of that, he then becomes a pedophile, with no evidence in his work or life that he idolizes or fetishizes children (all his films are longing for a child, to be a father, to have that connection). But, he changes his fetishes, and changes his sexuality, and becomes a pedophile, for one day only, and never does again.
Each one of us will make her decision regarding Allen's guilt or innocence and each one of us will vote with our movie-going dollars. As of now, it appears that Amazon is second-guessing the distribution deal it struck with Allen. ("Guilty.") Many, many stars are reconsidering or flat-out refusing to work with Allen ("Guilty.") His last film tanked. ("Guilty.")
Allen's career will forever be defined by these last, incriminating years. Exactly what he deserves. I
I read every comment in this thread. Attention all of you who seem relieved that this whole #Me,Too/recriminatory moment was passing. We ain't even started. So buckle up for a different society. People and courts will no longer be able to brush aside a child because she is a child. Pedophiles won't get to do what they want to children, even to their own children.
13
First off, Allen's films have been tanking for the last 5 years, Blue Jasmine was his last successful film back in 2012, and I wasn't a fan. I haven't gone to see a Woody Allen film since Irrational Man, and I like Woody Allen a lot and think he's innocent. So, Guilt or innocent can't be decided by whether or not I go to his films.
A company goes where whatever will look best for the company in the long run, meaning nothing if they cut ties, as that doesn't decide guilt, just whether or not people will respond negatively to the accusation. It's vogue now and nothing at risk by criticizing Allen. They have nothing to lose. Some have gotten their nominations, or won the Academy award, now they can get their name in the press by attacking Woody, it's just a move to make in a social world. None of that lends itself to guilt.
1
This mob judgment on Allen is exactly what can be expected of a society that conducted the Salem witch trials and later the childcare "trials" on the basis of kids' unsupported statements. In this case, you have another older child, Moses, testifying that his mother coached him to lie about this. But of course that doesn't matter to the lynch mob. This is the judgemental and vicious culture America is now spreading round the world..,
4
More male apologists for this sad, despicable, misogynistic excuse for a human being. His movies creeped me out from the beginning, it's now completely clear why.
24
Bret-
Really? Open with the Rolling Stone article - the one case of mistake in a sea of actual events with real victims.
Way to plant the seeds of discredit to literally millions of people who suffer from abuse with one stupid article!
That's like starting an article about Global Warming with a couple of stupid mistakes scientist may have made despite the literally huge amount of data and evidence to say otherwise.
Oh wait you've done that before- sorry, now I know your pattern.
19
Show me the evidence. If there is one piece of evidence that hasn't been taken out of context and been disproven, then I'll switch sides and say Woody did it. There isn't a single piece of evidence that hasn't been discredited in this case. It's been in the public eye since 1993, the only new evidence that has ever come out, has been in favor of Allen.
5
...and you, in turn, are smearing the accuser. That's troubling, Brett.
17
Is Stephens trolling his colleague Kristof? Neither man brings up that Mia Farrow came to the costume fittings for "Manhattan Murder Mystery" after Allen was accused of raping their daughter. Does that sound like the behavior of a mother who is concerned about her daughter?
10
Then there's this
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/i-read-decades-of-woody-allens-pr...
6
The idea of innocence without proof of guilt has disappeared in all the #metoo excitement. It is always hard for people to stick to this idea. Our minds tend to make themselves up based on exactly what Stevens cites: where our sympathies lie. Whether we approve of Woody Allen as a person has nothing to do with whether he is a child molester. And now I'm reading articles about how all his movies prove he is a misogynist. I even read articles suggesting that rectification of the injustices done to women justify some innocent casualties. This idea is immoral. We don't persecute the innocent in this country to catch some guilty people. Or do we?
7
Well, I disapprove on principal people who molest children, no matter "how nice they are" in other respects.
However, if you mean "can a person who is a child molester, rapist or pervert ALSO be a talented artist or musician or writer".... then yes. It is definitely possible.
2
To me, Allen has been a slime bag ever since the Soon-Yi incident. What difference does it make that he has been with her since he had sex with a teen that was the daughter of his girlfriend? Does the fact he married her excuse his behavior? I don't have to believe or disbelieve Dylan to know Allen is disgusting.
16
The judge handling the custody battle was not an expert regards to determining whether sexual assault took place. That was left to the Connecticut State Police hired investigators, all qualified in determining whether there was evidence to the charges. If they were good for State Police, well that's good enough for me. The judge said that he thought those investigators were too close to Woody Allen. The judge didn't provide any evidence ot support his opinion, and it was only an opinion, no basis on fact. The prosecutor said he though there was "probable cause" that Allen did indeed commit rape, also with no evidence to support his opinion. The prosecutor had nothing to support the accusation. He expected a different conclusion with the invetigators and he got nothing. So in my opinion he called a news conference made his speech in order to save face. Besides, we are all aware that a prosecutor could indict a ham sandwich, but not Woody Allen? The prosecutor controls the Grand Jury process, calls the witnesses and presents evidence that he/she wants, no defense attorneys present. Still, no indictment, just cop out excuses. There's also the practice of "Judge shopping" and i believe that's how they ended up with the judges they had. Woody Allen has been through hell and back , still innocent and that doesn't sit well after 25 years with brainwashed Dylan and spiteful Mia Farrow. How about investigating Mia for alleged child abuse instead? Believe Moses Farrow.
9
Everything you wrote there is incorrect to what happened, though you are right.
Judge Wilks claimed that that the report was Sanitized and thus less than credible. This is because Yale-New Haven destroyed their notes, and wouldn't testify. They didn't work with Woody Allen's attorneys, but, they did talk to Dr. Susan Coates, the family psychiatrist, and they talked to Woody's psychiatrists, to gage whether or not he had inclinations to sexual abuse (this is a man with over 30 years of therapy and he signed over his right to privacy for them to investigate, something that's not brought up), so when people say they went off the words of his therapist and psychologists, this is true (but not like how they make it sound, they interviewed them as part of the investigation, to get a look into his mind). Dylan was interviewed six times, she changed her story three times according to the two social workers (though Dr. Leventhal never met with her). He maintains to this day the accuracy of the report, and still is in charge of the Yale New Haven Child Sex Abuse Clinic and it is still used by the state.
The New York Department of Social Services (in conjunction with NY SVU) did a 14 month investigation and came to the conclusion that there was no abuse. this was after Judge Wilk's made his ruling about believing Dylan and brought to question the Yale New Haven study.
2
Sorry, but there is no reason to assume Dylan Farrow was "brainwashed" -- and she is now THIRTY TWO YEARS OLD. Any brainwashing from her childhood at age 7 would not have "stuck" for this long.
You can possibly influence a small child, but how do you sustain that influence on a 32 year old adult woman? and what does Dylan have to gain here? By speaking out against her immensely rich, powerful father....she has ensured she is cut out of his will. He is 82 years old! and a millionaire many times over! she has literally nothing to gain here, and EVERYTHING to lose by telling the truth.
2
You mean like how the WH didnt believe the two abused wife til a picture surfaced? Loke how michigan swept years of allegations under carpet? You mean how its not strange woody married his daughter? Please.
15
Cheap innuendo, you ought to be ashamed.
5
Ask Moses Farrow about Mia.
8
I have two brothers, but they don't know every aspect of my life -- what happened to me when they were not around!
The idea that your sibling somehow magically knows the truth about everything is ridiculous.
Also: Dylan has several other siblings, who DO believe her.
2
A balanced examination of the facts. As noted there are unequivocal examples of abuse but the #metoo has swept up too many without evidence -or with evidence out of context with the times.
4
He seduced, slept with and then married his step daughter.
He writes about--and depicts in films--middle-age men sleeping with underage girls.
He french-kissed an underage Mariel Hemingway on film--her first such kiss ever, much to her chagrin.
Farrow's account has been corroborated by witnesses and fits perfectly into a disturbing and disturbed pattern.
The fact that you would need more facts than this speaks volumes about you, Mr. Stephens. And what it says is not good.
25
Soon-Yi was not his stepdaughter. He didn't live with, marry, or spend the night at Mia Farrows house (according to Mia Farrow).
He writes about middle aged men sleeping with underage girls over the age of 15. (No one is denying he is plebophile).
She was 17 at the time.
Three witnesses existed for the event. 2 Babysitters and a tutor after it was done. That means that there was only two testimonies for when Woody Allen was in the house. the 2 sitters. 1 of them recanted, citing pressure from Mia Farrow, and saying that Woody was never alone for longer than 5 minutes. This means that the other babysitter is the only witness to him. And no, it doesn't corroborate anything, since, Dylan doesn't talk about his head in her lap, or seeing anything like that (this was all before the closet incident).
The third testimony is the tutor who "allegedly" found Dylan without panties on.
The one babysitter who recanted said that she graphically remembers Mia questioning Dylan for hours on where her daddy touched her, and constantly stopping and recording when Dylan started talking about the things she wanted.
with the Recanted testimony and Moses Farrow's account, which corroborates the recanted babysitter. You are wrong.
So please, when you state facts, let me know when you actually have some that haven't been disproven since 1994.
If you watch Allen's early films -- especially "Manhattan" but also "Annie Hall" - there are numerous remarks about things like having sex with teenagers, or seducing young girls. They are throw-away jokes. At the time, I figured they were just "creative license".
It is only looking back at them, you realize that Woody Allen had a real obsession with underage girls.
That was many years before the Soon Yi or Dylan incidents.
3
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once." And how old was Soon Yi when he "seduced" her? Dylan has never wavered in her account of Allen's molestation. Bret, go find someone else to exonerate.
10
Soon-yi was 19 or 21 when he began his relationship with her. She was 17 or 19 when Mia Farrow urged Woody to spend time with Soon-Yi.
He didn't live with Farrow, he didn't stay the night at Farrow's, he was not in any way a father figure to Soon-Yi and had nothing to do with her and paid her no attention (according to Mia Farrow's autobiography).
4
You’ve never watched any of this guys movies?
10
Every NYT columnist seems to want to weigh in on the Woodman. I don't need to see "evidence" to know that he's kind of a creep who's been creatively bankrupt for decades and morally bankrupt for God knows. He bedded the college-age daughter of a long-time lover, the half-sister of his own children, justifying his inexcusable conduct with, "The heart wants what it wants." When the Soon Yi relationship was new, one writer said "He deliberately took actions that caused the maximum amount of pain to the maximum number of people who had once loved him." My mother would refer to him as, "A real piece of work."
The Jury is not still out on those facts, even if the law has refrained from pursuing charges for other matters. If Hollywood decides to stop making his movies, it will not be because of some #metoo witch hunt, but Woody Allen reaping what he's sown. Cry me a river.
19
While I don't have an opinion as to whether or not Allen sexually molested Dylan Farrow, I do disagree with your comment that public opinion should be held to the same standard as a criminal case.
The standards of proof and rules of evidence in a court of law are understandably high and allow for people who are probably guilty to evade criminal sanction since the stakes- the accused's very freedom- are so high.
We as individuals can execute our own judgement and allow for much lower standards of proof.
9
Compar” that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims. OK I will. Can we start with his victim Kyle Stephens who he began molesting when she was in Kindergarten? No one believed her either.
10
Oh I see, the expert opinons.
2
Woody Allen married his daughter. That is all the evidence one should need.
8
No, he didn't.
4
I appreciate situations, like reading this article, when I can find common ground with the right side of the NYT columnists. Today is a danger zone for democratic norms in the United States. We need to celebrate occasions when thoughtful, fair-minded people on the left and the right can join to preserve fundamental values, like due process and presumption of innocence....and, perhaps most importantly, the ability to think with nuance and depth about an issue.
The situation with Woody Allen is not the situation with the predators with whom he has been associated. The facts make it pretty plain that is the likely conclusion.
3
Many thanks for this article. What is most appalling for me is the way people rush to judgement over something they choose to believe, often in the face of the facts. Anyway, for their stupidity, those A list actors from Mira Sorvino to Natalie Portman are off my watch list.
6
Thanks. Well said.
3
I believe that Dylan Farrow really believes she was molested but probably as a result of intense manipulative and vindictive behavior of Mia Farrow who was furious that her ex was having an affair with her (not their) adopted ADULT daughter. When Mia took Dylan to the pediatrician's office to be examined for this supposed assault, Dylan told the pediatrician that she was NOT molested by Allen. Mia then took the kid out for ice cream and return later that day only to have Dylan tell the pediatrician that she was molested. Allen took a lie detector test and passed, and demanded that Mia take one too. She refused to do the same. As a result of the report to the pediatrician, a full investigation was opened and a forensic team from Yale, a group that specializes in sexual assault did an extensive investigation and found that not only did an assault not take place but that the child was most likely coached by the mother. It is natural to want to believe a child, but in this case the evidence points to Mia Farrow using her child as a way to get back at Allen in a messy and ugly breakup.
11
In an instance such as this, one must take into account the first-hand evidence provided by Dylan Farrow's adopted brother, Moses Farrow (the child adopted by Woody Allen at the same adoption as Dylan). Moses Farrow, Ph.D., who has a career as a respected family therapist, states emphatically that, "Of course, Woody Allen did not molest my sister." Moses Farrow has testified how he, too, was brainwashed by their mother, Mia, in an attempt to damage and strike out at Woody Allen. Using innocent children in an attempt to falsely discredit others is as reprehensible an act and, to the children, just as damaging. Something should be done to stop Mia's vengeful attacks.
10
After thinking about this. I blame both Woody Allen and Mia Farrow. They both failed Dylan.
If Mr. Allen did molest her, he's guilty of abuse and Ms Farrow is guilty of not protecting her daughter. If Mr. Allen did not molest Dylan, Ms Farrow is guilty of using Dylan for her own means and Mr. Allen did not protect her. It's ugly either way. 25 years later there is still no peace for all parties. Sad.
1
And lest we forget, another one of the Farrow offspring named Moses has different recollections of what went on when they were children.
“... Moses contends that his mother was emotionally manipulative and physically abusive, detailing a number of alleged instances in which Ms. Farrow struck him or pressured the children to bend to her will. “Now that I no longer live in fear of her rejection, I am free to share how she cultivated and brainwashed me,” Moses is quoted as saying.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/29/movies/mia-farrow-woody-allen-abuse.html
7
My brother is adopted. Never is he referred to as my "adopted" brother. He is my brother. I find that referring to Dylan and Soon-Yi as his "adopted" daughters to be strange and somehow adding to the disqualification of the charge.
If my mother married my brother, that would be incest. No one would say that it is not. Perhaps because we are all the same race has something to do with it. A daughter is a daughter - whether or not someone is adopted, if they are brought to the family as a baby or child, there is a father-daughter relationship. So, to say that he has never behaved badly, other than with his other daughter (Soon-Yi) is insane. Transferring from a father-daughter relationship to an equal lover relationship is a lie some people tell others is normal.
As I remember, the prosecutor felt that there was reason to move forward with prosecuting Allen, but decided not to because of the welfare of the child, Dylan. That does not make him innocent. I would like to see all of these same people who proclaim Allen innocent because he was not convicted say the same about OJ in reference to Nicole.
Racism, classism, misogyny.
8
Yes, all he's done since the accusation is marry a woman that was a virtual step child that he met and groomed since she was a child.
9
Even is Dylan's claims are false. He should dismissed for shacking up with his DAUGHTER-WIFE, that alone is grounds to be ostracized out of popular culture.
5
Sorry, but I'm not buying this tautological apology for Allen. He did something really sick and egregious by marrying Ms.Previn. One time speaks volumes. He may not be a child molester, but he crossed the line. After that I never saw a Woody Allen movie. And I loved them.
6
I never doubted the Woody Allen accusations from day one.
6
This needed to be said.Thanks.
2
I note that people often retroactively project Mr. Allen's personal issues into his films, as they they should all be taken as perverse romans a clef, whereby the protagonist's attraction towards an ingenue is seen as the director's personal pathology. From such a perspective, the truth of the Allen/Farrow issue is right there in front of audiences - visible in plain sight - if only we would get past our antiquated notions of white-male auteurism, and all that.
So what, then, is the appropriate response I should have? As much as I want to sympathize with potential victims, I am also troubled by the incessantly public nature of the claims, as though the real objective here is not to have Mr. Allen convicted in a court of law, but to have him crushed by the court of public opinion, buoyed by Hollywood's callow moralism.
1
There will almost never be "abundant evidence" - shame on anyone to suggest the accusation can't be made without it, it's an accusation, not a conviction. Suspicion is, unfortunately - perpetrators know this - the best we can do. One can be suspicious and remain open to evidence the accused is innocent - that evidence, too, is usually illusive. The question then is which way to err.
3
We’ll probably never know the full truth of what happened. Accusations sometimes can ruin a truly innocent person & vise versa. It’s a fine line between Truth & Falsehood. Having a fair and honest system of reporters, judges and jurors using the philosophy of Truth, Beauty & Goodness is our very best system of reality. Thanks for your article.
1
I have no idea what did or didn't happen, but when I read other comments where folks insist that their own experience is universal- "I can spot them," from a person that has never "spotted" Mr Allen, it's clear that the public component of this is absurd. Stop speculating on the lives of people you'll never see, I can assure you there are children in your own community that need love and protection.
2
Wow! What a saga, giving Allen's past action(s) the benefit of the doubt...while not doubting the sincerity of Dylan Farrow's recollection, as a child, of the event(s). I'm afraid that the truth may not be evident to us in the foreseeable future...unless Woody comes forth, and tells his story...if different from a straight denial of abusing his station. One wonders if something akin to 'touching' inappropriately was interpreted as a full come-on assault, where two human beings, imperfect as 'we' all are, may muddy the waters to an impossibly difficult judgement on our part. Ought we not stop being voyeurs of an event whose interpretation remains a nightmare?
Thank you, Bret Stephens for this piece. I'm an increasingly concerned about the current practice of trying people in the media, instead of a court of justice. The man is 82 -- what is to be gained by destroying his career at this point? What is to be gained by smearing him repeatedly in the press? And what of the pain and suffering this is bringing his two young daughters? I'm sure he doesn't want to increase the acrimony by suing for defamation of character, but I wonder what Soon Yi (who knows the truth about MIa Farrow's parenting) will do after Allen dies.
8
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims."
This is a really gratuitous comparison. This piece would have been as effective without it--maybe more so.
We will probably never know what happened or didn't happen. But, he's still a creep. THAT much is obvious, and we do know that with certainty.
4
When you have worked in the field of child abuse, as I did for 30 years, you learn that the people who investigate child abuse are relentless in their desire to protect children.
If anything, they will err on the side of the child. It would not matter who the alleged perpetrator was--he could be a famous person, a well-respected person, or an ordinary person. To these folks all of those considerations were immaterial.
All that mattered was protecting the child.
The fact that an investigation was done, by a well-respected organization, and no grounds for abuse were found should end the issue for Woody Allen. Those investigators would not have missed anything, would not have let anything deter them from obtaining the truth, and would not have been incomplete in any manner.
Their findings can be trusted. You have to know who these people are to really get this: If it was there they would have found it. Period.
5
You do understand that CT State police did find probable cause to bring charges, but decided it was better not to put the child through that ordeal..., in keeping with the culture of the time. That is in the public record. So they found the evidence. Period.
3
Stephens creates some smoke around the charges against Allen. He uses a hospital's conclusion that was criticised by a judge. He compares the Allen evidence with the most horrendous cases of the women gymnasts. He notes that children have a penchant for fables and that Allen's purported actions were never repeated except for his affair with an almost-child step daughter (But he married her!). He implies that the sympathy for Dylan stem from Allen's unlikeability. None of this comes close to making a case that Allen has been "smeared." He has not been smeared. If anything, it is Dylan who has been smeared by those who rushed to Allen's defence.
5
Wasn’t his step-daughter.
1
The #MeToo cause has been extraordinarily beneficial in drawing attention to male sexual assault throughout society. It's about time.
But it is dancing on thin ice when the cause is used to settle smoldering grievances or petty disagreements, or when accusers make up or exaggerate what happened to them. Dylan Farrow's broadside has the feel of that.
Predators like Harvey Weinstein are thankfully gone. But an able, highly effective public servant, Al Franken, was also tossed aside due to absolutely unproven allegations, and our nation is worse off with his voice silenced.
Let's hope Woody Allen is also not shamed into silence as the result of not just an unproven allegation, but also a disproved one.
5
Stephens statement that since Connecticut declined to press charges against Allen that "it is what we have to go on," is nonsense. Stephens fails even to mention the major opposing argument, the statement by the state's lead attorney that he had "probable cause" to press charges against allen but didn't do so because of the fragility of dylan, the "child victim," who was only seven years old.
Other arguments, all of them pointed out by Maureen Orth in Vanity Fair in 2014, are that allen had been in therapy for months for alleged inappropriate behavior toward dylan with a child psychologist before the abuse allegation was presented to authorities; that the judge found allen's behavior toward dylan "grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her;" and that the panel of "experts" from Yale New Haven hospital that cleared allen did not include a single psychologist or psychiatrist, and that the only doctor on the three-member panel, a pediatrician, had never examined dylan.
none of these opposing arguments make allen guilty. but all raise the most serious questions about his treatment of seven-year-old dylan. stephens barely deals with one and fails to mention the others.
4
The column brings to mind a incident that occurred in my neighborhood in the 1960s. A young female student made charges of molestation against a male teacher at my elementary school. The well regarded male teacher lost his job. Years later the girl admitted she had made up the story to gain his attention. Eventually rehired this teacher suffered untold damage to his life and reputation.
4
The Woody Allen/Mia Farrow relationship had been heavily publicized since it's inception. After they adopted Dylan photos of the family appeared, and as a teenager I always wondered why that little girl looked so very unhappy in every photo. I told myself that anyone who had to look at Woody's mopey mug all the time would naturally mirror such an expression. Then it came out that he was 'overly obsessed' with her, and in therapy for it. That was enough for me. He smothered that child and it damaged her, from the get go. I felt bad for her then that she had a creepy dad, and I feel the same for her now. He plays the same role in all his movies, a creep with an obsession with a woman. Artistically he's a one trick pony. As for his bizarre comments about his step-daughter/wife, they just expose him for the manipulator he is.
6
I agree with Mr. Stephens. And would add also that Dylan's brother Moses has always maintained that this did not happen; he was fourteen at the time. Ronan Farrow, a brother who maintains that it 'did happen' was five. The nanny at the time remembers hearing Mia Farrow coach Dylan over a number of days.
But the important thing is that no one knows. There's nothing to have an opinion about.
An important comment is that Dylan is not 'lying.' She has believed this to be true for a very long time. Whether or not it is true is another story.
I think it is time for the public to try to break our fascination with this particular dysfunctional family's complicated dirty laundry.
5
The critical premise here that “... most parents know that young children are imaginative and suggestible and innocently prone to making things up” is striking, relative to the piece’s main point of not making judgment based on unspoken social biases. First, documentation for this premise is not even provided. Second, it is written in a way inferring that all “young children” are in the same category, which “most parents,” but not all, understand or know about. The tacit categorical dismissal of what young children might claim because they are young, needs very serious justification, justice for them being the issue My experience is that children have a level of integrity that ought to be admired by adults, especially when they complain of being hurt. Children certainly are entitled to respect by adults.
5
Agree with this, which is remarkable because Stephens never seems agreeable. But I don't agree with this line, "We still live in a country that paints a bright line between accusation and fact." We no longer live in that country you seem to remember Brett. We live in Trump country, where the truth is only one of many alternative facts, and social media gets the same value as the NY Times and other legitimate news sources. So, it's not hard to see how Allen gets smeared. The stage has been set from the top- fake news! Truth and facts no longer matter.
2
If Allen was accused of multiple incidents of inappropriate behavior with teenage girls or young women over the years, I wouldn't be surprised at the accusations. But sexual misconduct with a 7-year-old girl, I'm not as sure.
2
Skepticism is a greatly underappreciated trait. Always I have considered Thomas my favorite of the disciples of Jesus because he did want proof. The horrors of the Satanism scare of the latter part of the last century should be a corrective to present rushes to judgment. I imagine more damage was done then than during the Salem witch trials. (Sheriffs down here in Alabama went to a training session on spotting Satanists. One of the sure signs was vegetarianism.) So much that is important is emerging from the present movement, but let those involved recall the worst excesses of the French Revolution! Just because the bandwagon is rolling toward the edge of a cliff doesn't mean you have to jump aboard. Allen is no angel and never has been. Throughout his career I have admired the artist while having reservations about the man. But I'm used to doing that, hence my love for the work of William Faulkner. The main case against him does come from a child, and as you say there appear to be inconsistencies in her testimony. (You were careful to point out that even if she is wrong, she may well believe what she is saying.) And that child is, was, under the sway of an angry mother. And children can be swayed. Children can be made to believe anything. During the Satanism scare even accused adults became convinced that they must have done the dirty just because children they loved accused them. I've got no doubt about Weinstein. I do have doubt about Allen.
3
I share Mr. Stephens’ opinion as stated in this column. The phenomenon of social contagion is a two-(or more)-pronged sword. It can be used to better understand the manner in which the #MeToo movement (or any movement) has spread beyond the Weinstein revelations (or the movement’s original origins). It can also be used to discount such spread, with claims that the participants of the movement see dis-ease in places they hadn’t hitherto thought it to be and where it may or may not belong. With social contagion that which is seen as possible can easily become probable.
With respect to the explosive topic of sexual behavior, social contagion can be quite explosive indeed—especially in a culture historically at least known for its puritanical attitudes (actual sexual behavior would appear to have often radically differed from those attitudes). It would behoove us all to be aware of this two-pronged sword. What is possible may not be probable and only fact should determine where this line has or has not been crossed.
To date Allen would seem to have the facts on his side. Reading more into it seems more social contagion than otherwise—not wishful thinking, just the “possible” unjustifiably being labeled “probable.”
5
I do not understand Bret Stephens' rush to defend Woody Allen without doing expansive research on Allen's past. Did he not even bother to read Allen's own journals (held by Princeton University) which details disturbing writings about children and sexual urges. What is your motivation, Stephens? I will never understand the denial of truth by many people when it comes to abusers of any kind.
9
This is the problem with Stephens' piece. The reason why we believe the allegations against Weinstein & Spacey were because their accusers came from within the entertainment business. But Allen's accuser is not. I wonder how Stephens would feel if Dylan Farrow was an actress. I'd bet his op-ed would be a lot different.
1
Two things are true: (1) There are cases where people abuse, and cases where people make false accusations, so every case must be considered according to the specifics of that case; and (2) People want to believe stories that confirm their own biases, and disbelieve ones that do not, and will engage in complex mental machinations to support their preferred beliefs.
Many of the #metoo cases we have been discussing this winter involved multiple accusers. The stories are consistently told, repeatedly told, and confirm each other because of deep similarities. Nassar had HUNDREDS of accusers. Weinstein and Cosby DOZENS. Porter THREE. The number of accusers matters, to anyone with a modicum ability to reason. People who dispute these cases--despite the overwhelming evidence--let's face it, you just don't want to believe.
The Allen case is different. There is only one accuser. The guy may be a narcissist and a horrible human being, but ONE accuser, in a child custody case--not the same thing at all as the other #metoo cases. And the fact she remembers it now means little--false memories are terribly easy to implant in children. One study shows that TWO mentions of a made-up childhood incident (spilling grape juice on your relative's dress at a wedding, for example) is enough for people to remember that event as if it had happened to them. What's more, they start confabulating details of the memory on their own.
8
You were going along fine, Mr. Stephens, until the next to last paragraph. "...[A]ccusing someone of being a molester without abundant evidence is also odious..." is tarring with far too broad a brush, because it smears the victim her (or him) self, and the parent who must be the child's first advocate (and may be the only one). You mention Harvey Weinstein and Larry Nasser--their earliest accusers had no evidence but their own memories, and in the case of Nasser's younger victims' parents, not even that. Were they "odious" to make their accusations? The abundant evidence you're calling for only became abundant as the sum of little-or-no evidence accusations.
I venture to hope you intended to convey "It is odious to accept fully the child-molestation accusations of strangers without abundant evidence."
I am applaud you for stating the obvious in these contentious times.
5
A nasty divorce, a lack of a witness or a consistent pattern of behavior make this case unjudgeble to any outsider. I’m so sorry for Ms Farrow whether she is a victim of molestation or a victim of a manipulative parent seeking vengence in a divorce. Weinstein, Spacey - and Donald Trump have all had multiple accusers revealing distinct patterns of behavior. But I’m still smarting over Al Franken. What a travesty of justice that was. Why so much public debate over a now minor celebrity, and so little over a sitting U.S. senator who’s only identified public accuser had suspect political ties? It’ s a story that deserves to be revisited in the media to foster some discussion of standards for weighing accusations against sitting politicians. To primarily focus this discussion on celebrities has been no loss, lots of gain for the media, including the NYT.
8
Usually, I'm on the side of the molested. The fact that no one has come forward besides Dylan is an indication to me that, in this case, it's a false accusation. As far as I know, trying to rape a child is not normal, it's also a compulsion men can't seem to resist when they have that tendency.
6
The author of the article proves his own point. He is biased in favor of Woody Allen and so interprets the facts. Woody Allen tends to appeal to a certain group of pseudo intellectuals (among others of course) who cannot believe one of their own would act in this way unless the evidence is overwhelming. On the other side of the coin are those who would believe any woman over any man.( eg. Hillary said all women should be believed). Frankly this just reinforces the concept of innocent until proven guilty. The presumption of innocence given our most heinous offenders, while not perfect, is not being applied equally to all. That being said he fact that he had an affair with and married an adopted daughter of his then wife really makes him suspect. I would not be a good defense juror. He would make a terrible witness on his own behalf. Hopefully others could be more objective.
1
When Woody Allen ran off with Soon-Yi, my bias against his overall odd behavior and appearance, caused me to cast judgement upon him. But after 5, then 10 years together, I changed my view. I realized that I'd let my biases run rampant, and the union of these two people is very likely a "good one." There had been no more rumors of Woody Allen and sexual exploits. I had let my preconceptions lead me to an erroneous conclusion.
Woody Allen looks funny, often acts oddly, and has (or had) great power. He even has an off-beat name. He fits our cultural bias for sexual misconduct, fetishes, etc extremely well. It is not surprising, despite the lack of any real evidence, that people continue to emphatically say that they believe Dylan Farrow.
We all have biases towards matters small and great, including those we are loathe to admit to (especially involving ethnicity/race, sex, physical appearance). Instead of observing and considering our own biases, as the author suggests we do, many of us try to hide them (even from ourselves) and instead let cognitive dissonance reign. Social media makes this particularly easy to do. Thusly, decent people (individuals and groups) are wrongly castigated.
Whether it be Woody Allen, people of a given religion, immigrants from a given country, etc -- before judging, start by looking at your own preconceived notions.
8
These "allegations" started eight months after Mia Farrow terminated her relationship with Woody Allen, during a time in which he was suing her for custody of some of their children.
Farrow was understandably humiliated and angry. It makes sense that she would lash out at Allen in any way possible. And that she would do anything to ensure that he does not get custody of any of her children, including the one child that they conceived together.
Why do people forget this important fact? I strongly suspect that Farrow convinced her then-7-year-old daughter of this supposed occurrence as a vindictive act against Allen.
If mom tells you something enough times, a young child will start to believe it. And if mom keeps repeating the story again and again over many years, I'm sure it must feel like a vivid and solid memory.
Further, I'm certain that Farrow still harbors incredible anger and resentment about the affair, and keeps pushing this story as a way to tear down Allen, whose presence in our culture and in the news must be a constant reminder of her humiliation.
Farrow's anger was and is justifiable. Her actions -- both to Allen and to her children -- are not.
6
You don't know what her actions were. You want to indict is Carrie without any evidence while assuming that.Allen is telling the truth, again without evidence.
2
What is it about Conservative/GOP men that they cannot bear to hear women's voices if they are saying something that disturbs their Patriarchal Privilege?
4
Bret, the conservative, as usual leaves out some compelling information, while projecting his own shortcomings upon the rest of the world.
The missing information is that the prosecutor said there was probable cause to charge Allen, but the trauma the victim child would experience going through a trial was reason enough to not bring it before a jury.
The shortcoming is Bret is controlled by his existing biases, but writes that we all are. Conservative fantasy land.
6
What has all but convinced me of Woody Allen’s likely innocence as to what Dyan Farrow has accused him of doing when she was a child is the quasi-rebuttal of her brother Moses Farrow. As recently as this January he has accused his mother, Mia Farrow, of abusing him and of convincing Dylan she was abused. Dylan is a victim of childhood abuse and her brother Moses through his own life experience has pointed to Mia, not Woody as the perpetrator.
7
And if course, Moses is a boy. Double standard anyone.
1
smear? the guy slept with the daughter of his significant other. His conduct created the smear on his reputation. Can't wipe it off either, it's permanent
9
It's good to know that if a man molests only one child, once, then that child is not to be believed. If 265 molestations is the new standard, then Mr. Allen is indeed safe.
10
I notice that you conveniently left out the child psychiatrist who testified that the Yale-New Haven hospital is “seriously flawed" as well as Dr. John M. Leventhal, who headed the Yale-New Haven team, having claimed he interviewed Dylan Farrow though Vanity Fair reported later that he did not. You also left out Frank Maco, a state’s attorney in Connecticut, who says he believes Dylan Farrow and has “probable cause” to prosecute Allen, but wants to spare Farrow the trauma of a trial. Finally, you wrote, "He married Soon-Yi and has been with her ever since." What? Allen adopted Soon-Yi when she was seven years old. It's bizarre and repugnant to me that you would attempt to normalize his marriage to her, particularly after we've learned Allen's private notes show he's obsessed with young girls. The entirely appropriate level of scrutiny around this whole sordid ordeal is a normal human response, not "smearing." I hope you realize that by characterizing it that way you are basically raising your hand and saying, "I too am a fan of my longstanding male privilege to engage in sexual conduct that may now be considered questionable and am attempting to preserve my privilege to engage in it." The answer is no.
8
Mia Farrow and Andre Previn adopted Soon-Yi. Woody Allen did not adopt her.
2
Thanks for the clarification, Lisa. I still find it profoundly bizarre and inappropriate that Allen married a person who came into Farrow's life when she was 7 yrs. old.
3
It's about time we inject some balance and rationality in the Farrow accusation. Allen reports that Mia told him on the phone that she had something planned for him which turned out to be the accusation.
No one else has accused Allen which is unusual for molesters. At this point in history, I still believe Woody.
By the way, Allens personality is partly contrived and partly the real Woody. Don't be to quick to buy into his neurotic persona. He was an entrepreneur in high school and has a long record of professional stability along with a lengthy marriage to Soon Yi!
.
7
Thank you for this. I'm sure that it's in response to Nicholas Kristof's recent opinion piece, which is at least the second column in which he has taken Dylan Farrow's word at face value while admitting that he is a long-time friend of her mother's. At heart, I'm more of a Kristof fan than I am of yours, but I think his loyalties are misplaced. I'm old enough to remember the Mia Farrow of "Peyton Place" days, when she had a nervous breakdown and hacked off her hair. She's beyond neurotic (making Mr. Allen seem run-of-the-mill in terms of stability). I can sympathize with her jealousy when it comes to him taking up with a younger woman (her adopted daughter, no less), but that relationship seems to have been a stable one. He wasn't married to Mia, they didn't even live together; at the time, he had no legal relationship with Soon Yi. I'm speaking here as someone who can say #MeToo; around age 12 I was repeatedly molested by a trusted family member whom I adored. But the words of the Farrows--both daughter and mother--ring false. I'm sorry for all involved.
6
Really guys? Old Woody should be exempt from being called out as a child molester? Why? Were you with him 24/7 when he was married to Dylan's mother and sleeping with one of their other children? Have you interviewed victims and tried molestation jury trials? I have. I found in over 20 years as a prosecutor in a major city, trying felonies, 1/12 of all felonies, and trying all the child molestation cases that the computer randomly assigned to my judge, that many jurors and many witnesses and many parents of victims were molested and many did not report their cases to parents or cops. Woody's behavior towards young women is so telling. Believe the victims. This believing of men over women and children by people has got to stop. My kid victims, as young as 4 yoa btw, got on the stand and nailed their abusers because I told them to tell the truth and don't lie for anyone. Oh yeah, and I, childless, was called to go bail out a now tv star who put a child victim on the stand cold and the kid frozen in front of her father and the jury. I told that kid what had happened to me on my horse by an old senile neighbor when I was a kid and why I did not tell my parents for years because my father would have killed the old neighbor. Believe Dylan.
7
Bret - OJ was also proclaimed "not guilty" by a court of law. Maybe that should be your next column. 7 year olds don't make this kind of stuff up.
5
We are playing Arthur Miller's "Crucible" over and over daily in these frightening days! Virtual reality - smearing and hanging men for sexual harassment and abuse of women in their lives, proving it in videos, too. Larry Nassar is now the insane pedophile who will be spending the next couple of hundred years in jail (if someone doesn't put paid to him before his sentences are up). Accusation and fact are still shibboleths in our mortally skewed American society, which has latched onto the past millennia of spousal/ girlfriend/ female and male child abuse on our hinge of history. Alas, the truth is often never revealed in a court of law or public opinion, and fair play is not an option for those accused. Trump is a master player in misogyny and foul play, and he's still above the law and adored by his ignorant base. The truth - abuse and abasement of women - is biblical, Talmudic, and
the truth never outs anyway. "Smear" is a bad five-letter word, Bret. Don't use it. Woody used to say, "the heart wants what it wants. No logic." Dem's de facts, Jack.
2
The phrase " I believe Dylan" immediately reveals how irrationally the average American thinks.
In general an emotional statement can change the mind of the majority of population , instantly, if it is intense enough....That explains the results of the recent presidential elections...
Of course,it is always possible for Allen to be a a monster ..... But since we did our best to find out what happened and the appropriate authorities decided that he should not be prosecuted , it is over . .
But for the average American It does not matter that the case was investigated and It was found that Dylan was not molested but she most likely was coached by her mother all these years , it does not matter that her brother Moses said the same.
It does not matter - "I believe Dylan" s/he says - because ....she believes it and she appeared on TV crying ..
It does not matter that MiaFarrow is unreliable - she said Ronan might have been Frank Sinatra son . The same time Dylan was attacking actors for working with Allen ,Mia Farrow gave permission to show her clips at the golden globes award to honor Allen.
I forgot to mention the love police :
responsible to indentify who dates whom, their age difference and if their legal choice is typical and therefore moral
and appointed to decide if the inappropriate couple should be condemned to stonewalling through social media and tabloids, to make sure that their professional and social life is stigmatized and it is finally ruined.
Bravo!
3
Bret you're right on here. It is well known and documented that children and young adolescents can be hugely manipulated to play into a sinister narrative of a parent. Take for example the Florida case where a 13 yo was manipulated by his felonious parents into thinking he had brain cancer. For the purpose of a fake go fund me campaign.
Yes Woody is a creepy neurotic but the evidence doesn't support his vilification.
4
"Allen... in his late 50s, had a distasteful affair with Mia Farrow’s adopted, barely adult daughter, Soon-Yi Previn.... He married Soon-Yi and has been with her ever since."
Distasteful? No. Allen, in his 50s, left his common-law wife for her college-age daughter. His children now had to contend with the fact that their father was having sex with their step-sister. Allen's disgusting choices in this affair were not criminal. But does Bret Stephens understand what a grotesque, damaging violation of his children’s boundaries Allen committed when he started having sex with their step-sibling?
Has Stephens stopped to think about the monstrous narcissism it takes to do that? Does he realize how grossly offensive it is for him to call Allen’s egregiously unethical, noxious choices merely distasteful—or how ludicrously sexist he sounds when he suggests that Allen’s marrying his children's step-sister made the situation better, as if making an honest woman of Soon-Yi were the important thing?
In the context of this ostensibly oh-so-reasonable column, Stephens’s choice to use the word “distasteful” to describe Allen’s deranged and indefensible decision to have sex with and marry his children’s step-sister is just so telling, and the pomposity that allows Stephens to be so comfortably clueless is so, SO indicative of the kind of attitudes, not just about gender but about POWER, that have allowed sexual harassment and assault to be committed with impunity for so long.
8
Didn't he also marry a young woman who was, in terms of family role, his own step-daughter? Didn't he do this after grooming her for years, and taking erotic photos of her when she was quite young (possibly 21, but perhaps not even that, since her birth date is unknown)? Evidently, he acted on his fantasies more than once. What about "Manhattan," in which his character has a relationship with a teen-aged girl? That kiss was rather traumatic for the young actress, herself a minor. And it appears he pursued her as well after the movie (See https://www.wmagazine.com/story/mariel-hemingway-woody-allen-teenage-gir....
3
I'm afraid that the true abuser is the mother who has raised two children to devote their lives to avenging her humiliating treatment by Allen.
6
There was one evidence people don't register on this affair. Woody Allen agreed and took a lie detector test with investigators and passed with flying color, while Mia Farrow refused to take one. One can infer Mia Farrow was lying. The video tape she submitted was not a continuous one but was taken during a 2-3 day period with stop and coach to continue with many inconsistencies.
6
For the past 25 years, Dylan Farrow has stuck to her story that Woody Allen molested her when she was a young girl. And Mr. Allen has maintained his innocence, while offering a plausible reason why Ms. Farrow might be mistaken. During that period, no new information has emerged to shed any light on who is telling the truth. Instead, there has been a social movement that has exposed blatant and rampant sexual misconduct by other powerful men. Is that any reason to recycle stale allegations against Mr. Allen? If so, why are media organizations re-interviewing all the women who have accused Donald Trump of sexual misconduct?
3
Dylan Farrow seems to have become a professional victim. Yet I have read nothing about her working to secure the safety of children, nor strengthen their legal protections and rights, or support of counselling facilities.
Maybe she has and it wasn't considered newsworthy, but given the "column inches" she has generated in her monomaniacal pursuit of Mr. Allen, I doubt it.
What I do not doubt is that she is the victim of her mother's unhinged thirst for revenge against Mr. Allen for having taken her adopted daughter as his child bride, which is ironic given that Mia Farrow too was once the child bride of Frank Sinatra herself.
6
One of Mia Farrow's adopted sons Moses is now a therapist. He has publicly sided with Allen. He could remember his Farrow going over the story again and again so she would get it right. It has been proven that false facts could be transferred to children so that they believe that it is reality. As the article alludes to the phony sex scandals involving children in the 1980s such behavior has caused the lives of innocent people, children as well as adults, to be ruined.
4
Good article and it seems the shrewish zitriol of MIA Farrow and her family supporters, Ronan (Franks boy Mia?)and Dylan, has fresh disputed accusations. The witch hunt continues.
3
I am not a huge Woody Allen fan, though I have enjoyed some of his movies (while at the same time cringing at the fantasy on screen - usually a young woman finding Allen's character attractive - I used to think, yeah, right, only in Hollywood).
But that's neither here or there. The fact is Woody Allen is innocent, and I find it the height of cowardice that many actors who have worked with Allen (and, in fact, clamored to work with him or were nurtured by him), have turned on him on nothing more than allegations. Those, too, levelled by a somewhat unhinged Mia Farrow (ok, I don't know that, but from what I have seen of her interviews and wide-eyed allegations, she seems a bit off). And the evidence - just one accusation in decades of film-making and being around groupies, hangers-on, aspiring actresses, etc. by a seven-year old whose parents were then in the midst of a bitter divorce. And she said it was a one-off event. That, I submit, is improbable - child molesters don't stop at one victim. In any event, I am not privy to any information or evidence that would make me believe Woody Allen guilty. Bravo to Alec Baldwin . . .
3
I appreciate this article. During the investigation, Woody Allen also passed a lie detector test while Mia Farrow declined to take one.
4
His portrayal of the quavering bravado of an underage girl trying to negotiate situations, interactions, and sexual exchanges that are far beyond her capacity to fully understand, let alone manage, bespeaks first-hand observation. Watch Manhattan, then send your 14- year-old alone to your hero’s lair.
3
Please donate to RAINN and help everyone who has been abused and no one believed them.
1
Thank you for daring to stand against the mob, with torches held high and pitchforks tightly-clutched, looking for the next beast to slay. You do not have to admire Mr. Allen's affair with Soon-Yi to recognize that the distraught soon-to-be ex-wife had an ax to grind, and grind it she did.
2
The best part is the unhinged left eating it's own, just like any proper revolution. We hope the mass insanity continues, through Novembers eighteen and twenty, when the only ones left standing will be a daytime diet coach, an ambulance chaser that once held a President's coat, a rube Socialist who speaks Brooklynese and Rose of butch haircut fame. Sometimes we make our own luck and sometimes it's a gift.
The case against Woody Allen has been built through a thoughtless and damaging -- not just to Mr. Allen -- accrual of isms: ageism, sexism, antisemitism (yes, I'm afraid so), racism, provincialism, Victorianism. Is androphobism a word, yet? If it is, add it to the list. I'm not a slavering fan of his movies or writing, hold him in no great regard, have no vested interest in coming to his defense, beyond plain old -- wait for it, here it comes, another loaded suffix -- rationalism. Evidence counts. The evidence is in his favor. I'm grateful to Bret Stephens for this mild anodyne and counterbalance to last week's column by the Farrow family surrogate, Nicholas Kristof.
12
Perhaps because it's such a well-known fact, perhaps for other reasons, Stephens fails to mention that Allen was already in a relationship with Mia Farrow when he seduced her adopted daughter, Soon-Yi. Allen's behavior in that situation doesn't make him guilty of molesting Dylan, another of Farrow's adopted daughters, but it certainly makes it much easier to believe that he was capable of doing it. That type of information can't be struck in the court of public opinion.
Think of the massive level of self-indulgence and sense of entitlement required to think that that type of behavior is acceptable and could be justified with an infantile rationalization like, "The heart wants what it wants."
A man who thinks that way is capable of anything. I believe Dylan.
7
I disapproved of Allen's affair with Soon-Yi, but she was 21 at the time, but let's assume it began several years earlier. This would show his desire for an 18-21 year-old, not for younger children. Why would a man lusting for, and having feelings for a young woman, also have intentions of harming young children? The situation doesn't make sense to me, and the fact that nearly everyone ignores the finding of actual investigations is odd. I saw the national panic about satanists abusing children in the late '80's and '90's and it was truly scary, that such accusations went so far without the intervention of simple reason. I understand that some accused at that time may still be imprisoned.
2
No, it doesn’t. I know exactly no one wants to hear this, but pursuing a relationship with a girl in her late teens says next to nothing about someone’s interest in 7-year-old children. If you look at the assorted #MeToo stories, you’ll notice all the men have a specific type of sex crime they (allegedly) committed. Harvey Weinstein didn’t do what Louis CK did, and Louis CK didn’t do what Bill Cosby did. It’s not because they lacked opportunity or imagination.
There’s plenty of evidence Woody has a thing for teen girls, which is creepy enough. There’s no evidence except the story of a traumatized girl in the middle of a vicious custody battle that he’s clinically a pedophile. The number of times the Farrows grab the narrative doesn’t make their story true.
10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation
Go ahead and google that folks. Perhaps Mr. Stephens should as well.
1
" The reason they have not been spared is because they are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The facts, not the allegations, prove it."
It's interesting that you chose Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey as examples of people who can be hanged by the neck of public opinion based on your estimation of the probability of their guilt, but curiously chose to ignore the most glaring and arguably famous example of someone who fits this mode of selection for public execution by NY Times columnist.
We have a president who has even been recorded boasting of repeatedly sexually assaulting women, and dozens of victim's statements attesting to the same..
If one person is subject to hanging by public opinion then all should be subject to it.
You nor anyone else is qualified to be the judge and jury of anyone. If you object that , in fact, you are since you are not administering justice (punishment) but simply expressing an opinion, then no hangings by public opinion should be exempt . Otherwise, you are just being the judge again, the judge of that which can be judged.
Who was the judge?
Who was on the jury?
Who was for the prosecution?
Who was for the defense?
Such that Mr. Stephens can REPORT the “charges…are almost certainly true” and “the facts…prove it” against Weinstein & Spacey. Kevin Spacey allocuted to being gay and having an alcohol problem. Similarly, Glen Thrush allocuted to being treated for alcoholism and experiencing a series of serious personal issues, some medical. If he were actually guilty, wouldn’t have an investigative reporter working elbow to elbow on a book with him have known, heard, suspected, something?
On the other hand, Nassar, had judges, juries, prosecutors and mounted a defense. Even there, a judge was criticized for losing her impartiality, which will undoubtedly result in an appeal. Where does Spacey, or even Allen, appeal his sentence?
Is Stevens “fronting” Allen’s apologia? Feels that way.
2
While Woody Allen's private notes aren't evidence that he is a child molester, they are proof that he's a creepy, gross, boorish misogynist with an unhealthy obsession with teenage girls.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/i-read-decades-of-woody-allens-pr...
Those too are facts that need not be ignored because other accusations remain unproven.
4
You know nothing about sexual abuse, or its victims, who often say and do apparently contradictory things.
4
Interesting that they call Dylan Farrow ‘Farrow’ to imply it is Mia Farrow who was putting Allen’s case back in the news. Might reconsider the subscription.
1
I can only hope that the charges against Allen are false, because I admire his comedic genius. But the charges have not been substantiated, and I withhold judgement. I am surprised that many of the comments are “off with his head”, despite lack of firm evidence. Let’s consider the Catholic Church. The charges against the Church ave been validated, and they involve the top leadership. The Church has a history of being on the wrong side of justice. Galileo, Spanish Inquisition, religious wars, etc. Why not call for the total dissolution of the Church, and banish it from our country? Because it has so many followers? So did the Nazi and Communist parties. I personally would not support such a banishment, but it would be consistent with the desires of many of the comments. I am just wondering if the pendulum has swung too far in the opposite direction. If I were 21, rather than 81, I would be in a quandary about how to ask a young lady for a date, without being accused of rape. I have four daughters, and I would defend them with my life, but I would like to understand the new rules.
4
I am both a fan of #MeToo movement and a fan of Woody Allen. He is a national treasure and one of our most important film artists. #MeToo is incredibly important as a social movement.
I am naturally suspicious and have always felt that the accusations agains Allen are off. I agree with Brett here that since a court of law found him not guilty and that there have been no other accusers this is a dispute with an angry ex-wife.
8
Wow, just wow. How long did he groom Soon-Yi and how young was she when he started? What about the fact that Allen portrays himself with teen girls over and over and over again in his movies and his writings? As for Dylan Farrow, you left out some pretty important information. That the charges were dismissed to protect Dylan Farrow but that the judge said on the record he found the accusation to be credible. That the supposed evaluation by Yale was done by someone who never met Dylan and was completely dismissed by teh judge. That there were witnesses that saw Allen with his head in Dylan's lap, in bed with Dylan, behaving inappropriately with her. That Allen claimed he had never set foot in the attack where he molested her but later had to confess that was a lie because his hair was found there. That Dylan Farrow's recounting of the events has never ever changed. That it was her pediatrician that called authorities, not Mia Farrow.
Why leave all these important facts out of this piece? Perhaps the better question is why are people working so hard to defend a man who has made it clear through his art and through his actions that he is a pedophile.
6
I am glad that the New York Times published this article, after having published so many articles to the contrary -- often merely assuming Allen's guilt as though it were obvious. My only criticism of Stephens' article is that he did not mention Moses Farrow who corroborates the claim that Mia Farrow coached her children as to what she wanted them to say about Allen.
6
If half the population is brain-washed by Fox News, fake Facebook ads, and phony Tweets, why is it not plausible that seven-year-old Dylan Farrow was manipulated by an angry and vindictive Mia Farrow? Based on all the circumstances in the case, I think it's not only plausible, it's probable. But I can't prove it and therefore Mia should not be jailed.
5
I’m sorry. This is too much. Is it necessary that he act on his urges at least twice? Very disturbing. The judge found reason to believe her. Allen admitted his behavior was what is was. He doesn’t get it. He doesn’t see that he violated her? Frankly, there is never a good day to disregard a victim’s statements. But, today, really?? We are reeling from Trump’s tacit acceptance of a wife beater. From John Kelly’s apparent disregard for 3 women’s testimonies to the FBI. Sorry, but the misogyny really stinks. I wish there was a way for men to get it. Some do, but then we have to read pieces like this. It is a slap in every victim’s face.
5
Over three hundred twenty-three million Americans have no idea of the exact nature of Woody Allen's guilt in regard to criminal behavior concerning Dylan Farrow and of the rest, well over ninety-nine percent do not care, yet in the court of public opinion he is as guilty as the like of a Joseph Mengele. And who knows, maybe he actually is. But as the MeToo movement both means and does well in calling out the obvious predators, like all movements that have had to fight since the dawn of mankind to be taken seriously, it goes too far. It not only routinely ignores the rule of law, it boasts of its capacity to ignore the rule of law for expedient effects, such as destroying the careers of certain Senators and NY Times press corps members because their crimes were just enough past boorish to be an embarrassment to the cause. And there is hue and cry against describing the efforts at calling out predators and marginally defined enablers a witch hunt, but the best evidence of it not being a witch hunt would be in allowing the rule of law to run its course and to not go looking for a rope each time a new potential predator or alleged enabler is discovered.
6
What a GREAT era in which to be a lawyer....
...all of Western civilization is now swimming in really muddy water.
1
The smearing of the rich and powerful Woody Allen.... vs the smearing of the fragile and silenced Dylan Farrow... hmmm...
If you read the judge's ruling in Woody Allen's failed custody case against Mia Farrow, he cites ample evidence that Woody Allen was grossly inappropriate with Dylan, and it is a documented fact that he had been in treatment for this behavior for some time prior to the occasion in the attic. He was witnessed being in an inappropriate situation with her the same day of the attic incident that he denies. Read the ruling. The panel that "cleared" him was not qualified in child sexual abuse. The state did not press charges, not because there was not evidence, but because it would subject Dylan Farrow to exactly the kind of doubts and challenges that you are subjecting to her now.
Why do you find it necessary to defend this very strange and selfish man who consistently disregarded bounds of decency within the family? Who should have the benefit of the doubt??
Read the ruling:
https://www.scribd.com/document/205403621/Allen-v-Farrow-Custody-Ruling-...
5
Let's see, an old man who made moves on his adopted daughter (folks, that is just MESSED UP) cannot be trusted. Nor can anyone who defends this creep who has been creeping on women in most of his films (seriously, you have to be part of the Allen groupies not to see the pattern). I'll just leave this from Farrow's editorial:
"In the final legal disposition of the matter, a judge denied him custody of me, writing that "measures must be taken to protect" me and that there was "no credible evidence" that my mother, Mia Farrow, coached me in any way. A prosecutor took the unusual step of announcing that he had probable cause to charge Allen but declined in order to spare me, a "child victim," from an exhausting trial.
It is a testament to Allen's public relations team and his lawyers that few know these simple facts. It also speaks to the forces that have historically protected men like Allen: the money and power deployed to make the simple complicated, to massage the story." -http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-farrow-woody-allen-me-too-201...
The PR machine is still chugging on, it seems.
6
Justice Now, you are wrong, flatly, plainly.
2
I don't understand the need to come to the defense of this creature known as WA.
From your co-worker, AO Scott: "But underneath the neurosis and the shrugging, stammering self-directed put-downs was a powerful sense of entitlement. The Woody Allen figure in a Woody Allen movie is almost always in transit from one woman to another, impelled by a dialectic of enchantment, disappointment and reawakened desire. The rejected women appear shrewish, needy, shallow or boring. Their replacements, at least temporarily, are earnest, sensuous, generous and, more often than not, younger and less worldly than their predecessors. For a very long time, this was taken not as a self-serving fantasy but as a token of honesty, or freedom from sentimental conceptions of domestic love. ....A recent Washington Post article dug deep into the archive of Mr. Allen’s unpublished writings and found ample signs of his preoccupation with very young women, something moviegoers have been aware of since “Manhattan.”"
You can also find the 'The scathing 33-page decision from the presiding judge in Woody Allen’s 1992 custody suit against Mia Farrow,' here:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/danny-shea/heres-the-1993-woody-alle_b_47...
It's astounding this piece was written at all but perhaps not surprising. That's what the watershed MeToo movement is about.
@gemli, you've gotten ample evidence, one male celebrity/prominent figure after another, but you don't want to give up on WA? Come on....
2
Reading this article makes me feel like I want to punch Mr. Stevens in the face.
Now, if doing so would in fact make me a perpetrator of an assualt, well, I would have acted on my evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar....
5
Surely this commentary by Brett Stephens is facetious at best. And as a survivor of childhood molestation, I find his opinion tasteless and uninformed.
6
Good article but you might have noted how Trump makes a mockery of your statement that “We still live in a country that paints a bright line between accusation and fact.”
3
Oh for crying out loud. Woody Allen's reputation has been know for years.
4
Seems like we had something like this involving communists in the fifties and a lot of innocent peoples reputations were harmed.
5
Here, Mr. Stephens, is a link to the 1993 ruling written by Justice Elliott Wilk:
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/danny-shea/heres-the-1993-woody-alle_b_47...
Justice Wilk writes:
"I agree with Dr. Herman and Dr. Brodinsky that we will probably never know what occurred on August 4, 1992. The credible testimony of Ms. Farrow, Dr. Coates, Dr, Leventhal and Mr. Allen does, however, prove that Mr. Allen’s behavior toward Dylan was grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.”
Here is another account of what occurred from Vanity Fair by Maureen Orth in 2014, way before #metoo:
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts
"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."
"Dylan’s claim of abuse was consistent with the testimony of three adults who were present...a babysitter of a friend told police and gave sworn testimony that Allen and Dylan went missing for 15 or 20 minutes... Another babysitter told police and also swore in court that on that same day, she saw Allen with his head on Dylan’s lap facing her body, while Dylan sat on a couch “staring vacantly in the direction of a television set.” A French tutor for the family told police and testified that that day she found Dylan was not wearing underpants under her sundress."
Have you read these accounts and the Judge's entire ruling?
42
There a two major mistakes in this piece.
The first is the logical fallacy that one instance of abuse is not enough evidence. It is. This evidence is now brought by a woman in her thirties and should be treated as such.
The second is in quoting the Yale study without quoting the prosecutor in CT who said there was enough evidence to prosecute, but typical of the ways these things were handled in that time, did not think a young girl could deal with the proceedings.
11
Failure to prosecute is meaningless in abuse cases. Look at how many reports the Catholic Church ignored for decades. Look at how many reports about Larry Nassar the Michigan authorities ignored. For that matter, look at Bill Clinton and Donald Trump.
31
Thank you, Bret.
9
I think Allen showed his lack of morality in taking nude pictures of a young Soon Yi during the course of his relationship with her mother Mia Farrow,by the fact that he entered into the family, by adopting 2 children with Farrow, and having a biological son, Ronan, who has had his name changed twice, from Satchel to Seamus,though,now there has been a new revelation from Mia, who said, he might be Frank Sinatra's biological son, because she confessed that she continued having sex with Frank throughout the years after their divorce.
If I recall, she was having sex and eventually wed with Old Blue Eyes, when she was the same age as Soon Yi and Frank was about 25 years her senior.
It seems as though Mia was also guilty of cheating on Woody during their years together.
All very sordid, and a scandal which is made for publicity.
They are keeping themselves in the papers, which is what waning celebrities do to stay in the minds of their public.
Actually, It is a bit distasteful of the press to keep reminding us of this mess.
Can we all try to forget this happened? It isn't that important in the scheme of things. Woody and Mia aren't going anywhere....they will eventually fade away from most peoples thoughts. Which might be a blessing for society at large.
13
Ronan sure looks a lot more like Frank Sinatra than Woody Allen! I feel sorry for all the children who had these two neurotic people as their parents.
Love their movies though.
Mr. Stephens - he did molest a child - his step daughter (yes - I know he wasn't married to her mother - but after over a decade he most certainly was her common law step father) and he exploited her sexually, photographed it and then went on to marry her in a deranged attempt to legitimize it. I can't help but think of the notoriously classic Humbert Humbert when I see Woody Allen. And I'm sure we can all agree he was a deviant criminal. Mr. Allen's perverted obsession with pubescent girls has been apparent his entire career. Sadly, our culture has tolerated that for too long. Many would still welcome Roman Polanski back with open arms. But - as a childhood victim - I can spot these perverts a mile away. And the damage they do is lifelong - and being an amazing director, brilliant writer etc should never excuse them. Whether or not he molested Dylan Farrow can never be legally proven with certainty. But, he stands very credibly accused. And I completely disavowed him as a human once his relationship with Soon Yi became public. Shame on anyone who could ever excuse, rationalize or explain away that violation.
43
Bingo! Beautifully expressed. After having been a lifelong Woody Allen fan, in 1992, I penned a long essay about how horrified I was that the dysfunction that was so evident in his movies played out in real life, something I did not see coming. The headline published by one of the New York tabloids said it all; it simply read, "Bananas!" The Soon Yi affair affected the way I saw him ever since, and I no longer had (or have) an enthusiasm for going to the movie theatre to see his newer works. I don't know what happened to Dylan, but she has my sympathies, and like Dana who posted here, I believe there is no excuse for a man who wants to abuse his power or gets by with something that would send someone else to the slammer.
3
" common law step father" There is no such thing. For God's sake, learn some facts before to breathe fire.
"how horrified I was that the dysfunction that was so evident in his movies played out in real life, something I did not see coming."
I'm horrified that you don't know the difference between fact and fiction.
Pics or it didn't happen. Isn't that the way people think now?
I have an adopted brother and I know adoptees are no less a part of a family for being adopted, so the fact that he married an adopted daughter is so unbelievably creepy to me and tells me this man has no proper boundaries and is absolutely a pervert.
So whether or not there are pics or other hard evidence of him creeping on his other adopted daughter, there are certainly enough pics of him with his daughter-wife. So that's enough to make me vomit.
15
He married "an adopted daughter." as you note, but not HIS adopted daughter. He married his former girlfriend's daughter.
The relationship with Soon-Yi was in my opinion inappropriate. You're certainly free hate him for it. It's a free country. But not against the law, and it's none of my business. It has nothing to do with whether he committed a crime, and I think that's Bret Stephens point.
1
Soon Yi Previn was not his adopted daughter, nor was he ever married to Mia Farrow.
1
She wasn't HIS adopted daughter; she was Mia Farrow's. It is illegal to marry your adopted child. And she wasn't a child; she was an adult. Is this the choice most of us would make? No. But bad choices aren't illegal. 63 million people voted for Trump and they're still walking the streets free. Letters like most here make Stephens point: we fail to distinguish what makes us uneasy from what is actually, factually true in a situation. Allen never molested his daughter. That's where the facts lead us. Until there are new facts, that's all we can say. Otherwise, we're no better than the alternate facts crowd surrounding the Liar in Chief.
1
Sometimes when a famous person is charged with a crime, the schadenfreude and wannabe crowds hurl trash and sharpen the guillotine without examining evidence. Call this "The Children's Hour" as in Hellman's play, where 1 little girl ruins a school, and many lives. I guess we delight in finding dirty clay feet on heroes. Makes us feel righteous.
A few years after "Hour" we saw dozens of kid fantasies about nursery school workers sodomizing, flying, and hurting baby bodies. A family business was ruined, and two lives ruined by self-righteous disregard for facts. Precisely the same rage has accepted what Yale-New Haven and the CT judiciary rejected as inconsistent, unreliable, possibly tampered-with "recollections".
It's happened before, too. The same rush to judgement occurred when Salem Puritan leaders used "spectral evidence", testimony of witch-seeing young people to hang, drown, and crush to death people - whom the state later acquitted with apologies and a pittance to survivors.
Is Woody guilty? Psychiatrists, counsellors, and courts ruled "No". Mia and Dylan say "yes". Actors declare a questionable truth - "Must be, no one makes false accusations like these." We know better. Woody could be anyone, a man or woman of no fame, never found guilty in law or psychiatry, but ruined anyway. And you might be next.
25
Woody wasn't found "not guilty." That's an important distinction; and there's a lot to this case that will tell you why. Based on your comment, it's not what you're thinking.
2
citing the salem witch trials is very much on point in the present atmosphere.
Well, Mr. Stephens, you should read what Richard Morgan thinks about Woody Allen after reading his journals: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/i-read-decades-of-woody-allens-pr...
Spoiler: He's obsessed with young girls.
10
Have you read Stephen King? What do you think of him? Are you truly willing to conflate journals with actions?
1
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once." Oh, and that time he married his (for all practical purposes) step-daughter, who, at 35 years his junior, he had a "fling" with prior to the end of his relationship with her mother. If that's not acting on an evil fantasy, perhaps the author doesn't know what one is? Oh, and when he and his step-daughter/wife adopted, isn't it lovely they chose girls! Would their mother even recognize an evil fantasy if he were acting on it??
10
We don't know what happened and if anything happened.
But what actually is the issue here is the answer to the question:
"What happened to innocent until proven guilty?"
My response is, #MeToo happened or as I would like to call it, the Neo Jacobeans happened.
And that is a much bigger problem in itself.
If a mob that shouts loud is now the guideline for right or wrong then why bother?
This is what happened in the Cultural Revolution of China in which the collective issued an allegation and that was enough to sentence the accused.
If the accused had he nerve to defend itself, it was seen as proof of guilt and only increased the sentence.
Sorry, but is this really the world the leftists, liberals and feminists wanted to create?
Then I will have to ask everyone in the future "When did you stop beating your wife, children or partner?"
Just to be on the safe side of Facebook's "Like" justice.
13
What also happened os that America elected President an admitted abuser of women. I agree the pendulum might swing too far in the wrong diection during these times of #MeToo, but it least it has been put in motion.
To me one of the unasked questions is what to do with (some) men's overwhelming sex drive. Perhaps we should legalize sex work. Our attitude toward paying for sex ... assuming all sex workers are abused into it, for example ... shows we still seem to think "good girls don't do it."
Well, then, where are good boys supposed to get it?
This short list from Vanity Fair shows how Woody Allen stacked the deck; it is well worth a read: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts
I have worked as a trauma therapist for 20+ years. Inconsistencies in young children's reports are the norm, as they are often scared to tell the truth or the whole truth. They are often confused as to adult questions being asked of them and will attempt to answer what they *think* the question means, as children are often taught to respond to authority figures regardless of understanding. Is it known if the person(s) questioning young Dylan all those years ago had forensic training in questioning child sexual abuse victims?
That Woody Allen didn't get convicted means absolutely nothing in this world of he said/she said. It means the case was not proven, with a deck stacked against the plaintiff. That's about the legal system, not the kid, not the charges. Anyone who blindly believes that not charged = innocent has not spent much time around the legal system.
The statement about Allen having acted as a pedophile exactly once is a stupid statement -- so far as Bret Stephens knows, Allen did it once. I'll wager there are others who sadly know better. But even if Allen "only" did it once, that once doesn't matter? is that really Stephens' contention? how disgusting.
16
These sensational stories appear in the media as impetus for ad hoc activist action. Consonant media norms, the observed standards of rational inquiry are minimal or none. People auto-incite their passionate partisanship and so brook no compromise. To do so would appear to be denying another claim with which the claim that someone is or must be guilty of violating an important social norms is associated. That basic claim is that the underlying social norm--the measure in the instance--is itself right. The question "Is A guilty of this crime?" becomes "Do you not agree that this kind of crime is a big deal?" Whether something we agree is evil is a big deal is an important debate sometimes; it enters into most social justice questions. Consider the Holocaust, where denial can take the form precisely not of denying that it happened as said, but that it matters. The Black Lives Matter movement is a good example of a claim for the importance of an issue: its real claim is not that black people are being killed but that the rest of us should care.
The Social Justice Warrior logic short-circuits certain questions by collapsing them. Here the type of crime is generally recognized, but the SJWs worry that not everyone cares enough.
And so, dear Dylan, We do care about the kind of thing you say happened to you. It's wrong. Did it happen? The media are poor law courts. Could you be not lying but mistaken? Perhaps. But we do care. End sex abuse now!
3
I agree with the broad strokes, but use of the term “social justice warrior” is needlessly inflammatory. Values Voters, abortion opponents and alt-right provocateurs use the same old playbook. Performative outrage is as old a politics itself.
"... exactly once." And so Stephens dismisses a victim's account because, hey, you're only a true pedophile if you've done it more than once. If that were only the case. Allen was caught with sexually graphic photographs of his longtime girlfriend's barely-legal adopted daughter, a teen to whom Allen was a father-figure to since she was around 8 years old. If this isn't a gigantic red flag that he may have a behavioral pattern, then I don't know what is. If you really believe that he had not been grooming Soon Yi since she was a child, and that this magically consensual and sexual relationship happened out of charming and innocent circumstances then you're deceiving yourself. What he did to Soon Yi, along with telling interview quotes and thinly disguised confessions within his films, these are all simply signs at the gate, telling you what lies inside. And if you walk farther in down the path, you'll find a 7 year old girl named Dylan, betrayed not only by a father figure but by those who protected him. If it was a 300 lb. middle-aged man living in a trailer park, and the accuser was your own child, I wonder how forgiving and legalistic your personal reactions would be. If you truly believe she was coached, read her own letter to the NYT in 2014 and its heartbreaking and enraging details: https://kristof.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/02/01/an-open-letter-from-dylan-f...
9
Why do 265 girls need to be assaulted before justice is served to one man? The woman in Rolling Stone who falsely reported her story did so only once such stories became popular. Mia Farrow persisted in telling her story even when it wasn't in vogue. Why is it so hard to believe that she, a grown woman, might actually know what happened in her own life?
6
"It concluded categorically: 'It is our expert opinion that Dylan was not sexually abused by Mr. Allen.'”
Reads more like your categorical conclusion. The hospital issued an "opinion" and they issued it without even interviewing Dylan, so yeah, it's been criticized.
7
Could Mr. Stephens check to see if Mr. Allen signed a letter with other male films directors to support the waiving of Roman Polanski's extradition back to the U.S? Roman, you may remember, is convicted of sexual assault on a 13 year old.
4
Why don't you do some research before you imply.?
Did you know that Mia has supported Mr. Polanski. A fact.
1
Are you kidding me? Look at the evidence in clear daylight. Woody Allen's marriage to Mia Farrow's daughter Soon-Yi is incredibly disturbing behavior. You are asking us to give a man who crosses those kinds of boundaries the benefit of doubt? Unbelievable.
Of his relationship with Soon-Yo, he said, "I’m 35 years older, and somehow, through no fault of mine or hers, the dynamic worked. I was paternal. She responded to someone who was paternal.”
He is a sick and creepy man. I believe Dylan.
20
Even if Woody Allen is sexually fixated on young girls, what is the evidence that he molested Dylan? Dylan and Mia Farrow say he did. On the other hand, in what appears to be a totally objective investigation report in 1993 (Dylan was age 7 years and 8 months) by the Yale-New Haven Hospital's Child Sexual Abuse Clinic it was concluded that Woody was innocent. The entire report must be read to understand why its conclusions appear valid. But the Clinic had more first-hand information than anyone else has. The two Clinic professionals interviewed Dylan and Mia Farrow on nine separate occasions. In the face of this report, an unbiased thinker must give the benefit of the doubt to Woody Allen.
10
Let us not forget that this is not the first person that Mia Farrow accused of sexual assault. She accused Maharishi Mahesh Yogi of such back in 1968. The Beatles were with her and left India. Later they decided her account was fabricated. It is also the only time Mahesh was accused of this from anyone. it just seems odd. Details of this are all available by any search.
11
Maureen Orth's Vanity Fair piece is full of facts about this case that Bret Stephens left out of his opinion. Reading it may well change the way people assess Farrow's credibility; it completely changed mine, and not in a good way for Woody Allen.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts
10
One of the most disturbing aspects of the smearing of Woody Allen is this constant unjustifiable and illogical line of argument that if he ran away with a 17/18 yr old girl who happened to be his stepdaughter and was something she was totally active in, incidentally, that therefore he must have abused a child. Or that because he had naked photos of his now wife when she was 17/18 that this means he must have sexually abused a child. This kind of argument is so fallacious and downright silly it is almost beyond comment. However, it needs to be stated clearly - An older man fancying a 17/18 yr old girl does absolutely NOT under any circumstances lead to the conclusion that therefore you abuse a child. Time and again, though, we see this thrown out as if it had anything to do with it. His relationship with Soon Yi Previn is proof of one thing only - the love they have for each other.
9
Do you have a daughter? Did you take or do you have naked photos of her as a teen? Do you "fancy" her in a sexual way? Do you have fantasies of marrying her or having sex with her? Would that "love" be okay with you? If you answered yes to the first question and any of the others you have a problem like Mr. Allen.
3
"who *happened* to be his stepdaughter"? You really want to say that? Like the teachers who engage in sex with people who *happened* to be their students? there is such thing as fiduciary duty of someone in authority or power over another to set boundaries in order not to manipulate the vulnerability of the other and I would think a stepfather / stepdaughter relationship clearly fits the bill.
2
Woody Allen is, like, his own father-in-law. I don't think so. I believe his accusers.
6
Woody Allen obviously has a predilection for young girls, and that doesn't change in a lifetime. Hear hooves, think horses, not zebras. Why would Dylan put herself through the turmoil of being a victim if it wasn't true? Seven is certainly old enough to recall trauma and not to be fed lies by her mother. That might work at 7, but not at her current age of 32. To say that Woody Allen had a "distasteful" affair with his stepdaughter Soon Yi, is to downplay how serious it is to fall in love with one of your children. It's beyond distasteful and it shows the truth of his character, he has a predilection for young girls. Although she was on the borderline of adult, it still crosses some disgusting boundaries to fall in love with a child that you are supposed to care for. No respectful man would do that. It's hard to imagine how anyone could argue otherwise. People show you who they are, and he has shown us who he is with his past behavior. Just because he is a genius filmmaker doesn't mean he doesn't have a devious sexual side. If in fact this is a "He Said, She Said" situation, one only needs to see his past behavior with Soon-Yi to come to the logical conclusion that he is a sick man who makes good movies.
3
Wpody Allen never molested Dylan Farrow. Not one investigator who looked into the case felt that this was a legitimate claim.
These claims were common at the time in custody battles. If one wants to know what life was like growing up with Mia, this link has a really good perspective:
https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out/
11
I don't go to Woody Allen movies because he had an affaire with his de facto step-daughter 35 years his junior while he was in a long-term relationship with the teen-ager's (college kid's?) mother. That is morally repugnant enough for me.
6
The affair started when Soon-Yi was in college, but don't let a fact disturb your hatred.
1
The one unaddressed point in all of this, including the MeToo movement - is the demographic - Crazy Woman.
Vindictive. Vicious. Cruel. Punishing.
Deeply offensive to all women who are not -
Vindictive, Vicious. Cruel. Punishing.
But all the same, they exist. They walk amongst us.
And they do harm.
3
There are men who abuse only their wives and daughters and go no further, it all remains an inside jab.
5
Wow. "Guilty beyond a reasonable doubt"? I thought that happened in court, with a judge and a jury of the accused's peers, not at the end of a journalist's pen.
5
Thank you, Bret Stephens! It's about time someone came to Woody's defense in a high profile setting. The attempt to lump him in with Harvey Weinstein et al has been a disturbing and disgusting spectacle.
10
Mia Farrow adopted Soon-Yi Previn. That means she was the sister of Woody Allen's children with Mia Farrow. So Allen married HIS OWN CHILDRENS' SISTER. Think of the effect on Allen's children of THEIR FATHER MARRYING THEIR SISTER. Out if all the 4 billion or so women in the world, Allen had to marry this one.
In all the years since, I have wondered why this has never made any difference to the Hollywood elite, the cineastes and the ordinary hip public that goes to see his films and thinks he's OK. Take away everything Btet Stephens says in this column and there's still this marriage. Would someone, perhaps Bret Stephens, please explain to me why this act, with its strong whiff of incest, if not illegal, is not morally repulsive for the damage it has undoubtedly caused the children? And explain to me why he should not be shunned.
15
"Mia Farrow adopted Soon-Yi Previn. That means she was the sister of Woody Allen's children with Mia Farrow"
No it does not mean that.
Whatever it means legally, in terms of domesticity and family she was a sister or half-sister in a family with a mother and putative father figure who was there for many years. Any child in that family would have felt he was her or his father regardless of legal distinctions. And would also have made little distinction between a sister or half-sister who lived in the home with everyone. Are we people or legal machines?
2
"One time" is one time too many. Furthermore, it's one time that we know of. Allen did marry another of Mia Farrow's children, after all. I'm not sure where the witnesses and evidence some people are so keen on having is supposed to come from. Serial assaulters are often good at stealth and hiding their crimes. Women and children who bring attention to sexual predators are subject to humiliation and trauma by the authorities who are supposed to help them, so the incentives for making false accusation are mysterious to me. Now that we have just begun to scratch the surface of this enormous problem, some people are already tired of hearing about it. I guess it is unsettling to think that the default perspective of the powerful white male is being undermined by the truth.
9
I usually don't agree with Stephens but this time I do. I find it outrageous that Nicholas Kristoff wrote yet again about this issue last week, supporting Dylan, whom he claims is a family friend and ignoring any facts which disputed her claim. For instance, Woody Allen took a lie detector test, which he passed, while Mia Farrow, Dylan's mother refused to do so. Also soon after Mia found out about Allen and Soon Yi, she sent him a disturbing valentine, of a previous family picture with a knife in his heart and in Soon Yi, and needles in everyone else, which shows a very disturbed woman. Finally he completely ignores Moses Farrow, who says that he and his siblings were abused and brainwashed by Mia and that the incident never could have happened.
http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/books-magazines/books/woody-allen-a...
Dylan has had her day in court over and over again. I feel sorry for her but the abuse she suffered was no doubt not by Allen but by Mia, who used her daughter as a pawn to get revenge.
19
Bret Stephens leaves out two other victims of Woody Allen. Allens current wife was under age when he started relations and take nude photos of her. And Mirial Hemingway who was under age in Manhattan and had to make out with a 40 year old Allen
12
"That investigation (most of which remains under seal) may or may not be dispositive."
I think you may mean "probative."
4
Woody Allen/Dylan Farrow problem?
I don't know. No comment really. I saw Dylan Farrow briefly on TV and didn't know what to make of it. She was smiling through tears, seemed kind of ambiguous. Kind of like that military pilot recently reporting UFO sighting off California--smiling, telling the story. Seemed strange. I feel iffy when people are "telling me the truth" but they're faces appear odd or contradictory or what have you. I don't think it's the average citizens place though to judge Woody Allen. What do we know?
10
Shouldn't "the weight of available evidence, to say nothing of the presumption of innocence, extend to the court of public opinion?"
They don't, particularly in the punitive and incoherent age of social media, because public opinion is no "court". Apart, perhaps, from the familiar sense of "kangaroo court".
We have been seeing too much of that misleading term lately. It would prudent to stop lending dignity to unrestrained mobocracy and banish the illusion of a "court of public opinion" from our discourse entirely.
6
Bret leaves out the odious role of Mia Farrow who manipulated Dylan into believing fantasy.
Almost as disgusting are the actors who have denounced Allen, but were thrilled to work with him when it suited their careers.
9
Just goes to show that regardless of how despicable the behavior of a man is, nor how long the history, or the propensity of evidence, there will always be men who will close rank and accuse the victim.
Based on my experience, those who close rank are generally guilty of the same manner of behavior they defend in the accused. Intellectualize all you want, contort the truth, excavate the morsels that have been picked to the bone to
present your alternative 'view', but let's not pretend you ever had an open mind about Allen, or what he was accused of.
Allen has always been an unattractive weasel of a man, a whining self-involved, typical predator in victims clothing in plain sight. From the very start, he chose overtly vulnerable women both as his romantic interests and in his films.
Sadly, they fell for his guise as a harmless victim, much to the detriment of themselves. More bro propaganda from a bro and a bro defender at that.
10
JaneQtoYou, Let's not pretend YOU ever had an open mind about Woody Allen.
It is a matter of record that Woody Allen was in the habit of becoming romantically involved with women who worked for him. Some of us dissaprove of such things.
A long term relationship with one of them, Mia Farrow, ended in a bizarre fashion. They kept a home together and adopted a couple of children and had one together. In that home were Farrow's adopted children from a prior marriage. This put Allen in what I would consider a familial relationship with those children, regardless of legal status. Allen proceeded to have sex with her adopted daughter. This is the action of a first rate creep. The other charges, which I believe, are even worse.
It is surprising to me that anyone at all was willing to do business with him or attend any of his movies after the Soon-Yi-Farrow affair. That was creepy. Bret Stephens doesn't find such a thing offensive. That tells me something about Mr. Stephens, another defender of a man who abuses his position to victimize women. I have long called Woody Allen fans enablers of abuse against women and children. You can't smear such a person any more than reporting the facts. The fact that anyone defends Allen speaks for itsel as well.
Nobody has to "smear"
17
We are all getting way ahead of ourselves these days. We are assuming guilt upon accusation. Rob Porter is just the latest. In the past we would show some hesitancy in automatically believing ex-wives.
Now, Bret Stephens says Harvey Weinstein is "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The facts, not the allegations, prove it." He has denied forcing anyone to have sex; so, Bret, where are your facts?
Now, I have no facts. I just read the newspaper, but this isn't right.
3
As another reader pointed out, pedophilia is not like hang-gliding—"I think I'll give it a shot; then if I don't like it I'll try something else." Pedophilia, like many obsessive perversions, doesn't simply end when someone thinks better of it; otherwise there would be no need for AA, methadone, or in many cases, prison. Allen's twenty-five years of being "clean" speak to the uncertainty of the initial charge, but in a sense it's too late anyway: I don't think there are many people who will ever think of As for due process—lacking in the case of Al Franken for instance—not even that was able to save Mr. Allen in the court that counts.
3
Speaking of biases: You see how convenient it is for a Republican to doubt that women who claim to be the victims of assault are telling the truth, right?
6
"It goes without saying that child molestation is a uniquely evil crime that merits the stiffest penalties. But accusing someone of being a molester without abundant evidence is also odious...."
how abundant does the evidence have to be? before you stop believing in the innocence of the accused. Is there a measure?
7
I believe that measure is called "proof beyond a reasonable doubt".
It's technically not required in the "court of public opinion", as the author of the article notes. But perhaps after "A Rape on Campus" and the bogus Duke allegations, we should be a little more skeptical, and a little more hesitant to "listen and believe".
Sadly, Mia Farrow is out for blood. While the MeToo movement is clearing the air and women are finally being listened to concerning sexual harassment, the down side is that accusation alone is enough to ruin someone. Where there is sufficient proof of wrongdoing is one thing but it is easy for someone seeking revenge to make unfounded claims.
4
Woody Allen, is as low as you can go, I tend to believe Dylan.
Let us not forget how old Soon-Yi Preven was when he swept her off her feet,
and Married her !!!
7
Mia Farrow was 21 when Frank Sinatra swept her off her feet and married her. Soon Yi was 21 when she had an affair with Woody Allen and they married.
Same age. Difference? Soon Yi had known Woody pretty much her whole life.
Another difference? Soon Yi and Woody are still married more than 20 years later.
1
There's one fact about the Allen-Farrow controversy that should place a barrier against any further reportage on the subject, especially from those who, like Stephens, by definition know not a scintilla of what did or did not occur up in that attic those many years ago: the fact that Woody Allen, a man approaching 60 years of age, was in therapy counseling at the time for his obsessively intimate behavior towards Dylan Farrow, aged 7. Hello? Is it, within this context, a stretch to believe that Allen crossed a thin line between thought obsession and action? I do not believe so. I believe Dylan. At any rate, the real smear in this article is conducted by Stephens against Farrow. His using the University of Virginia's false rape case as a means to discredit Farrow is beneath contempt, and would be inadmissible as evidence in any courtroom in America.
12
Woody Allen was found to be not guilty in a court of law. When do your feelings end and facts take over?
2
I will answer Dylan Farrow why the #MeToo movement has spared Woody Allen. Hollywood stars just want to be famous. That includes Mia Farrow. That is why she stuck around in that goofy relationship waving at Woody across Central Park when he went home at night. None of the “stars” want to bite the hand that feeds them. That is why 20 years later, after the alleged attack and they are bitter has-beens, their memory is suddenly refreshed and Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey now stand accused. Woody Allen is the last refuge for a film for a “Hollywood star.” Who would want to ruin their chance for a comeback when they have worked so hard?
4
We can't wait to read what you write, most of the time, so don't waste your reputation or your audience's time defending Woody Allen.
10
As a survivor of childhood abuse by a close family member, I believe Dylan. Reading this opinion piece hurt like all the times my abuser minimized the affects and reality of his abuse. Denying that you have abused someone is exactly what abusers do. Having people like the writer of this article come to the abuser's defense even though he cannot know that Allen is innocent enables abusers like my abuser and Woody to not face the consequences of their actions. Woody having sex with his teenage step-daughter was not okay either, and it certainly should not be used as an excuse to blame the victim and the victim's mother. Woody Allen has gotten off scot free for 20 years for being a creep in plain view. No poor victim Woody here. He's a big rich boy who is not in jail. He does not need the NY Times to come to his defense.
12
I wish you would have been more specific about what in the column you dispute, that is, what does the columnist say that you find inaccurate? I'm disputing your rage or your pain, but I'm trying to understand what it is in the column, specifically, you dispute. I recall the Yale-New Haven hospital report and it certainly swayed me. at the time. Recall, Mia Farrow brought out these charges only after the affair emerged between the Soon-Yi Previn and Allen.
1
But you cannot know that Allen is guilty. Just because you tend to BELIEVE her story makes the fact this has been litigated and Allen proven not guilty. This is not your case to try - no facts have been present to you beyond allegations and what has been tried in a court of law. To all those having the same response as the above, please “feel” away the court’s findings before you continue to blather about how it looks to you, or by sharing your misstated facts about Woody Allen and Mia Farrow’s cohabitational relationship, or his role in the lives of her adopted children.
1
False memories are a real thing. Children aren't the only ones that fabricate and cling to them. You don't have to call Allen a liar to not believe him.
Allen fancies that Soon Yi "responded to someone paternal ... it was just a good luck thing"--no matter the immorality and tremendous harm it caused the Farrow family. Weinstein "made an awkward pass" at Uma Thurman after "misreading her signals". Charlie Rose always felt he was "pursuing shared feelings" with his interns, and either way, they were "not wrongdoings".
People will believe what they want. But please stop with the one rape is OK defense. It's not murder unless you've killed at least three or four. O.J. only killed two people after all, so yeah, innocent.
11
What does Woody Allen have to do with the inaccurate Rolling Stone University of Virginia story? Exactly nothing.
He has been accused repeatedly of child molestation not by some anonymous stranger, but by his own adoptive child.
The so-called "distasteful affair" was with the teenage adopted daughter of his ex-wife! Yeah, that's distasteful.
And if you're still not sure Allen was obsessed with older men having affairs with teenagers, watch a couple of his movies.
This man, who is perfectly articulate and has the considerable wherewithal of wealth and power, does not need to be defended by NYT columnists.
23
You leave out that Allen was found not guilty in a court of law. Also that one NYT columnist, a dear dear friend of Mia Farrow’s was allowed an op-ed recently recounting Dylan Farrow’s resurgent tale. You know, she’s been on her media tour and all lately. Let’s all give this disproven allegation credence again, shan’t we?
1
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once."
No, he married his stepdaughter. Before marrying her, he apparently had sex with her and had her pose naked for him in photos, all while he was in an intimate relationship with her mother. Just because he married Soon Yi does not erase the depravity of his initial actions.
14
Agreed; it was the closest thing to pedophilia he could get away with and not lose his career.
2
Fascinating discussion: Woody Allen MAY have engaged in a singular act of sexual depravity and for all practical purposes loses his economic, creative, and lifelong recognition in the Arts; and on the other hand we have a Republican President who celebrates his serial sexual depravities, rises to the highest job in the land, retains it, and is lauded by half of the American public. Go figure...
9
The only "fact" I feel I know about Allen is that he was infatuated with Dylan's beauty when she was a very young child. This was attested to by a family friend observing Allen's hovering behavior and effusive praise toward Dylan. This is consistent with his sexual tropes in his movies, older men, comely young women, not to mention preoccupation with sexual prowess.
None of this means Allen actually was sexually abusive toward Dylan, but it does mean he, like many others, is besotted with female beauty. This is not a crime, but it is consequential in how we experience the world and our relationships.
Why would Mia Farrow, who claims her daughter was sexually abused, befriend and defend Roman Polanski, an admitted child rapist?
Mia Farrow has more than usual reason to hate Woody Allen. Her adopted daughter Soon-Yi did pretty much the same thing with him that Mia Farrow did at about the same age to Dory Previn, the wife of Andre Previn. What went around came around.
My final point is that Woody Allen is not accused of sexual assault. He is accused of child sexual abuse which is in an entirely different category. If true he is ten times worse than Weinstein. Or rather, there just is no comparison.
To countenance that sort of accusation without solid evidence is irresponsible (yes, Nicholas Kristof, I'm looking at you).
We don't know that Woody Allen is guilty. We don't know that he is innocent. We don't know anything and in a perfect world people who don't know would shut up, but this is far from a perfect world.
11
It's about time the NYT published this or something like it. Dylan (and Mia) and Woody have had their day in court; and the court has exonerated Woody. I've little doubt that Dylan believes what I infer Mia taught him to think.
11
Please read this article, then watch the short video. Something very sinister about this behavior. https://www.thecut.com/2018/01/woody-allen-american-film-institute-diane...
2
The writer of the article on Allen in this video has no sense of humor. Regardless of what you think about Allen's behaviors, he was absolutely ironic in his presentation, with no malice aforethought. The article is scary, not Allen in this instance.
1
Please apologize for this. Just admit that you glossed over the story or were unaware of the details. It’s so upsetting.
6
Apologize for telling the truth?
2
I believe Dylan Farrow.
6
The law doesn’t care what you think. Woody Allen has been found not guilty in a court of law.
You can believe she believes it and she can be wrong. I believe the children who say they were abused by Satanic Sex Cults in the 80's as far as they believe it. It didn't happen.
I still wonder how the people who accept Mia and Dylan Farrow’s side of things justifies that side of the family’s continued relationship with confirmed child molester Roman Polanski. He’s so good a friend of Mia’s that she’s gone to court to defend him— and this long after the allegations against Woody Allen. You’d think that if the abuse allegations against Allen were true then Mia wouldn’t be hanging around with one of the world’s most famous child molesters and Dylan would also be writing columns strongly condemning her mother’s facilitation of this man. But Mia speaks of Polanski with great praise, and Dylan utters not a peep. Curious, no?
12
No holds barred "vigilantes;" perhaps with some arbitrary righteousness. The Henry Fonda film "Oxbow Incident," displays it with consequences.
3
Yes, good film, too. But the Leo Frank case comes to mind as well.
2
Why are we so interested in the doings of these somewhat creepy people? They lived in separate apartments in New York City, where ordinary people have trouble affording ONE apartment. They never married but adopted children together. Ms. Farrow makes strange allegations about the paternity of her son. They both have checkered romantic histories. He, a middle-aged man, ended up marrying a woman who was barely out of childhood, and who was his sort-of stepdaughter (if normal categories can be applied to this disordered situation). The whole situation is degenerate.
If the allegations against Allen could be proven he’d be in jail. I have no idea whether he molested yet another sort-of stepdaughter, or whether Mia coached the child to say that. Literally anything is possible when you’re dealing with these people.
One more artist with a confused personal life. If you like his movies - I don’t, particularly - go ahead and see them again. Perhaps we should leave his rather shady personal life out of it.
7
The importance is that they are trying to take away the classes dedicated to him, they're trying to get his deals cancelled for more films. This entire thing is trying to destroy a man's legacy and name. My mother has worked for 33 years as an OT, celebrated, awarded, published... she's one year from retirement, and she works with a child whose parent doesn't like her diagnosis, and has gone out of her way to create a smear campaign. Calling her incompetent, horrid, and attempting to sue the school to have her kids brought to a private school. For my mother it's heartbreaking to be going 30+ years in a career without a blemish, and to have this be her so long, having to spend her time in and out of meetings dealing with a woman who calls her incompetent and tells other parents this.
A person only has their good name and their work and their trying to destroy both of those things. Important to defend it.
1
Given that women have forever been subjected to all manner of abuse with no advocacy or legalized protection (think Salem Witch Trials at the least) I can't say I shed many tears with men lamenting the prospect of a witch hunt. Just think of it as your time and man-up.
2
That makes no sense whatsoever
2
Cruella, indeed.
does Nicholas Kristoff read your column? Perhaps it's time he did. For a smart guy (he went to the same college as Jared Kushner, after all) he is certainly being played as a fool by the social forces he has waded so lamely into.
4
It can take many years (if ever) for abuse victims to speak out, and the encouragement granted them by the Weinstein blowup is relatively recent.
So maybe Allen's victims simply haven't come forward yet...
And maybe there simply aren't any
1
Woody Allen's long ago affair with then Yale student Soon-Yi Previn--now his wife of 25 years-- looked like a form of incest to media gossipists and the rumors spread. The claim by Dylan Farrow that he molested her at age 7 is another story unsupported by factual evidence. Allen may be guilty of bad judgement in involving himself with former companion Mia Farrow and her children, but he has never been charged with pedophilia and this fingerpointing must end.
12
I'm sure Mr. Allen has read this column and I hope he reads the comments section to see the depth of support he has.
4
Mr Stephens legalistic argument aside, societies have always shunned those who's behavior didn't conform. Allen had an affair with a girl for whom he was a father figure, which skirts the very edge of taboo. Dylan's accusation is made more credible by those actions. He primed us to believe him capable of the worst, so why is anyone shocked that we do & want nothing to do with him?
4
Really? Woody, Roman Polanski, the list goes on. I am so done with Hollywood apologists.
2
Roman Polanski went to trial, confessed to his crime, and now 6 other women have come forward to say he did the same thing to them in the same time period.
Woody Allen has denied the allegations, has had the Yale New Haven Study, the New York Department of Social Services, his estranged son, and a Nanny (who testified against him) recant her testimony and say she believed his innocence.
But yea their the same thing.
“A distasteful affair”? With an adopted girl you had a stepfather relationship with? I’d say there is a bias here against empathy. My father’s best friend was in his late 30s. I was 16. A dear friend was swooped up by a 30-something family friend who had watched her grow up when she was 19. They lived together 7 years. That made it ok? Educate yourself, ethical journalist, about family bonds, power dynamics, and plain ol’ shame and fear. Log in the eye ...
4
I remember reading a public transcript years ago that found Farrow's tale believable & revealed that Allen was not allowed to be alone with Dylan. When Dylan was molested, Allen had secreted her away from her minders. As far as your statement that if he WAS a pedophile, he appears only to have acted once - it simply beggars belief. Because, if so, that one victim was Dylan Farrow. Guess she's not as important as Allen?
2
Yes, this was during the custody case. Judge Wilks made that ruling. After Judge Wilks made that ruling, (not ruling on Allen's actual guilt or innocence) the New York Department of Social Services continued their investigation with because of New York SVU, and found, No Abuse took place. The Nanny (one of the people to testify to that behavior) came forward, admitted to lying, said He wasn't alone for longer than five minutes, and she remembers hearing Mia ask leading questions to Dylan, "Didn't you say that Daddy touched you somewhere below the belt," and did this for hours.
You also 19 years after that, have the testimony of his son Moses who corroborates the testimony of the Nanny that came forward.
2
He had an affair with a 17 year old, who seems to have been the inspiration for Manhattan. He was accused of seriously creepy behavior around Hemingway, by herself, including taking her on an unchaperoned trip to Paris as a middle school student. He married his partner's adopted daughter, legal or not, it's odd. Matt Lauer may have not broken laws, but he is a toad. Allen doesn't look so good either. Still, I like his old movies.
5
Since Woody and Mia started dating after Manhattan and Soon Yi was 8 at that time, and they started the relationship when she was between 19 and 21.
1
Your thoughts on the law and presumption of innocence are obvious and beyond debate, despite people who insist on doing so.
I will take you to task, however, on how you attempt to breeze past Allen's "distasteful" affair with Soon-Yi Previn.
There exist dozens of spectacular adjectives to describe what he did to Mia Farrow by beginning this affair with her daughter, but "distasteful" would not come close to making it onto my list.
A man capable of doing something so lacking in respect and decency to his partner is capable of anything. It is a breach of trust that should be beyond comprehension and contemplation to a normally thinking and feeling human being
And the fact that he later married Miss Previn does not address that breach in any way or point to his possible innocence.
Mr. Allen is a terrible example to deliver what should be an important message.
2
Dylan's story changed over time, yet we are asked to "believe" her. That's a contradiction. She would easily be discredited in the eyes of a jury, which is probably why it was never brought to trial.
3
I have always loved Woody Allen -- the way his mind works, his crazy Jewish humor, and his just plain humor. When I feel depressed I pick up his writings and read a few pages and am soon smiling. I'm sorry for Dylan, whether she was prepped by her mom or not. Men tried to sexually abuse me too when I was her age, but I handled it in ways that stopped it immediately -- went directly to their wives. I guess I'm saying that we're all responsible for ourselves. And I'll never stop watching Woody Allen movies for any reason.
5
It's really easy to threaten to kill a seven year old or their family members if they tell what happened to them. It's easy to do the same to an adult. Just because your abusers were easy to get away from doesn't mean everybody's were, and I'm frankly a little disturbed that someone who experienced something like that would want to leave that up to a kid.
1
Weren't you a lucky girl that adults believed you?
2
Don't be disturbed. Different kids differently handle lessons learned. Makes them stronger.
Although I absolutely abhor and condemn even the most minor child abuse and sexual harassment, I also strongly believe in the most basic tenet of American jurisprudence: an individual is innocent until proven guilty. In fact, our legal system is premised on the idea that it is better for a guilty individual to go free than for a innocent individual to be convicted.
In recent situations involving Mr. Weinstein and Mr. Spacey, the overwhelming evidence is that they committed the crimes of which they are accused; however, in the case of Mr. Allen the evidence is not persuasive. Although the crime of which he is accused is horrendous, our system demands that he be presumed innocent at this time.
3
There are indeed many inconsistencies in Ms. Farrow’s remembrances.
There are also many inconsistencies in Mr. Stephens’ piece. At heart, he is saying: “Beware of witch hunts.”
But he lacks the courage of this conviction and tries to skate around that theme as deftly as possible by trying to discredit Ms. Farrow gently, but thoroughly.
I don’t think Mr. Allen is currently under any legal danger. I could be wrong. What happened between him and Ms. Farrow will never be perfectly known to us.
But SOMETHING and SOMEONE damaged that family terribly, and I don’t think it was a seven-year-old.
2
"You don’t have to doubt Farrow’s honesty to doubt her version of events."
Amen.
You've put into words many of the thoughts I've had about this story since the original accusation became public. And thank you for that.
I wonder if Mr. Kristoff ever EVER has had a moment of doubt as to his belief in Dylan's account. Yes, she's your friend and you want to give her comfort Mr. Kristoff. And it would be an earth shattering moment for you to step forward and say that you might just be mistaken. But, Mr. K., you might just be mistaken. .
3
Perhaps if we could find another, less loaded term than "bias" most people might readily acknowledge that we approach issues like this from a particular set of experiences and beliefs. Beliefs arise from a process of deductive reasoning, which can operate with or without supporting facts—faith in the existence of God is the best example. It's true that many of us let our beliefs overrule factual evidence, but it is even more common for facts to be missing altogether, or hard to uncover, so beliefs (or biases), which reside in all of us, guide our judgments, by default. That's why we have trial courts—not just to render judgments, but, first to ascertain facts. Whether Woody Allen abused Dylan Farrow is a matter of fact, and it is a fact that is unknown and by now probably unknowable (perhaps even to Allen and Farrow themselves). Dylan Farrow was, for statutory and evidentiary reasons, unable to persuade the courts to charge Wood Allen with a crime and bring the issue to trial. Without the fact-finding process of a trial court, we fall back on our beliefs. Beliefs are important and useful, but they are too thin a reed on which to hang Woody Allen. Without facts, one cannot with justification either believe or disbelieve Dylan Farrow; given the uncertainty, it seems manifestly unjust to presume Allen's guilt.
2
There are many levels of allegations -- bald, baseless, rumored, credible, substantial, doubtless, etc. -- and many levels of proof -- probable, clear and convincing, beyond a reasonable doubt, etc. What matters is what arena is being used to pass judgment. Is it the court of law or the court of public opinion or some other arena? If I am walking down a dark street in a tough neighborhood and a gang of boys is walking toward me, what level of proof do I need to decide I should avoid them?
Woody Allen is indubitably innocent in a court of law. It is a different question to ask what standard of proof we should use to decide to avoid his movies.
This is what is difficult to face: we'll never know what happened. Thus, there will be bickering among people who have preferences, never based on facts, which they would like to believe. It can go on without resolution into eternity. We all latch onto some fragment which we consider important.
The investigations which Woody Allen points to as exonerating him were remarkably unprofessional and quite possibly influenced by Allen's celebrity. The judge in the custody case pointed this out and it factored into his decision. This makes a difference to me, because of my personal history, but it is hardly conclusive evidence.
2
"We still live in a country that paints a bright line between accusation and fact. "
I disagree. Trump's accusations of President Obama, HRC, Comey, Mueller,etc., have blurred that line to the point we can barely see it. It appears the administration can say anything about anybody, true or not, with little or no proof, and then just moves on to the next victim. Look at John Kelly's attack on the Florida congresswoman which was proven to be false, a complete fabrication. He never apologized, at least publicly, and never admitted his lie.
What was that about a "bright line"?
1
If we lose 'due process ' we are in deep trouble, and we are not immune from that occuring.
1
While the author makes some clear points here, this is complex, and based on what else I've read - see the WaPo article about Allen's papers and writings archive (most about his desire to have affairs with young/teenage women) - I'm inclined to think ill of him. And the writer even acknowledges that Soon-Yi was barely an adult when he married her.
And let's assume Farrow is telling the truth here, and we choose not to believe her. What effect does that have?
2
I don’t need Farrow’s story to despise Woody Allen. All I need to know is that the man had, in his late fifties, an affair with a teenager—an adopted child with very real vulnerabilities— who was emotionally if not legally, his step-daughter. That reads incest and worse than incest. And no, I’m no longer interested in his artistic output. There are so many extraordinary artists in this world. I can survive without patronizing this one.
Come to think of it, if I met any man who, in his late fifties, was dating any teenaged person, I would think of him as a person of profound character flaws and view him with deep contempt.
3
Woody Allen may have been smeared but it looks to me that the real victim in all this is Dylan. The author does leave out that the Judge did feel there was enough evidence to go to trial but was worried about the well being of Dylan in doing so. Dylan appears to be in middle of her parents battle and what happened during their marriage. there are no winners there.
The #MeToo movements of "cherry picking" of whom they are outraged about is shameful. Congress has still not been held accountable for their settling of Harassment cases behind closed doors. The evidence there is clear in all of those cases and yet silence. You might as well leave those who've been exposed alone if you are going to look the other way when it comes to the law makers in this country.
3
Nothing excuses taking advantage of another human being. Especially the young and helpless. Full stop.
This morning after reading about another man ruined by the accusation of a former wife. That's right I said former spouse. I wondered out loud to my wife "where is due process".
Thank you for asking the question. Every American is entitled to innocent until proven guilty". In this era of social media, virtue signaling and the 24-hour cycle is that impossible?
1
curious that hollywood has learned nothing from HUAC, whose smear tactics, abetted by its local house organ, the hollywood reporter, ruined the countless lives, (and, btw, whose corrupt leadership ended up in some of the same jails as those they condemned).
with pressure now being put on the white house and political environs for both possible (the call for general kelly's ouster prior to investigation) and actual (yet another pass for h(r)c) and her complicity with a staffers abuses) silences, it may be that the light is, at last, being turned on those whose tolerance has abetted abusers, the most egregious of whom have smeared others to deodorize their own gains from keeping mum, (earning the same disgrace that came to the HUAC masters).
the suicide of jill messick, of whom no one but rose mcgowan, has spoken ill, has, with explosive force, compelled attention to the collateral consequences of unsubstantiated allegations.
ms mcgowan who admits her own complicity in her first incident with weinstein, who took settlement money and who continued to work for him, may fancy herself the vehicle for opening the can of creeps to the wider public but should rather provide motive and cue for deeper reflection.
and now, with the outing of women of power who've also groped the help, and the exoneration, as inquiries proceed, of some who were smeared, maybe we can gain some balance, a quality far more useful than hysteria as an element of cultural reform.
1
Yes, the principle of innocent until proven guilty is an important one. Each individual is entitled to have their suspicions one way or the other about Woody Allen and Dylan Farrow, but these can be nothing more than hunches. So far, there is not sufficient evidence to pillory this man. I do not say that Dylan Farrow is wrong or a liar. It is entirely possible that she is telling the truth. But it is equally possible that this awful assault never occurred. As for all of the actors who have not merely abandoned Woody Allen, but loudly professed regret that they ever worked with him, all I can say is that Hollywood exists to make shows, and often makes a show of its virtue. It may sound cynical, but I believe that the actors so loudly denouncing Woody Allen are doing so to burnish their own reputations and capitalize on this #MeToo moment. I like movies, and I recognize that Hollywood does wield enormous cultural influence. Personally, though, I do not care about actors' political views and I certainly do not look to them as moral exemplars.
1
Complicated and who knows? But I don’t stop looking at paintings by artists I know were abusers of various sorts. I listen to Wagner. I look at Balthus. People are sometimes quirky, sometimes loathesome, sometimes wonderful. Ars longa. The rest is vita, and judgement is difficult - which doesn’t stop people from passing it.
Child molestation is one of the most difficult crimes to prove. Typically there are no witnesses and little if any forensic evidence. Investigators are usually left with the memory of a child who has been psychologically damaged by the betrayal of an adult that they trusted and often loved and the adult who denies that anything took place.
But the weak point of this story is the mere passing reference to Allen's custody battle with Ms. Farrow. The judge in that case after hearing extensive testimony not only awarded custody to Farrow, but limited Allen's visitation rights.
This is a highly unusual move. Typically the non-custodial parent gets liberal visitation. But in this case Allen was only allowed visitation under third party supervision. This means that the judge concluded from the evidence that there was a potential risk to the child if they were left unsupervised in Allen's custody.
This of course is not "proof" of criminal behavior. But using the preponderance of the evidence standard the judge concluded that caution to protect the child form potential harm was warranted.
As I recall, Allen appealed and the Appellate Division upheld the trial courts ruling. After following the case I decided that I didn't need to put my ticket price in Woody Allen's pocket. Others may reach different conclusions for a variety of reasons.
In making that choice I haven't smeared Allen or smudged the line of truth. I just think I'm closer to the truth than Stephens is.
4
Americans are so hung up on age differences it clouds their judgment. This is a cultural issue which other cultures don't find problematic. In the Dominican Republican nobody bats an eye when a 60-year-old man shows up in public with a 20-year-old woman. In Charles Dickens' "Hard Times" the author states that the average marriage in England in the second half of the 19th century was between a 50-year-old man and a 20-year-old woman. When I was 48 I married a 29-year-old woman. The only reason people didn't make a big deal about the age difference was because she's Black, and the racial difference trumped the age span. What if she was 19 and I was 38, the same 19-year age difference, would that have been worse in our society? Would 58 and 39 be more acceptable? The age of consent in Massachusetts is 16. As another commenter noted, an 18-year-old can be sent off to war, but we're supposed to get upset when someone of the same age decides to marry an older man? America is a sexually repressed country, and that accounts for many of its social problems.
1
Bravo to the NYTs for allowing someone to say this. Innocent until proven guilty has been entirely lost in the "public opinion mill" of electronic media, as well as legitimate news sources. Some of the men caught up in this frenzy will not regain their positions. Garrison Keillor comes to mind. The fact is that there are people who will use this public bias to level false accusations for revenge. It appears to me that Mia Farrow has engaged in this strategy ever since she was spurned by Woody Allen. The problem is also that the public has lost the ability to consider context with any accusation, whether in the case of a public persona saying anything non-PC or in cases such as this where spurious accusations are not considered in the context from which they arise.
1
Finally! In this climate of Witch Hunting and accusations without Due Process I thank Bret Stephens for putting up a realistic road block to the hysteria surrounding Woody Allen (happily married for more than 20 years and with adopted children).
Actors are rushing to judgement, "regretting" having worked with Allen when until recently the rush was to do just the opposite even though Allen was never found guilty after a thorough investigation. Nor, during all the movies he ever made was there ever a complaint about him from any actor.
While monsters like Harvey Weinstein and Larry Nassar deserve the condemnations they received, too many men are losing careers and livelihood through accusations and the immediate assumptions of guilt.
It is time for everyone to take a step back and a deep breath. And it is time to put the Woody Allen story to rest.
3
"But it’s precisely because Dylan’s account plays to our existing biases that we need to treat it with added skepticism. Most parents know that young children are imaginative and suggestible and innocently prone to making things up. The misuse of children’s memories by ambitious prosecutors against day-care center operators in the 1980s led to some of the worst miscarriages of justice in recent U.S. history. You don’t have to doubt Farrow’s honesty to doubt her version of events."
Indeed there is quite a lot of literature on this subject. Elizabeth Loftus is a psychologist who has done important work on the subject of false memory, including in cases of allegations of child sexual abuse (often these will occur in child custody cases).
People seem to opine on the Allen case without stopping to ask whether the allegations fit with typical psychological or criminological behaviours of child sex abusers. Is it common, for instance, for one who has been accused of sexually abusing their child to then begin a custody proceeding for said child and siblings against their accuser (the mother, in this case)?
1
Bret Stephens is absolutely right. The so-called "#MeToo" movement is a chilling example of what can happen when the mob mentality spawned by social media receives the unqualified support of the mainstream press with absolutely no regard for the principle of innocent until proven guilty. Since when has it ever been ok to convict and punish people for criminal acts solely because they have been accused of those crimes?!
2
Woody Allen needs to step forward and admit it. If he doesn't, he will go to the grave with a truly filthy conscience. There's something profoundly creepy about that man and his movies, and there always has been. It's stunning that so many man can't see it, as evidenced by the tidal wave of defenders on this page. Or perhaps they do see it, and see it in themselves as well, and therefore they do protest too loudly. As long as men are protecting each other's perverted behavior, we are in trouble as a society. The only solution is for every girl and woman to get a stun gun so that next time some creep tries to rub against her, she can slam him. Society as a whole has never and is never going to protect young girls--that's what the comments on this page show.
1
Many, if not most, child sexual abuse cases are not prosecuted. Children make poor witnesses, have difficulty processing, organizing and expressing content related to being victimized by a family member. I am reluctant to disbelieve the report of an adult who as a child disclosed the abuse, was not believed, and continues to assert her truth. The comments before repeat an untrue narrative about childcare workers in the 1980's being unfairly prosecuted. The Witchhunt Narrative by Ross Cheit clearly addresses this false perspective that continues to minimize children and protect abusers.
2
Thank you for this very reasonable article. I have felt the same way for a long time. People need to look at the evidence and stop acting on prejudice.
2
Losing faith in the integrity of our institutions follows the lead set by Trump. It’s not that he’s a reliable leader but that he leads from the highest pinnacle of leadership in the United States. Leadership is not innate to the Office of the President. but it has been a tradition to let the Presidency set the bar.
It’s not a bar set totally by law but more by our willingness to accept it, in much the way a green light is accepted as “go.” The light has no real power; its power comes from every-body’s acceptance of its symbolic meaning.
What Trump has brought to the table is the insistence that tradition is not a commanding power and that nothing happens if you challenge tradition and there are no punishing laws for breaking or defying traditions.
We believed that it was tradition to respect one another—especially the weak—a category women and children were fitted into (by tradition). Men are late to discover what women and children have always known—that all men do not respect or play by traditional rules.
It’s going to take some time to fix something that’s been broken (but mostly out of sight) for a long time. It’s going to take at least three years before we can reinstall integrity at the top again, in the meantime, a lot of men are going to be unevenly penalized for a loss of decency at the top and that includes people like Woody.
Mr. Stevens, you say that "We still live in a country that paints a bright line between accusation and fact." Please let us know what country you live in. I would like to move there.
5
“But accusing someone of being a molester without abundant evidence is also odious, particularly in an era in which social-media whispers can become the ruin of careers and even of lives.” For the many victims of abuse who have struggled to find the strength to point out their abusers to an audience intent on being deaf to the cries for justice, this is another rock for the pedophile to hide under and another wall for them to scale. The abundant broken bottles and broken marriages in broken lives, caused by these predators, that Mr. Stephens, is odious.
2
Years ago the daughter of a friend accused her step-father of abuse. There had been warning signs, but the mother did not believe her daughter. I was told a great many details by a mutual friend who also did not believe the accusations, but I absolutely believed the daughter. So did the courts, who did not charge the step-father, but gave the mother the option to allow her former husband, the child's father, to regain full custody.
Most sexual molesters (over 90%) violate children within their families, and most molest only their own children, whom they regard as theirs.
Are we being fair to Allen? Perhaps not. Allen lost me long ago with Manhattan. He should have been smeared for that, but no one seemed to mind overmuch. The minor actor who played opposite him did mind and was vocal then and since about her sense of violation. There are rape jokes and so forth in other films. Funny? Not to me.
Sometimes the pendulum swings too far back because it must swing, in order to find rest in the middle. Perhaps Allen is victim here. Viewing only his films, without his daughters accusation, he is at the very least sometimes a little creepy.
3
Thank you, Bret Stephens and The New York Times, for finally writing a balanced and fair look at the treatment of Woody Allen.
1
A judge who examined all the evidence closely concluded that there had been misconduct by Woody Allen and that protecting Dylan from him was necessary. So I don't quite understand why it is said that there is no evidence. The link below analyzes the judge's ruling. The judge also concluded that Mia did not coach Dylan.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/inside-the-shocking-custody-case-court-doc...
3
Many, many commenters say the accusations came in the middle of a custody battle, but this is just not true. Woody Allen was planning to sign over custody rights when the accusations came out. He only sued for custody afterwards. There was no custody battle at the time of the accusation, but Woody Allen himself has said Mia Farrow was lying because of this (at the time) nonexistant battle.
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/culturebox/2014/02/woody_allen_and_dy...
Part of what the Me Too movement has emphasized is the many pressures to stay silent that survivors suffer under. I don’t know what happened, but spreading false information, or saying there must be no other victims because no one else said anything, seems more misleading than anything I’ve seen written against Woody Allen.
2
I don’t know if abuse victims are the most impartial third party judges in another’s abuse case.
I'm not sure about these allegations but I do blame him for Zelig.
2
She wasn't just barely-adult; she was his stepdaughter. That's a little creepy. For a public figure to choose such a relationship was idiotic, and I'm not surprised it has come back to bite him.
Still, I remember the McMartin case. I have twice taken legally-required courses on recognizing signs of child abuse (for two different degree programs). One was at the height of the McMartin hysteria, and I was taught in deadly earnest about devil worship and secret tunnels under the preschool. The other was after the debunking, and that's when I learned that California (at least) law now requires that all law enforcement interviews with children be videotaped, to prevent police or prosecutors impressing a child with the adult's own fantasies.
God, I hate it when I agree with Mr. Stephens about something.
3
I lived in southern california during that horrific McMartin School trial that also led to incredibly expensive insurance costs for Pre Schools that parents now pay for. It was a joke how ludicrous claims by poorly coached children were taken with the credibility of an adult. Even as they were clearly so outrageous as to be out of the fertile mind of a coached child. It was like no one had ever heard a child make up stuff much less after proper coaching. So the poor Buckley family suffered, preschool families STILL suffer because of this gross miscarriage of justice.
Same too for Woody Allen.... here a woman scorned using a child as a tool for vengeance. Proof absent.... guilt assumption by those who now refuse to work with him. Witchhunts yield a lot of victims. Just like actual crimes.
3
We've been through this before, when there was a rash of lurid, despicable and rather unbelievable child sexual abuse cases in pre-schools that were zealously pursued by ambitious district attorneys (who never apologized for their misaimed zeal).
In the 1980's lives, even families and businesses were destroyed in the hysteria as children were coaxed to invent delusional stories of adult conspiracies of horrible abuse. The McMartin case was the biggest and worst. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/10/us/the-trial-that-unleashed-hysteria-...
I find it so objectionable that Allen married the very young adopted daughter of his lover, that I can't watch the man in film without some visceral disgust, but that is a moral judgement, not a legal one.
Allen is a public figure, and with that comes public judgement, but he should be judged by what we know. Child abusers are rarely single offense criminals.
1
Yes. This disgraceful vilification of Woody A. has always infuriated me as it is without legal and measured thoughtful substance as you point out so well. This article is long overdue. I am troubled by all the group think and mass hysteria involved with the bandwagon style of convicting people. The cause is important and justified and women have too long been victims but over simplification and lack of careful and fair words and examination will demean and derail it.
6
You should read the article in Vanity Fair. There was a lot going on before the incident that Dylan Farrow remembers. But maybe you want to discount it?
https://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/1992/11/farrow199211
3
In the fight for justice for women and children, there will be, like in all scandals, those guilty, those innocent, and those caught in between. In the case of Mr. Allen, unless there is enough evidence to fit his case into guilt or innocence, we will likely never know. So the verdict will be a hung jury. But he is paying a price. Maybe not enough of one to satisfy the guilty camp, but a price, nonetheless.
2
What a bizarre linking of the irresponsible reporting by Rolling Stone to the case of Dylan Farrow's telling of her experience. Only someone who has always been believed could write this essay. When you are a woman, or a person of color, or a child, you know how often your experience and your words are dismissed as exaggeration, or distortion, or irrelevant foolishness. It's not so easy for us to trust "officials" that investigate allegations when they conclude that the accuser is lying. Particularly common when the accuser was a child in past decades. Just because there have been no other pubic accusations doesn't mean that it never happened to Dylan. I think you are probably correct that it's harder to trust the words of one woman than that of many. But that does not mean that she is untrustworthy. It may just be that we've been trained not to believe women. Why, oh why do we still have white men telling us why we should not be believed?! Have you heard nothing during the outcry of the past months Mr. Stephens? Try listening more closely, please.
12
Thank you. It does appear that men have co-opted the conversation about abuse. I went back and read some of the coverage on this story that was done in the '90s, where Mia Farrow is described as a person who looks like she belongs in an asylum, with "wild" hair and emotional outbursts. The press basically blamed her for finding the pictures of Soon Yi. Of course, Woody Allen stated that it was Soon Yi who wanted the pictures taken and he just told her to relax and be sexy. So, basically he's declaring that he had nothing to do with those pictures (except, in trying to please Soon Yi, he took them). A lot of the coverage blamed Mia Farrow for her reaction and the way she inhibited "a great artist." Boy, am I sick of the great man theory of history and all of the ways that men oh so subtly always blame the woman for getting in the way, ruining their careers, cramping their style. I believe Dylan Farrow and I think she's remembering the abuse that she's able to remember. Read the Vanity Fair article. It will give you a far different perspective than the one Mr. Stephens is presenting.
3
The Connecticut investigation is sealed. A judge used it to deny Allen custody of Dylan and her siblings. Every day in this country prosecutors decline to prosecute a suspect because their evidence does not meet "beyond a reasonable doubt" threshold or they don't think witnesses will appear to be credible.
It would be nice if our justice system were perfect. It's not. Sometimes the innocent are convicted and sometimes the guilty go free.
4
In support of Mr. Stephens, treatment of pedophilia is a vexing problems--nothing is known to work that well in the vast majority of cases: https://www.health.harvard.edu/newsletter_article/pessimism-about-pedoph... .
There are a lot of questions about Mr. Allen's guilt--which over so many years has never been established. But too many questions and doubts are embedded in the public's mind. Maybe the "truth" is out, but just one view among several options that cannot be sorted.
This is a long awaited op-ed piece.
I am deeply troubled by the current effort in the media to rehash the allegations that Woody Allen sexually abused his daughter, Dylan Farrow.
It remains noteworthy that the only independent review of the allegations (Yale Sexual Abuse Clinic) concluded that the accusations lacked merit.
Still, the prosecutor insisted that Allen was almost certainly guilty and stated that he would have pressed charges were it not for concern for the mental health of the child.
The attorney's behavior was certainly worthy of judicial reprimand and/or censure. Yet, the judge remained silent.
Now some movie stars who have worked with Allen have concluded that
the allegations must be credible. In turn, they express regret for appearing in an Allen film.
All this without a shred of new evidence. Only the relentless and unremitting
accusations from Mia and Dylan Farrow--over the course of twenty-five years.
Allen is entitled to the right of any individual accused of criminal activity:
the presumption of innocence. Controversial allegations do not constitute reasonable evidence of guilt.
Yet these allegations can serve to smear the reputation of the accused. Allen really cannot publicly defend himself: the media attention only serves to further tarnish his artistic reputation.
Paul Rossman, M.D.
San Anselmo, CA
31
Thank for this sober and even-handed piece. I agree with you. In this regard, there are two facts that lead me to believe Mr. Allen.
First, as you imply, it is rare in the extreme that a pedophile acts exactly once in their entire lives. Yet this is what we are told to believe: that Mr. Allen molested Dylan one single time - and there is zero evidence that he has molested any other child at any time, or that any of the dozens of actresses which whom he has worked has accused him of any type of assaultive, or even "boorish," behavior. Second, Dylan's claim is that he molested her in an attic. Really?! The world's most famous claustrophobe not only engaged in molestation a single time, but he went into the most claustrophobic of spaces to do so? I think not.
It seems that Dylan may well be expressing "false memories." (See McMartin Preschool Case, among other.). If so, blame for her current beliefs and feelings lies not with Mr. Allen but with Dylan's mother.
25
Thank God I don't like Woody Allen's films because I don't like his films, not because I don't like Woody Allen; and thank God I don't believe Dylan Farrow has proven her accusations because I don't believe she has proven her accusations, not because I don't believe Dylan Farrow as a person.
I simply have no feelings about either person.
Life's dilemmas are lot simpler when there are no dilemmas.
3
I don't possess first-hand knowledge of what transpired nearly 30 years ago between Mr. Allen and Dylan Farrow (none of us does). It's possible that, in enjoying the work of this filmmaker, I'm enjoying the work of a monstrous sex criminal. But one of the myriad factors that gives me pause in joining the accusers -- and buttresses my doubts about the accusations against Woody Allen -- is the details of what happened back in the summer of 1992, when the allegations first surfaced.
We all have access to internet searches -- you can do your own reading -- so I won't belabor the point, save to direct readers to an article from the Times's own contemporaneous coverage of the events: http://www.nytimes.com/1993/04/16/nyregion/dershowitz-says-farrow-involv...
My reading of the tea leaves is that, yes, the Farrow legal team was trying to extract a large financial settlement from Mr. Allen (I don't see how any other interpretation of the reportage is plausible). That alone obviously doesn't exonerate Woody Allen: Mia Farrow's lawyers wouldn't have been doing their job had they not pressed for any and all potentially desirable outcomes for their client. Still, the accounts from 1992 definitely give one the impression that Mr. Allen's accusers viewed him (among other things) as a potential windfall. They likewise give one the impression that Mr. Allen was willing to risk criminal conviction -- and massive negative publicity -- rather than compromise with untruth.
13
In her old age, my grandmother tearfully confessed to my mother one day -- 'I have to tell someone this, I never have, I must I must' -- that she, my grandmother, had been abused long ago, once, at the age of eleven by her step-father. My grandmother went on to explain to my mother that she cringed every time one of her own children, my mother the youngest and cutest particularly, were the object of a treat or sat on the old man's lap. She paid attention, my grandmother said, and watched things silently and carefully all those years until the day he died.
While I agree that the piling on of Allen is worrisome -- and who knows, perhaps entirely unjustified -- I'm not sure the 'so why then one-time only' argument holds all the water.
4
I wish you would give this story a rest, dear NYTimes. We have heard both sides for years now. This story is trotted out every time Allen receives an award or is praised for his work. Now it has been trotted out once again on the wings of the #metoo era. I feel bad for all parties involved because this is stressful for their families, but it is not newsworthy. Time to give it a rest.
7
Thank you, Ms. Nelson. MR. Stephens had to dig very deep to find something relevant to say. He failed to make an interesting or valuable point. I read the Times Eds and Op-Eds for careful and insightful thoughts. MR. Stephens just stirred the pot of a dried and distasteful issue.
2
There's a pretty effective rebuttal of the Farrow charges by a friend of Allen's, Robert Weide, who did a documentary on Allen at one point. Weide notes that the two nannies who were there for the Allen visit never let the girl out of their sight. One of the nannies also reports Dylan being heavy coached during a video the Farrows made accusing Allen of molesting her. Weide also points out all the inconsistencies in the Farrow allegations that caused state and local officials to drop their investigation. I'm not a big fan of Allen's, but it does seem that he's being treated unfairly and that Mia Farrow is a nut. It's also seems clear that Rowan Farrow is Frank Sinatra's son -- that she had an extra-marital affair with her former husband. This is a pretty messy situation. Neither side is particularly appealing, but these charges are dubious to say the least.
26
Mia Farrow publicly admits that Rowan Farrow may be Sinatra's son but had no qualms receiving child support from Allen. And she thinks that's ok. Seriously.
3
Also their adopted son Moses Farrow, currently a family therapist, sides with Woody Allen. Moses describes Mia as manipulative and abusive.
2
It's worth revisiting the case of Fatty Arbuckle, a silent film star and the highest paid one at one time.
He had a party and a young woman named Virginia Rappe, who attended, died several days later. Her friends accused Arbuckle of doing terrible sexual things to her that resulted in her death, eg, inserting a coke bottle in her vagina.
Despite lack of evidence, there were 3 trials. The first 2 resulted in hung juries. The last one found him innocent, with the jury writing him an apology.
Nevertheless, because of the publicity and public outcry, his career was destroyed. No studio would hire him, no theatre would show his movies, and no one would see them.
His life was destroyed by a false charge, fueled by public anger, and he died of a heart attack a few years later.
People who have been charged and found guilty need to be punished. But there is a reason for a presumption of innocence.
22
Bret Stephens is a fine writer who correctly demands respect for evidence when serious allegations of child sexual abuse are raised. I wish he would display that same respect for evidence in the matter of Climate Science.
8
Respect for evidence? Read the Vanity Fair piece and see all the "evidence" Stephens left out.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts
2
A Woody Allen fan myself, I put the question of his guilt in this matter aside a long time ago, considering it an unanswerable question.
Now that Bret has got this column out of his system, I recommend that he turn his attention to the still intriguing question of what Frank Sinatra knew about Ronan Farrow and when did he know it.
7
Thank you for writing this....what if this is a revenge story from Woody Allen's #1 muse - Mia Farrow? Her life and career went to pieces after they split so violently. What about the public opinion on the realization that their only biological child was in fact not Woody Allen's but Frank Sinatra's - talk about deceitful.... Life of celebrities seems pretty messy seen from a far away perspective and it is all too easy to judge.
9
Splendid article. Now more than ever we need to reaffirm the principle of innocent until proven guilty. It is bedrock of all civilized jurisprudence, and the point holds regardless of the truth in this particular case.
15
Trump is innocent, then?
1
There are no words. Please read the testimony. Children do not lie. This man has admitted to the behaviors and supposedly attended therapy years ago. He did it. Period. Sick.
6
I was a child; I lied. As did other children I knew.
As to your claims about Mr. Allen; please provide citations to support them.
Persecuting a person, without evidence, is despicable and deeply wrong.
26
I seem to recall that many people were executed in the 1600s, in Mass., because of the false testimony of children. The Salem witch trails are a strong example of how false charges and hysteria can create real damage, even death. So, yes. Children DO lie.
2
Kids lie about all kinds of things all the time, they aren't good at assessing the consequences of their actions, and they are easily manipulated by adults, especially adults they trust. People can also develop false memories and think that the lie they told was true. I'm perfectly aware that people don't lie about sexual assault to get attention or money for the most part, there's nothing glamorous about being an accuser, and false accusations of rape are rare in comparison to true ones, but rare is not the same thing as nonexistent.
3
Allen did himself in as a credible person when he took up with one of his ex-wife's daughters. I don't know what the facts are, and I never will, but that is more the reason that people veer away than anything else.
I can understand that in a bitter divorce and custody hearing accusations fly. And I can understand how someone can become convinced of a false narrative from their own childhood, or even how Mia Farrow can be convinced she is right even if she is not. Or how the facts don't support her, but she may have truth on her side after all. I can understand all sorts of interpretations and conclusions.
Most likely, had Allen not decided to seek sexual companionship from his ex-wife's offspring, there'd be nothing to make of it all. But he did, and that left a stink of uncertainty surrounding him. I don't consider him guilty or innocent, but unsavory. Seeing his films just isn't worth it.
18
Cathy: "I don't know what the facts are ... " That is patently clear. Allen and Farrow were not married, ergo, there was no divorce. Soon Yi was not Farrow's "offspring". Before you being speculating about the unknown "facts", it might help to ascertain the easily available facts.
Cathy, he was never married to nor lived with Mia Farrow. And her son, Moses, has publicly said that Farrow coached her daughter as an act of revenge.
1
I don't think it was her offspring was it? Wasn't the gal Allen married an adopted daughter?
The only opening to this column that would have sounded worse would have been if Stephens defended Woody Allen via the Duke lacrosse case.
5
I can imagine how much influence Mia Farrow had in Dylan's memories. Mia Farrow married a man considerably older than she and if my memory is correct she dated Frank Sinatra when she was very young and he pretty old. Where does she come from to critique Woody Allen for marrying Soon-Yi( and they've been married quite awhile). As another commenter said no other woman has ever accused him of any strange, illicit or inappropriate act yet there's suddenly a group who believe Dylan rather than Woody.
I can't imagine that if he had molested her that it would not have recurred and that doesn't seem to be the accusation.
The actors who are now condemning without any serious evidence should apologize.
17
The issue is not the pair's respective ages. The issue was that Woody Allen was Ms Farrow's long time partner when he started the affair with her daughter, whom he had known since she was a child.
2
No serious evidence? According to whom?
In a very easy Google search, I found a NYTimes article from 93 and an investigation from Vanity Fair in 2014 that's full of it.
So you know more than actors who've worked with Allen?
How does that work, exactly?
I've read the biographies of Allen, Farrow, and their families...the whole group is messed up in the head.
Nice to Stephens give the benefit of doubt to Allen. Now I await his column pointing out that Juanita Broaddrick waited 20 years to accuse Bill Clinton of rape and before making those accusations had twice denied them under oath and that the Starr investigation found insufficient basis to proceed against Clinton. We will likely never know the truth with Allen, Clinton and for that matter Clarence Thomas but as a matter of fairness a benefit of doubt is due to even the most despicable people.
5
The article is unconvincing. I leave it feeling far more sympathy with Harvey Weinstein. At least Harvey hasn't married his own step-daughter.
5
@Carl R London, UK
"I leave it feeling"
Thus you provide perfect confirmation of Stephen's thesis. Your existing biases were confirmed by the smear stories about Allen.
11
Not that you have any existing biases.
Mr. Allen going after his step-daughter is a matter of public record, not one of my biases or a smear campaign. It is a horrible violation of parental trust. Parental incest is one of the few taboos that applies across all the varied cultures on this planet.
What ambitious adult starlets and predatory adult producers get up to in hotel rooms pales by comparison.
2
Agree completely. Woody Allen was investigated, and cleared. No one else has alleged wrongdoing. All things considered, this Farrow accusation does not ring true.
42
Except for Woody Allen, has anyone of these other cases been investigated? Maybe Weinstein, what about the scores of others? Maybe Spacey and Cosby, but the scores of others are simply accusations, no charges, no investigations, more he said she said....
He wasn't cleared. But he wasn't prosecuted, either.
There's more of a story here, but you don't appear to know it.
3
For once I have to agree with Bret Stephens.
There was a period in the late eighties when various daycare employees were wrongfully accused of child molestation. In these cases it was eventually shown how relatively easily children can come to believe something traumatic has happened if they are asked leading and suggestive questions under pressure. This truly came to be known as a witch hunt, where understandably nervous parents were drawn into the horrible melee.
Though nobody but Woody Allen himself can know for sure what happened in this case, Mia Farrow struck many observers as being out of touch with reality and highly vindictive. We will never know for sure who the delusional or maniacally revengeful person was here, but I for one believe that though Allen was most likely a neglectful parent, it was most unlikely that he is a molester of children.
25
Why are you crediting Woody Allen as the only person who would know what happened, and not credit Dylan Farrow for knowing the same?
A number of commenters have stated this, and it makes no sense.
2
So the question is whether Allen would have survived fatal castigation had his extramarital affair with his then-wife's young adopted daughter taken place in today's world. Not likely.
5
Allen and Farrow were not married, never even lived together. Are facts irrelevant?
How is that the question? Your analysis is inaccurate on the facts. Read this, or anything else fact based: https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-woody-allen-allegations-not-so-fast
1
The MeToo movement is to encourage those who have been silent to speak out. Dylan spoke out, was listened to, repeatedly, and her story has been thoroughly investigated. She (and Mia Farrow) are using the victimized women to repeat their disproven claims. In that way, they abuse the women how speaking out as much as they abuse Woddy Allen.
19
Why should we automatically doubt Dylan??? Just because she was very young???? YOU THINK SHE MADE THIS UP !!!??? Her stories may seem inconsistent just because she WAS so young, and probably very confused about what happened. Sometimes it takes a very long time to come to terms with encountering such evil.
I JUST found out that my child was molested by a doctor (pathologist) that I was dating at the time. FORTY years ago. Looking back VERY carefully, I have no reason to doubt it. We will not pursue it, though truthfully I wish him dead. My child survived and has thrived. I, however, feel very guilty about not RECOGNIZING oddities in the doctor's behaviors then that today would seem very evident. (It seemed a much more innocent time then.) I only hope that he did not go on to harm his or other subsequent children. I only wish he could be held accountable for his heinous actions. He is a walking monster.
13
He is not saying "automatically doubt Dylan". Where did you get this from? He says that before destroying a person's career, we should take a look at the evidence, and that in this case, the evidence really isn't there.
That's not "automatically doubting". That's healthy skepticism, which we should always have, all the time.
1
Why should we automatically believe Dylan???
2
Dear Atikin, get off your high horse and examine the facts. The kind of hysteria you exhibit is not unlike those found during the Salem witch trials in which countless young women were sentenced to death based on "feelings" and not facts.
Moses Farrow tells us of the intimidating and violent nature of Mia Farrow in the lives of her adopted children. None of them wanted to ever displease her. Dylan was coached in the middle of a bitter separation between her parents.
Stephens said it correctly. "You don't have to doubt Farrow's honesty to doubt her version of events."
1
Woody Allen himself wrote a very credible side of the story in the pages of this newspaper.
As this column attests, the weight of the evidence and the credibility of the witness has been questioned by not only wags, fans and pundits, but by law enforcement in the state of Connecticut.
An unseemly aspect to this story is when Mr. Allen is accused by his legal son who is an Anglo variation of Frank Sinatra. I mean, the guy moralizing about his putative father is the product of a violation of sundry Ten Commandments by his mother.
I'll bet when Woody Allen conceived the "Kugelmass Episode" he never thought that something much more byzantine and tawdry would happen to him in real life.
Alas, all of life is not as pleasant as lunch with Groucho and Cavett.
7
I will find the list of actors (and others), who are persecuting Mr. Allen via this horrific smear campaign and never watch any movie they're involved with.
13
I too believe Mr. Allen is innocent. However, Stephens would have been more persuasive if he had detailed the alleged time line and some of the other alleged details that still stink to high heaven after all these years.
5
Excellent. Write the same story using “victim x” and “accused y” instead of well-trodden names and, in my opinion, it doesn’t go very far. Justice is truth and truth is verifiable.
16
Speaking of facts... it is interesting that you left out the fact that the prosecutor at the time said that there was sufficient evidence to go ahead with a prosecution of Mr. Allen but he chose not to because he didn't want to traumatize 7 year old Dylan any further by putting her through the stress of a trial. It seems to me that you are being very selective with your facts. Perhaps you are like Donald Trump and you think that the men are always telling the truth.
70
Then have to put the prosecutor in jail For being negligent and leave a criminal Free.
most prosecutors are afraid to try child molestation cases. I've seen so many dismissed that were good cases
3
Exactly so. Not being prosecuted due to the age and potential for further traumatizing a child is emphatically not the same and being cleared. Allen has not been cleared, not by any stretch.
3
"We still live in a country that paints a bright line between accusation and fact." We do?!
25
I don’t believe the Dylan thing. But what about the nude pictures he took? He is as bad as Weinsteinand others.
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/03/23/nyregion/nude-photographs-are-focus-of...
Despite doubts about Dylan Farrow's accusations, it's hard to fault her for what's clearly her genuine belief she was assaulted when she was 7 years old. But there's plenty of blame to go around, starting with Mia Farrow allowing this account to become the defining story of her daughter's life. The spectacle of celebrities jumping on the anti-Woody bandwagon without any reliable evidence has been a sorry example of outrage run amok.
29
Could it be we tend to believe Dylan Farrow because Woody Allen married his another step daughter Soon-Yi Previn ?
Was Dylan Farrow coached by her Mother Mia Farrow when mom got furious at Woody for married her adopted daughter ?
It is true young children are imaginative and impressionable, but I wish Dylan well , she is beautiful and young and needs to get on with her life.
You raise important points Bret.
13
I have avoided Woody Allen movies ever since he ran off with his all-but-adopted daughter. Even though he hadn't actually adopted her, he was a father figure. And even though she was old enough that it was not illegal, the whole thing was creepy and disturbing
It's hard to separate art from artists. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. But in Woody Allen's case, I could not watch his movies anymore without thinking about who he really seemed to be. I don't want to elevate or reward in any way someone who behaves like that, and I don't want set aside what he did in order to laugh at his jokes.
52
Ker,
I applaud your honesty, however, I can't help thinking about the appearance if you confessed to racist thoughts, for example. Both admissions reveal narrow mindedness, but our culture will not react vociferously to your admission. There is a too ready acceptance of group think among our populace.
Yes, me too. And I feel the same way about Tom Cruise. Can't watch him any more without thinking about his Scientology craziness.
2
There seem to be a number of tone-deaf readers taking Mr. Stephens to task for the following:
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims."
His point isn't that abusing a child "exactly once" is okay, as so many outraged commentators seem to think. It's that pedophiles don't abuse children just once, they do everything they can to put themselves into situations where they have the opportunity to abuse as many children as they can as often as they can over the course of a lifetime. That is the nature of their sickness. And, weighing other considerations (specifically the investigation at the time), I believe Mr. Stephens' conclusion is, if Allen is accused of doing it just once, he probably didn't do it all.
46
The problem is that many of the readers are reading with the bias that the author describes. Kind of a "catch-22" in trying to talk common sense to the populace.
3
IF Mr. Allen is guilty, I think pedophile isn’t quite the correct word. He doesn’t go after strangers. Only the family at hand. He wouldn’t need to stalk multiple children. He had two beautiful girls in his own home.
2
Okay, but, in a feat of hyper-grooming, the man had a "fling" with his wife's daughter, married her, and adopted two young girls.
2
Mr. Stephens, you and I usually don't see eye-to-eye, but I thank you for this article.
Guilty until proven innocent is NOT the foundation of our justice system, and neither should it be so for our own personal verdict of individuals. I cannot condemn Mr. Allen without much more factual information, and will not join the witch hunt bandwagon, which, unfortunately, all too many contributors here seem most eager to do.
36
Mia Farrow is a little on the weird side, having adopted so many children. And having married Woody Allen.
Dylan was only five years old when she was questioned by her mother about abuse. When I was five years old, I thought Mighty Mouse was my friend.
That age doesn't mean that you don't remember people being mean to you, and you forget and make it up. I remember a boy punching me in the stomach when I was just six years old, and I still remember that clearly. And I am 58 years old now.
9
They never married just lived together.
No matter what your age, a child knows when their father is doing something he should not be doing. It’s not the same as being punched.
2
They didn't even live together...separate apartments on opposite sides of Central Park.
"Most parents know that young children are imaginative and suggestible and innocently prone to making things up." As someone who experienced child abuse and was not believed until adulthood when my abuser finally admitted it, I can assure you that memories and details are not always clear. Many studies have shown that abused children often cannot remember exact details, either because of disassociation or the simple fact that memories in childhood can be blurry. However, that does not necessarily mean the event(s) did not happen. Children do have active imaginations, but if in adulthood a person says she was abused -- even if the details are fuzzy -- it is unlikely she is not lying. The incident detailed in Rolling Stone and other fabrications are exceptions to the rule.
12
I would agree except it is possible Farrow planted memories in Dylan's head at a young age. If this had happened, whether Farrow did it intentionally or by subconscious suggestion, Dylan would likely be unable to distinguish between reality and planted memories.
2
Another piece on the Allen 'scandal'. Surprising in a way, as pushback is rarely moderate. The link here offers a context for understanding more fully. There might be some reason that I'm not aware of why this material gets so little exposure. Maybe some smart people out there know what it is.
https://ronanfarrowletter.wordpress.com/2018/01/04/moses-farrow-speaks-out/
8
Two other cases are worth noting for their impact as well as their reality. First, those against Bill Cosby, and second against Byron Hefner, the partner of the former Speaker of the Massachusetts House. Both had as much, if not more, impact on their allies or naive partners than they did on the perpetrators or, in the case of Hefner, on any direct victim. Cosby seriously undermined the career of a world leader in education, Dwight Allen, who trusted Cosby enough to write a book and lead a world-class movement toward student-centered learning as Dean of the University of Massachusetts School of Education, only to be undermined by that trust and leave the School he helped raise to an international standard. And pretty-boy Hefner undermined the most prominent Massachusetts progressive by trading on his looks and contacts to engineer political deals never shared with his "partner" or, more likely, victim.
There is a much wider spectrum of victims than #MeToo seems ready to acknowledge. That hardly makes such partners innocent, but it surely should inspire more thought before characters like Woody Allen should be joined by others so deeply impacted by a range of recognizably dangerous but highly personal wreckage.
2
I never believed Mia Farrow. She had my sympathy, but that's about it. As a social worker I worked with many families going through divorce. The amount of hatred I saw was astounding. Spouses who in the rest of their lives were mature, reasoning people were suddenly during the divorce process behaving like 10-year-olds. Truth went out the window when it came to their spouses.
As for Farrow, the alleged abuse occurred at a time when he was very young and suggestible. I think he was brainwashed by his mother. He may truly believe he was molested, so let's cut him some slack. He does not deserve some of the criticism being sent his way.
All of this, is not to say I admire Woody Allen. His treatment of Mia was disgraceful, and that's putting it mildly.
9
Dylan is a she.
2
For the record, Dylan Farrow is female
1
Bret Stephens is lamenting a mob mentality that lynches people who look guilty even if the evidence of guilt has reasonable doubt. Memories are funny things and from time to time all of us make clear memories of things we have been told that we never actually experienced. I have no doubt that Dylan Farrow has clear memories of being abused. They might be true. They might also have been unintentionally created by internalizing things her mother said about her father in reference to Soon-Yi.
He said, she said cases are hard. They are harder still when one of the parties is a child and the events being remembered took place long ago. Woody Allen now lives with the shadow of Dylan Farrow's accusation and whether he is guilty or innocent, the shadow will remain.
13
Now, I must confess to writing that comment without looking more deeply into the matter. After doing a bit of reading post posting, it does seem that there's more weight on Dylan Farrow's side than Bret Stephens presents.
3
Excellent op-ed. Mia and Dylan Farrow had at least two opportunities to prove their accusations. In the absence of new evidence or similar charges, I find shocking the new attempt to tarnish Woody Allen's reputation. McCarthyism redux.
25
"innocent until proven guilty" is a standard in a court of law. Deeply private acts of invasion and intimidation are not going to be admitted by the perpetrator.
The whole point is to reduce what are inherently shame-based behaviors to "innuendo". It is a very successful tactic.
Woody Allen's personal choices in his private life as well as his body of work trivializing and demeaning women and feminity support the "accusations."
6
Great example of how an adult abuser can dominate over a little girl. The writer's support and reasoning to dismiss isolated acts of violation is all too real in our society, present and past.
7
#MeToo has turned into a mob action quick to shout down anyone that dares to suggest it is only the rule of law and reliance on empirical evidence that can tame our tendencies to prejudge and condemn those accused. Shouldn’t the weight of available evidence, to say nothing of the presumption of innocence, extend to the court of public opinion, too? #KeepItRealToo
7
Hmm, I too was abused by a family member who, as far as we know, only did it to me. Old enough to remember, my parents know too. While I cannot know for sure about Woody and Dylan, I know Mr. Stephens is dead wrong in his assumptions about the many ways abuse can occur.
24
Yes, Deborah. Thank you. A child remembers, possibly imperfectly, yet still correctly
2
I despise Harvey Weinstein and think he should face legal punishment but I enjoy his films. Woody Allen is a lot more grey but the same applies. I see him as potentially an evil person but his work is solid and I can distinguish between the two.
We blackballed people who we thought were communists. It was wrong to discredit the work. Victims have to speak out, prosecutors have to prosecutors, judges and juries have to act. The public over time will decide on the quality of the actually work.
This is a highly nuanced problem because in many cases the victims were making a nuanced choice between their personal careers and their personal self respect and dignity.
This movement needs to go from blackballing work to empowering women to have the self respect to say no, bring charges and be protected from being blackballed for reporting criminal activity.
It's sad that the number of women assaulted in the workplace who feel utterly powerless not only continues, it is encouraged in the current White House. Until we go past a wink and a nod, society needs to take these assaults seriously and women need to take their responsibility in reporting them seriously.
If Woody Allen is guilty of assaulting a child he should be in prison. I should also be able to enjoy his work. Pass the popcorn.
1
I agree with you. In this moment no accused man is given the slightest presumption of innocence. Sometimes the accusations are overwhelming, but Allen was accused years ago by a daughter of an angry ex. The medical and abuse experts found no concrete evidence. That should be the end. Ms Farrow May believe she was molested, but that doesn't make it true. All the actors that are now maligning Allen had nothing to say and saw nothing in all the intervening years. This is an example of a pendulum swing too far.
10
This is an excellent article. The kangaroo court of biased emotion driven public opinion should not be used to destroy peoples lives. Due process and the legal justice system must prevail. Period. Otherwise we're no better than those of the Salem witch burning days.
12
Vigilante justice in the modern age frightens me to the core. Without the rule of law, no one is protected.
13
Thank you, Mr. Stephens.
I believe Moses Farrow, that his mother has been trying to destroy her former boyfriend in the press for the last 20 years, and has used her daughter as a tool.
36
One of the kids,, twelve at the time, became a famiky therapist & reconciled with Allen & says the allegations were cooked up by the understandably enraged Mia & implanted in the youngest kids.
44
Good article - but no one is listening.
It's all turned into mob justice at this point.
39
The test for whether you want to enjoy the company of someone, or trust someone, vote for someone, or pay for a ticket to someone’s performance, is not whether an allegation distasteful to you has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the standard for determining whether an accused shield be incarcerated or executed. Not even the civil standard for liability - more likely than not - is the correct test for matters of personal association or trust. It is enough that one believes on the information available that an accused is someone you prefer not to associate with, or trust with your children. For me, I’ve heard enough to decide I won’t buy more tickets to Allen’s movies until more information becomes available to cause me to change my mind. That may be unfair to Allen, but doing the opposite may be unfair to Dylan. Either way, it’s my choice, and I see nothing wrong with anyone doing the same.
10
Than you for your support of a core U.S. principle:the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
23
The issue of false memory syndrome is a difficult one. Once a false memory is implanted, through whatever cause, the mere act of "remembering" it strengthens the memory further. For anyone who wants to learn more, here is a good place to start. Note that you may need a subscription to read the full articles: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/neuroscience/false-memory-syndrome
13
Icky and illegal are two very different things. The Woody Allen and Soon Yi relationship was merely icky (and is now somewhat less so, having stood the test of time). They were consenting adults when it began — not a “barely adult,” almost-child and an old man, but two adults making a mutual decision to have a physical relationship. At age 18 a recruit can be sent off to fight a war. An 18-year-old can decide who she takes as a sexual partner. You can’t have it both ways.
Allen was never charged with molesting Dylan. He must be given the benefit if the doubt on that. I remember following the story at the time of the investigation. Everything pointed to Mia Farrow having manipulated her daughter into believing the molestation happened. I believed then and I believe now that the child was coached to describe the assault as she did. So she came to believe it herself. Dylan is telling the truth as she knows it, but that is not necessarily a true account.
I’m not defending Allen’s character. I think he is a vile man who is obsessed with himself and with the perceived sexual availability of too-young women. This is evident in his films and his writings. He comes across, to me, as damp and leering. Neither am I defending his film making, which I feel has long been stuck in the mire of the aforementioned obsessions. But I will defend his right to be that weird, old guy who married his girlfriend’s adopted daughter. Legally. All the other stuff is rumor. Stop punishing the guy.
17
A man being accused of child molestation while in the middle of a messy break-up and custody battle is so common it's a cliche. Dylan's older brother, Moses, was in the room with Allen and Farrow all that afternoon and says Allen and Dylan never left it. There were others present. Moses also reports his mother, distraught over the Soon-Yi affair, coached and encouraged her children to accuse Allen of various things.
Child-molestation is serial behavior. If Allen did this he did it only once, which makes him a unicorn.
26
The fact that no other women in 25 years since or before 92 have accused Allen of any misconduct is a huge factor that shouldn't be ignored. Almost all pedophiles have had many more than one complaint lodged against them. We'll never know for sure, and Dylan could have been easily persuaded by Mia and hungry attorneys that this happened.
I mention hungry attorneys because I was falsely accused of rape in 93, and despite the fact that my accuser was a known prostitute, facing charges of writing 10k in bad checks on a closed account, and had filed 3 separate false claims of being raped, including one a by a security guard who just arrested her for shop lifting, this case dragged on a for a year.
Finally I requested a settlement hearing after realizing my attorney was colluding with hers to keep collecting fees that my employers' insurance was paying for. A nuisance suit settlement of 35k was given to the woman.. The woman's attorney is a celebrity who was recently dropped by a celebrity client facing multiple charges of sexual harassment and assault. She was fired for her aggressive strategy of wanting to portray his accusers in various suggestive poses with him. He was also making her book into a tv show with an extremely lucrative deal for her.
This case set off the whole 'me too movement'. The attorney is Lisa Bloom, Gloria Allred's daughter, and her celebrity client was Harvey Weinstein.
10
The age of Soon-Yi Previn is unknown, I actually had to look at the other letters to find the spelling of her name. Her age is unknown because she was found abandoned in the streets of South Korea, I believe. So her early childhood history is virtually a mystery. And so theoretically no one knows if exactly what age Soon-Yi Previn was when she and Woody Allen began a sexual relationship.
Of course they entire dynamics around Woody Allen and Mia Farrow were an unusual family situation. Mia and Woody were not married yet adopted children together and the had the one son, Mia later claims might be the son of her former husband Frank Sinatra. Although the son could easily just resemble Mia more than Woody also. And I don't see anyone with DNA results on the news.
I always felt that it was a terrible betrayal by Soon-Yi to her adoptive mother to go with Woody Allen. Mia saved her life by the adoption. Plus to cause so much social disruption. Soon-Yi is very self centered to do this to her adoptive mother who saved her life. As for the sad situation of the potential molestation of Woody Allen's adoptive daughter by Woody Allen. I don't know what to think.
The question I ask myself is how do we enjoy art when the artist is flawed. Can we continue to enjoy their art. I spent years watching and re-watching Woody Allen films and found great happiness and comfort in their elegance. Just fun movies or showing a cool way of life in great New York city apartments. Sad.
6
What's sad is people who imaginatively analyze and judge other people and so easily want to believe the worst.
1
As a child of sexual abuse, using information that is inconsistent is gong to be standard for a child. You are using an adult perspective to form your opinion and while no one else gave evidence doesn't mean there isn't any. Please refrain from using the word smear in the title. That is a loaded word and one that has strong bias in it.
28
As I recall, there is a brother who disputes his adoptive sister's contention that it was Woody who was the abuser and instead contends that the actual abuser was Mia.
Anything to that?
7
There are no winners in this story. As the Prince says in the last line of Romeo and Juliet, ALL ARE PUNISHED.
8
The issue is does Allen deserve to be "punished" based on available evidence.
1
The worst thing about these unfounded accusations is how quickly some actors Woody hired for his films have abandoned him. It is this kind of moral cowardice - not dissimilar to what happened during the McCarthy era - that should be punished....by boycotting their films!
26
Finally a voice of reason in the chaos and attacks. But you leave out the New York Department of Social Services. The recanted testimony of one of the Nanny's who claimed she was pressured by Mia Farrow. And Moses testimony 19 years later, with no contact with his father, that his mother was abusive and he remembers her coaching Dylan (he was 13 at the time. Ronan, who advocates for his sister was 5 at the time). Moses is now a family therapist and psychologist of some note.
And all that information came out after Frank Maco made his comment that he had probable cause for a trial (which doesn't mean a conviction), if they had tried and convicted Woody before 1994, he would still have enough evidence to overturn the ruling, or at worst, get a new trial with enough probable cause that no jury could convict him.
22
Also, he took a lie detector test and Mia Farrow refused to. I don't believe there is enough evidence to believe him a child molester. Dylan Farrow may be traumatized, but that could also be from her mothers actions.
Regardless, what he did to that family by starting an affair with his long time partners young daughter was despicable and very harmful and inappropriate. He should have ended his relationship with Mia and slowly and openly courted Soon-Yi if he truly loved her. He cheated on his girlfriend with her (not his) daughter, that in itself is truly self-centered and dishonorable behavior. He caused immense harm with his actions. He was having his girlfriends daughter pose for nude photos-what kind of man would do this? Seems compulsive and sneaky. He crossed a line when he started intimacy with his girlfriends daughter.
It was not illegal, but it was immoral.
However, how he treats actors professionally seems more important in their choice of whether to work with him than his old drama with his family. And there seems to be a lack of trying to heal on the part of Mia Farrow and some in her family, a vengeful aspect- that is also not OK and not healing to the family
15
Dylan's story of abuse emerged during a custody battle between Mia Farrow and Woody Allen. Mia Farrow was understandably enraged about the affair (and later marriage) of Allen and Soon-Yi Previn and was determined that he not be allowed to see his children. It seems reasonable that Mia Farrow could have planted this story of abuse in Dylan's young head. In her despair, Mia Farrow may even have convinced herself of the truth of abuse. But investigators at the time believed that Mia Farrow may well have planted the narrative in young Dylan's head in a desperate attempt to strike back at Woody Allen for his painful betrayal of her. The story Dylan told changed numerous times when she was 7, and now as an adult the story has been cast in concrete.
18
Have you forgotten a movie called "Manhattan" in which the protagonist is in love with a underage teen, and the descriptions by one Ms. Hemingway of how desperately unpleasant it was to get her first kiss from one Woody Allen? Mr. Stephens was 6 when that movie was released. I was 22.
Then there was an article, maybe 30 years ago, claiming Allen was a male chauvinist, penned by a man, rather than a woman.
So it's not data point, it's up to 4 that I know of.
6
I've been thinking about "Manhattan" while reading this article and the comments. Mariel Hemingway's character was 17 in this movie. 17. A minor. And there are many sexual situations and dialog between Allen and Hemingway throughout. It is so wrong and sleazy of Allen to normalize this kind of "relationship" in the film.
3