Woody Allen's Bullshit Pity-Party
By Betty Fokker on February 09, 2014
Then there is the little known fact that only “small percentage [of child molesters] may have a lifelong, exclusive attraction to children, and have little or no emotional interest in adult partners. The majority are not exclusively attracted to children, have adult emotional relationships, and have not molested multiple child victims”. Plus, you haven’t offended again and/or are probably not going to do it again because you know NO ONE would believe you about Dylan anymore. Good for Dylan, for stopping your disgusting predation.
I was also angered by the classic gaslighting attempt when he wrote, “Dylan and took her immediately to a doctor to be examined. Dylan told the doctor she had not been molested. Mia then took Dylan out for ice cream, and when she came back with her the child had changed her story.” Okay, for one thing that is normal behavior for child victims of sexual assault. For another thing, he refers to Dylan – the daughter he supposedly loved/loves SOOOOOOOOO much, as “the child” not “my daughter”. Finally, implying he is innocent because she “changed her story” is rich coming from him since “Allen changed his story about the attic where the abuse allegedly took place. First, Allen told investigators he had never been in the attic where the alleged abuse took place. After his hair was found on a painting in the attic, he admitted that he might have stuck his head in once or twice. A top investigator concluded that his account was not credible.”
Hmmmmm … that’s two easily verifiable lies from a man who was in his mid-fifties at the time v/s the normal behavior of a scared child. Who is the more believable witness? His dishonesty also makes anything he claims Mia Farrow said about him deeply suspect. The man is clearly willing to lie to make himself look better; why should we believe any of his bullshit?
Allen also attempts to defend himself by saying it was “illogical” for him to rape Dylan that day (I guess because child molestation is such an otherwise “logical” activity and not the impulse of a twisted cuntmonkey at all). Too bad he doesn’t mention the court documents where three adult witnesses swore under oath about events that day that corroborated Dylan’s account. I wonder how Mia Farrow implanted those memories in them? Woody doesn’t enlighten us.
In Woody Allen’s whinging defense of himself as the “real” victim he also trots out the fact that the “special investigative unit they relied on in such cases, the Child Sexual Abuse Clinic of the Yale-New Haven Hospital” found that he had not molested Dylan. He neglects to mention, of course, why the judge found the report iffy at best. The panel was two social workers and a doctor who never met Dylan Farrow even once before he signed off on the “Woody totes didn’t do it” opinion. That’s on top of the fact there were no notes, and nobody was willing to testify on Woody’s behalf.
Don’t worry! Woody has his OWN explanation of why the Judge Wilk didn’t believe the report. Woody bemoaned that “Justice Wilk was quite rough on me and never approved of my relationship with Soon-Yi”. Right, the judge wrote a 33 page diatribe of why you were a shitheel and the worst dad ever and Dylan needed to be protected from you ALL because of Soon Yi. Allen then goes on to say that it was the AGE DIFFERENCE that people thought was gross. No, asshat. It was the fact she was the teen daughter (we can do the math, BTW. There is no way you were sure she was 20, let alone in her “early twenties” when you started porking her) of your girlfriend, a young woman you had once tucked into bed with a teddy bear instead of your withered old cock, that the public found repellent.
Oh, and Woody thinks it is just mean of Mia to judge him when SHE isn’t perfect either. She had affairs and married a much older man once too! Granted, none of those people were the barely legal child of her partner, but Woody doesn’t see why something that silly matters. You can practically hear the son of a bitch pout.
Moses Farrow’s changed story that Woody is innocent is given yet another airing as well. Any expert will tell you that “Sadly, others in the relationship realm of the victim and offender often turn against the person making the report.” Thus, Moses Farrow’s account (which is contradicted by court witnesses) is not holy writ. It is, in truth, subjectively less reliable that Dylan’s. Lets look at some motivations Moses may have to have turned on his sister and mother. He may be a family therapist, but he wants to be an artistic photographer. He is always shilling his art (which is pretty good to be fair) on Twitter. Now, who do you think has the connections to help him out the most? His do-gooder mother or his still powerful daddy? How can he prove (since Dylan is being asked to prove the improvable) that there isn’t at least a subconscious motivation to turn on Farrow to please Woody? Or to punish the other siblings who have overshadowed him and still support Dylan? I mean, you could argue that sure Moses believes his dad didn’t do it, but how do we know Woody Allen didn’t brainwash him with tempting gifts and fiscal support? Do we just take the guy’s word for it? Why is his word more believable than Dylan’s? Other than his penis and his support of the patriarchal hegemony and status quo, that is.
More Like This
Recent Posts by Betty Fokker
Most Popular on BlogHer
Save time, money and space with the FoodSaver® Vacuum Sealing System! AND it keeps food fresh up to 5x longer! Read our bloggers' experiences with the FoodSaver® System and see why you should get one for your home. Plus get a chance to win $100 Visa gift card! Read more