The NYTimes published a ‘Poor Woody Allen only molested his daughter once’ op-ed

69th Cannes Film Festival 2016 - 'Cafe Society' - Photocall

The New York Times has lost the thread, right? They’ve made so many missteps in the way they cover certain subjects or frame certain stories. I’m still upset about that “Nazism in the heartland” piece last year, where they normalized the f–k out of actual violent American Nazis. Or how about all of the water-carrying they’ve done for Donald Trump over the years, and how they’re still beating some weird, alt-history timeline of “President Hillary needs to answer for all of her crimes!” Anyway, add this one to the sh-t pile: the New York Times published an editorial written by climate-change denier Bret Stephens, where Stephens actually argued that worst case scenario, Woody Allen only molested his daughter ONCE so it’s fine because women are vengeful bitches or something. You can read the piece at the link (I wouldn’t recommend it):

In case you don’t want to barf your way through that pedophilia apologia, this is probably the most relevant quote:

Imagine the brass balls it takes to not only mansplain to a victim that she’s wrong about her experience, but then to tell her that even if she was molested, IT ONLY HAPPENED ONCE. Bret Stephens wasn’t just wrong on the facts of Dylan Farrow’s case, he actually suggested that pedophiles should get a pass if they only molested one child one time. Everybody gets a freebie, I suppose. My God.

Dylan Farrow responded, even though she didn’t have to because every single person who read Stephens’ editorial was appalled. Dylan wrote on Twitter:

If @BretStephensNYT is interested, there is much more information he can find on my case than what he cites in his piece, some of which I have posted here.

To presume I invented this story & convinced myself of it is no less insulting than calling me a liar. I’ve consistently stated the truth for 25 years, I won’t stop now. It’s Stephens’ right to doubt me if he so chooses but his incredulity doesn’t change what happened that day.

What it does do is make it harder for the next victim to come forward.

[From Dylan Farrow’s Twitter]

Dylan’s right – it will make it harder for the next victim to come forward, especially when the paper of record, the esteemed Grey Lady, is out here giving a voice to pedophilia apologia. I’ve also been thinking about something else too: it should be up to victims to decide if and when and how they speak about their abuse and abusers, and it’s making me sick to see an increase in the “demands” that victims speak out or comment every time some idiot or a–hole makes an assy comment. It’s Dylan’s right to comment, but no one should go to her and ask her to comment every time a Bret Stephens-type wants to make a name for himself as a contrarian intellectual.

Dylan Farrow during an appearance on CBS' 'This Morning.'

Photos courtesy of WENN and CBS.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

77 Responses to “The NYTimes published a ‘Poor Woody Allen only molested his daughter once’ op-ed”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. jferber says:

    F-ck Woody Allen and f-ck the New York Times for this article.

  2. Rapunzel says:

    F*ck off New York Times! This editorial cancels them for me. This is disgusting and illogical to boot. Apply this thinking to other crimes like robbery or Murder. Nobody would say something like this. Why is it sex crimes are the only crimes get this sort of Nonsense? Is it because they Involve women? Of course it is.

  3. grabbyhands says:

    Oh my god.

    How low do you have to have sunk to try and quantify sexual abuse???? I mean, I guess it should no longer be a surprise considering how they’ve been apologists for 45 and his Nazi buddies and their policies, but still.

    Man, the NYT used to be well regarded. I’m not sure why 45 takes such pot shots at them-they’re doing his work for him most of the time.

    • Esmom says:

      How low do you have to have sunk? Look at us, we are in the age of Trump. Nothing matters. Nothing.

      On a related note, I just heard an interview with Judy Blume on NPR and they were discussing the #metoo movement. Blume actually said that she thinks Woody Allen is “a different case” and that she will still see his films. Sigh.

    • Sean says:

      The quote from the article is mischaracterized. The author is making an argument that Woody Allen is not a child abuser because it is unheard of for child abusers to abuse exactly one time and never before or after. He is not giving Woody Allen ‘one free pass’ he is saying this lack of behavior goes to show that he was never an abuser in the first place.

  4. Evie says:

    My first reactions when read the New York Times OpEd piece by Bret Stephens is: “How much is Woody Allen paying this hack?” and the NYT should change its slogan to: “All the news that’s unfit to print!”

    But then again, the NYT employed reporter Jason Blair for years, who famously plagarized or just plain made up stories and even went so far as to file stories from his Brooklyn home when he was supposed to be in attendance at events — some of which were out of town.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/11/us/correcting-the-record-times-reporter-who-resigned-leaves-long-trail-of-deception.html

    So in this context, I shouldn’t be surprised at the garbage they let Stephens spew about Dylan Farrow.

    It’s galling and appalling to see such trite in a “newspaper of record.” Dylan is correct: Stephens blatantly ignored the facts.

    I applaud Dylan Farrow though for standing her ground and pointing out the facts with true dignity.

  5. Nicole says:

    I got rid of my subscription to the times last year. They are straight up trash

  6. Jess says:

    The NYT is almost completely awful. The reporters who broke the Weinstein stuff are great but otherwise it’s gross. Look at Glenn Thrush and Maureen Dowd too. Shameful.

  7. Izzy says:

    NYT, you are cancelled. Ugh. In addition to the pedophilia – which was MORE THAN ONE INCIDENT – he fricking married his stepdaughter.

    • Lahdidahbaby says:

      Yup, Izzy — and only after his partner and coparent Mia Farrow found pornographic (apparently extremely pornographic) photos that Allen had taken of Soon-Yi. There had been newspaper photos taken of Allen and Soon-Yi out and about together from the time she was 17 — I recall one of the two of them together one night at a pro basketball game — but people assumed at the time that he was just being a good stepdad.

  8. Mia4s says:

    Frankly the “one accusation” issue with Allen is always going to be a problem. It’s one of the reasons this debate will go on forever (that and the accusation coming out during a brutally bitter breakup). The public has been responding supportively to multiple accusations, there is some kind of vague consensus that offenders have patterns of multiple victims. So one victim and one accusation becomes an odd outlier, for right or wrong. Looking at it honestly, has this MeToo movement really made much progress on single accusations? I’d say not really.

    Whenever I see these stories tweeted Dyan always responds; which tells me either someone sends them too her or she set an alert. That’s her right but I can’t help but feel it’s unbelievablely bad for her mental health. Not everyone is going to believe her…ever…and her one chance for justice was blown years ago when the prosecutor (and her mother?) decided not to proceed. That was it. Sorry to get dark but there is no positive in this story. At all.

    • WTF says:

      The thing is, I don’t think this was one time. The court records indicate a history of abuse. The incident DURING the divorce is the one that everyone talks about because it had already been identified as a problem and he STILL did it again. A counselor had already said, his contact with her should be limited by the time this incident happened.

    • Lorelai says:

      I mean, regardless of what one thinks of Woody Allen’s guilt (w/r/t Dylan’s accusation specifically), it is a preposterous argument— no one would say, “but OJ only committed murder once.”

  9. The Original Mia says:

    Bret Stephens is trash. Reason #17535 why the NYTimes won’t get my money or clicks.

  10. damejudi says:

    What the actual f*ck?

    What is this world in which we live? This thinking does defy credulity.

    Dylan doesn’t have to keep answering this sh*t, but I admire her consistency, her articulate responses to crazy. I don’t know how she does it.

  11. Aiobhan Targaryen says:

    What is sad is that Bret Stephens, the editor in chief, and every hand that touched this before it went to print thought that this was a sound argument to make. In no way shape or form could this even be considered a good idea, The argument is morally abhorrent and factually incorrect and no one thought to fact check his piece before it was published. Why does it matter if he did it once (which is wrong) or 1500 times? This is not the olympics or a pedo contest on who has hurt the most children. You don’t get points deducted or disqualified from being a pedo because you did it once. He violated a child and is still getting away with it over twenty years later. Bret Stephens is a pig who should be suspended from every correspondent job he is contracted for writing this.

    I would say to boycott the NYT but I don’t have a subscription to that mess and never will. This should finally put a nail in the coffin for EVERY PERSON who every considered the NYT a bastion of liberalism. If the nazi sympathy pieces did not get you to cancel, you were fine with the rampant sexism thrown at Hilary, surely the enabling of a pedo has to get people to see what utter garbage this section of the newspaper is and always has been.

    The only good writer for the NYT left is Charles Blow. I wish he would leave but I do understand that he does not make editorial decisions and needs a job. I cannot take food out of his mouth. I don’t consider the style, book, or food sections part of the NYT anymore.

  12. Nivi says:

    I have to say this Bret stephens has really lost his marbles. i for one actually believe in due process because for a functioning society, you have to have a law and order system. I didn’t know anything about woody allen scandal but i read the court documents and ANYONE who has read those documents, can’t really say with straight face that Woody Allen is Innocent, let alone a NYT Published Author.
    I think Every Single Men’s Right activist who is screaming due process necessary, Atleast need to look on due process’s results and not make a fool of themselves.

  13. littlemissnaughty says:

    What the … where have they been for the past 4 months??? WHERE? Who thought this was a good idea?

    He did NOT do this once. He also took explicit pictures of a then-teenage Soon-Yi. The fact that she later married him does not make it okay. I would bet a month’s salary that there were others but really, if I were them, I would not say sh*t either.

  14. HK9 says:

    This campaign to “lessen” his crime is even more repugnant to me because that means there must be complicity in order for this to occur which makes it even more disgusting.

  15. Juliette says:

    That article is disgusting.

  16. Talie says:

    Because this case has gone on for decades…there will never be resolution.

    This is how it always goes…the heat gets got, then it dies down, and actors go back to work for him.

  17. lisa says:

    i have to think all the old dudes who want to die on the woody allen hill must really want to protect their own right to be a pedophile and get away with it

  18. Cilla says:

    EXACTLY ONCE ? A crime is a crime is a crime. Once is one times too many and how can he possibly know that it was exactly once? Is this man out of his freaking mind!!

  19. SuzyQ says:

    “You can read the piece at the link (I wouldn’t recommend it):”
    I have a real problem with this statement if you’re going to quote part of the piece, form an opinion and then ask us to opine.

    It’s not a contest. One assault is one assault too many. One violation is one violation too many. The NYT lost me last year with their sloppy pandering to Trump and his deplorables.

  20. Eric says:

    The NYT op-Ed section is terrible. They fawn over Emperor Zero too.

    Nuff said

    • cr says:

      They still have some good columnists: Egan, Krugman, Collins, Goldberg. But at this point, it’s not worth it.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Yes, they do. There are also many other sections I enjoy reading. I am not canceling it because of a piece that I hate and that makes me want to shank the writer. I like some of the other writers and can easily ignore him. I prefer to focus on the ones I get something from than the few who need to change professions.
        But they need to rethink this direction they decided to take. They put out a statement once the son took over saying they were going to be more provocative and sometimes offer controversial articles and opinions. Okayyyy…but provocative doesn’t have to mean irresponsible.

        They have been getting the harsh pushback they deserve and more. Washington Post has been kicking their butt in the political department anyway. So has the Atlantic, New Yorker, Economist, the Nation, Mother Jones, etc. The paper needs to get this mess under control. This is the 4th or 5th time they have embarrassed themselves lately.

  21. Jordana says:

    I read the article, and some of the article comments…..just wow. He actually wrote something like… that the ‘distasteful’ affair with his barely adult step daughter….
    How every reader didn’t trip on that sentence,I don’t understand. It was a heck of a lot more than distasteful. And nearly adult means not an adult and it means a minor. The twisting of words in the article was just shocking and gross.

  22. Mama says:

    NY Times is officially over. They did some good work but they have been on a downward spiral and this is it.

  23. Nancy says:

    To defend a pedophile is indefensible to begin with. Secondly, if whomever authored this piece believes in a one time pass, then I suppose it would be fine to kill him, just the one time. WTF is going on in this World of ours.

  24. Londerland says:

    http://www.lililoofbourow.com/?p=1140

    Slight side-note…

    This article is a really interesting read, compiling many public statements by Woody Allen, and detailing the ways in which they contradict each other. Basically a great counter for anyone who might still be “erring on the side of caution”, “due process”, “nobody really knows what happened”. (I know plenty of those people, even right-on woke feministy types, who still can’t shake this “we just don’t know” bull when it comes to Woody Allen.) Make them read this and see that Allen has repeatedly made a liar of himself with constant evasions and contradictions, and cannot be trusted.

  25. perplexed says:

    How does the NY Times choose which OP-EDS get published?

  26. Mabs A'Mabbin says:

    Don’t read the comments. Just don’t. I shouldn’t have… it’s Monday morning, just dropped my son off at school (we were discussing why going to school was important even in this information age where problems and questions can be addressed post haste lol. He actually said the words, “I’m never going to need this in the real world.” LMAO. Kids have been saying that since the advent of school itself.)… ANYWAY, pressed some fresh coffee and sat down for news digestion and glossed those comments from what I can only surmise as severely myopic dregs. Now I’m heavy-sighing and my coffee’s getting cold.

    I apologize for my meandering lol. I’m very good at that!

  27. Amide says:

    To be fair, I think the NY Times wrote this in response to Nicholas Kristoff’s earlier article.
    As others have said, when you see the comments that follow BOTH articles, it’s a real eye opener.😶

  28. Marjorie says:

    Any piece about Woody Allen’s pedophilia in the Times gets a ton of comments saying it’s not true, and Dylan is a liar, and Mia is a lunatic. It’s a hometown blindness thing.

    He didn’t hide himself in his 70s/80s movies, see Manhattan with the 17 year old girlfriend. Woody specifically told us who he is years ago, in the movie “Crimes and Misdemeanors”. His character, an idiot, cracks the joke “the last time I was inside a woman was when I was at the statue of liberty.” Then the camera does a hard cut to a beautiful little girl – who is actually a 6 year old Dylan Farrow. It’s ghastly.

  29. Jordan says:

    And that one time is all it takes to permanently damage the victim. It’s disgusting to see how much pedophilia has been accepted by the media when it comes to a public figure.

  30. Cayy says:

    HE MARRIED HIS DAUGHTER. (Does anything more than that need to be said?!)

    • thisismeee says:

      Though Woody Allen’s actions with Soon-Yi were awful and gross, she is not his daughter. She is Andre Previn’s daughter. Technically, not even his step-daughter since Farrow and Allen weren’t married. But, she is his son’s sister. So Allen is both Ronan’s father AND brother-in-law. And, I just realized, Woody Allen is Mia Farrow’s son-in-law. Yuck to all of this.

  31. adastraperaspera says:

    Absolutely vile. Does Bret Stephens have a daughter he would like to offer up to be abused “just one time?” Or maybe he could get in line himself? As for the NY Times… Fell into the trap of courting controversy and ginning up horse races to sell papers. Chose to lionize their homeboy Trump (whom they knew more than anyone else was a mobster) and smear a former First Lady and Secretary of State during an election cycle. Like most media nowadays, not putting cash into investigative journalism. Mostly relying on access to the Trumpkins and other power players to get stories. This country is in terrible trouble right now, but The New York Times keeps trying to play both sides. Not helping.

  32. Milavanilla says:

    Vile piece, even more upsetting comments on the NYT – Allen’s publicists working overtime…

  33. minx says:

    He’s a disgusting, selfish, perverted man. I can’t even look at him.

  34. Ruyana says:

    I guess they forgot about his affair with his step-daughter, 35 years younger Soon Yi? I guess they forgot about the way it came to light? Mia finding naked pictures of Soon Yi that Woody confessed to taking? But they say he’s not a molester? In what world?

  35. Sparkly says:

    I’m astounded that the NYT would publish such disgusting drivel. What’s happened to that newspaper? This is not okay.

  36. Melissa A Durante says:

    Please don’t make all men look evil by calling it mansplaining. Most men consider child molestation to be an evil and despicable act

  37. Lorelai says:

    Well, Stephens got the attention he wanted 🙄

  38. Wickster says:

    30 year NYT reader, I just called and cancelled and told the poor woman on the other end why. From our conversation, I suspect she agreed. I told myself it was okay to read a paper with opinions I disagreed with over the past year–and it is. But when I read an Op-Ed published that deliberately leaves out facts that counter his argument, and argues that only one instance of molestation isn’t that bad–I cannot ethically continue to support this paper. I will stick with my WaPost subscription. I am okay with viewpoints I disagree with. But how this “argument” that slides over facts and dismisses truths and concludes one act of molestation isn’t so bad, made it past editorial well–something is wrong with their vetting process.

  39. noway says:

    Please don’t cancel the NYT from your readership. This is an op-ed and the NYT has been doing some great investigative stories lately. The NYT does like to put all sides on its op-eds and honestly, if you only hear one side of an argument does that make you any better than the rabid Fox viewer. Still read critically. Ironically, I would say this article shows the need for more editors at newspapers. The author has a point. People do tend to view stories based on whether they fit their viewpoint, and they don’t look for accuracy. I would say this would be a better editorial about any of the myriad of government problems we have not Woody Allen.

    Since the writer went on the stupid train with this story, I’ll go there too. He seems to be propagating for due process which can be a noble cause, but often times is a distraction, aka Trump. Allen was adjudicated somewhat, and there are official reports saying it is not likely he abused his daughter, but there are records saying something happened and other people not materially involved saying something happened. Plus it was a long time ago with a lot of money involved, why is it crazy to believe this woman who has also told the same story for 25 years. Honestly, we don’t have any more evidence on Harvey Weinstein or Kevin Spacey who he assumes is guilty. Just more victims. Is that it if you get more than one it must be true. Sure it makes it more likely, but I wouldn’t diminish the one victim either. This theory is almost as bad as the line if Allen did abuse her it was only one. Please this negates any argument the writer had, because it is beyond stupid.

    I think Dylan and all victims have the right to defend, ignore, say their story, ask for tons of money, file criminal complaints or remain anonymous. It is up to them and we need to let the victims get through this however they can.

    • Bobjane says:

      The New York Times is generally amazing and has been a real leader in reporting on sexual abuse. There was a great story this weekend about how much pornography young people watch and they way it taints their expectations about sex. It makes me sick to my stomach to see people cancelling their subscriptions just because they don’t like one opinion piece.

  40. Shannon says:

    I’m fortunate in that I have a ‘normal’ father who never exposed me or any other child to that kind of abuse, never. But I can tell you this, it would have only taken ONE time to ruin my life forever. I don’t know what it’s like, but I can imagine well enough to know that one time is it. I don’t think there’s any going back to having your daddy again, like, “Daddy only did it that one time.” Gawd these idiots are pissing me off. Do we have to fkn march 24/7 or something?

  41. K (now K2!) says:

    Emma Thompson talked about this, exactly. She asked the interviewer if someone needs to have done it to loads and loads of people, on loads and loads of occasions, like Weinstein, for it to matter, or was once enough? And then she answered her own question: yes, once is enough.

    And anyway, as so many people have noted, it was. not. once.

    Though I note Allen now has a climate change denier, and a man famous for emotionally abusing his own daughter, as the current apologists in chief. Seems legit.

  42. maryquitecontrary says:

    Why does this author keep bringing up the word “adoptive?”

    As in “adoptive” daughter Soon-Yi Previn? As in “adoptive” daughter Dylan Farrow?

    Does that excuse sick and predatory behavior? That they were “adoptive?”

    Good God man. You need therapy. You need to sit down and look very hard at the warped arguments excusing…yes EXCUSING…Allen’s twisted behavior that you just offered in this horrifying op-ed.

    Sickening.