Dylan Farrow wrote a NYT essay about Woody Allen & the abuse she suffered


A few weeks ago, the Hollywood Foreign Press Association honored Woody Allen with a lifetime achievement award at the Golden Globes. Woody – who hates flying to LA for awards season – did not show up to receive his award, and Diane Keaton accepted it on his behalf. During the telecast of the Globes, both Ronan Farrow and Mia Farrow tweeted about Woody’s honor, basically saying that the HFPA was standing against survivors of physical and sexual abuse by honoring Woody’s work. Ronan and Mia have been increasingly vocal about the claims that Ronan’s sister Dylan made against Woody years ago. Dylan claimed then, and is stating in more detail now, that Woody, her (adopted) father, molested her when she was just 7 years old. Mia spoke about it extensively in a Vanity Fair interview last year, and Dylan spoke to VF too. And now Dylan has written a guest column in the NY Times about it this weekend:

What’s your favorite Woody Allen movie? Before you answer, you should know: when I was seven years old, Woody Allen took me by the hand and led me into a dim, closet-like attic on the second floor of our house. He told me to lay on my stomach and play with my brother’s electric train set. Then he sexually assaulted me. He talked to me while he did it, whispering that I was a good girl, that this was our secret, promising that we’d go to Paris and I’d be a star in his movies. I remember staring at that toy train, focusing on it as it traveled in its circle around the attic. To this day, I find it difficult to look at toy trains.

For as long as I could remember, my father had been doing things to me that I didn’t like. I didn’t like how often he would take me away from my mom, siblings and friends to be alone with him. I didn’t like it when he would stick his thumb in my mouth. I didn’t like it when I had to get in bed with him under the sheets when he was in his underwear. I didn’t like it when he would place his head in my naked lap and breathe in and breathe out. I would hide under beds or lock myself in the bathroom to avoid these encounters, but he always found me. These things happened so often, so routinely, so skillfully hidden from a mother that would have protected me had she known, that I thought it was normal. I thought this was how fathers doted on their daughters. But what he did to me in the attic felt different. I couldn’t keep the secret anymore.

When I asked my mother if her dad did to her what Woody Allen did to me, I honestly did not know the answer. I also didn’t know the firestorm it would trigger. I didn’t know that my father would use his sexual relationship with my sister to cover up the abuse he inflicted on me. I didn’t know that he would accuse my mother of planting the abuse in my head and call her a liar for defending me. I didn’t know that I would be made to recount my story over and over again, to doctor after doctor, pushed to see if I’d admit I was lying as part of a legal battle I couldn’t possibly understand. At one point, my mother sat me down and told me that I wouldn’t be in trouble if I was lying – that I could take it all back. I couldn’t. It was all true. But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily. There were experts willing attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.

After a custody hearing denied my father visitation rights, my mother declined to pursue criminal charges, despite findings of probable cause by the State of Connecticut – due to, in the words of the prosecutor, the fragility of the “child victim.” Woody Allen was never convicted of any crime. That he got away with what he did to me haunted me as I grew up. I was stricken with guilt that I had allowed him to be near other little girls. I was terrified of being touched by men. I developed an eating disorder. I began cutting myself. That torment was made worse by Hollywood. All but a precious few (my heroes) turned a blind eye. Most found it easier to accept the ambiguity, to say, “who can say what happened,” to pretend that nothing was wrong. Actors praised him at awards shows. Networks put him on TV. Critics put him in magazines. Each time I saw my abuser’s face – on a poster, on a t-shirt, on television – I could only hide my panic until I found a place to be alone and fall apart.

Last week, Woody Allen was nominated for his latest Oscar. But this time, I refuse to fall apart. For so long, Woody Allen’s acceptance silenced me. It felt like a personal rebuke, like the awards and accolades were a way to tell me to shut up and go away. But the survivors of sexual abuse who have reached out to me – to support me and to share their fears of coming forward, of being called a liar, of being told their memories aren’t their memories – have given me a reason to not be silent, if only so others know that they don’t have to be silent either.

Today, I consider myself lucky. I am happily married. I have the support of my amazing brothers and sisters. I have a mother who found within herself a well of fortitude that saved us from the chaos a predator brought into our home. But others are still scared, vulnerable, and struggling for the courage to tell the truth. The message that Hollywood sends matters for them.

What if it had been your child, Cate Blanchett? Louis CK? Alec Baldwin? What if it had been you, Emma Stone? Or you, Scarlett Johansson? You knew me when I was a little girl, Diane Keaton. Have you forgotten me?

Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse. So imagine your seven-year-old daughter being led into an attic by Woody Allen. Imagine she spends a lifetime stricken with nausea at the mention of his name. Imagine a world that celebrates her tormenter. Are you imagining that? Now, what’s your favorite Woody Allen movie?

[From The NY Times]

Yikes. I believe her and I believe that she still has difficulties with everything today. I believe that Woody Allen abused her and I think there’s a good possibility that Dylan – who is now a 28-year-old adult – is ready to publicly deal with many of these issues and discuss them in a larger forum. I think there are questions about the timing of this Farrow family campaign, but it’s more than possible that Dylan’s decision to speak out now came from a cumulative effect, that Dylan felt ready and wanted to take power back from her abuser.

Woody Allen reacted to Dylan’s essay, but through his lawyer and his publicist. His lawyer told Mother Jones: “It is tragic that after 20 years a story engineered by a vengeful lover resurfaces after it was fully vetted and rejected by independent authorities. The one to blame for Dylan’s distress is neither Dylan nor Woody Allen.” Woody’s publicist told Mother Jones: “Mr. Allen has read the article and found it untrue and disgraceful. He will be responding very soon…At the time, a thorough investigation was conducted by court appointed independent experts. The experts concluded there was no credible evidence of molestation; that Dylan Farrow had an inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality; and that Dylan Farrow had likely been coached by her mother Mia Farrow. No charges were ever filed.”


Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

562 Responses to “Dylan Farrow wrote a NYT essay about Woody Allen & the abuse she suffered”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. blue marie says:

    I can’t believe he’s still blaming Mia, what a disgusting pile of sh-t.

    • MrsB says:

      Yes he is and I can’t believe so many people in Hollywood still support this pedo. It absolutely sickens me.

      • Willa says:

        Colin Firth is in Woody allen’s next movie. Disappointing.

      • Soporificat says:

        Since several commenters are repeatedly posting links to the Daily Beast article (which is a real hatchet job), I’m going to leave this right here. It’s well worth the read, and speaks to many of the issues that commenters below have raised:

      • lrm says:

        I agree, though want to say that throughout history and not just for actors or directors, but writers, respected leaders, etc., there have been those with double lives or shady parts of their lives…that if we knew about them, we would have to disavow many of the great works, thinkers and accomplished leaders we venerate. I guess ignorance is bliss and yes, with technology and media, plus greater empowerment of victims, it’s harder for people to hide their actions. though publicists and PR persons still do a great job. we’d likely be shocked if we knew the truth about many of our beloveds [even though we've known about allen for years...]

        I also feel for Allen’s current ‘daughters’ you know the ones he ‘adopted’….

      • GoodNamesAllTaken says:

        No, are you sure? Oh that sickens me.

      • OGmutha says:

        Why is the Daily Beast article a hatchet job? Isn’t the Vanity Fair article (written by a friend of Mia Farrow’s btw) the real hatchet job? And isn’t Mia Farrow’s hypocritical, destructive behavior the hatchet?

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        “Why is the Daily Beast article a hatchet job?” – OGmutha

        For starters, the author of this hatchet job on both Mia and Dylan, Robert B. Weide, is Woody’s BFF, pictured here arm in arm with his little buddy. – http://24.media.tumblr.com/63f7785eb699a251d1a27e52ca22126c/tumblr_mzpydjZ7yK1rjriquo1_500.jpg

        Robert B. Weide is also the director of a 2012 glowingly revisionist piece of utter bullshit Woody Allen documentary, and this week he wrote a rabidly pro Woody PR piece defending him from Mia and Ronan’s tweets denouncing him for sexually abusing Dylan. In the article, he sickeningly does everything he can to paint Mia Farrow as a bitter scorned Ex and suggests Dylan Farrow is lying and/or brainwashed into making up the many, many times Woody Allen molested her. In just one example of the hatchet job Weide did on Mia & Dylan, he (and you) left out the court documented fact that Allen had been seeing a psychologist for 2 YEARS for his continuous excessive fondling and fixation on Dylan prior to the little girl telling Mommy he was sexually assaulting her.

        Dylan wrote her open letter to directly repudiate the disgusting Daily Beast article and plainly states exactly what happened in great detail. – http://freethoughtblogs.com/butterfliesandwheels/2014/02/inappropriate-fatherly-behavior/comment-page-1/

        OGmutha , read the above article and then tell me SHE’s the one doing a hatched job on poor victimized Woody.

    • ANDREA1 says:


      • Lilian says:

        Mia Farrow is a dodgy character in my opinion. I’m not saying it didn’t happen or that she’s lying. Regardless of weather it happened or not, Dylan 100% believes it and she’s the one suffering for it today.

        I just think there are too many inconsistencies. From the tape that Mia submitted to the police, to the examination that was done on Dylan that found no abuse took place, to the fact that Mia Farrow carries on about Woody yet she openly supports Roman Polanski who admitted he raped a 13 year old, The supposed abuse happened while the custody battle was in full swing in a house full of people and that was apparently the first time, lastly her brother is now in prison for child molestation(yes i know one has nothing to do with another but still, she never mentions that).

        Whatever happened poor Dylan is the victim here and one of her parents has destroyed her. I hope she heals.

      • Lindy says:

        I agree with Lillian.

        I also think that themes repeat in people’s lives, and in family lives. Mia’s brother was a molester; her daughter was allegedly molested. Mia married a 50-year-old man at age 20 (Sinatra); her daughter married a 50-year-old man at age 19 or 21. Mia took a married man away from his wife and ultimately married him herself (André Previn); her own partner was ultimately ‘stolen’ by and ultimately married another woman.

        I believe 100% that Dylan believes this happened. I also know that induced memories were very common in the 1990s, particularly in custody cases. I hear Dylan’s truth, but what the objective truth is, I do not know.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        I had read that Mia didn’t actually support Roman Polanski. She was at a party at his home the night before the assault and was simply asked if she saw him doing anything inappropriate towards his victim. She said she didn’t, and that was the extent of it. Maybe someone else knows more about it, or differently, but if true, I would hardly call that support.

        So because Mia has some things in her past, that throws doubt on Dylan’s story? I fail to see how Mia’s past can excuse a predator. The court believed her enough to revoke Allen’s parental privileges. That speaks volumes to me.

      • JessMa says:

        I agree that Mia is wrong for the Polanski thing. She still considers him a friend, and even testified on his behalf in his 2005 defamation lawsuit. Regardless, I still think Woody is a creeper. Also as an attorney that works with abused foster kids, I can tell you sexual abuse often doesn’t leave damage. I have kids who have had their external sexual organs touched. There is unfortunately plenty a perp can do that doesn’t not leave evidence of abuse.

        You would be horrified to see how many cases are dropped even when police and prosecutors truly believe there was abuse. To the state it doesn’t matter what happened, it matters what they can prove in court. If a child is too young, too traumatized, or lower functioning the state won’t usually proceed without strong physical evidence or a confession.

      • LL says:

        @JessMa – Someone asked her last week on twitter if she is still friends with Polanski and she said no.

        Here is the tweet:

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        Um, right Lily and Lillian, because without the molestation charges from only one of his victims, he comes up roses. Did you forget about the other one that he’s married to? The one that he took pornographic pictures of when she was a teen, pictures he stored under a box of tissues in his apartment? Believe what you want, but let’s not all front like the guy is a pillar of morality other than this one thing.

      • Belle Epoch says:

        Wait, stop the train for a second. An exam may not have indicated physical injury, but that does not prove the child was not molested. I don’t want to get graphic here, but there are plenty of inappropriate ways to touch and frighten a child.

        Also, people are too hung up on the train incident. Dylan describes a pattern of continuous creepy inappropriate behavior. She loved and trusted her father (or father figure if you insist) and clearly was confused about what was normal and what was not.

        Also, it’s hardly a surprise that the investigation sided with Woody – not just because of his position of power, but because these situations almost NEVER end up siding with the child. That’s why so few children are put through the trauma of a court case. The reality is that they will probably lose.

        Thank you, Kaiser, for saying you believe Dylan. What you write up there carries a lot of weight.

        By the way, that article in the Daily Beast was a blizzard of words from someone who is not even a family member. No one outside a family can REALLY know what another person is capable of.

      • Christy says:

        @JessMa, thank you! I was going to post same thing ( I had worked as attorney for CPS for five years). It kills me when people say there is not physical proof or charges were not brought, as if that means it did not happen. Reading her essay, and his known conduct with is wife, I believe her 100%.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        So let’s see: he ends his relationship with Mia by banging her teenage daughter and leaving naked photos on the mantelpiece, married his sons’ and daughters’ sister (who is he met as a small child and to whom he was a parent figure, in a relationship with her mother, even if he never legally married Mia), and responds to his daughter’s letter by blaming it all on Mia…..

        But Mia is the one who is “dodgy”?

        Mia’s own history is completely irrelevant to what Woody did to Dylan. I believe Dylan. Everything she is saying and doing, all of her feelings, are completely consistent with surviving sexual abuse. I see no evidence that Mia has been anything but a supportive mother.

        If you look at the legal facts, the judge in the case dismissed Allen’s team of psychiatrists as biased. The AG found probable cause for an arrest but stated he would not because the victim was emotionally fragile. This is very common. Sexual abuse does not always leave physical evidence, and without a confession, the child testimony would be critical. She was only seven.

        I cannot believe the logical and emotional backflips people are performing to protect this man’s image. As if that were the most important thing at the end of the day. It’s all about image. Power and influence are seductive, I guess.

      • MrsB says:

        Well said @Miss Jupitero I’m disturbed at the amount of the support this man is receiving and even though I shouldn’t be surprised, I am.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        Again, please deal in facts: Mia is not friends with him, just saw him at a party, but she testified for him in 2005?

      • pleaseicu says:

        There was more than one medical exam done on Dylan. Her pediatrician found evidence of possible molestation and referred her to the hospital while the police medical team said there was none and concluded she was either lying or coached by her mother.

        Although conveniently, all of the records and notes of sessions with Dylan for every single medical professional appointed to the police medical team conveniently were destroyed and only one of them ever testified, the rest refused. At least one judge involved in the case was pissed and openly reprimanded the team for their unprofessional behavior.

        A panel of judges concluded that something inappropriate was going on with Dylan and because of all of the hinkiness that went on during the investigation they couldn’t conclusively rule abuse but felt there was enough to suggest it probably happened, either way that he was unhealthily obsessed and fixated on Dylan. Woody lost custody and they ruled he was never to have unsupervised visitation of one of the kids and he lost his right to see Dylan full stop. That ruling was never changed. He was the more powerful, wealthy person in the case and he employed an entire floor of a high powered law firm to fight all of this 24/7 and he not only didn’t get custody, he lost even shared custody and was limited to supervised visits only.

        And these allegations didn’t come out of the blue as his defenders suggest. IIRC it was nannies and housekeepers who were looking for Dylan and couldn’t find her and that’s when she would be discovered in the attic with Woody. IIRC sometimes they apparently didn’t even know he was in the house until he was found with her in the attic. And as was covered in multiple articles, before Mia found out about Soon Yi, Woody had been in therapy for months to specifically address his obsession and sole focus on Dylan that others had noticed and called him on.

        The states attorney involved in the case has said more than once that there was probable cause to charge Woody but that Dylan was so traumatized by the investigation (where she had multiple “objective” professionals she was supposed to trust telling her she was lying or her mother told her to lie) he didn’t feel he could put her through the trial.

        Vanity Fair has an in-depth article about the history of this case and then Slate also has a great article, very objective, separating the established facts from the spin from both Woody’s and Mia’s sides.

      • Irishserra says:

        Lindy: “Induced memories were common in the 1990s…”??? Please help me understand exactly what you are saying, because while I understand there may have been some instances of such a phenomenon happening, I don’t understand exactly what your point is, nor what was so special about the 1990s that would have brought an onslaught of “induced memories.” So let me stop myself from getting all snarky and just genuinely ask that you elaborate.

      • Lauren says:

        @Irishserra I think she was talking about how common cases of Satanic Ritual abuse and sexual abuse became in the 1980′s and 1990′s almost reaching a hysteria level largely due to the release of a book written by British Columbian born Michelle Smith called ‘Michelle Remembers’. That book now widely believed to be made up by the author/ her therapist as well as eventual husband did see a lot of people coming forward with similar claims of abuse. That time period also had the infamous McMartin Daycare/ Preschool case in which many of the staff were accused to abusing children under their care. I studied a lot about this phenomena/ time period for abuse claims in my various Religion/ Cult Studies classes. I don’t really think Dylan’s case fits the criteria for the specific time period the other poster was possibly acknowledging. I don’t think she has been coached by anyone in childhood and her story doesn’t have various changes to it. I believe the poor woman is telling the truth.

      • asiont says:

        I agree with Lilian, I don’t really believe mia farrow on this one. her son moses distanced himself from her claiming that she brainwashed all her children. also, one of the nannies who was present while the whole “molestation” incident was supposed to happen quit her job claiming that mia farrow made the whole story up and tried to force her to support her in court. plus, woody allen passed the lie detector test and mia didn’t agree to take one. isn’t that a little strange?

      • OGmutha says:

        Nobody knows what happened. But before jumping on the hysteria bandwagon, at least do yourself a favor and get the facts straight. This is an old case that didn’t even hold enough water to carry a charge against Allen–he was never charged–actually, the proper investigating authorities determined Dylan Farrow was most likely COACHED BY HER MOTHER. Moses, another adopted child, has said he and his siblings grew up being “brainwashed” by his mother against his father. Facts.

        Another Fact: the Daily Beast article was written BEFORE Dylan’s letter. It was a response to what the author perceived to be Mia Farrow’s hypocritical behavior (tweeting against Allen and the Golden Globes after she willingly signed a release to allow her image to be used during the Allen/ Golden Globe tribute reel). The Dylan Farrow letter was published AFTER that on Nicholas Kristof’s blog. It should be mentioned Kristof is a close friend of Mia Farrow’s.


      • John says:

        Lilian for the Win.

      • Jarredsgirl says:

        OGMutha, you can’t POSSIBLY know what the facts are in this case. Not even courts – who do thorough investigations – know the facts.

      • Agreed, Lilian for the win & Jarredsgirl for pointing out the obvious. Since this still seems to be part of an ongoing family feud, isn’t it wise to keep out of it? I have no idea whether WA abused his adopted daughter, but I dislike the feeling that this is revenge or professional envy masquerading as ‘truth’ & possibly misusing this young woman even further.

    • Shannon1972 says:

      The words I have for him are so vile that they would probably violate every CB rule. Beyond disgusting.

      • Monkey Towz says:

        Everything Lillian said. This issue should be looked at more objectively. If Woody did this, he deserves to be vilified, but Mia is a strange character and I’m not 100 percent sure what’s going on.
        And I am a fan of both of them, which sucks
        b/c some of their best work has been together.

      • Sankay says:

        I agree with both Lillian and Lindy,

        I think unfortunately there are too many inconsistencies with the story. The reports at the time said that Dylan appeared coached. Whether it happened or not we’ll never know but again I think Dylan believes it did. The video with the stop/start taping of Dylan’s story shot by Mia is major red flag. Poor Dylan, she was trying to please her mother, and who wouldn’t in that scenario.

      • Sarah says:

        I keep on wondering whether Woody Allen would stoop low enough to hire people to fill up comment boxes with pro-Woody spam. And my instinct is, yes, yes he would.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        I respectfully disagree. The prosecutor stands by Dylan to this day, and the judge had very harsh words for woody. The experts who decided there was no abuse wouldn’t testify in court and destroyed their notes. That, in my opinion, is more of a red flag than the video. Mia said the reason the video stopped and started is because she only filmed when Dylan was actually talking. I do this with my own kids when I’m filming them, so I find that completely reasonable and not much of a flag at all.

        Edit: sorry Sarah, didn’t see you there…my comment isn’t for you.

      • jess says:

        @Shannon Whats even more vile is that he adopted two more little girls in his marriage to Soon Yi. In photos I can never get past the look in the two little girls eyes. So, I believe he has continued this behavior for years without consequence.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Jess, goes to show what Hollywood money and power can do. I read that because there was no conviction, the accusation was irrelevant to the adoptions. That blows my mind…with the hoops normal people have to jump through to adopt a child, how this sick man adopted two is beyond me. I can only hope he managed to restrain himself with them.

      • jess says:

        Shannon I’m sure he knew exactly what he was doing when he adopted those little girls. Years ago I saw pics of him with those girls and in every pic it was just creepy the way he would be holding them or pulling them to him, and their body language just spoke volumns.

    • Hiddles forever says:

      Yes what a disgusting bastard. Any artistic respect I had for him is gone.

      I was abused as a child too, it is a neverending nightmare.

      Best thing he could do to defend himself was shutting up instead of calling Dylan out as a liar for the upteempth time.

      I hope he goes to hide under a rock until he dies. ‘Disgraceful’ is him.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Oh my, Hiddles, I am SO sorry that happened to you. In light of your experience, your response is admirably restrained. For what it’s worth, I hope he crawls under a rock too, and think “disgraceful” is too nice a word for the likes of him.

        *Virtual hug to you*

      • MorticiansDoItDeader says:

        From the ages of 7 through 8, I was sexually abused. I was too ashamed to tell anyone until the age of 28 (and only did so after extensive therapy). A physical exam may not have supported the fact that I was sexually abused (as I was *only* forced to perform and receive oral sex). I find it profoundly disturbing that people here are questioning the validity of Dylan’s claims based on lack of physical evidence or because of Mia’s past. By questioning what happened to Dylan, you make it more difficult for other survivors of abuse to come forward. We fear being scrutinized, shunned, and being victimized (yet again) by people defending our abusers. Please consider these things before writing us off.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        MortDID, I am so sorry for what happened to you. No one is writing Dylan off, but I also don’t want to start accusing anyone of anything based on ephemeral accusations. I had a student who was in a terrible situation and I wanted to foster him for a bit to help. I was told I was too attached, inappropriate, etc, and I was humiliated because I just wanted to help and saw firsthand how bad things were. This was last year; the mother pulled him out of school and claimed he was going to live with relatives down south. And he is now a missing child.

      • Kiddo says:

        @MorticiansDoItDeader, Evidence of absence is not absence of evidence.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Morticians, I remember your experience from another post recently – too many of us shared that day. I’m glad you are here to advocate for victims again. The silence and shame has to end.

      • Lemon says:

        Morticians and other people posting who have been abused as children – I am very sorry about the abuse you suffered. In my work I deal with abused and traumatized children daily, and I can attest to what a horrible problem that is for our society. That being said, there is not enough evidence to say what has happened in this case. And just because you or other people have been abused, does not mean every abuse allegation is true, or that our society’s presumption of innocence until proven guilty no longer holds. I think it is obvious that Dylan was horribly traumatized by one or both of her parents. What happened is unclear.

      • holly hobby says:

        I don’t hope he hides under a rock. I hope his male part rots and falls off. I believe Dylan and it’s a shame there are people who side with this jerk.

      • Steph says:

        I just wish all of the people who believe he is guilty and every other scrum bag in Hollywood (MJ, Polanski, Chris Brown, etc.) would stop putting their disgust at their personal lives aside to continue to enjoy their art. If the public stopped accepting them it wouldn’t matter if other people in Hollywood ignored their abhorrent behaviour.

      • ncmagnolia says:

        Hiddles, hugs and love for you. Happened to me, too. That’s why I know in my gut (have always known, really) that everything Mia, Ronan and *especially* Dylan has said is true. There is no other answer. You would never put this out for public consumption if it wasn’t so. You also cannot fake this shit. Hope Woody burns in hell, 100 x’s over.

      • holly hobby says:


        Should people say the same thing about Hitler too? After all he was a failed art student and he wrote that book.

        To admire his work is to finance his income. Something I will never do.

    • Shazz says:

      I know – he married his other daughter – does he not get that that shows he’s a pedophile? Adopted or not, he was in the father role, and it’s as sick as if she had his DNA.

      • deehunny says:

        YES. THIS. He took vagina shots of his daughter and left them for Mia to find. in the ***extremely detailed*** VF article Mia’s mother, Maureen O’Sullivan, caught Woody inappropriately rubbing suntan lotion on Dyan when she was just 4 (please read for more detail.)

        It was a repeated pattern of behavior. Nannies knew they were not to leave him alone with her for even a second. That’s why they freaked when they couldn’t find both of them for that several minutes it took to hurt her forever. A second is all it takes.

        I try to be objective and fair to other points of view on CB but it sickens me that anyone, particularly ANY WOMAN who knows the facts can even say “we don’t know enough.”

        Rant over. Sorry if I offended.

  2. Dita says:

    So since charges were never filed then this must be a lie? So Dylan was coached by her mother and made this all up in her head. Poor girl tells her story and people call her a liar and blame Mia Farrow. This is why victims of abuse sometimes never come forward with the horrific things people have done to them. What’s the girl have to do? Take a polygraph test?!

    • Eleonor says:

      There’s nothing worst for a victim of an abuse than being called “liar”.
      Probably the celebration of Allen was too much for her.

    • A says:

      I don’t disbelieve the accusations, but asking why charges weren’t ever filed is a legitimate question. I was wondering that myself. I understand and sympathize with victims who don’t wish to press charges because they don’t want to bring it back up, but clearly the victim in this case wants it to be a big deal. Even when she was younger we knew about this accusation, right? And she has that right, but it does seem a little inconsistent.

      Of course, I haven’t kept up closely with the case so I may be missing an explanation – if anyone can explain this please tell me!

      • MrsB says:

        I believe the reason given for not prosecuting him, was that Dylan was too “fragile” a witness. The fact that he was stripped of ALL parental rights, visitation even speaks volumes to me. Judges don’t do that for nothing.

      • Shopperetta says:

        But in a controversial move, state’s attorney Frank S. Maco announced in 1993 that while he found “probable cause” to prosecute Allen, he was dropping the case because Dylan was too “fragile” to deal with a trial. Mia agreed with the decision, he said.

        Dylan was “traumatized to the extent that I did not have a confident witness to testify in any court setting, whether that’s a closed courtroom or an open courtroom,” Maco recalled to PEOPLE last fall after Dylan spoke out to Vanity Fair about the alleged molestation.


      • Meredith says:

        An emotionally fragile child victim would be further traumatized by a trial and cross-examination. I am a criminal defence lawyer and I have no trouble understanding why the trial didn’t go forward. Allen followed up these accusations by marrying his log time girlfriend’s teenage daughter. That says it all for me.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        The judge also called him an unfit and selfish parent. The court had very harsh words for WA, but his people whitewash that away. They said he passed a lie detector test, but it was administered by his own people, supposedly, and his lawyer knew it wouldn’t be admissible in court anyway.
        I think Dylan was railroaded…what a demented thing to do to a suffering 7 yr old.

        Edit – just saw Meredith’s comment. Agree 100%

      • IzzyB says:

        It’s surprisingly frequent when one parent is the abuser.

        My friend is a lawyer and a lot of parents when they’ve fought a custody trial and had their child cross examined and stressed beyond belief decide not to go ahead with another trial to try and spare them more misery.

        They get custody and the other parent is blocked from the child, and they just want to protect their child from more upset and harm.

      • Hannah says:

        @MrsB: That’s incorrect. He wasn’t stripped of all visitation rights.

      • FLORC says:

        Unless its open and shut with heeps of evidence a prosecutor will do everything possible to keep the victim off the stand. You really are in the worst place were you have to relive a memory you never want to remember.

        So many people believe if they weren’t convicted of sexual assault or the prosecution declined to file charges then there was no evidence. Really it’s protecting the victim from day after day of watching people tell them what they know happened either didn’t happen or was somehow their fault.

      • MrsB says:

        @Hannah If you have any evidence he had any visitation rights, I would be interested in hearing it because Dylan says in her letter he had none.

        “After a custody hearing denied my father visitation rights, my mother declined to pursue criminal charges, despite findings of probable cause by the State of Connecticut – due to, in the words of the prosecutor, the fragility of the “child victim.”

      • Hannah says:

        @MrsB: “Judge Wilk would ultimately grant Mia custody of Satchel and Dylan. 15-year-old Moses chose not to see Woody, which was his right.” Source: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/27/the-woody-allen-allegations-not-so-fast.html

        “Allen was denied visitation rights with Dylan O’Sullivan Farrow and could only see his biological son, Ronan, under supervision. Moses Farrow chose not to see his father.” Source: http://m.imdb.com/name/nm0000095/trivia (Don’t know what the original source is for that).

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldBQ4icOzWk At 18:30 (granted he doesn’t confirm the interviewer’s statement).

        I want to make it clear I’m not in either camp here. I just think people should be going about discussing this story more objectively, which I understand is difficult given the subject matter.

      • paranormalgirl says:

        I’m a psychiatrist and I agree… you often try to keep the victim off the stand if at all possible, especially one who is 7 years old and has possibly been abused by her father (“adoptive” or not, he was legally her father.) The trauma can be too much.

      • mayamae says:

        It’s unfortunate all around, because a successful prosecution against Woody would have prevented the adoption of the girls he has now. If every victim was too fragile, no perpetrator would be prosecuted. I don’t know the answer.

        To be clear, my life has been strongly impacted by abuse. I raised my chronically sexually abused cousin after her father pled guilty to save her from testifying.

    • Lee says:

      My cousin tried to rape me when I was 21.

      Following the ‘incident’ I went through therapy, abused alcohol, had panic attacks in public, spent many nights sleeping in my closet, had knives and weapons hidden throughout my room and apartment (in case he came after me again and tried to finish the job), and would wake up screaming on the nights I was able to sleep.

      After almost two years, I gave my mom permission to tell my aunt what happened. My aunt’s response: Lee must have had a bad dream. My son would never do that. He loves her.

      He loves me alright. Flat on my back with his hands around my neck and bruises on my body from fighting to get away.

      For the longest time I couldn’t decide what was worse: the physical attack or flat out being told I must have imagined what happened.

      • PunkyMomma says:

        Yes. My mother told me my “uncle”, (ie a very close family friend) was only “playing” with me. He had me cornered in a closet on the second floor. He wasn’t playing and I was a nine year old with no one to defend me. To this day, I don’t want to be near my mother.

        I totally believe Dylan. My therapist told me incestuous sexual abuse occurs in one in four families if the victim is female, one in eight if the victim is a male.

      • Lauraq says:

        Yup. My brother molested me when I was 8 (I didn’t tell anyone until I was 20), and my mother acknowledges that it happened, but insists it wasn’t his fault. She says it’s only because he’s mentally ill (he exhibits all the signs of Antisocial Personality Disorder, i.e. he is a psychopath), and it’s my job to help others understand that (yes, my mom really told me it’s my job to help others understand that my brother couldn’t help but molest me). Everyone in my family knows about it but maintains a relationship with him, and I even got lectured for not inviting him to my college graduation. Also, my sister and my mom threatened to never speak to me again if I didn’t go to his wedding a few years ago. I went, but I spent all day alternating between panic attacks and crying hysterically.

      • KC says:

        @lauraq my brother is (likely) a psychopath too — he physically abused me, and frequently threatened to kill me with knives and his guns — and was still the favorite child so i feel your pain on that. do you know if your brother’s wife knows about his psychopathy? or suspects anything is wrong with him?

      • Kelly says:

        Jesus, the stories shared here are giving me nightmares. I already had a very slim faith in humanity, but really, might as well just throw it out the window for good.
        I applaud every person who’s managed to survive and live on after any type of sexual attack. I hope the perpetrators get a taste of their own medicine someday.

      • Lauraq says:

        KC-I’m sorry to hear about your brother. It’s so much worse when it’s in the family because there is really no escape.
        My brother’s wife has problems of her own-she does lots of drugs regularly and my mom says (although my mom will always just take my brother’s side) she is prone to fits of rage, so I’m guessing they get physical with each other (my brother has a history of beating girlfriends, which my mom also excuses as ‘They must like it or they’d leave him.’). I know from my mom that they say every few months that they’re getting divorced, then get back together. I might say they deserve each other and good riddance, but his wife has three children from a different guy that are in the middle of it, and that just makes it depressing.

  3. David99 says:

    I believe her .

    • Seattlemomma says:

      Yup. Me, too. Every word against that creepy bugger.

    • Tapioca says:

      I genuinely believe that Dylan genuinely believes what she’s saying. I also used to be squarely on the “Woody Allen is a perv” train.

      However, after recently reading all the information out there and the massive holes in the story – including Dylan’s statement video taken alone by her mother and with several gaps in the filming that suggests she may have been coached – I’m becoming less and less convinced that Allen molested her, and that Dylan is rather the victim of an embittered and vengeful woman seeking to strike the lowest blow in an acrimonious custody case.

      I may well be wrong, but we know that Mia is a committed enough liar to convince one man, another’s child is his own, and if you don’t think that a woman scorned will invent an abuse allegation, just ask Gary Oldman.

      I am prepared. Bring on the hate!

      • Erinn says:

        I won’t hate you. It’s your opinion, and you gave it very respectfully.

        I’m not sure if I believe that though. This had been brought up quite some time ago, wasn’t it?

        And if we’re going with “but we know that Mia is a committed enough liar to convince one man, another’s child is his own” we can also go with “we know Woody had no problem sleeping with and marrying one daughter, what stopped him from not sexually assaulting the other.

        We don’t know what went on, we may never know. But I am going to take the stance of believing someone who’s childhood was incredibly f—-ed up in a way that no childhood should be, over the creepy old man who couldn’t even gather a statement when questioned.

      • Frida_K says:

        I agree with you on a lot of levels here, Tapioca. At the same time, who really knows? There are signs that Woody Allen is lacking in boundaries (marrying his former step-daughter, for one). But there are also signs that Mia Farrow is somewhat of a nutter. I just don’t know what to think, other than to feel very sorry for Dylan.

        On that note…what happened with Gary Oldman?

      • Seagulls says:

        I’m with you, Tapioca. For me the biggest inconsistency in Mia’s story – because as another poster above has said very eloquently, whatever happened, what Dylan believes is her truth and it affects her life everyday – is that she claimed somewhere in these proceedings that she felt for years that Woody was sexually obsessed with Dylan, yet she did absolutely nothing to prevent anything from happening (breaking up with Woody, moving out of their connected house or whatever that setup was). What? That’s insane!

        Furthermore, when do sexual predators change their victims that much (from a child to a teenager)? And when has a sexual predator ever stopped with one victim?

      • cr says:

        Erinn, this is a problem isn’t it? It’s apparently easier to believe that Woody molested his 7 year old daughter because he has a fondness for teenage girls. Which doesn’t mean he molested Dylan.

        And Mia has this reputation as a humanitarian saint, even though she’s no saint.
        Which doesn’t mean she coached Dylan.

        We don’t know what went on in that household, either when Woody and Mia were still a couple and after.

      • FLORC says:


        Thank you for stating your thoughts and opinions in a well worded manner.
        With that said I don’t think Mia’s history should discredit Dylan’s stance.

        And Maybe i’m giving Ronan too much credit (I don’t think I am), but he’s a very smart man with all kinds of intelligence and he also elieves Dylan and feels Woody is a creep.

        There isn’t just 1 type of abuser. Some do stop with just 1 or 2. They do go after all types. There is no set format for all abusers.
        And I think Dylan stated it quite well. Woody hid it well. You think you would know if that was hapening, but more often than not you don’t pick up on it. An abuser can be so careful and manipulative. Showing the outside world charm and making their victim(s) feel helpless. You always hear about the person who was found with bodies buried in the walls and the neighbors, friends, and family all say they never knew they were capable of it. Those people do exist.

      • Kiddo says:

        I think Dylan is in legitimate pain and that she suffered trauma. It’s not for me to determine the origin of that trauma. Her story is compelling and has the ring of truth. But there are many terrible characters in this real life tragedy.

        Woody Allen disgusts me as a person because, if for nothing else, although he didn’t adopt Soon Yi, clearly, he established his relationship with Mia as a family, beyond a casual coupling, because they adopted a child together. Whether or not he engaged in the role of father figure to Soon Yi, he was in a position of power as the father of someone in that house, and crossed boundaries that shouldn’t have been by poaching a lover from within the siblings. That goes beyond selfish in terms of the health of the entire family unit. The legality of that relationship is one thing, the ethical ramifications are quite another. He absolutely damaged that household.

        As far as Mia, something is terribly off. I also read the Daily Beast article. I know from having read archives recently, that it is true that Mia called Soon Yi retarded back then, and cut off funds for her schooling, so she too had a mean streak and decided to hurt her daughter for her own cause and rejection. Neither adult considered the impact on Soon Yi beyond their own selfish desires.

        I know that the Daily Beast author had his nose so far up Woody’s butt, that it was impressive that he was still able to write, and yet, I do want to know if she (Mia) was asked if it was okay for her clips from Allen’s movies to be used. I wonder if she got royalties on them.

      • Erinn says:

        Cr – exactly. The whole thing is a complete mess because there’s sketchiness all over the board.

      • Magsmarq says:

        Here’s a piece published last week in the Daily Beast. I found it very informative and it clearly demonstrates why Allen was never charged, and two, why there very well may be reasonable doubt if Allen ever had been charged.

      • pleaseicu says:

        I read the Daily Beast article but it’s basically an opinion piece marketed as an objective truth.

        The author Bob Weide is best friends with Woody Allen and made a documentary praising all things Woody Allen. Even his twitter profile pic is of him and Woody together.

        That Daily Beast piece is about as objective and fact-based as if Mia’s best friend wrote an “objective, fact-based” piece about Woody.

        I think Slate probably has the most objective article out there that starts with the premise of separating the known facts from the spin both sides put on things.

      • Seagulls says:

        @FLORC – you missed my biggest red flag in all this: Mia’s claims that she felt for years that Woody was sexually obsessed with Dylan. Yet she changed nothing, protected her not at all. That makes absolutely zero sense to me, and for me calls into question everything Mia says. I said further downthread: I do believe Dylan was molested – but by her uncle who has been convicted of molesting children.

      • Kiddo says:

        @Seagulls, It’s possible that those things aren’t mutually exclusive. Mia may have had concerns about Dylan and Woody, and she might have let it slide for her own motives. Her only employment was through Woody’s films. We can never know the full unadulterated truth because both Woody and Mia are very self-serving people, with PR machines, who each used those children in horrid ways. One doesn’t have to be saint in order for the other to have perpetrated abuses upon those kids. I say that they both did, although to what degree on either side, we will never be certain.

        Because Woody has sustained this long term marriage to Soon Yi, it is not proof that she wasn’t groomed in youth and that the relationship isn’t unhealthy, and because Mia has support from several children doesn’t mean that she isn’t manipulative, and so on.

        The only people, in the entire ordeal, who are innocent and have truly suffered, are the children.

      • hmmm says:


        The thought that Dylan “believes what she is saying” is par for the course for the sexual abuse skeptics.

        Dylan is now grown up and still maintains this. And there is nothing in it for her except more disbelief and excoriation.
        She has nothing to gain and everything to lose by her assertion. Even if I did not believe her I would find logic in this and it would make me wonder.

    • Godwina says:

      I believe her and all people who claim to be raped or molested, because I am statistically WAY likelier to be right if I heed them. You don’t even need facts–or a heart–to beat those odds.

      Or, as someone put it so well on Twitter yesterday: “Believing a survivor’s words doesn’t just mean you’re statistically likely to be right. It’s basic human decency.”

      • FLORC says:

        And so many are so quick to dismiss those claims of assault. Immediately blaming the victim. Even here to a certain extent. That Mia is the mastermind here because she was jilted of course Dylan is just saying what her mom told her to believe.

        Why do so many immediately blame the victim?!

        I’ve said it before and i’ll say it again for context. I was drugged and raped. Woke up bruised and beaten. My friends at the time told me I made it up and probably wanted it to be rough. I blood tests proved I was slipped a depressant.
        All the evidence in the world can be staring them in the face, but many will rationalize it as “they wanted it”.

        In short, this man makes me sick and Mia’s past doesn;t matter here. Dylan made it clear she was ashamed and hid his actions from her mother. Think Mia is sketchy all you like, but don’t discredit Dylan’s memories because of it.

      • Gretchen says:

        @ godwina

        You hit the nail on the head.

      • Hiddles forever says:

        It is a pity there is no smilie here to applaud what you just said.
        As a rape and abuse survivor, it feels so encouraging to hear these words, “I believe you”.

      • Roma says:

        I’m so sorry @FLORC. I was drugged and raped as well, and being told it was “your fault” was the hardest thing to get over.

        I can’t imagine how Dylan feels, as all the armchair quarterbacks explain why they think Woody should be given the benefit of the doubt. She’s a stronger woman than I.

      • jaye says:

        As a survivor of sexual molestation by an uncle and subjected to inappropriate behavior by several other uncles and my father, I so relate to Dylan’s story and I believe her. The difference is, everyone believed me. That didn’t stop my torment. I should have received counseling but I never got it. The uncle who molested me and his own daughters was still allowed visitation. Whenever he would come around I would hide in a closet, sometimes for hours after he left. All you want to feel is safe from the monster who hurt you. I don’t feel like I was.

      • Godwina says:

        So sorry to hear you all went through that. Strength.

    • I Choose Me says:

      I believe her too. Never liked that creeper and will continue to not watch his movies.

      • deehunny says:

        @jayne— I am so sorry. And you made the best point of this thread– even if Mia is “crazy, vindictive, a liar, etc.” it still doesn’t show that he didn’t molest her. It simply shows that she failed to protect Dylan.

    • OhDear says:

      Me too. And I say this as someone who’s defended someone who was falsely accused of the same crime.

      Also, I think people should keep in mind that if what she said in the letter was false, it’s a clear-cut case of libel and Allen can sue the hell out of her.

  4. Dorothy#1 says:

    Poor Dylan, I haven’t supported Woody Allen since he married his daughter. He is a vile disgusting man.

    • cr says:

      But he didn’t marry his daughter.
      You may be creeped out by the fact the he ended up marrying his former lover’s adopted daughter, that I perfectly understand.
      But, and this was mentioned at the time, Woody and Mia never married, never lived together, Soon-Yi was not his daughter, and she didn’t consider him a father figure. She considered Andre Previn her father.
      And Soon-Yi was a college student when her relationship with Woody began.

      • Kiddo says:

        You know, while that’s true, the relationship wasn’t as cut and dry as that. They adopted Dylan together, so their relationship went beyond this casual boyfriend/girlfriend in different houses narrative. Unless the people from the adoption agency were completely star-struck, it would seem to me that the way Mia and Woody represented their union at the time, as a marriage of sorts.

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        No, she considered him That Guy That My Mom Dated For Ten Years While I Was in Elementary School. If a man dated his partner for a decade and watched their daughter grow up, if he shared father/daughter-like moments with that child and was genuinely concerned for her welfare, he, at the ripe old age of 56, could not just flip a switch and take a series of spunk pictures of her and leave them under his tissue box for his personal pleasure. Who the heck secretly does that while still maintaining a relationship with the child’s mother? You are free to believe the Woody-Soon-Yi side of the story, that he was a nice old man who waited until his long-term partner’s daughter and son’s sister was of age to fornicate with her, but his behavior is in no way normal, appropriate, or non abusive because of it.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        Could we all stop it with this hair splitting? Adopted children are children and equal members of the family. He was in a 12 year relationship with Mia as a partner and had children with her. Other children in the family consistently described him as a father figure. He is now his daughter’s brother in law.

        In what reality warp is this not an aggressive transgression?

        And yeah, oh sure, they waited until she was eighteen. That is sooooo believable and makes everything just fine.

      • Kiddo says:

        @Tanguerita. That fills me with disgust, in light of later developments and full context.

      • Janet says:

        It doesn’t matter that Soon-Yi was not his adopted daughter, or that she was already 18, or that Woody and Mia were not married or even living in the same space. What did matter is that Soon Yi was old enough to understand that Woody was her mother’s paramour and you don’t disrespect your own mother by boinking her boyfriend.

        As for Woody, he is beneath contempt. He didn’t even have the decency to keep his mitts off his paramour’s daughter. He not only totally disrespected Mia by banging Soon Yi, he completely destroyed a mother-daughter relationship.

        I don’t know which of the pair of them is worse. Soon Yi is a contemptible b*tch and Allen is a monster, IMO.

      • Kiddo says:

        Soon Yi was incredibly young, an adopted child in an unusual household, to say the least. I’d cut her some damned slack.

      • Sullivan says:

        @ Tanquerita: that photo of a young Soon Yi sitting in Woody’s lap is chilling. It should be referenced any time someone says Soon Yi didn’t consider him a father figure.

      • Peppa says:

        @Tanguerita: He is still a vile pervert imo, but that is a picture of him and his daughter with Soon-Yi NOT a young Soon-Yi.

      • Recept says:

        Tanguerita, et al — That photo is from 2008 and is of Allen and his daughter Bechet. Here’s the original from Getty Images: http://www.gettyimages.ca/detail/news-photo/woody-allen-and-daughter-bechet-dumaine-allen-attend-san-news-photo/79675825?Language=en-GB

      • Violet says:


        You’re splitting hairs.

        Woody is the father of three of Mia’s children, which makes him the father of three of Soon-Yi’s half-siblings, which makes Woody her de facto stepfather.

        They’re not sure quite how old Soon-Yi was when she was adopted in 1978, but bone scans indicated she was between 5 to 7 years old. Mia and Woody got together in 1980, when Soon-Yi was between 7 to 9 years old.

        I believe Dylan. What’s more, I’m sure she’s not the only child he ever abused. I suspect that he brainwashed Soon-Yi from an early age, grooming her from the moment he first met her. The really scary thing is that he and Soon-Yi adopted two girls.

      • Nerd Alert says:

        When a man marries a woman he knew closely as a child, especially if the sexual relationship starts right after she is legally an adult, it is usually a case of child-grooming. Meaning he helped bring her up to be loyal to him, and whatever happened between them before the age of consent is as good as locked in a vault. Marrying his stepdaughter is a very effective way to cover up wrongdoing, if any occurred. If not, he still groomed her to be loyal from a young age with the end game of sex in mind.

      • JessMa says:

        The picture with his daughter still looks gross when you know his history. I can’t believe he was allowed to adopt after a previous court banned him from contact with his daughter.

      • Nate says:

        @cr: Ugh. I just can’t. When two people are “in love!!!” and adopting children and spending their time together, we’re supposed to believe that what they have going in the relationship is just as real, as binding, as important, as a marriage contract. When we start calling their offspring “biological” as opposed to their “adopted” children, people take offense and say that it’s PC to call them anything but “their children, period”. And I get it. And then, in this case of Woody Allen, people are all, “he’s not related to her!!! he wasn’t a father figure to her!!! he never adopted her!!!” Please pick a side. Please stick to it. Is a father figure someone who only adopts the children of his partner legally? Is he required to put in a certain amount of hours or change a certain amount of diapers or prepare/provide a certain amount of meals before he’s considered the father figure in that child’s life??? How many people with children in hollywood, married or not, do you know who spend hours and sometimes weeks away from their adopted and/or biological children? Are these still not considered the fathers??? I don’t care if Woody lived in the same place as Mia. I don’t care. He was WITH Mia, romantically at the time, and he fathered biological children with Mia. If you don’t see that as a personal promise of commitment, well…ok. But you have to then apply that reasoning to all people who aren’t married and to all people who adopt. You can’t have it both ways.

    • Decloo says:

      @Tanquerita: I believe that the photo you posted was mislabeled. I’m almost certain that that is not Soon-Yi but instead their daughter Bechet. One, it looks just like Bechet, two, it doesn’t look like Soon-Yi, three. Allen would not have looked quite so old.

      • Peppa says:

        Just commented that too. It is definitely a picture of him and Bechet at a Knicks game a few years ago.

      • ParisPucker says:

        yes, and here’s the family photo that ‘explains’ who she is: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eHHUbh5YbA8/T–5phavzWI/AAAAAAAARVw/ep2vMSDPVAs/s1600/woody-allen-soon-yi-children-family-statue.jpg

        Despite this, he’s still sick. I know Ronan – amazing person. And if he refuses to speak to him and believes every word of it, that’s enough for me. Woody Allen does not deserve any awards whatsoever. If anything, he’s lucky to enjoy his freedom and to give him accolades (despite his talent) is a message from society stating that you can behave like a monster, letting your demons screw up the lives of innocent children and helping perpetuate that inflicted hell by belittling or denying the harm you inflicted. Woody Allen (and all those who have inflicted sexual or any kind of abuse) to children are a lower version of scum and deserve punishment. Kudos to Dylan for using her voice in such a potent way in that it’s triggering a much needed discussion and acknowledgment of this type of awful abuse that continues to be deemed acceptable when other choose to deny that it occurs…she is very, very brave and I think the world of her for coming out like this and writing this letter. I can’t say more, but she’s not making this up. And WA deserves every iota of heat, shame and negative attention that he’s getting. As for the actors who have chosen to work with him, they should either comment appropriately (unlike the dismissive, passive comment made by Blanchett – so disappointing bc i have loved her for her work) or by directly responding to her privately in a way that acknowledges what happened to Dylan. Anything less than that is adding insult to her injury…

    • Kiddo says:

      @Peppa, Thanks. That was freaking me out otherwise.

    • hmmm says:


      That is his daughter Bechet? That is one unhappy looking child.

  5. Faye says:

    I believe it’s true, and I feel terrible for her. However, at this point there is little to no chance Allen will suffer legal consequences, and almost certainly, no setbacks in his professional career or acclaim either.

    Sadly, victim-blaming/shaming and closing ranks around the perpetrator of child abuse occurs in “normal” communities. How much more so in the incesutous, moral cesspool that is Hollywood.

    • LAK says:

      Faye: it looks like his career didn’t suffer at all, but it did. For a good 10-15yrs after this case. For a while he abandoned film making and instead went Jazz playing with a band for some years. His career was dead.

      He couldn’t get distribution or financing in the USA. He eventually found a company in Europe that was willing to take him on. That’s why his films for several years were shot in Europe. That was the criteria for financing and distribution.

      When he gave the tribute to NYC (celebrating the spirit of NYC after 9/11) at the Oscars 2002, that was the first time he was welcomed back, and it was a one off and for a very specific reason.

      I’d blame the public more than i’d blame Hollywood because if you make money for Hollywood, they will embrace you. Who gives hollywood money? The public. And if the public hadn’t started going to see his films, his career would never have been resurrected.

      Right now you are seeing the resurgence of his original career high.

      • hmmm says:


        Hollywood could have shunned him. Hollywood knew way more than the public.

      • mayamae says:

        I agree. It’s the public that splits hairs. How many times in a Natalie Portman thread is it mentioned that she supported Roman Polanski? And yet many popular celebrities (Harrison Ford) are never questioned. Similarly, everyone here hates Woody Allen and criticizes Diane Keaton for her association with him. Yet Cate Blanchett, apparently because she’s beautiful and well dressed, gets a pass.

        If I pointed out the evidence against Michael Jackson as a chronic pedophile, people would start posting about his musical genius. His career was minimally affected, and the younger generation doesn’t even seem to know about the accusations against him. And talk about a man who caused red flags by his parenting!

        I think Woody probably molested Dylan. I think Mia probably coached Dylan and ignored the huge red flags and flat out disturbing behavior. I think that Mia went along with not charging Woody because it was more convenient to her life, and wouldn’t expose anything fishy she herself did in the situation (like victim coaching). And tell me what molested child is not fragile? I’m pretty sure that every single child who is forced to testify against their abuser is fragile and traumatized. I am sure that every parent of every molested child wants to protect them from testifying in court, yet knows it’s the only way to put these guys in prison.

        It’s possible to feel ambivalent about this case without being a Woody Allen sponsored spammer, without being a victim blamer, without victim shaming, without thinking abused children are liars. I think Ronan Farrow is a brilliant man, but he is not perfect nor infallible, and he’s certainly not a neutral party. I am impressed with that fact that, unlike Mia and Andre Previn, he does not deny the very existence of Soon-Yi being his sister.

        It deeply bothers me that even though Mia characterizes Soon-Yi as “retarded”, underage, and controlled by a diabolical monster, she has disowned her as no longer her daughter. To me, that proves that Mia does not view her as a victim, and is jealous of the woman who “stole her man”. Proving the whole situation was very unhealthy and confused before the abuse even began.

        As I posted above, my life has been very affected by abuse – in more ways than I care to share here. This whole situation troubles me greatly, and to express those feelings should not make me a hater, shamer, victim blamer, etc.

        ETA I won’t read The Daily Beast item since the author is supposedly Woody Allen’s friend, but I’ve read the old Vanity Fair article, and it’s very disturbing.

      • deehunny says:

        @mayamae– very well said and eloquently put. Thank you for posting.

  6. Hannah says:

    This is just so sad. And it doesn’t appear that there will ever be a resolution.
    I think it’s also fair to direct attention to this, though: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/01/27/the-woody-allen-allegations-not-so-fast.html

    • original kay says:

      I read that article as well. The only thing that stood out to me what that Mia herself apparently gave permission for her movie clips to be used in the award montage.
      Is that true, does anyone know?

      how can she possibly proclaim what she did on twitter if she gave permission to be a part of it all?

      know what I think happened? I think she gave permission for her clips to be used, thus agreeing to be a part of the award, and then Ronan tweeted. She rode his coattails and hoped no one would publish that she agreed to be a part of the award.

      • GiGi says:

        I don’t understand this (and just have a minute, so I can’t read the above article now). Why would Mia Farrow have to give permission for her clips to be shown? Are we talking about movie clips? Because you give that permission once, when you make the movie and then whoever owns those rights, owns them. No actor would be asked for permission about showing a clip of a movie.

      • original kay says:

        @ gigi

        when you get a chance, read the article.

        It states that Mia was specifically asked for permission to use her movie clips in the montage.
        If she declined, they had another montage to use, one that just skipped the years she spent making Woody Allen movies.
        She apparently agreed that her clips could be used.

        I am confused as well.

      • Hannah says:

        @Gigi: I’m not sure about the technicalities but I believe anyone has to give permission when their work is shown in a different context. If an actor’s movies are shown on tv or at a screening at a festival etc. they don’t need to give permission. But if only segments are used in another context (a tv show, a documentary etc.) they need to ask for your consent.

      • Magsmarq says:

        The author of the piece was the creator of the montage, and he specifically states in the article that he asked Mia for her permission.

    • Whateverworksforyou says:

      That article is a travesty. There were entire swaths of text it was painful to read, he editorialized so heavily it was disgusting.

      My personal fave wtf moment was when he made the argument that since mia has since hinted that frank sinatra is ronan’s real father, it makes it somehow less of a ‘moral transgression’ for allen to get with ronan’s sister. you know, since he’s no longer *technically* both a father and a brother-in-law

    • Mallory says:

      I’d take it with grain of salt, or a tablespoon… That guy’s Woody’s biographer. Excuse me, if I don’t find him at all compelling. I’m sure he’s not at all biased on this matter. I mean his documentary is not at all a “love song to Woody”.
      In that pathetic article, he’s basically frothing at the mouth while character assassinating both Mia and Dylan. Overtly or subversively. I’ll take a pass. And sure I’m exaggerating, but it’s convenient how Mia gets to be spiteful green monster of envy and pettiness and Woody, the clueless victim.

      But we can never have the onus on the perpetrator, now can we? What with the b****es always asking for it.

      • Lark says:

        The dude is a slut shaming prick who left out major facts of the case to try and favor that disgusting monster of a man called Woody Allen. He basically tries to say because Mia cheated in her early 20s and mid 20s, that she somehow convinced Dylan to make this up and is almost on the same level as Woody. Yes, he literally made that comparison…that slut-shaming jerk made me throw up in my mouth when I read it.

      • IzzyB says:

        I like how he’s saying get the facts straight while using the gossip that Ronan may not be Woodys child as a way of making the Soon-Yi situation seem less creepy.

        This is not just biased, it’s a character assassination of Mia and Dylan

      • Mallory says:

        But we have to debate this, to look at the facts… As the fanboys say, he’s innocent till proven guilty, which means that Dylan is the liar till proven otherwise. Ffs.
        And aside that sorry excuse for a human being that is Weide, the manbros and the MRA geniuses, what I find disconcerting and nauseating, is the number of women that are on the sides. But no… there’s no patriarchy whatsoever and Hollywood’s such a beacon for social progress, to paraphrase Clooney.
        Gimme a break.

      • Peppa says:

        He is way to close to Woody to be objective about it. I believe he said he wasn’t going to “attack” Mia and then went on to attack Mia several times.

    • Luca26 says:

      The only other thing that stood out in that article is that Soon-Yi and Woody barely met according to even Mia until she was of age. That’s a relief that at least she entered into that relationship as an adult as sick as it still is.

      Dylan should be applauded for speaking out. I was speaking with a friend who is a Woody Allen fan who was too young to remember the scandal and hadn’t heard of any of this until Dylan’s letter. She was horrified and I’m sure he’s lost a fan.

      • Sarah says:

        Wot? My understanding was that Woody was essentially her only father figure, from at least her early teens. And he may not have lived in the same house as her, but he was dating her mother and in and out of her mother’s house on a daily basis.

      • Jag says:

        Perhaps I’m remembering incorrectly, but weren’t naked or half-naked photos of Soon-Yi found lying on a table in his possession when she was 16?

      • Seagulls says:

        @Jag – I believe the pictures were left on the mantel in Mia’s house. As someone pointed some other site, we have no idea who took the photos, if Woody left them to mess with Mia or if Soon Yi left them out as a very teenaged thing to do.

        Either way, I find that age difference icky, icky, icky.

      • Luca26 says:

        The article quotes Mia’s memoir. Soon-Yi is the adopted daughter of Previn. I think that he was a father figure but he has disowned Soon-Yi. Since Mia and Woody never lived together (they each had their own apartments) he didn’t spend much time with the older children. Mia decided that Woody and Soon-Yi should go out and get to know each other on innocent outings and that is when they began their affair. It still doesn’t make it ok in my eyes but I do believe there was consent and since this is Mia’s version of events I believe it.

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        @seagulls and jag:

        Mia Farrow found naked photos of her daughter under a tissue box, as the story goes, in Allen’s apartment. She was posed in such a way as to expose her genitalia in every picture. When she confronted Allen about the pictures, he copped to having a relationship with her daughter, a fact which WA and SY Previn had been concealing from Farrow all along.

      • Nate says:

        The girl’s true age wasn’t exactly known. She was adopted after surviving a horrific life on the street from the time she was very small. She was backward and very behind in all her childhood milestones, and couldn’t talk, read, or learn well. Mia had been paying for her to get private tutoring to bring her up the best way she could. The tutors Soon-Yi had came forward and testified that they believed the girl to be the victim of Allen’s “grooming” from a young age, and that she was mentally challenged enough that it made her a very easy target for him. They guessed at her actual age, but whatever it truly was, it was clear that her affair, or at least his fixation on her, began long before she was “legal”. This is truly perverted, no matter how you want to dice it. If Brad Pitt or Hugh Jackman began a relationship with one of his adopted children, whether the paperwork was actually there on the adoption or not, people would be horrified. Think about it. The age difference is literally the same. These men, like woody, had biological and adopted further children whilst with the mother. It’s a travesty, and I don’t know why people are questioning it.

    • cr says:

      I used to be squarely in the ‘Woody Allen did this’ camp.

      But even shortly after the accusations, there were questions raised.

      And reading the DB article reminds my why I have that kernel of doubt.

      Most accusations of abuse are true, and I think the initial reaction of believing the accuser is the correct one. But questioning a specific case is also not ‘wrong’, as false accusations do happen.

      Dylan is a victim. But to me there is a legitimate question is who is her victimizer, Woody or Mia.

    • JessMa says:

      It was written by an Allen friend and admirer. It is so obviously biased. He also makes a big deal about the examination proving no sexual abuse. That is total b.s. since an exams can’t prove or disprove touching. Exam can usually only prove penetration if there are injuries. He also says Woody passed a lie detector. Yeah it was given by his own people. He could take the test 10 times and only pass once and then discard the other 9 results.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Exactly, Jessma. The lie detector defense is ridiculously weak…who knows if it was even administered, and it wouldn’t have been admissible in court anyway. His lawyers knew that. And the exam defense just makes me see red – it proves nothing. That was all for the “court of public opinion”.

    • Jennifer12 says:

      I read that article and thought it was well written. He clearly tries to stay objective, and yet people are character assassinating him. People don’t want to hear that there are two sides to every story or that there are inconsistencies that need to be heard. I don’t think it’s appropriate at all that he married SoonYi but I also find it alarming that people still say he married his daughter. Facts are facts, and you need to be accurate. I think that destroyed a family and that is the genesis of all of this. Mia is the person accusing and the person who people are believing and it’s fair that we see all facets. I find her defense of Polanski sickening because there is PROOF he drugged and raped a junior high student. Whatever the victim says, she was raped and Mia repeatedly defends him. Her brother was caught raping multiple children. She is saying she lied to her son, former partner, and former lover about paternity. She helped drive a former friend into the mental institution by getting pregnant with the friend’s husband’s baby (the guy who would later adopt SoonYi with Mia). Is this a person who is honest? I think her brother is Dylan’s rapist and either the facts are hazy and got lost or were deliberately manipulated.

      • Whateverworksforyou says:

        Seriously, you fascinate me. Are you trolling for kicks? Do you draw a paycheck for this?

        Don’t slut-shame Mia; don’t insinuate that makes her automatically a bad person and don’t imply (without evidence) that she has bearing on Dylan’s account of what happened. Do not imply that, as Soon-yi was not his biological daughter, he did not have an obligation–as her mother’s boyfriend of 12 years–to NOT make sexual advances to her

        I mean Jesus you don’t even distinguish between the two VERY DIFFERENT things you “think” really happened: it was either the uncle OR she made it all up. And I don’t think you care as long as it wasn’t Woody

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Wow. Are you serious? That’s some pretty damning stuff. What are your sources? I’ve been reading about this since yesterday afternoon and this is the first time I’ve heard Mia’s brother accused of raping Dylan. That a HUGE accusation and casts everything else you say as wild conjecture, to put it mildly.

      • pleaseicu says:

        Mia doesn’t repeatedly defend Polanski. She’s publicly said she’s not friends with him anymore.

        And IIRC the only support she’s shown for him in decades is testifying during a defamation lawsuit to the fact that at the time he was supposedly harassing and off with a girl as was stated in the article he was suing over he was actually with her and a group of others.

        And IIRC between Mia and Woody, only one of them signed the petition publicly supporting Polanski and asking for him to go free, and it wasn’t Mia.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        My comments keep getting lost, sorry. Not paid, don’t like Allen, find him morally disgusting because of Soon-Yi and talentless because his films are a bore. Home with 2 sick kids, so had to call in sick. Not in the entertainment business and don’t know any celebrities. I offered a possibility which I clearly said was an opinion. Mia’s brother is a proven child molester. He was around her kids a lot. Would he have been able to resist?

      • Jennifer12 says:

        Sorry, forgot: I don’t slut shame, but what do you call someone who slept with an ex behind her partner’s back and the ex’s wife whom she considered a friend years before any of this broke, birthed his child and then passed the kid off as the partner’s? That’s an honest person? As for trolling, you’re all over this thread. What are you doing?

      • pleaseicu says:

        Jennifer12 can you provide links to the proof that Mia’s brother had access to and was around her children a lot or at all? I’m actually curious where this idea came from because I’ve never read anything like that before. Even Woody’s team or defenders have never put forth that Mia’s brother was behind it or even around the kids, and since he was convicted of actual child sex abuse he’d be the easiest person to point fingers at.

      • hmmm says:

        In questions of sexual abuse, there are rarely “two sides to every story”. The fact that this comment suggests that also suggests someone who hasn’t a clue about sexual abuse.

        The rest of the comment is an vicious indictment of Mia, regardless of the protestations of neutrality.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        I don’t know of any links, I’m sorry. I actually should have been clear that I just assumed her brother would’ve been around her kids because the Farrows were a close family and she probably didn’t realize he was a child rapist at that point. What I am just wondering- wondering is all- is if he was around Mia’s kids because they are his family and Mia is close to her siblings, would he be able to resist sexually abusing them? It sounds like there is more to this story than what is out there is all. I just have a thing about people making assumptions and kangaroo courts.

      • deehunny says:

        @Jennifer12– it is your opinion and I respect that it’s your opinion. I disagree.

        Even if the child rapist brother was around the children a lot and let’s say he molested them, that still DOES NOT MEAN Woody didn’t molest Dylan. Non sequitur.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        Thanks, deehunny. I will listen to anyone who is not screaming (in writing or otherwise) or lobbing nasty insults. I don’t know what happened; none of us do. Whatever happened, I hope Dylan is able to find peace.

      • Terry says:

        So you think Dylan could have been raped by her uncle? Lame. I think a 7 yo would know the difference between a father and uncle.

      • Nate says:

        Ugh. WOW. That’s all I have to say. Woody’s PR machine is alive and well. Get a clue: the article was written by a good friend of Woody’s. It’s biased. People are naively choosing to believe what they want to hear, that it’s simply a question of Woody’s word against Mia’s. What’s generally lost in translation are the witness accounts of maids and nannies who came forward with evidence of their own about Woody and Dylan. Stuff like their not being able to find Dylan for several minutes as she would disappear with Woody, and emerge later from weird areas of the house, without underpants. And a lot of this was noted before Mia was even told. Explain to me then how Mia could have orchestrated all this. The story Dylan tells of her father putting his head in her naked lap? Yeah. That wasn’t Mia’s account. That was an eye-witness account from an employee in the home. Whether it was a nanny or maid, I can’t recall. People are literally performing emotional lobotomies on themselves to excuse this piece of trash. And quit with the accusatory stuff about Mia. She’s not a perfect person, I will give you that, and her brother is horrendous, but I haven’t seen her support her brother. And she was asked to give an account in a courtroom about a dinner with Polanski years ago. It doesn’t mean she supports Polanski or the petition to have charges dropped in the case against his rape victim. Reading comp, people. Reading comp.

    • red_jane says:

      Mayamae I couldn’t agree more.. thank you for objectively summing up my feelings so well!

      • Jennifer12 says:

        No, Terry. I am saying that it is possible the uncle, who was around them, could have molested her. Or more than one sibling. Painful memories and trauma can bleed into each other. I don’t know what happened; I know what Dylan is saying happened. And neither do you. I don’t see how going around in circles is helpful. None of us want to see children hurt or molesters go free but I also don’t want to see people turning into a mob based on what someone says happened without proof because that is vigilantism. The threads can contain a mob mentality.

  7. GoodNamesAllTaken says:

    How heartbreaking. And enraging. And I don’t think it will change a thing. She’s right.

  8. GiGi says:

    While I know he was never prosecuted, I think he did it. Because he clearly has no idea of sexual boundaries. And I believe that any man who could be sleeping with his lover’s teenage daughter could definitely have been molesting her young daughter as well.

    And when I think about this in terms outside of Hollywood – like, say this was being said about a teacher or a coach or a friend – this would be considered so heinous. And yet these celebs continue to work with him, continue to laud him. And good for Dylan for calling these people out. What if it *were* one of their kids? Are they really so callous to all of this?

    • V4real says:

      +1 Gigi IMO he definitely did it and I believe deep down inside people in Hollywood knows he did it. Sometimes if something don’t affect people directly they don’t concern themselves with it.

    • ANDREA1 says:

      Yes am equally glad she called them out.

      • Londerland says:

        I’m glad she called them out too, and I would love for one of them – any of them – to have the decency to respond. Even to say, flat out, “I don’t believe Dylan” or “we’ll never know”, just take a minute inbetween your floods of praise for this wizened narcissist’s “sensitivity” and “great roles for women” to acknowledge this issue.

        Sadly, I suspect they’ll just blank the article altogether and continue to act like it’s nothing to do with them, and Blanchett will thank him in her Oscar speech…

      • Peppa says:

        Alec Baldwin commented about it when confronted on Twitter saying it was a personal family matter that he had no right to comment on. Cate made a neutral comment when asked by a reporter (another “it’s a personal matter type thing).

      • deehunny says:

        My neighbor was telling me (not direct knowledge so I can’t answer any questions) that Alec Baldwin was on Howard Stern and Howard Stern was asking him how he could ever work with such a vile human being. HS basically said he would never watch anything with WA in it or funded by it and Alec has no business working with him and though that’s his personal choice, it’s the wrong one.

    • Nicolette says:

      Hollywood has no moral compass what so ever. Children are offered up as sacrificial lambs in a sense for profit and greed. I only wish every victim of abuse in show business would stand up and point their fingers at their abusers and call them out. Who ever it is, I don’t care how powerful or influential. Directors, producers, actors etc. Time to string them up by their balls as far as I’m concerned. It is a sick industry, filled with very sick people. Yet they parade around on their red carpets and their award shows and act as though they are so much better than the rest of us. It’s time for someone to step up and do something about it.

      • pleaseicu says:

        This is true. Polanski, Corey Feldman has said he and Cory Haim were routinely passed around to HW execs for sex and were backed up by the woman who played Nellie on Little House on the Prairie as it being just a known thing in HW at the time, and then Victor Salva, a director who was convicted of sex abuse of one of the child actors on one of his movies and his first movie after being released from prison was for DISNEY with Francis Ford Coppola helping to get him the job and bankrolling him.

      • mayamae says:

        Don’t forget Neverland, Michael Jackson’s personal pedophile amusement park.

    • hmmm says:

      Yes, yes, and YES! I’m so glad she called celebs out, named names. It’s about time.

      • deehunny says:

        @pleaseicu– I had no idea about the Haim and Feldman incident. It’s crazy to know that Hollywood is a haven for pedaphiles. I had no idea and thought they Polanski, Jackson, and Allen were isolated incidents. Thank you for opening my eyes.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Deehunny – I don’t know if you will see this, but if you do, please read Coryography, by Cory Feldman. His story was amazingly well written, and amazingly horrifying. He doesn’t name all names, but he doesn’t hold back on what was done to him and Cory Haim. It will turn your stomach.

  9. badrockandroll says:

    Such a tangled mess of inept prosecutorial conduct all those years ago. It reminds me of an old Law and Order episode where a kid was coached by her mom to say that daddy did bad things. The initial complaint involved a patched up video & nannies recanting testimony. Everyone mentions Ronan, but no-one talks about Moses cutting his ties with Mia and joining up with the Woody camp. And the use of a military analogy is deliberate.

    I have no idea whether Dylan was abused by Woody or not, but I do think that that whole household of children was abused by this split up of twenty years ago, and I feel sorry for every one of them. Just not Mia or Woody.

    • Rhea says:


    • Lindy says:

      I agree with you on this. I also think it’s creepy that the Farrow family keeps trotting this out in public. Yes, cut your ties with Woody, get Dylan all the help she needs, let her know you’re there for her and back her up 100%. I don’t see the utility of getting onto Twitter and bringing the public into a truly horrific sequence of events.

      • Seagulls says:

        At least Dylan has finally shared her thoughts publicly. There was something that felt kind of exploitative about Mia and Ronan talking about this over and over. I know some people who have been abused want to speak about it, and some do not, but for them to keep tweeting about it felt wrong.

      • Sarah says:

        Dylan says in her letter that she has found it very hard to deal with the public adulation of Woody. So Ronan and Mia criticising him in public is probably their way of trying to make up for it. I don’t see the problem.

      • JessMa says:

        It is her story and she can go public if she wants. Sometimes these stories help other victims step forward or feel less alone.

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        “Everyone mentions Ronan, but no-one talks about Moses cutting his ties with Mia and joining up with the Woody camp. And the use of a military analogy is deliberate.” Badrockandroll, it’s all too common for siblings to side with the sexual abuser parent against the victim. It is far easier for family members to completely ignore what the victim is saying, indeed, even call them “liar” than it is to wrap their brains around the possibility that someone they trusted, loved and grew up with could do such a heinous act to a child.

        Lindy, the Farrow family is not ‘trotting this out’ like a show pony pouting because they don’t have enough attention; they are shining the glaring exposure of child abusing slimes who try to lie and squirm their way out of being found out. This is brave and necessary. Your attitude, and yes, your letter, is the cudgel that beats back little children and even grown men and women readers here from finally emerging from their caves of pain and solitude into the bright light of possibility, that of a new and ultimately happy life.

        The ‘utility’ of bringing the public into this is to save other little girls who are too afraid and/or ashamed, to give them the courage to speak up against their abusers long after the statute of limitations have expired, and to finally release them from the nightmares they’ve borne alone and in silence. The truly ‘horrific sequence of events’ here is all the too familiar tragedy of abusers denying all and blaming their victims as mixed up crazies. The repeated soul wrenching ugliness of never knowing if other victims are cowering in secrecy eats away at the little girls and boys, even as adults while trying to heal and go on with their lives.



      • Nate says:

        Yeah. It’s all dirty laundry anyway. They shouldn’t be talking about it. It’s the responsibility of the victim to heal on her own while her abuser is about to receive numerous accolades this awards season, despite everyone in hollywood knowing full well what happened. Yeah, I can’t imagine why that would provoke a victim or her mother/brother to say anything. How uncouth. *eyeroll*

    • hmmm says:


      So eloquent and so on point.

    • mayamae says:

      I’ve never heard that Moses cut ties and joined “sides” with Woody Allen.

  10. Launicaangelina says:

    I can’t help but think of his film, Manhattan. In that film, he had a teenaged lover.

    • Mallory says:

      In most of his films, there’s this theme of younger love interests. Talk about variety. But they’re art, so we can’t see any malicious intent in any of them.

    • JessMa says:

      I heard his first wife was 16 or 17. Does anyone know the details?

      • Decloo says:

        His first wife was 16 but he was only 19.

      • Mallory says:

        For Decloo, in some states, that still could be considered statutory rape. But why push it.
        And then there was Soon-Yi.
        But why so mean, to quote the classics. It’s all circumstantial. His behavior looks predatory. Allegedly! And women… they just can’t wait to sleep with men and then, screw their lives nine ways till Sunday. Even if there weren’t any corroboratory patterns, his actions speak volumes. You’d have to be deluded otherwise. Not that the groupies who’ll never meet Allen, would ever listen. Too busy fawning over his work. Work that does not absolve his actions in any way.
        This whole cult at the altar of pedophiles who happen to be great film-makers, is never gonna disappear. See the newest member of this select group, David O’Russell.

  11. Lilian says:

    I’m not sure what to believe. 2 sides to every story.

    • Rhea says:

      True. With that said, I still feel sad for Dylan. She clearly suffering as a result of whatever happened in that household.

    • hmmm says:

      Rarely in the case of sexual abuse.

    • Hiddles forever says:

      Not really.
      In rape and sexual abuse cases there is only one side that is important for society, the perpetrator’s one.
      You hear continuously people blabbering about false allegations and how not to ruin the life of the “poor innocent” accused one. Do you think the majority of people believe victims?

    • Nate says:

      “2 sides to every story.”
      If you’re talking about 2 sides to every adult bust-up, yes.
      If you’re talking about the case involving a 50+ year old man and a 7 year old girl who called him “dad”, uh…no. Kids can’t make this stuff up. Adults are wise enough and cunning enough to defend themselves with whatever means necessary. Children have no one to turn to if another adult doesn’t back them. Not exactly a case scenario where this mantra applies. For the record, I was sexually abused–for eight long months–at 16 by a man in his sixties. Luckily, when I finally came forward, my parents believed me. But that didn’t stop the community backlash against my parents for denouncing “a very respectable man who did great things for all the neighbors.” It’s sick, and in a case like this, especially when the evidence is overwhelming, why the hell can’t we just. believe. the victim? The odds are already stacked against the children anyway!

  12. Greata says:

    I believe this vile little man is guilty.

    • springingforward says:

      Yes, he is guilty. I will never watch another WA movie; Hollywood is seriously messed up.

  13. Whateverworksforyou says:

    This op-ed just rips me up inside. Most abuse victims are *at least* spared the world lauding the abuser as some kind of unparalleled gift to humanity. I’m so heartbroken for her–though it’s good to see that she seems to be doing well now

  14. kibbles says:

    Her essay was so powerful. I support her 100% and am glad she has finally found the strength and the voice to fight back against Woody Allen and his supporters in Hollywood. Kudos to Nicholas Kristof at the New York Times for giving Dylan the opportunity to tell her side of the story. And so happy to see the support she is getting throughout the blogosphere. Most of the comments I’m reading support Dylan and believe her allegations against Allen. I loved the end of her essay calling out some of his biggest supporters in Hollywood: Cate Blanchett, Louis CK, Alec Baldwin, Emma Stone, Scarlett Johansson, and Diane Keaton. Very, very shameful.

    I like Cate Blanchett, but I do not want her to win for Blue Jasmine. I think Cate’s award would forever be tainted by Woody Allen’s crimes and this growing storm to hold him accountable. She might also receive a ton of backlash just by being associated with Allen and winning for a movie he directed. She deserves to win another year for another movie that isn’t associated in any way with a pedophile creep.

    • OhDear says:

      I hope she (meaning Dylan Farrow) gets the peace that she’s been looking for.

      Blanchett’s (and Baldwin’s) response to Farrow’s letter was disappointing, essentially saying that it was a private family matter.

      • emmie_a says:

        I’m not totally disappointed in their responses… yet. Dylan had the courage to make her abuse public, but that doesn’t mean that everyone feels comfortable discussing in public what happened to her (or on Twitter of all places). And I’m not saying that they (Cate & Alec) don’t believe Dylan and yes, it would have shown a lot of courage to speak out on her behalf, but it’s such a very sensitive topic. Plus, Dylan has had years to think about this and reconcile her feelings and put everything into words. I don’t think the celebs she named had a heads-up about her letter so maybe they also need time to digest everything and respond? Again, I’m not saying they don’t believe her or that they are blaming her or anything like that – I just don’t think it’s fair to expect an immediate response when dealing with such a delicate, sensitive, awful story. It will be interesting to see which celebrities speak out against Woody in the days ahead.

      • Nate says:

        “It will be interesting to see which celebrities speak out against Woody in the days ahead.”
        Um. It’s been YEARS. And most celebrities, at least the ones in the public eye with the biggest careers, have remained mum. And while I see your point about them not wanting to comment on such a sensitive topic, it’s still a moot point. It’s still a way for them to distance themselves from what they feel so as to be able to continue working and making money. How hard would it be to say something about how you wish her the best and hope she finds peace? Oh, no. Even that would be too patronizing a response if you hoped to work with Woody Allen again. Their compliant, wooden statements are literally them washing their hands of it in the pursuit of $$$. It’s still very, very shameful. Dylan is a badass to call them out by name. The public won’t forget it, and if it causes them to squirm in their Oscar-baited seats, good. There are times when you can’t afford to be plutonic about something so horrid.

    • mayamaely says:

      Some actors’ support of Woody Allen bother me more than others. Diane Keaton has had a close personal relationship with him for years, and may truly believe he’s falsely accused. I really love Diane Keaton and have to believe this is the case. Having said that, I fast forwarded through the Golden Globes honor and almost all of her acceptance speech. Cate Blanchett, on the other hand, knew all about these accusations before ever knowing him. Cate does not need the job or the accolades that often accompany a Woody Allen film. I usually love Cate, but this has disappointed me greatly. If the wins the Oscar, it may be tainted with the *post-molestation Woody Allen film.

  15. shitler says:

    I just threw up. Can this “man” please be arrested?

    • Erinn says:

      Oh but he’s an ARTIST! He works in Hollywood. People LOVE his movies!

      I hate situations like this. As if some assholes art suddenly trumps their lack of character.

      • OhDear says:

        It’s a bit like Jerry Sandusky’s situation, too. He’s the coach for Penn State’s legendary football team, he can’t be a child molester!

      • Hiddles forever says:


        Or like Jimmy Savile, wait.. He can’t be a pedo, he presents a TV show for children!!
        Well considering the amount of reports (214 victims) should I say we can now consider him a pedo for sure?

    • Sloane Wyatt says:

      He’s wealthy. He bought and paid for his legal escape from paying for his crimes.

      There is one legal system for the rich, and one for the rest of us. The more money you have the better outcome you can purchase. Lady Justice should be depicted with bags of money on her scales.

  16. Shannon1972 says:

    I believe her 100% and I hope he finally gets what he deserves. He’s a sick, sick man and he has made my skin crawl since the Soon Yi marriage. I’m obviously not a fan and wish he had been prosecuted so that Dylan’s suffering may have been eased a bit by justice being served. I also hope Dylan takes back her power, and finds some peace and satisfaction with the public support she is getting. And to that point, I’ve never been a Lena Dunham fan, but I now have a mountain of respect for her publicly supporting Dylan on Twitter the way she did.

    A lot of chatter yesterday about whether or not she should have called out the actors who have worked with him…many Cate Blanchette fans thought that was wrong. But more people seemed to think Cate’s response when asked about it yesterday was weak and political, more intent on not jeopardizing her oscar. Wondering what the CB community thinks about it…many Cate fans here.

    • emmie_a says:

      “I hope he finally gets what he deserves.”

      What would that be? If a public essay makes Dylan feel better, that’s great. I sincerely hope it helps her healing process. But what is it going to do to Woody?? None of this is shocking news. The allegations and stories have been out there for years. Missing out on an Emmy is not going to hurt Woody at all. He could care less. He’s not going to lose his fans or his place in Hollywood or his funding for future projects. I could be wrong, but in the end this isn’t going to hurt Woody at all.

      Yes, it might hurt Cate and her Emmy chances – but maybe that’s the risk you take when working with Woody. But I don’t think it will make people who think he’s a Hollywood god think twice about working with him in the future.

      And maybe I just don’t think much of Hollywood and their collective morals (I know, a horrible generalization) because I think if Hollywood wasn’t involved, or if Woody was in a different industry, it WOULD hurt him on some level.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        I see what you’re saying, Emmie and I sadly agree with you on all points. Perhaps it’s wishful thinking on my part, that Hollywood would turn away from him and stars would stop lining up to work with him. Probably won’t happen, but I can still hope. I know the statute of limitations ran out years ago, so legal relief is out unless she files a civil suit, but I don’t see this being about money for Dylan. Why would anyone put themselves through this public torture?

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        Well….. I agree with you that if the public doesn’t care and he keeps on making Hollywood money, that there will probably be no professional ramifications for him. However, times are a-changing, and if people are sensitive to sexual abuse and they hear a firsthand account of abuse from a victim, it might sour people on him, particularly if the family is vocal enough. Not everybody will want to be associated with the child molesting director if there are professional or reputational consequences for them. Just think of all the people in Hollywood who won’t wear fur or who pretend they are faithful, etc. for their public images.

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        ITA, Stars.

        Woody has the consequence of public shaming. He get’s questioned by reporters, perhaps just when he thinks his latest movie whitewashes his crimes. Dylan and her family publicly calling him out ensures we don’t forget.

        I’m sure boos, hisses, and whispers follow him wherever he goes. For controlling child sex abusers, being talked about eats at their craw because their need to appear blameless will never be fulfilled. Their repeated public outing also helps ensure they lack easy access to as many new victims. That IS something!

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Stars and Sloan, I really hope you are right. The fact that there are people twisting themselves into pretzels trying to defend him is beyond depressing. The only thing that can convict him now is the court of public opinion, and if people stop seeing his movies and he becomes a social pariah, then we may see some movement. Personally, I was also disheartened that the celebs that Dylan called out in her letter were so careful and politically correct. It’s as if they are saying that working with Allen isn’t the same as condoning his behavior…but I think it is.

      • emmie_a says:

        Sloane Wyatt: I hope he finally does succumb to public shame. But I don’t agree that being shamed or talked about will ‘eat at his craw’. He certainly didn’t show any ill effects after marrying his ‘daughter’. I think abusers are too invested in their own feelings. They don’t care what others, especially their victims feel/think/say. Obviously what Woody did years ago didn’t affect (effect?) him or alter his life or his career in any drastic way so it’ll be interesting to see if anything effects him now.

  17. DanaG says:

    I believe her now and I believed her then. Woody and his team are trying to deflect everything and put out incorrect information. The fact he managed to scar a 7 year old to the extent they prosecutors were unable to put her on the stand shows to me her mother wasn’t coaching her. Woody married his adopted daughter who also looked a lot younger then she was back then. I think Hollywood needs to grow a backbone and stop falling over themselves to appear in what are now pretty pathetic movies. Woody needs to retire and just go away I hope his new movie Blue Jasmine doesn’t do well at awards in the future there is no excuse for what he has done. To put the blame back on the victim and her mother is just as bad as the acts he committed back then. I can understand Dylan coming out now Woody is being praised and she is still tortured by what he did to her.

    • Jarredsgirl says:

      That’s right. Blaming the mother of his abuser shows his misogyny. I believe Dylan and I think that it’s very courageous that she published this. How difficult it must be for Dylan to see Woody being lauded.

  18. serena says:

    God, if this is true that it’s beyond gross. I’m inclined to believe Dylan’s story but I still have my doubts.. I don’t know, this is so so complicated and weird.

  19. Lark says:

    I am so angry and upset about Woody and this case, where a guilty man walks because he has money and power. The NYC judge basically flat out accused Woody of paying off the psychiatrists, and the state attorney in Conn. stands by Dylan. They also stated that there was “probable cause” to pursue the case but that they decided not to because they didn’t want Dylan to have to be put on the stand. Not to mention he took nude photos of his (at the time) likely underage de-facto stepdaughter to whom he had been a parental figure since she was 8, and who was the sister of his son, and left them for Mia to find….whom he later married. Also, his creepy films where nebbish old men old enough to be the father or grandfather of some girls become “love” objects…Does no one look back at Manhattan now and shake their heads? The female lead was a high-schooler. And lastly, Dylan SAYS he did it.

    I get so pissed at the Woody Allen apologists, who conveniently “forget” to include the facts I mentioned above in their articles or try and argue that Soon Yi wasn’t really his daughter. Bitch please, he was her father figure since she was 8 years old and she was the sister of what was thought to be his biological son. I am so angry at some of the media, which are leaving out the facts I mentioned above and are biased in favor of Woody. The media is supposed to tell the whole truth, but Woody still has powerful friends apparently. UGH. I will never read The Wrap again after their disgusting, obvious victim blaming insinuations in their article about this and Blue Jasmine. My heart just breaks for Dylan. Rant over, but still…ugh. I just fume. I want his little turtle face to get run over by a mack truck. He is a true monster, and it pisses me off that Hollywood has basically “protected” him and many of them “stretch” to defend him. As much of a POS child rapist as Roman Polanski is, at least his victim specifically stated that she wants to move on with her life and has specifically said she wants Roman to be able to work and move on with his life. Dylan obviously doesn’t feel the same, and I’m angry at the people who work with Woody because of that. Screw Diane Keaton and all of them.

    • Seagulls says:

      I don’t think people include those “facts” because they’re in dispute.

      I do believe Dylan was abused, but I think it was by her uncle, Mia’s brother.

      • Sarah says:

        what “facts” are you basing that on?

      • Shannon1972 says:

        That is a massive accusation to make. Talk about “facts”! Even the pro-Woody blogs haven’t floated that one.

      • Seagulls says:

        @Sarah and Shannon – the fact that Mia’s brother is a convicted child molester.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        And Woody Allen is a pillar of morality? One doesn’t negate the other. You are still making a huge leap with this one.

      • Seagulls says:

        How is it a huge leap to think that a convicted sex offender would reoffend, with family, when that a sadly common occurrence, and that during the course of a bitter break up a little girl might be encouraged to change her story?

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Because you are still pulling that accusation out of the air. There is absolutely nothing to back it up and Dylan has said very clearly and without any question that her father is the one who abused her. It’s common knowledge that Allen had an inappropriate relationship with Dylan – the judge even pointed it out and denied him any visitation. The prosecutor in the case believed Dylan – we’ve been over the specifics too many times today to rehash them.
        At what point does the brother figure into this? Not ignoring his crimes, but to point the finger in this case is still a huge leap. Not even Woody Allen’s people have done that, and he would have been an easy target.

      • Stinky says:

        @seagulls I see you arguing the same point over and over on this thread and no one has sufficiently answered your question, so I will jump in here:

        Mia DID do something about Woody when she learned he was obsessed with Dylan. She FORCED him to get psychological counseling and made certain all the nannies knew he was NEVER to be alone with the child. EVER. Which is why alarm bells went off that one day when the nannies couldn’t find Woody and Dylan while Mia was out. And the rest, they say, is history. (Read the 1992 Vanity Fair article so you can learn what, in fact, Mia did do to protect all her children.

      • Stinky says:

        @Seagulls If you want to factor Mia’s brother into all of this, the more believable scenario would be that, perhaps her brother molested Mia when she was a child, and she was, in turn ATTRACTED TO A CHILD MOLESTER AS AN ADULT. Perhaps her brother and Woody share similar traits that she subconsciously was drawn to (even if he never touched her as a kid). That’s a more likely chain of events and more plausible than completely discounting what Dylan said, the sequence of events, the facts both sides acknowledge in the case, the recorded time frames as to when people spent time with whom, and every ounce of logic.

    • Faye says:

      “They also stated that there was “probable cause” to pursue the case but that they decided not to because they didn’t want Dylan to have to be put on the stand.”

      I read that elsewhere, and it did and still does confuse me. Since when does a prosecutor not prosecute someone they believe is guilty because it would be difficult for the victim to testify? Is that even legal? If all prosecutors made decisions based on that criterion, hardly any crime would be tried!

      It’s just so strange to me. Either there wasn’t enough evidence for them to prosecute, or the guy was in Allen’s pocket somehow.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Faye, an attorney addresses this upthread. Check it out, it’s apparently very common, depending on the victim. A prosecutor apparently will avoid putting a victim on the stand if they think they would be further traumatized by a trial.

      • Lark says:

        Faye, it’s (unfortunately) extremely common in sexual abuse cases for them to take this path of not prosecuting because they don’t want someone to be on the stand, especially when it’s known that they will likely be torn into by the defense attorney and if the victim is still traumatized. They don’t want to prosecute when they think there is a chance they may not win and the victim may end up being further traumatized….Of course, a victim or their parents have to agree (like Mia did in this case). They often take “deals” also to prevent victims of violent crimes or sexual assaults from having to testify if the victim is thought to be mentally fragile still….They did something similar to a friend of mine. She sunk into a deep depression after being sexually assaulted, and it was not a slam dunk case so the prosecutor asked if she didn’t want to go through with the case. A few other girls ended up coming forward at the last minute, so my friend wasn’t the only one testifying but she was ripped into by the defense attorney of the scumbag who called her every name under the book.

        Read the Vanity Fair pieces from 2013 and 1992, where they actually went and talked to people like the state’s attorney. I believe the NY Times also wrote a good investigative piece. The Daily Beast article is a sexist piece of hogwash written by Allen’s close associate who straight up lied and omitted several facts in an attempt to spin it in Allen’s favor.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        If the victim is young and fragile, and if the victims testimony is crucial to the case (as is often the case in sexual abuse cases, where the perpetrator may have taken care not to leave physical evidence and where there may be no other witnesses) this happens quite a lot. It’s very difficult to prosecute these cases for exactly this reason.

      • Stinky says:

        It is very, VERY common, especially in the case of children. Having them relive their abuse and then be subjected to a defense attorney implying that they are lying or that they are making things up, etc., does far more psychological damage to a child than just getting the victim away from the abuser permanently. And the abuser lives to abuse another day, It’s a sad fact and as disgusting as can be.

      • Nate says:

        It’s very common. Ideally, the courts wish to protect children. A courtroom is a very intimidating place for an adult, much less a child, because due process requires that every bit of testimony be cross-examined. Many young children, be they victims or witnesses, are spared this if the consensus is that the child would only be harmed and further damaged in having to go through with it. I thought everyone knew that. Either way, it’s telling that the judge riled against Woody and took away his parental rights. That wouldn’t have been done if there was no evidence to support Dylan’s claims.

    • MynameisPeaches! says:

      I couldn’t agree more, Lark. His defenders are disgusting.

    • hmmm says:

      So agree with everything you said! Apologists argue on a technicality, that he was not her father, stepfather, etc. But he WAS a father figure considering the years involved. He may not have technically been a father, but he was emotionally a father figure. No amount of distortion can erase that psychological FACT.

    • littlestar says:

      You stated it perfectly, Lark. And I agree with everything you said.

  20. original kay says:

    I also believe he did this.

    I believe he is guilty, all the way.

    I liked that Ronan spoke out. I applaud Dylan for doing so as well.

    I really would like to know if Mia gave permission for her film clips to be a part of the award montage. does anyone know? I didn’t watch the show, were her movies represented?

    • Lindy says:

      I look forward to hearing from Moses. I would assume he will be the next one to speak out.

      • JessMa says:

        Unless he was in the attic during the assault, I don’t see why it matters. Whatever issues he and Mia have is separate from Dillon’s abuse. It is her story.

      • original kay says:

        comment moved to proper location.

    • Shannon1972 says:

      As GiGi states above, the actors don’t own the rights to the films, clips, or images, so they wouldn’t need be asked. Where did that story come from?
      I didn’t watch the show and I haven’t seen any of his movies, so I have no idea if her clips were used.

    • Jennifer12 says:

      Mia gave her permission for her image to be used. It is illegal to do so otherwise.

      • original kay says:

        go back and read, someone addresses this with facts. not being snarky, just letting you know this was addressed above.
        the story came from the article that Woody’s biographer wrote, a week after the tweets about woody allen. it was a mess of an article.

        @ Jennifer

        thank you for clarifying. now I don’t know what to think about her prior knowledge about the award montage. she participated in it when she had the choice not to , to stand up before the award was given.
        I find it odd she did give permission. That, to me, is wrong.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Thanks original Kay, I will do that. I believe Dylan, so I am biased, and so is Woody’s biographer. He’s a fan.
        Just want to point out that I have a very close relative who is an actor, and on every project they sign a pretty iron clad release that signs away their rights to the images (film, print or otherwise) from the project and also states that their images can be used in perpetuity by the owners. So why is using Mia’s clips without her express permission illegal? I wish Mia would just clear that up.

        Not snarky either. I’ve got no snark for this one. Just genuinely curious.

      • original kay says:

        @ Shannon

        I wish she would too. Just a statement clarifying what actually occurred, because it does not look good on her at this point.
        It looks like she jumped on Ronan’s bandwagon, when it was he who stood up against the award.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        I don’t know enough legally to explain it, but Mia had to give permission for her image to be used.

      • pleaseicu says:

        If it was just film clips, no, she didn’t have to give permission. The company who owns the copyright to the films would be the ones to give permission to use the film clips.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Thanks pleaseicu. That’s what I thought, that it was copyrighted material and automatically belongs to the company that produced it, not the actors.

      • Nate says:

        Not only does it make more sense that the studios would own the rights instead of the actors, that blurb of info came from the beast article, which was so obviously biased on woody’s behalf it was nauseating. I don’t know that I’d even call it journalism.

    • vangroovey says:

      It’s incorrect that individual actors don’t have to give their permission. They do when it is used for something other than a standard viewing. So like, they have to give permission to have their likeness used in a montage. It has to do with publicity rights.

  21. eliza says:

    I wish all the people who ask why charges were never filed would read the NYT piece and her open letter in it’s entirety and their questions would be answered.

  22. Ag says:

    Disgusting piece of shit.

    As are all his apologists.

  23. Emdeedee says:

    The man went on to become romantic and marry another “daughter”…. I would say he was in a position of trust when he started that relationship….so clearly he has no boundaries!! Does that not speak volumes about him?

  24. Dodo says:

    A young woman has gone out of her way to discuss a very ugly and sad experience. Why on earth would anyone make that sh*t up?
    Jeez people are stupid…. or equally bad as Woody.

    • cr says:

      I don’t think Dylan/Malone is lying, I think she believes that it happened.
      And as I mentioned in a previous comment, most accusations of abuse are true, but, there are cases in which children have been coached.
      Is this one of those cases? I don’t know.
      But the reality is, neither does anyone else on this thread, whatever it is that our instincts are telling us.

      • Seagulls says:


      • hmmm says:

        If the preponderance of cases are true, than why is this not assigned the same probability?

      • springingforward says:

        Give it a rest, cr.
        Young children such as Dylan don’t make up stories of sexual abuse nor do they bring attention on themselves repeating those events years later at the age of 28. She has nothing to gain but the relief of unburdening herself of the weight of abuse from a man lauded by Hollywood and some movie goers.

      • Aurie says:


        No you need to give it up springing. Go read about the McMartin case and watch the Dutch movie “The Hunt”

        CR gave a very impartial, reasonable response. Yours is simply a case of “let me profess my moral superiority by siding with the victim accusers no matter what”

      • Nate says:

        This isn’t “instinctual”. That’s what is so infuriating about you Woody supporters. You may not think you are supporting him, but you are doing so whether you choose to believe it or not. The facts are out there. They make sense. They didn’t wish to put Dylan on the stand, but they removed her from Woody’s care. This is enough for any skeptic. It’s common and it speaks volumes against Woody. Plus there’s plenty of testimony from plenty of witnesses besides Dylan and Mia. Go back and read the VF article. Read the full NYT piece. At least try and get more info than from a beast article written by Woody’s biographer. If you’re very hung up on hating Mia, that’s fine. It’s your choice to do so. But it doesn’t negate what happened between Dylan and Woody. Or Soon-Yi and Woody. And I’ll bet you every penny I have that one day we’ll be hearing from his adopted children with Soon-Yi. And then who will the public blame? Soon-Yi as a “coach”? How long can this go on?

      • Nate says:

        @Aurie: We aren’t simpletons. We understand that false accusations happen. But the facts in this instance are too overwhelming to ignore, and there’s more evidence to support Dylan’s claims in this case than there is evidence to exonerate Woody. Every bit of “info” that has come out to deter Dylan’s story or to paint Mia as a terrible person came directly from one of Woody’s people. There are only a few sources you can trust to be unbiased, and from those sources, it’s plain to see that Dylan’s story is considered factual by the judge, the legal experts, and the psychiatrists who worked with her.

  25. Sarah says:

    very difficult case. a man who raised an adopted child and then married it, well that does not prove anything but it certainly makes him very creepy and immoral.
    the problem with such cases is that you can almost never really prove it. no evidence of sexual abuse? that means he didnt injure the body. if he touched her sexually there wont be any marks but its obviously still molestation.

    what i really liked was the way she started and ended her essay. with a casual, small talk question. that makes it a lot more powerful.

    Also calling out some of the people who worked with him is a good thing in my opinion. Cate Blanchett isnt guilty in this case but her response came across as not caring about it.

    oh and for Woodys Team: you guys should hope he is innocent. if he is not you are taking money for defending a child molester and putting down a victim.

    • Happyhat says:

      I think it’s definitely showing everyone’s price, as it were. Your career, your ability to win an Oscar over speaking out about abuses of power in the industry you work in. The number of blind eyes turned in Hollywood must be staggering.

    • Jennifer12 says:

      He was wrong to marry SoonYi but he was never her dad, adoptive or otherwise. Her dad is Andre Previn and her name is (or was) Soon-Yi Previn. It’s all these inaccuracies that make me wonder if people attacking him are doing so based on actual facts.

      • Sarah says:

        He was certainly her step-father!

      • Jennifer12 says:

        When did I say he wasn’t? I stated her father is Andre Previn. I also said- repeatedly- that he was wrong.

      • Jaded says:

        @Sarah – he was not her step-father. Woody and Mia lived separate lives. He never adopted her. He was her mother’s boyfriend, that’s all. What he did was morally reprehensible but far from illegal or worthy of prosecution. I’m sure he had an unhealthy obsession with Dylan/Malone that may have led him to cross a line physically with her but as there was no sign of vaginal or anal penetration, the sexual abuse may have been a more “hands off” situation, but horrific nevertheless and left its mark on her emotionally and psychologically to this day. A close family friend with a drinking problem molested me when I was a kid. I wasn’t raped but the other stuff he did was sickening and stayed with me a long time until I got some therapy in my teens. We can’t know what exactly went down that day but Woody is in my opinion a very weird guy who doesn’t seem to have any kind of moral compass.

    • Seagulls says:

      Taking money? And who is putting Dylan down? I do believe she was molested, but I believe it was her uncle who did it. Memory is a funny thing, and when pushed and pulled it changes, especially when you are a child and the person pushing and pulling your memory is your mother. From everything I have read, that was not a well house.

      Woody is his own kind of gross. I don’t think he was Soon Yi’s father figure (by all accounts, this was Andre Previn; he was her father and the father figure), but marrying a teenager basically (I can’t recall if she was 19 or 20 when they married and was certainly 17 when they started dating)? Ew.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        There is no proof, so I am not saying definitely, but I believe there is something about the uncle as well. He has been caught molesting multiple kids and had access to Mia’s. Would he have been able to resist?

      • hmmm says:


        Your belief has nothing to do with Dylan’s very clear statement. I am apt to believe her over your completely speculative belief.

      • Seagulls says:

        @hmm – great.

      • springingforward says:

        Seagulls, how much money are you taking?
        Such clearly specious and arbitrary finger-pointing is indicative of employment by the Allen camp.

      • Nate says:

        So…as I said multiple times upthread: if your 50 year-old boyfriend, who adopted further children with you and had a biological child with you…went on to cheat on you with the child you had adopted and he had known since she was at a tender age, it would be fine to call hands-off because you had adopted her within a previous relationship? Really? It can take years for an unmarried couple to complete the paperwork to have both their names on the certificate of adoption. And considering that so many celebrities have property all over the world, and undoubtedly spend time apart/in separate homes, what then, qualifies as a father?!?!? We’re supposed to recognize unmarried unions with or without children as equally respectable as married unions…until one of the partners, as in this case, wants to marry the adopted daughter? How in hell are we supposed to make that quantum leap in judgement without appearing hypocritical? Explain that to me? And why oh why are we continuing to bring the brother into this?!? By all accounts, he wasn’t around and he wasn’t the perp. That’s like saying, “Oh, there are so many child abusers around the world, and it’s more logical that one of them that we know about did this rather than the one the victim and multiple witnesses and the psychiatrists and the judge say did it!” Are you for real right now???

  26. Happyhat says:

    This is like the whole Jimmy Savile thing in the UK. There’s a reason that a man could have over 1000 claims of abuse – power and fame. The number of people who knew him and who said either they knew and did nothing, or they suspected but did nothing. The number of people who were not surprised.

    Who knows what the truth of Woody Allen is – but I’m inclined to believe Dylan is telling the truth. A powerful man abusing his position?! Not a given, but not surprising either.

    • HotPockets says:

      Thank you for bringing up Jimmy Savile, who by the way, was knighted by the Queen and had many ties to political leaders and the Royals, he was a raging child molester and people were paid off by the BBC to cover it up and ignore it, we live in a sick world, especially when you’re a powerful man in the industry. It wasn’t until Jimmy Savile’s death when the truth finally came out and wow, is it disturbing.

      Why does Hollywood embrace it’s pedophiles and rapists?


      Terry Richardson
      Roman Polanksi
      Jimmy Savile
      Woody Allen

      and many many more.

    • mayamaely says:


      My comment is not in any way in regard to Dylan Farrow, but to your comment that someone accused by many must be guilty. My comment isn’t regarding the UK case either, I know nothing about it.

      We had a horrible phenomena in the 1980s and 1990s that’s been called “Daycare Sex Abuse Hysteria”, spurred on by rush to judgment and overly zealous prosecutors, and possibly well meaning but unprofessional mental health specialists, and America’s belief of out of control Satanism.

      Probably the most famous was the McMartin preschool trial in the 1980s. Spurred on by one child’s claim of abuse, a form letter was sent out to parents of all the children, stating their children may have been molested. The letter instructed parents to thoroughly question their children in a manor that was highly suggestible. By the following year, the number of suspected abuse victims had ballooned to 360. This was helped along by over zealous law officials and the “experts” who interviewed the children using highly suggestive comments inviting children to pretend or speculate. Out of the 400 children that were questioned, 360 were said to be abused.

      After time spent with these experts, the children told of Satanic rituals involving animal sacrifice, witches flying, underground tunnels, hot air balloon trips, orgies at car washes and airports, and being flushed down the toilet to secret rooms. This case led to the belief in False Memory Syndrome. Two of the experts on the case wrote a book called, Michelle Remembers, which recounts a story of a young girl who remembers through hypnosis, horrific Satanic rituals she was involved with. The book is now discredited, but helped fuel the Satanic scare of that time.

      These cases involved trying dozens of daycare workers, and resulted in reversed convictions and acknowledgement that probably no abuse happened. It’s this time in American history that may cause people to question a child’s claim of abuse. There is documented false memory syndrome, and I’ve actually watched a special in which children were coached into telling very vivid stories of elephants walking into the classroom and talking to them in vivid detail, and absolutely seeming to believe it was true. This is why it’s so important that children be questioned properly, and in this age it is usually done.

      There is also a case, in the 1990s I think, in which a woman “remembered” through hypnosis her father killing her best friend when they were children. The man went to jail, but it’s possible that false memory was planted by the hypnotist. It was almost a movement at the time where people who had no memory or even suspicion of being molested as children, then recalling such incidents through hypnosis.

      Most techniques that caused these problems have been changed and the questioning of children is now recorded and completed by highly trained experts.

      Having doubt does not make one a monster. If no one had doubted these out of control zealots in the 1980s-1990s, hundreds of daycare workers would be prosecuted monthly for Satanic rituals, murder, and mass molestation.

      • Nate says:

        YES…but there are facts in this case that only point to one conclusion: that despite Mia’s character, despite how she handled the cheating scandal with Soon-Yi, there is but one perpetrator, and his name is Woody Allen. I find it hard to believe that even with his wealth, his resources and his fame, Allen would still be reprimanded by the judge and removed from his daughter’s life if there weren’t enough probable cause. People forget that there was an investigation into this case, and that the one and ONLY reason Woody wasn’t prosecuted was because of the courts decision to protect the child from having to testify. This has been made clear again and again by all the right authorities. This is not uncommon in the system at all, and does NOT mean that there wasn’t enough evidence to prosecute him. If people would actually READ about this from someone other than Woody’s hollywood pals, they’d feel differently.

  27. Whateverworksforyou says:

    WHY do people keep bringing up that dailybeast article? It was appalling! He lobbed cheap ad hominem attacks at Mia, Ronan and Dylan and he followed it up by saying it isn’t actually that creepy to cheat with and then marry the daughter of your ex-girlfriend of 12 years if we think about it plus anyway it makes him somehow less likely to have abused Dylan. You know, because people without sexual boundaries or honor are rarely opportunists and of course have ironclad types. MANY very young abuse victims are deemed too fragile to be subjected to courtroom interrogations, and some of you seem to confuse that with a verdict of ‘innocent’.

    I’m so angry I can’t even type. I need a break from this site

    • kibbles says:

      Agreed. That Daily Beast article was appalling. So misogynistic in every way. That article was probably one of the reasons why Dylan decided to finally speak out now. The author of that article is a personal friend of Woody and doesn’t seem to have a problem that he married Soon Yi Previn. Disgusting. I saw that the author is now getting a ton of hate from people on Twitter and elsewhere. He deserves it all for supporting that creep and attacking Mia, Ronan, and Dylan. It’s no wonder so many victims remain silent when you see the kind of attacks that are being made by the supporters of these pedophiles and rapists.

    • Jennifer12 says:

      WHAT? No, he didn’t. The writer was very objective and tried his best to make good points. He never said that it wasn’t creepy to marry your ex-girlfriend’s daughter. He said you couldn’t accuse him of something based on that. I guess it isn’t at all creepy that Mia continually defends someone who was proven to drug and rape a 13 year old or that her brother is a convicted child molester who was constantly around her kids. And before you say anything, I hate any crimes against children and have testified for kids I think have been abused. But I loathe people’s automatically attacking anyone instead of hearing everything and finding evidence.

      • pleaseicu says:

        You do know that Mia doesn’t defend Polanski, right? She testified in a defamation lawsuit ONCE in 2005 as to the facts of his whearabouts on the night an article accused him of something. And that she’s publicly said she’s no longer friends with him.

        Woody’s the one who’s publicly supported Polanski going free by signing that petition that went around HW begging for such a great artist like Polanski to not be arrested and to let him go free.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        She testified for him, but doesn’t support him? I believe there is other evidence on the internet that supports her friendship for him. And Woody is an idiot for supporting Polanski.

      • hmmm says:


        Dylan asserts that Woody Allen sexually assaulted her when she was a child. What has this to do with Mia regardless of anything?

      • Lauraq says:

        Jennifer, it means that she told what she believed to be the truth in a case unrelated to the rape case. Are you saying you would lie under oath just because you didn’t like someone?

      • Nate says:

        My eyes are stuck in the back of my head from rolling them so damned hard. Have you read the names on the Polanski petition? Have you read ANYTHING other than that beast article? Do you know how the legal system works? I hope for your sake that you’re very, very young. Or that maybe this is the first time you’ve read up on this case. It’s the only way to explain why you would miss so many important facts along the way. In fact, and in all honesty, maybe this is the first time many young people have heard about this? Through the beast article? I can’t conceive of any other way people would defend what’s clearly going on here…

    • Sarah says:

      I have this horrible suspicion that some of the people defending Woody in the comments are in fact on Woody’s payroll.

      • eliza says:

        I wouldn’t doubt it.

      • kibbles says:

        Oh absolutely. The author of the Daily Beast article stated that he produced and directed the two-part PBS special, Woody Allen: A Documentary. He owes a lot of his professional success to Woody Allen. They are friends and associates. The author knows Woody’s people. That article should be discredited. It is a biased piece of reporting.

      • cr says:

        That would be no. In this case there are legitimate questions about whether this happened. And bringing up those questions doesn’t make us Woody supporters.
        Do I understand why you think Woody did this? Absolutely.
        But for some reason bringing up questions about this particular case makes those of us who do Woody Allen supporters, pedophile supporters, blaming the victim, etc.

        @kibbles: the actual facts of Mia’s previous relationships aren’t biased reporting. You don’t have to like his interpretation of them, but as I mentioned in another comment, Mia’s no saint either. And her past may no have no bearing on what happened with Dylan. Or it may. I don’t know. But then, neither do you. Not really.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        I can’t speak for everyone, but I am not on Allen’s payroll and I am not a fan of his nor am I sure what happened. I just prefer logic and facts, and all the heated emotions and accusations do not speak of those. He is disgusting for what he did with Soon-Yi, which can be proven. His films suck, which is my opinion. I have questions about what happened with Dylan, and since there is so much we don’t know, I just don’t think you should be so definitive without proof. But that’s another opinion.

      • Seagulls says:

        Uh, no. If that were the case, then all the alleged paid trolls would only ever have commented on this and related threads, like when the Scientology people show up and only comment on those pages, acting like attack dogs. Those of us who are not convinced that Woody molested her – and I accept that I may be wrong – haven’t denigrated Dylan or her story.

      • Peppa says:

        To be fair, I have seen lots of support for Woody on other sites that have had this story up since Saturday. I don’t think they are on Woody’s payroll, but I do think they are his fans or fans of the actors Dylan named in her letter (not talking about Celebitchy though, I recognize most of the screen names, so I am sure they aren’t paid shills). Also, some supporting him are saying they were victims of a manipulative ex so they believe that is what happened to Woody.

      • Becky1 says:

        Although I admit I have enjoyed some of his movies, I personally find Woody Allen creepy. The situation with Soon Yi is disturbing and extremely inappropriate. If he molested Dylan, he’s obviously much more than a creep-he’s a very sick and criminal person. She’s a young woman who has suffered a lot and no one can argue that the whole situation is very sad. However, how do any of us really know if he did it?

        I find the rush to judgement on this site and in the media in general kind of disturbing. My perspective may be a bit different as when I was a very troubled teenager back in the mid to late 1980′s a psychologist that worked with me was convinced that the root of my problems was because my father molested me. My father was a bad parent but he certainly was not a child molester and I knew that I hadn’t been molested but this psychologist brought it up so much that it got to the point where I started to really question my own memories. Maybe I was molested and had “blocked it out” somehow? Thankfully I knew in my heart that this was not the case and continued to truthfully assert that he hadn’t but I wonder sometimes what would have happened if I had given in to the psychologist’s suggestions? I also wonder how many kids have been in a similar situation and felt pressure to “remember” things that may not have actually happened?

        I am not implying that children aren’t molested or that Dylan wasn’t molested. I guess what I’m trying to say is that none of us on this site really know what happened and at this point unless there’s a “smoking gun” none of us will every know. Accusations are made every day and they aren’t always true.

        Also, with the exception of Diane Keaton, I think it was unfair to name the other actors in the letter. Aside from Diane Keaton, none of them were friends with Woody at the time of the alleged incident and as far as I know none of them are personal friends with him now-they are just actors who have worked in his movies. It would be one thing if they worked with Woody after a child molestation conviction but that’s not the case.

        And no, I’m not on Woody Allen’s payroll. I work in healthcare and have posted on this site many times.

      • Nate says:

        What “legitimate questions about whether this happened” haven’t already been answered? In fact, what questions have any of you ASKED before you launched into a tirade about Mia Farrow? Do you not have the capability to separate one person’s lifestyle from another person’s crimes? That is, in fact, what the court systems are designed to do. A person may have slept with a married man. A person may have green eyes or red hair or made mistakes in their life. And…that has no affect or credibility in whether or not a different person committed crimes against that latter person’s children. It doesn’t matter, and yet that’s all that you select 3 people continue to harp on when you say you have doubts. I truly don’t get it. All the right authorities, and all the facts in this investigation clearly point to Woody. It has been stated, on the record, that the ONLY reason Woody wasn’t prosecuted on a mountain of evidence was because the system wanted to spare the child. If you want to deliberate the FACTS, deliberate them. Everyone here is ready and willing to point you towards evidence apart from the biased beast article. But all you’ve done, throughout the thread, is to try and deflect away from the case towards all of Mia’s faults. Most of which, I must again point out to you, come from unreliable sources and further, if true, have no bearing on this case.

    • Lark says:

      The Daily Beast article made me so angry at the author and Woody, and he twisted around several things and left out many important facts to try and spin it in Woody’s favor. Not to mention the author’s blatant slut-shaming of Mia.

      • Peppa says:

        Yeah, and he pretty much stated he wasn’t there to attack Mia. So the fact that she cheated with a married man changes anything? Why wasn’t Andre Previn called out for what he did to his wife??

    • Aubrey'sMom says:

      Whateverworksforyou…I’m with you! It’s crazy how most of you want to scrutinize Mia because she is awkward and praise the talented Mr. Allen. SICK! There is something very telling in some of these responses…VICTIM BLAMING. I feel for this poor girl but also love that she beat the odds.

    • Lulu says:

      You need to read this Vanity Fair piece: http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/archive/1992/11/farrow199211
      A really (long and) well researched article on the matter

    • OhDear says:

      Seriously. The DB article was written before this letter. I suspect that Dylan Farrow wrote the letter in part because of that article.

  28. Jade says:

    Oh, you bet the timing is questionable! Why are the Farrow family now being so aggressively vocal with their accusations? What is their agenda? Mia was the one who one who dropped the charges all those years ago, and never had him charged again and now the statute of limitations has passed, and for 20 years they’ve said hardly anything but now they’re doing all this press? There was a doco made about woody a few years ago that Mia was interviewed for, why would you be part of that if he raped your daughter?
    There has been so many discrepancies with this story over the years, and I do believe it’s a story, but people are quick to believe it because of his relationship with Soon Yi, but that doesn’t mean he’s guilty of this. I don’t know why they’re so vocal right now, I know people say it’s because he’s getting a lot of awards and his films really successful, but that doesn’t really make any sense to me because he’s always done pretty well…… So why now? It’s all very fishy…

    • eliza says:

      Well to answer your questions:
      1- Because he is being honored as some brilliant director by all the self congratulatory ass hats in Hollywood.

      2- Both the PROSECUTOR and Farrow in addition to a psychiatrist deemed Dylan too fragile to face the horrors of a trial.

      3- What was the extent of Farroe’s part in the “doco”. How recent were her parts in it? What were her contributions in the “doco”?

      In your opinion when would the correct time be to bring this up? If you would bother to read Dylan’s entire open letter AND the NYT piece you might understand a bit more from the victim’s perspective as she is now finally able, after years of self hate and therapy coming to terms with what happened to her, the doubt from the public and the pain. I guess she should apologize to all of you who doubt her for not opening up when you feel it was appropriate time to do so.

    • pleaseicu says:

      A child abuse victim can speak up and about her trauma ANY TIME he or she wants IMO. If the abuser doesn’t like it or finds it inconvenient for a little bit, oh well, live with the inconvenience because that discomfort will eventually go away, but the trauma of what was heaped on the survivor will never go away.

  29. Jennifer12 says:

    It would not be possible to put into words how much I despise crimes against children, but this entire case and people jumping on a bandwagon is amazing to me. There is an excellent, objective article on the Daily Beast that breaks the entire case down. First of all, Mia spoke out in support of a convicted child rapist, Roman Polanski, as recently as 6-7 years ago. Wouldn’t her dear friend- those are her words- be a sickening criminal (her words for Allen) since he drugged and raped a 13 year old and it was proven? Why hasn’t she spoken out about her brother, who was convicted of raping children? Is it not possible that she manipulated her daughter, or that her daughter has things hazy since it was a terrible time in her family and it was her uncle who abused her? I don’t like Allen; I think his films are a total bore and the fact that he married his girlfriend’s daughter beyond repugnant. But when you have the testimony of a scared, confused child who was examined by experts who felt that no signs of abuse occurred, why do you automatically attack Allen? I believe that is called a lynch mob, yes? Clearly, Dylan is in terrible pain and my heart breaks for her. But you are calling a man guilty with no proof and that is scary. Mia has a very sketchy background, and I find it insane that people think it’s great that she says her son’s father is actually Sinatra. So she was cheating on Allen with her friend’s husband years before everything occurred? And if it’s not true, why malign Sinatra? Don’t all the inconsistencies and half truths and odd situations make anyone’s red flag go up? Try watching “The Hunt”. And I will add that a few years ago, a NYC janitor was jailed due to a child’s sexual abuse accusations. He was attacked, abused, and then released because the accusations were recanted. THINK before you attack, THINK before you automatically believe the worst, and maybe be a little more responsible in your reporting. Kangaroo courts should not be making judgments.

    • Whateverworksforyou says:

      God I hope you are a spambot

      • Sarah says:

        I think possibly someone on the Allen payroll, actually

      • Jennifer12 says:

        Jesus Christ. Not a spambot, not on Allen’s payroll, not in the entertainment business, never met any of these people. I don’t even find Allen marginally talented and the fact that he married his ex’s daughter is beyond words. What I do have a huge problem with is that people don’t understand how easily you can destroy someone’s life with accusations or how kids can mix up what happened (the girl in NYC who accused the poor janitor was actually being raped by her mom’s boyfriend but was scared her mom would be mad at her) or how hazy memories or trauma can affect memory. I watched a school photographer nearly get ripped apart because a kid said he’d touched him, when it turned out the guy had only straightened the kid’s collar. Once emotion colors the situation, that is what is ruling it. As much as I wanted to help certain kids I went to court to testify for (over abuse allegations, by the way), I had to make sure that logic and facts were what I was being ruled by and talking about. You’re screaming OFF WITH HIS HEAD with no conclusive proof, no evidence and the testimony of someone years out of this situation, who was traumatized by a terrible family situation at the time, was around her uncle who is a convicted, proven child rapist, who struggled with her story at the time and whose mother seems unstable. Lynch mobs are not useful.

      • Soporificat says:

        @Sarah, yeah, it’s getting clearer and clearer that WA’s PR team are here in the comments. I wasn’t sure when I started reading the comments, but now there is no more doubt in my mind.

        “objective article on the Daily Beast” bwahahahaha! “Objective” — I do not think that word means what you think it means, lololol!

      • Jennifer12 says:

        Soporificat: this is what I mean. I said, clearly, that I am not on Allen’s payroll and you took my opinion- which, last I looked, I’m allowed to have- as proof that I am a secret spy sent from Woody himself. You don’t deal in facts, you deal in rumors and accusations, and that is what I shy away from. Last time- I am not in the entertainment business, I do not know Allen, Farrow, or any celebrity or celebrity offspring and I find the Beast article factual and objective. Apart from everything else, I find Allen’s films unwatchable because they are freaking boring as hell. And, again, that is just my OPINION.

      • Soporificat says:

        @Jennifer12 if you don’t have an agenda, then you are lacking in critical reading skills. That Daily Beast article simply cannot be described as objective. I say this not because the author is a friend of Allen’s and clearly worships him (as is evident from the article itself), but because of the way the article is structured and the tactics he uses. Tactics such as presenting some pieces of evidence and not others, getting very technical with some definitions, but not others, use of false equivalencies, and extensive use of innuendo and the ad hominem fallacy. This heap of sophistry is then wrapped in a smarmy envelope of concern trolling. An example, which shows just how genuine his concern is for Dylan, is that he repeatedly uses the name that she currently goes by–a true dick move. To sum up: the article is trash.

      • Seagulls says:

        Sarah and Soporificat – then report the comments you find questionable. If the fine folks at Celebitchy find evidence that these comments are by paid shills, they will remove them. They have done so in the past, I believe, most notably on the pages related to Scientology. Otherwise, you’re basically attempting to smear legitimate commenters with whom you disagree, band I don’t think that that is at all in keeping with the spirit or letter of the commenting rules.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        No agenda, not lacking in critical reading skills, and I don’t insult strangers. You’re verbose and you’re opinionated. It doesn’t make you necessarily correct. I’m sure we both wish the same thing: peace for Dylan. Peace out.

      • cr says:

        @Soporificat: I’m part of a Facebook group that’s been having discussions on this topic over the last couple of days. We don’t agree on whether or not Dylan was molested. Yet, we’re respectfully disagreeing, not calling each other trolls, and trying to clarify when we’re basing our opinions on basic undisputed facts, and when it’s based on conjecture.
        As already stated repeatedly, I completely understand why people believe that Dylan was molested by Allen. But my doubts do not make me a Allen supporter, a child molester supporter, I’m not blaming the victim, and I’m not on any ones payroll.
        So disagree with us, but stop accusing us of anything other than not agreeing with you.

      • Soporificat says:

        Look, that Daily Beast article was a total hatchet job. Btw, I read it because I didn’t have a clear opinion about the whole Woody Allen situation, and I was curious, but by the end of it I was so disgusted by the author’s obvious manipulations that I actually felt the need to comment about it.

        If you can’t see what the author was trying to achieve, then yes, you are easily fooled.

        Sorry if you think I’m verbose. I’m sure my comments are so much more “verbose” than the virtual essays others are posting here, lol!

      • the Original Tiffany says:

        Nope, but a Brandi Glanville fan who thought Leann was drugging Brandi and that is why her tampon string was hanging out. Didn’t she just make wildly inappropriate molestations comments? You support both. Ugh.

        This whole thing is sickening to me. We have an adult woman clearly witnessing that Woody Allen did this to her and yet many of you are DEFENDING him. Preposterous. She isn’t seven now, she is an adult and she is stating that these things happened. Not rumor, not conjecture, not hearsay. The VICTIM, speaking. Yet, people are in here stating her uncle did it? Or it didn’t happen at all. :(

      • Jennifer12 says:

        What a rotten thing to say, Tiffany. I said that I knew it sounded crazy, but wondered if it was a possibility. She has an obsessed stalker in Leann, and I had a stalker who once tried to drug my drink, so I know what’s possible, OKAY? I have backed off supporting Brandi in light of her recent issues because she seems very troubled and have made that clear. I don’t support Allen, I just said I had questions and didn’t want to jump to conclusions because that was dangerous. I thought CB was a place where we could express ourselves and our opinions and it was at one point, but it isn’t anymore. Incidentally, I work with kids and know what happens when abuse occurs and how trauma affects memory, how sometimes people merge into one another, etc. I just dislike kangaroo courts, like the ones that judged Fatty Arbuckle. Or like yours, judging me.

    • Syko says:

      Thank you.

      As the mother of a child who was molested, I totally empathize with any child, or parents of that child. But everyone is jumping to judgment on this situation. Children can have odd memories. They can think things happen when they never did. Or they can repress things that happened until many years later. I don’t know what is the truth in this matter, but I do know that a lot of the ammunition being used is false.

      To begin with, Woody was never a father figure to Soon Yi, or to Dylan or any of Mia’s adopted children. He was their mother’s boyfriend. He never lived with them, and he went home every night. That in itself limits the window of opportunity to molest the child. Add in that it was supposed to have happened while Woody was visiting at the Farrow home during the custody battle, when he was a guest in hostile territory, and the window grows smaller. Physical examination of the child showed no signs of molestation. Mia did not press charges. And now suddenly it’s a big issue, so many years later?

      Why is the romance between Woody and Soon Yi any more scandalous than that between Mia and Sinatra? Similar age differences. Mia encouraged Woody to spend more time with Soon Yi, who was nearly out of her teens at the time. Mia supports Roman Polanski and her brother, both convicted child molesters. She was always more of a child collector than a mother to the children. Moses, another sibling, doesn’t believe any of it, and is firmly in the Woody camp.

      I’m sorry Dylan is in such pain, nobody should have to live like that. But this rush to believe anything bad about Woody Allen is appalling. I’m not a big Woody fan, I never cared for his movies, except possibly “Annie Hall”. But he deserves to be assumed innocent until proven guilty.

      • Soliloquily says:

        It hasn’t suddenly become a big issue, it was always a big issue.

      • JessMa says:

        Kids can be molested in a matter of minutes. As I have stated before, exams cannot always prove sexual touching. Those exams look for tissue damage caused by penetration.

        The situation was more scandalous because he hooked up with his girlfriend’s teen daughter. That is very low. Sinatra wasn’t dating Mia’s mom when they hooked up. Mia and Moses having a falling out has nothing to do with poor Dylan.

      • cr says:

        Young children can have very odd memories. I’m old enough to remember the day care child abuse false accusations:


        I have friends who were abused. I also have a friend who was falsely accused by a foster grandchild.

        So while my immediate sympathies always lie with the accuser, it doesn’t always mean the accusations happened.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        I completely agree with your analysis, except for the fact that you should not date and marry your girlfriend’s daughter. She is the sibling of some of YOUR kids’ siblings. That is appalling. I have some issues with Mia, but one is that she seems to whitewash the things she’s done, like having an affair with her friend’s husband and deliberately getting pregnant by him while they were still married. That guy, by the way, is Soon-Yi’s dad.

      • shellybean says:

        Are you kidding me?????

        You are another example EXACTLY of what Dylan is talking about.

      • Janet says:

        “Why is the romance between Woody and Soon Yi any more scandalous than that between Mia and Sinatra?” Are you freaking kidding me?!

        It’s not an age issue, it’s a relationship issue. Let me put it in very simple words so you can understand it:

        Allen not only disrespected his paramour, he totally destroyed her relationship with her daughter. There is no way the mother-daughter relationship could recover from a betrayal of that magnitude.

        A little different from the Mia/Sinatra marriage, wouldn’t you say?

      • paranormalgirl says:

        “Woody was never a father figure to Soon Yi, or to Dylan or any of Mia’s adopted children.”

        Actually, they adopted Dylan and Moses together. Hence Woody losing visitation rights with Dylan.

      • Marya says:

        Yes the Soon -Yi romance was more scandalous than Mia and Frank. Woody married his long time partner’s daughter, with no regard to how this would impact the other children who now have to see their barely legal sister get married to their mom’s ex. What man would do this, even if he did truly only develop feelings after she was 18 (which I highly doubt). Any person with an ounce of common sense would never think to mess up the family dynamics and ruin the trust of the other children by doing something so borderline incestuous. He messed up more than one person’s life by doing this. I’m sick of people saying “he wasn’t a father figure” as if it makes it ok to step in and marry your girlfriend’s daughter with no regard to how it would hurt the other kids to see such a thing. Anyone who thinks this is ok is highly suspect to me.

      • Becky1 says:

        I agree with your comments @Sycko except that as many posters commented the Soon Yi relationship was more scandalous and disturbing than the Mia Farrow/Frank Sinatra affair for obvious reasons.

      • Nate says:

        Thank you for at least attempting to be rational. I still feel the need to spread word against the inaccuracies, however, just so more rational people like yourself can see this a bit clearly. To answer your points:
        1. Whether two people are married or not, we recognize that the union of two partners, especially with children, is an important union, do we not? He was a partner who fathered a child with her. I’m aware that the paternity is in question as of late, but Woody at the time believed it to be his son. He also adopted Dylan with Mia at the time, making him her father. Yes, Soon-Yi was adopted by Mia and her previous husband, but Woody came into her life when she was eight. No amount of semantics can take away from the fact that this man was by all psychological terms her “father-figure”. No matter how you view it, a 50 year old man, sleeping with and bringing children into the home with a woman, can be excused for having an elicit affair with that woman’s adoptive daughter. Whether or not he slept at the woman’s home is a moot point. Anyone else who would have attempted this would have been prosecuted, especially considering the fact that the girl’s true age at the time of the sexual affair can’t be determined exactly, and that she was mentally damaged/handicapped. To make excuses for this, regardless of where the man lived or whether his name was on an adoption certificate, flies in the face of any father who is waiting to legally adopt a child, or who accepts the children in his partner’s life as his own once he commits to the mother of those children. Even IF he did nothing illegal (and her suspected age based on bone testing suggests that he did), it is still a moral and ethical travesty of huge proportions, and I wish people could accept this and accept that stretching the circumstances to excuse him is hypocritical if they’ve ever considered two people without a marriage contract to have an important union.
        2. “He went home every night.” This is where I truly raise an eyebrow for your sake. I find it almost debasing to explain that when two people are seeing each other, it’s not rare for one of them to spend the night at the other’s home. It’s quite common, actually. I’m trying to be kind to you. If he spent time in that home at all, he had opportunity.
        3. Just because an examination can’t prove that a person was sexually assaulted does not mean they weren’t sexually assaulted. Even if penetration occurred, if there was no damage from it, no examination can prove it. Logically, this of course does not mean that no misconduct occurred!
        4. It has always been a big issue to anyone old enough to remember the scandal. It’s just that the Farrow family has been more vocal as of late, probably due to the children being old enough to speak out and hold their own. But Mia has never been silent about it. And Dylan, I’m guessing, may have felt it necessary to break years of silence due to the fact that her and her families reputation has been called into question by the Daily Beast article at a time when her abuser is receiving multiple accolades. The timing is actually quite understandable, really.
        5. Mia, a grown woman with enough mental presence to choose for herself, having a marriage with Sinatra is equitable to a possibly illegal relationship between a mentally handicapped girl and a man she grew up knowing as her mother’s partner is comparable? I’m not even going to go there. It’s sad that you would.
        6. Mia does NOT support Polanski. She was summoned to testify in court, under oath, about a detail in question to another case. NOT, I repeat, NOT the case involving his raping a teenager. She later stated that while she used to be friends with him, she has no ties with him at present. Her name is not on the petition list to drop charges Polanski faces in regard to the latter case. Furthermore, Allen’s signature IS on the petition.
        7. So women who have many children, or who choose to adopt many children, are now “child collectors” by default? Good to know.
        8. Moses is the only detail I’m interested in. If you can post a reliable source that claims that he supports his father (NOT the beast article, which is biased reporting), I’m all ears for that tidbit.
        Again, thanks for trying to at least be kind and rational in your explanation of your stance. But like everyone has been saying all over this board, you should try reading the accounts of people who actually matter in this case, like eye-witness accounts of Woody misbehaving with Dylan, or what the judge has to say about Woody and his decision to remove Dylan from his care. The VF article is actually quite frightening, and a truly unbiased look into the investigation and the facts as they occurred. No, he was not prosecuted because the court system wanted to spare the child. This is a very normal outcome with child victims. But all involved concluded that there was more than enough evidence to have put him away if they hadn’t been concerned with what might happen to the little girl in the courtroom. The best decision was made on her behalf, and because of that, to this day, people are questioning her instead of looking rationally at the accused and the evidence displayed. It’s nothing short of a tragedy.

    • Soliloquily says:

      As I stated yesterday, I have read the article, and it in no way changed my opinion. That “detached observer” was the director of Woody Allen’s new authorized documentary. The background of his twitter page is him and Woody, arm in arm. Not exactly unbiased. Bringing up Mia’s infidelity in no way discredits Dylan’s allegations, and Mia was most likely upset more because HER HUSBAND WAS SLEEPING WITH HER DAUGHTER. With regards to the team from Yale, even the judge overseeing the case said that they were “colored by their loyalty to Mr. Allen.” and did not completely trust them due to their unwillingness to testify and the destruction of their notes. Have you read the letter? I believe Dylan because what she said rang frighteningly true, from residual fear at the sight of trains to the PTSD she suffered. I find it extremely hard to believe that Mia engineered a traumatic event with specific details that still haunts Dylan today. In cases of Child sexual abuse, I will ALWAYS believe the survivor.
      It depresses me when people say “OH WELL WE CAN’T JUMP TO CONCLUSIONS” , and then proceed to discredit the experiences of a survivor. You are part of the problem. These are not Mia’s allegations, they are Dylan’s experiences. And to say otherwise is to betray Dylan and millions of other sexual abuse survivors.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Soliloquy: + 1000000.

      • Agath says:


      • Jennifer12 says:

        You shouldn’t jump to conclusions because it isn’t helpful and creates a lynch mob atmosphere, if not an actual lynch mob.

      • Decloo says:

        “HER HUSBAND WAS SLEEPING WITH HER DAUGHTER.” I just want to point out to everybody who is stating an opinion here or making a case one way or another: Your arguments are weakened when you fudge the facts. Mia and Woody were never married and lived in separate households.

      • hmmm says:


        Emotionally they were married and she was his daughter. Does a piece of paper make all that much difference? If so, it means all the unwed folks out there with children are somehow less connected.

    • JessMa says:

      In what world is an article written by Allen’s friend and supporter objective. Do you know what that word means? Also why focus on Mia’s past flaws, they have nothing to do with Dylan’s abuse.

    • lili says:

      i think you are right on. have long believed her brother was the actual abuser.

    • Peppa says:

      It’s hard to call that Daily Beast article objective. If he hadn’t mentioned Mia’s affairs with Andre Previn and (allegedly) Frank Sinatra, then maybe the author would have had a bit more credibility. I don’t think Jennifer and the others are paid shills though because I have seen plenty of people posting from their (legit) facebook accounts on other sites with the same opinion.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        Not a paid shill, and not a fan of Allen personally or professionally. It just scares me when I see a lynch mob mentality.

      • hmmm says:


        Why is Woody Allen so special? Others are lambasted all the time and yet this is the case that brings you out of the woodwork.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        @hmmm I’m sorry, I don’t know what you’re implying. Well, actually I do, but I comment on CB all the time, so you’re incorrect. I have seen lynch mob mentality and I have seen people falsely accused and it scares me and that’s all. What I tried to say is that we don’t know anything for sure and shouldn’t conjecture and accuse, especially because there are so many odd things surrounding this sad, miserable situation. But since you sound as though you’re taking this very personally and since, frankly, I’ve never seen you here before and I’ve commented on this site for years, I am going to say that we both wish peace for Dylan Farrow and leave it at that.

    • mercy says:

      You’re probably being mistaken for an Allen supporter or part of his PR effort because 1) you fail to acknowledge who wrote the “excellent” Daily Beast article and his possible bias; 2) you’re repeating the accusations contained it it word for word; and 3) you sound exactly like a few others who are doing the same thing.

      I can understand having doubts, but to conspicuously ignore the connection of the DB writer to Allen AFTER it has been pointed out so many times and take his version of events hook, line, and sinker looks suspicious.

      • Tara says:

        @mercy: exactly! It’s the repetitive cluelessness and misdirection that has people questioning the motives of commenters like Jennifer12 and seagulls.

    • littlestar says:

      Ummm… HELLO!!! Have you not been reading ANY of the responses to your comments on this thread?! That Daily Beast article was written by Allen’s BEST FRIEND! It is not an unbiased article! Of course it is going to be skewed in favour of Allen! As for Farrow supporting Polanski, it has been stated several times that she testified as to what she knew (which wasn’t much) and that she no longer supports him. I try not to attack people on here, but come on! Why are you spewing out the same tripe over and over again when many people on here have already stated that you are incorrect?

      • Jennifer12 says:

        I’m sorry, which tripe exactly? Saying that we should know all the facts, that we shouldn’t jump to conclusions? As for Farrow, barring the fact that she testified for him in 2005, when exactly did she decide to withdraw her support for him? Actually, don’t tell me. I never said the article was excellent, I said it was factual and didn’t seem emotional. Please don’t condescend to me over an opinion. I do not know much about Allen or the guy who wrote the article, but I thought it was an acquaintance as opposed to a best friend. I was unaware that if you bring up questions or say you don’t automatically agree with someone, then that means they can’t state an opinion.

  30. Lila says:

    This situation is so awful. I absolutely believe that Woody was inappropriate with Dylan. There are accounts from too many people saying that they saw him be inappropriate with her (remember the Vanity Fair article from back then?). That said, I have a little hesitation regarding the incident in the attic. Her obvious trauma and young age combined with the intense feelings for Woody from her family just make me wonder a bit about that one particular incident.

    I don’t really think it matters though. Woody is a pervert IMO. He was sexually inappropriate with two girls raised as his daughters. Since the statute of limitations is long passed making any kind of legal answer a moot point, the details matter a lot less to me. He deserves to have to answer for the inappropriate relationship he had with Dylan, regardless of how far it went, and the trauma she suffered from it. He should have to answer for the inappropriateness of having a relationship with his teenage daughter. I fully believe he is a pervert and that stigma should follow him everywhere.

    I won’t shade the timing of all this because of the tone of the tribute a few weeks ago. I don’t disagree with him being honored for his work. I think he is exceptional at making movies and he is far from the first artist to be an awful person or a pedophile. That tribute wasn’t about his work IMO though. Diane Keaton in particular made it about how awesome he is as a friend and a man. Once it went there, I think the Farrows bringing up this history to refute it is absolutely fine.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I am not familiar with the Vanity Fair article from back then. Can you sum it up for me or point me in the right direction?

    • Nate says:

      I can understand why people are countering with the fact that children can have false memories of an occurrence. This is a documented phenomenon and it does happen. When I first heard about Dylan, I kept this fact in the forefront of my mind, never blaming her, but in wondering who might have told her, or how she may have come to believe this. However, once you read the account of events, told by her and by members of the staff that worked in Mia’s household, it becomes obvious that she not only believes it, that it is 99.9% likely to be true. Then, if you factor in the statements made by the judge, the evidence presented in the investigation, and the shady behavior of Allen’s lawyers and psychologists (they burned their evidence, they kept inaccurate and incomplete records that they weren’t willing to use, they falsified testimony and research), it becomes abundantly clear. And all of this, I might add, goes without the obvious horror story of his abuse and marriage to another one of the children in that household. And yes, I use the term abuse. They aren’t sure that this child was legal when he began his sexual relationship with her, and by all accounts of psychiatrists and tutors employed to help her reach simplistic milestones and give her a basic education, she was severely psychologically damaged and socially handicapped, as well as mentally handicapped, and that is what initially drew Mia to the child, knowing her money could help reverse a terrible situation for Soon-Yi. In short, to ignore all of this and say that it’s still up in the air is reprehensible. There’s more than enough evidence to say that our sympathies should sway significantly toward Dylan (and even Soon-Yi), despite whatever choices Mia Farrow made in her personal life. She may have done things I disagree with, like sleeping with a married man, as her detractors have pointed out, but it in no way takes away from Allen’s crimes.

  31. MinnFinn says:

    I also think he did it because 1. There is no evidence or rational reason to believe that Dylan made up the assault 2. Woody had sought therapy for being overly occupied with Dylan 3. Woody is attracted to prepubescent-looking females. Evidence for that is his long history of having teen lovers who looked much younger than they were. Wife #1 was 16 when they married. His movie Manhattan was based on his 17 year old lover Stacy Nelkin. Soon Yi back in 1992 when it came out that she was Woody’s lover could have been mistaken for a 13 year old. Several of of his 21+ age lovers and wives had the early adolescent characteristics of tiny breasts and youngish faces.

    Yeah, he’s a perv alright.

  32. Cubfan34 says:

    Soon-Yi is not his daughter by any definition. Andre Previn is her father.

    • MynameisPeaches! says:

      That is true. However, Soon-YI is the sister to his daughter Dylan and son Ronan. MIa Farrow is Soon-Yi’s mother. He began a relationship with his long-term partners young daughter. That makes me queasy.

      • cr says:

        What does Mia’s ‘awkwardness’ have to do with any of this?
        If those of use having some some skepticism about the claims are supposedly on Woody’s payroll, are those like you who want Mia’s past left out (but Woody’s left in) on her payroll?

        Scrutinizing what’s out there about this case, and the past of histories of both Mia and Woody, isn’t victim blaming, or supporting Woody.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        Mia’s awkwardness has nothing to do with this. Good grief, the better question would be if we are all on Dylan’s payroll, since this is HER story, not Mia’s. That is why Mia’s past is not relevant to Dylan’s experience.

        To follow your logic, we should be scrutinizing *Dylan’s* and Woody’s past. That’s pretty close to victim blaming, but by all means, start digging on Dylan so we can be fair.

      • cr says:

        @shannon: my akwardness comment was posted under the wrong comment.
        And as already been mentioned on this thread, where are the comments blaming Dylan? Because I’m not seeing them, and I’m not doing it. Raising the question of whether or not Mia coached Dylan isn’t blaming the victim, no matter how you want to see it.
        And Woody’s past is being scrutinized.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        You’re right, cr, I did see that the awkwardness comment was in another thread, but by the time I did, my comment had been posted. I’m sorry about that.
        However, I still stand by the rest of what I said. Woody Allen’s past should absolutely be scrutinized, and it is. However, saying that Dylan was deliberately coached is a hair’s breath away from calling her a liar. Coached is just a more polite way of saying it. Further, Mia is not the victim in *this* particular story – Dylan is. And Mia is not the accuser – Dylan is. So if anyone else is going to be scrutinized now, it would be Dylan. She is a 28 yr old woman who is opening up her experience to the world, and now she owns it. That was my point.

        Soon Yi is a whole other can of worms, and I can see how people are connecting them, but I am referring solely to Dylan’s open letter. You can choose to believe what Dylan says happened, or you can believe otherwise. If you don’t believe it happened at all, that’s your choice and I respect that. Neither of us were in that attic. I just think the difference between “coached” and “lied” is a matter of semantics here, and whether you say Dylan was “coached” or “lied”, it is still basically shifting blame to the victim. Perhaps you aren’t trying to lay blame on Dylan, but your comments are coming off that way.

      • cr says:

        ” I just think the difference between “coached” and “lied” is a matter of semantics here, and whether you say Dylan was “coached” or “lied”, it is still basically shifting blame to the victim. Perhaps you aren’t trying to lay blame on Dylan, but your comments are coming off that way. ”
        To you they are. Sorry if that’s the way you, and others, want to interpret it. I do not think she is lying, I think she really believes that Woody molested her. And it’s entirely possible that he did.
        But if she were coached, she’s still a victim, and I’m not blaming her, or any other child that’s been coached. They’re the victims.
        This is what I’m interpreting in reading the vast majority of comments: any questions about the validity of this case are being interpreted as: blaming the victim, supporting Woody, being paid trolls, etc. Even if it is being stated very specifically that that isn’t the case.

      • Shannon1972 says:

        “This is what I’m interpreting in reading the vast majority of comments: any questions about the validity of this case are being interpreted as: blaming the victim, supporting Woody, being paid trolls, etc. Even if it is being stated very specifically that that isn’t the case.”

        Fair enough, I think I see what you are saying. I’ve been mulling over how to respond to you for a while, and it seems to me that our (your and my) point of difference revolves around Mia Farrow, and her role in this. If I am reading you correctly, you are saying that it doesn’t matter whether or not Dylan was coached by Farrow, you see her as a victim either way. However, I do think it matters whether or not she was coached, and is actually central to the issue. Was she assaulted by Woody Allen or not? If you believe Dylan was coached, then you don’t believe she was assaulted. ( I’m not putting those words in your mouth, I’m just explaining how I see it.)

        You aren’t blaming Dylan at all, you’re perhaps blaming Mia. So it’s not direct victim blaming, since you absolve Dylan either way, but it’s murky. I believe that at this point, Mia is irrelevant since Dylan has come out and said unequivocally that Woody Allen did these things to her. I guess it boils down to this: I am seeing this as a black and white issue, and you are seeing a gray area.

        This is a very emotionally charged topic and most of us are dug in tight on our position, so that will create a lens through which we interpret the comments of others. However, I am really glad we were able to discuss this rationally despite the difference in opinion.

      • Tara says:

        To those who assert they’re not victim-blaming when they question whether Dylan was coached into believing Woody molested her. Dylan said in her op-ed that those stating precisely that belief … Caused her pain. So, you don’t think you’re part of the problem, but it’s clear she does.

    • hmmm says:

      And this makes it better, how? She was a baby he was around to see grow up. He was the dominant, most meaningful male, as Mia’s SO, in her life. And that’s just the beginning,

    • Janet says:

      @Cubfan34: Correct. Soon-Yi is not his daughter. But she is the daughter of his paramour, and as such, he should have kept his mitts off her. As I said upthread, you don’t screw your paramour’s child. Not if you have a shred of common decency in you.

      As for Soon-Yi, she’s a contemptible slut. She didn’t have the decency to respect her own mother’s relationship. She doesn’t get a pass because of her age. She was old enough to know what she was doing and she chose to figuratively spit in her mother’s face.

      Those two dirtbags deserve each other, IMO. I’m just appalled that they were allowed to adopt two children.

      • Gelina says:

        I came across a picture on the Internet of Soon-Yi as a child (look to be about 9, 10 or 11 years old) sitting on Woody Allen’s lap. The expression on her face appeared to be one of sadness.

        Why was a child that old sitting on Woody Allen’s lap?

      • Nate says:

        I agree with you when you say that his getting together with the child is unforgivable. However, I should mention that in light of all the testimony and evidence, Soon-Yi is as much a victim as Dylan. She was found living on the streets in her native country, completely malnourished and handicapped. Mia Farrow took to her immediately and brought her home. Multiple experts were hired to try and reverse her condition as much as possible, but it was stated emphatically that Soon-Yi would always have a degree of mental handicap because of her lack of nutrition as a baby/toddler. She was a very vulnerable target for a character like Woody, and experts have noted this again and again over the years. She has never spoken in public, and the “statements” given in regard to her position on her home life and/or her husband seem to be written for her, as multiple people who worked with her in her teens have said again and again. They don’t even believe it to be possible that she could string those types of sentences together. It’s actually very sad. All of it.

  33. Kelly says:

    My stomach’s turning, yuck, LOCK HIM UP.

    • emmie_a says:

      There is absolutely nothing that can be done on a legal level. He can’t be prosecuted because the statute of limitations ran out over 15 years ago.

      • Kelly says:

        There’s a time limit for reporting and prosecuting sexual abuse!??!

      • Kathryn says:

        Is the law different in the States? In the UK they’ve had some recent high profile cases where the accusations are based around events that happened 4O + yrs ago. It a shame they can’t start the investigation again as surely now Dylan would testify.

  34. LL says:

    I see are talking about Mia having a friendship with Polanski and I answered this above so I’ll put it here.

    Someone asked her last week on twitter if she is still friends with Polanski and she said no.

    Here is the tweet:

    • LILA says:

      Well, it took her decades to see what he was. decades before her daughter was adopted and decades after she was abused.
      Not praising Mia here at all, her taste in men is/was terrible. Cheaters, gangsters, all of them talented, yes, but with bad personal lives in different degrees.

  35. MynameisPeaches! says:

    I believe Dylan. I believe that Woody Allen sexually molested her when she was seven. I also believe the custody judge who termed Woody Allen’s relationship with his daughter as ‘grossly inappropriate’. This is a man who has no concept of boundaries and believes that it is perfectly OK for a grown man in his 40s to start a romantic relationship with the young teenage daughter of his partner. Woody had known Soon-Yi since she was eight or ten years old. Woody was the father of her siblings. How can anyone think that’s not problematic?

    Allen had taken nude photos of Soon-Yi when she was teenager. Why is a grown man taking nude photos of a young girl? The man is disgusting and it’s because of his position that he has been protected and lauded. Allen, Polanski , who was found guilty of raping and sodomising a child of thirteen , and Michael Jackson are of the same ilk.

  36. BendyWindy says:

    My favorite part is that “Dylan couldn’t distinguish fantasy from reality.” That’s called being 7, dipsh.t.

    Woody Allen creeps me out, and part of me thinks he’s a disgusting dirt bag. The other part, though, does feel uncomfortable saying so because he wasn’t ever convicted of a crime and that matters to me. I wish Mia had pursued it at the time. Her lack of pursuance is a tick in the column of his favor, and is part of what makes Hollywood comfortable with lauding him.

    • Seagulls says:

      That probably does comfort Hollywood, but as others have said the trial didn’t go forward as they felt Dylan was too fragile. So it’s neither for nor against anyone’s guilt or innocence.

    • Nate says:

      Mia was advised by professionals that to have the child testify in court, and therefore be able to be cross examined, would be detrimental to her psychological health, and Mia in the end, agreed. It was not something Mia came up with on her own, and I’m sure it was a heart-wrenching decision, knowing that you’d spared the child but the possibility of locking up her assailant would be out of the question. However, the judge reprimanded Woody and removed Dylan and the others from his care, and he was required to undergo psychological treatment for sexual misconduct. No judge would have ordered this without probable cause. There was more than enough evidence to lock him away, but these things happen when small children can’t testify.

  37. aquarius64 says:

    According to ABC News, the statue of limitations is up for Dylan to get justice through the courts. This maybe why Dylan went to the newspapers. And remember, it didn’t go to trial the first time around because Dylan, 7 at the time, was believed not to be able to handle testifying. Mia Farrow agreed. You can bash Farrow for not doing everything short of shooting Allen over this, but Dylan’s article rings true to me.

    As for Allen, the only court he’s now afraid of is the Court of Public Opinion – the one that can surely destroy careers and legacies. Look on the blogs about this story – majority of the comments are Team Dylan. I call this the Jerry Sandusky-Penn State/Catholic Church sex abuse scandal effect – high status does not automatically mean not guilty. Slamming the accuser’s character comes off as an admission of guilt in some quarters. Even Allen’s statement through his rep looks like he’s lawyering up. Allen is up for an Oscar this year; and it’s been suggested re-opening this scandal may hurt his chances. Now anyone in Hollywood who defends Allen publicly puts his/her career at risk. Look as Cate Blanchett’s and Alec Balwin’s responses to Dylan’s letter. In their own styles, they are carefully crafted statements so not to come across as co-signing on such a horrific act.

    I hope Dylan gets the peace and counseling she needs. Allen – I hope he pays for this.

    • emmie_a says:

      I commented on this above, but regarding the court of public opinion — These are not new allegations. There have been stories about this for years. He weathered the storm from marrying his ‘daughter’. I just don’t think this will be much different. Maybe I’m wrong – we’ll have to wait and see. And he’s not lawyering up. It’s very normal to have a lawyer issue a statement when there are legal issues involved (even if these are not current legal issues). And of course this was done at this time because of the Oscars and or in part because of the Golden Globes Lifetime Achievement Award. I think everyone wants Dylan to have her say and her find her peace. I just don’t think this is going to give her the revenge she is looking for (and that’s an assumption on my part, that she is looking for revenge – I know I would be).

    • original kay says:

      so if the statute of limitations has expired, then she can now say what really happened (again).
      However, if he rebuts or sues her for slander, Dylan gets her trial, at a time when she is much more stable to handle it.

      • pleaseicu says:

        I don’t think Woody will sue Dylan about the abuse allegations because in a defamation suit, libel or slander, he’d have to prove that what Dylan said about him was untrue. I’m guessing his attorneys have advised him that he can’t do that, even to the lower standard of proof required in defamation cases.

        I don’t think he’s ever sued anyone who’s written articles on the abuse, like VF, probably because he knows he’d lose on the being able to prove that what was said about him was untrue. (If he did sue anyone, he’s either dropped the cases or lost them) IMO he doesn’t sue because losing a defamation case on this topic would do a lot of damage to his stance that Mia’s behind it all and it’s all made up, he’s really her victim.

  38. Soliloquily says:

    So many people on here saying that Dylan was just “confused” and doesn’t “remember correctly” infuriate me. Sexual abuse is extremely hard to prove, especially in cases involving a child, because sometimes there are no outward physical injuries, and there are often no witnesses. I hope certain people are aware of what they are enabling by defending Woody. They are the mother, the grandmother, the father, or caretaker that has time and time again accused a frightened child of “making it all up”. Thank god Dylan had a mother who fought for her.
    I believe Dylan Farrow.

    • littlestar says:

      I do too. And I think given the number of years that have passed, the fact that she is now 28 and likely had a lot of therapy as well, that she can reflect candidly on what had happened to her as a child.

  39. sauvage says:

    Am I the only one to find the statements he issued extremely telling? Nowhere does it say, plainly: “I DID NOT sexually assault my daughter. I would never ever do such a thing to anyone and I am disgusted by the very thought of it.”

    Because that’s for sure what I would say. Or what anybody who is innocent of such a crime would say. This is the evasive language used by people who are lying.

    I believe Dylan Farrow, and I am incredibly proud of her for finding the courage to finally talk about this. The pain she must be going through even now, some twenty years after the fact, must be unimaginable. So is her amount of courage. My heart goes out to her. You go, girl.

    • kibbles says:

      +1 He’s talking to his lawyers and as we type to create his own PR approved op-ed to publish somewhere in response to Dylan’s powerful op-ed in the New York Times. His statement released through his lawyer was so weak. He must be getting ready to publish a longer statement but since he’s probably guilty, he needs to figure out how to say he is innocent without saying “I didn’t do it” since he probably did.

    • booger says:

      You know, you’re absolutely right. I’m reminded of politicians carefully wording rebuttals to imply accusations are untrue while not necessarily lying. Bill Clinton and the current mayor of Toronto to name a few.

      I posted a while back saying that I believed Dylan but also wanted to support the idea that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, so I didn’t wholly believe the accusations against Allen. It would be great if we could have it both ways, but we can’t. I’m now team Dylan all the way, because to take any other stance would discourage other victims of abuse from coming forward.

      I will say though that I hope the accusations aren’t true, if anything because the idea that Hollywood has been feting and endorsing a pedophile for so many years is appalling. Maybe he wasn’t found guilty in a court of law, but nobody can deny that his relationship with Soon Yi was (is) disgustingly self serving, opportunistic, and shady to say the least. What were the Golden Globes thinking?

    • Lena says:


    • nk868 says:

      ugh yes. his “denials” make me wonder if he’s crazy enough to believe his own lies at this point. as in, he really doesn’t believe he did anything wrong and with time has distanced himself enough from it he doesn’t feel responsible/guilty?

      that article by one of his defenders that came out a week before her story is devastating – the arguments his supporters are able to craft as a way of defending a pedophile. something along the lines of “i believe that she believes it happened”. as if he’s doing her some sort of favor by phrasing it in a way that denies it happened but isn’t calling her a liar outright.


  40. Neffie says:

    This is a man that eventually married his adopted daughter, so yeah this certainly does not sound far fetched.

    • Syko says:

      She was not his adopted daughter. She was the adopted daughter of Mia Farrow and Andre Previn (who, by the way, when asked about his adopted daughter, says “She does not exist”). He married his ex-girlfriend’s adopted daughter.

      • starrywonder says:

        It does not matter. He was dating her mother. She was probably no way near legal age when he got involved with her. He was taking pictures of her and doing who knows what else. To try to excuse the fact that he was not really her stepfather does not make what he did okay.

      • cr says:

        And this is one of the reasons why the Daily Beast article was written. This is what Weide wrote:
        “Let me add this: If anyone is creeped out by the notion of a 55-year old man becoming involved with his girlfriend’s 19-year old adopted daughter, I understand. That makes perfect sense. But why not get the facts straight? If the actual facts are so repugnant to you, then why embellish them?

        It’s understandable that Mia would remain furious with Woody for the rest of her life. If I were in Mia’s position, I’m sure I’d feel the same way.”

        But somehow clarifying this particular point makes some people think you’re a Woody Allen supporter.
        Feel free to be creeped out, I understand. I’m not sure I’d term my reaction to their relationship would be ‘creeped out’, but it also wasn’t support.

        @starrywonder: It does matter. Because if you’re basing the ‘he’s a creep’ and a possible child molester on the belief that he had an affair with his underage stepdaughter, when she was neither (Soon-Yi was in college when the affair began), then you’re basing it on ‘feelings’ instead of facts’. Because what I’m getting from the reaction to this relationship is that somehow the actual facts don’t matter, considering how many people get that part wrong.

      • Soporificat says:

        Actually, if we are going to be that technical what he actually did was start dating the daughter of his girlfriend and long-term partner, NOT “ex-girlfriend”. Mia became his “ex-girlfriend” AFTER he started up with Soon-yi.

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        Soon-Yi is the sister of her husband’s biological and adopted children with Mia Farrow. He took nude photos of Soon Yi and carried on a relationship with her behind the back of his long-term partner, Mia. If you choose to believe that the photos were taken and the relationship began when she was of-age, great. None of that nullifies the fact that he’s married to his own childrens’ sibling, and that he began the relationship as an affair while still with his lover’s mother.

      • starrywonder says:

        cs that is not the only reason. No matter what anyone wants to say about Mia and Woody living in separate homes and Allen never formally adopted her what he did was a sick thing. Pics of Soon Yi when she was 16 were found by Mia Farrow, the Daily Beast author does not dispute that it was a “creepy situation” but then tries to handwave it all around.

        I believe Allen did it because I read what Dylan wrote and everything she wrote speaks of this being true and she is suffering through and surviving it. She posted that letter after that Daily Beast article came out as a response to the tweets from Ronan and Mia Farrow.

        I believe he did it based on what the prosecutor said and also the fact that the judge did not allow him any sole visitations with her anymore. I believe it because all of her reactions since this has happened to her is the same lifepath some of my friends have experienced with cutting and self harming through eating disorders.

      • Nate says:

        @cr: The author of that “ariticle”, if you’d like to still insist it is, says he’d like to set the record straight on the relationship with Soon-Yi by stating the “facts”…then he goes on to state no new facts whatsoever that the public doesn’t already know. And I’m pretty sure Soon-Yi wasn’t “in college” at the time he started up with her. She was being tutored privately by people her mother had hired, and all of them came forward to testify that Soon-Yi had mental and social handicaps that kept her from understanding basic logic, and that she wouldn’t have been able to progress her education past a young age. His interest in her was purely predatory, and convenient for him in that she was truly mentally vulnerable. Think about it: she’s never made any public speech or statement, and the psychologists and tutors who worked with her right up until her affair was discovered have claimed that they don’t believe that the “statements” that are meant to be hers could have, in fact, been written by her, based on her lack of ability. Add to that, her true age isn’t really known, and it is quite debatable that he began his affair with her before she was of legal age. You factor in all of this truly SICKENING information, and it still doesn’t take away any credibility to Dylan’s case/investigation. That stands completely on it’s own. People are simply bringing it up because the man has a stand-out history of preying on underage girls. It goes back much farther than Dylan’s or Soon-Yi’s cases, actually. If you truly were interested in viewing this from a rational and un-biased standpoint, you would have done more research than just the Daily Beast article, and your critical thinking would have led you to understand that a man responsible for writing Allen’s biography and singing his praises isn’t exactly a pillar for unbiased reporting. I haven’t seen you answer any of these questions or show any signs of this sinking in, so I guess all I have to say is good luck to you as you try and navigate through life. I can’t blame people for becoming frustrated with you and two or three others on this board. There’s ignorance, and then there’s willful ignorance to a fault.

    • Isabelle says:

      She wasn’t his adopted daughter but was in girlfriends adopted daughter. Creepy no matter what and no way did he just develop an attraction toward her when she became 18. He’s a little creepo.

  41. WendyNerd says:

    I believe her. Allen has done nothing aside from throw money around and throw actual children under the bus to try and cast doubt upon these allegations. He supports Polanski, openly, he took naked photos of a teenager who was the daughter of his partner, and then married that same girl. Everything he does screams pedophile. Sorry, Woody, but actions speak louder than words and yes, money.

  42. eliza says:

    I have a difficult time understanding the people who say “Allen was not a father figure to Soon -Yi. Excuse me, he was a presence in all those children’s lives for TWELVE YEARS! You mean to tell me a man dating a woman for over a decade is not seen as a father figure? The fact that Andre Previn was her father doesn’t matter one bit. That would mean that any child who has a father cannot also look to a man in their mother’s life as a father figure because hey, he is not the father of record. Allen was a daily presence in Soon-Yi’s life from the time she was a young girl. THey began their affair when she was 19 or 20, so you do the math. It IS sick and God knows when his attraction to her began.

    • starrywonder says:

      Thank you! I was flabbergasted that everyone upthread is excusing this?! I am in young enough to not get the whole Woody Allen adulation and was just a kid when this mess with he and Mia Farrow came out. I remember my dad saying he was sick and we never had another Woody Allen in our home again. For those out there worrying about Cate Blanchett’s Oscar chances now? Seriously? It is a freaking award. She is not curing cancer or doing some awe inspiring thing, she acted in from what I read is a re-write of Streetcar Named Desire. I care more about the fact that all of Hollywood keeps trying to work with this monster and excuse people like him and Polanski. It’s sick.

      • eliza says:

        Celebrity worship is insane! Like you said, who gives a flip about Blanchette’s Oscar chances? It’s unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

        The apologists and supporters of this old neurotic douche bag puzzle me. It’s all blame a scorned woman like Farrow because her SICK boyfriend started a relationship then married a girl he had been around since basically she was a child. Let’s excuse it because he WASN’T her father. He did not live in the same house. He was not married to Farrow. What screwed up logic is that? If a man can be around the child of his girlfriend for 12 yrs and then marry her, why is it impossible for him to not have molested another? Who is to say Allen did not have inappropriate relations with Soon-Yi earlier than 19-20? Does he expect anyone to believe that once she turned thst age he SUDDENLY noticrd her and fell in love? Please!

      • starrywonder says:

        Eliza exactly! Let a man do this to me or to my family I will wreck you! If this was someone else he would be in jail and everyone would be screaming for his head. This reminds me of all of the mess with Sandusky and all of his apologists. Ugh.

      • Peppa says:

        Cate Blanchett knew all these things about Woody, this has been out there for twenty years! She is a lovely actress, but there are things in this world far more serious than her not getting an Oscar.

      • littlestar says:

        Totally agree, starrywonder. Who the F cares about Cate Blanchette losing out on an Oscar? It’s completely ridiculous. Maybe she should have thought about starring in Allen’s movie a little more then.

        You know what? I’d actually like some of these stars who support him and star in his movies to come forward and explain WHY they worked with Allen (Louis CK, Scarlett Johansson, etc).

      • Tswise says:

        DITTO 5000%

        There are a ton of disgusting comments here (and elsewhere), falling all over themselves to protect and defend a pedophile… who they don’t even know!… just because he is a famous director! He doesn’t even know you’re alive, people!! And if he did, he wouldn’t be your friend OR think you’re cool.

        And I can only hope that what happened to Dylan and Soon yi and Mariel and who knows how many others Woody has abused, never happens to these people’s children. Because obviously they will not even have their own mothers in their corners, when push comes to shove.

      • deehunny says:

        @littlestar– Cate Blanchet has finally responded, “It’s obviously been a long and painful situation for the family, and I hope they find some resolution and peace,”

        Alec Baldwin was ifs course less tactful. “What the f–k is wrong w u that u think we all need to b commenting on this family’s personal struggle?” and “”So you know who’s guilty? Who’s lying? You, personally, know that?” he replied to another, before tweeting, “You are mistaken if you think there is a place for me, or any outsider, in this family’s issue.”

        Source: http://www.eonline.com/news/506626/woody-allen-cate-blanchett-and-alec-baldwin-respond-to-dylan-farrow-s-new-york-times-letter

    • Soporificat says:

      Finally, some freakin’ common sense. Thank you!

    • dagdag says:


      so true, 12 years are forming a child´s development. Not to mention the fact that during this time they adopted two more children and had one son of their own.

      To destroy a family by marrying one sister is so amoral and so extremely selfish.

    • Violet says:


      This. Plus we will never know when his affair with Soon-Yi began. It was probably years before Mia found the nude photos he took of Soon-Yi. I suspect he started making advances shortly after he first met Soon-Yi, when she was eight years old.

  43. MrsBPitt says:

    I wonder if WA had been abusing Soon Yi since she was a little girl, too….

  44. Little M says:

    I have to say I am really sorry for Dylan regardless of who abused her. Her truth is her truth and she seems to be trying to stop being a victim -maybe because now she feels strong enough to do so, who knows. I hope she finds peace.

    As for Woody Allen… I have seen his movies and some of them give me the creeps. I know the movies are fiction but still. I just cannot watch them anymore.

  45. starrywonder says:

    Seriously some of you are trying for semantics about a man who married his ex lover’s daughter. Seriously I don’t care if she didn’t see Woody as her father figure or was not fatherly to her. He had no business taking nude pictures of her (fullstop). He had no business having a relationship with her (fullstop). It is sick what happened and if you honestly believe Woody Allen did not have sex with Soon Yi before she was 18 there’s a bridge in Brooklyn I hear is only worth a penny.

    I don’t care if Mia Farrow supported Roman Polanski or got with Frank Sinatra or did a whole host of other things. I care if Woody Allen molested his daughter. All signs from her story point to yes. Everyone claiming her uncle probably did it I have to ask where you in the room? Her comments about a train and what he did and what was going on ring true to me. The fact that family members had to tell Mia that something was off there until she caught a clue ring true too. She was in love with Allen and probably didn’t think he would do something this awful. Finding out that her partner for 12 years had run off with her daughter and molested another would turn me into a mess of awkwardness too.

    And Allen was denied any contact with Dylan. He was slammed by the judge, all of the evidence from his doctors were destroyed. If this was anyone else being talked about on this site everyone would be jumping to her defense but everyone is either trying to slam Mia or say well Woody didn’t do such a bad thing by marrying his partner’s daughter. Ugh.

    • cr says:

      “but everyone is either trying to slam Mia or say well Woody didn’t do such a bad thing by marrying his partner’s daughter. Ugh. ”

      Trying to clarify that he didn’t marry his stepdaughter isn’t supporting the relationship. Sorry, because you seem to want to believe that. My personality is such that I like basing things on facts, and the reality is other than Mia’s actual past, and the actual legal relationship of Woody and Soon-Yi, most of us don’t know shit about what happened in that household. We may all have our feelings, or doubts, or disgust, etc. But neither I, nor you, nor anyone on this thread really knows shit, even with the court documents regarding the actual molestation case.

      Do I understand why you think Woody is a creep and that he molested Dylan? Yes. But perhaps you should also understand that there are those of us who may not fully be on board with the molestation accusations, and our reasons have nothing to do with defending child molesters or blaming the victim, or slut-shaming Mia. It’s a difference of opinion based on our experience, knowledge and personalities.

      • hmmm says:

        If you have been around abuse of any sort or experienced it, you would feel differently. Your seemingly objective opinion would be replaced with real facts.

      • cr says:

        @hmmm: But I have. But even if I hadn’t why would my opinion be less valid than yours? And why do you think your opinion is based on the ‘facts’ more than mine is?

      • hmmm says:

        Arguing false equivalency. Not much to say in response to that.

    • starrywonder says:

      cr whatever seriously. You obviously have your own beliefs and I have mine. I believe he did molest her. Add onto the fact he married his long time partner’s daughter at the age of 19 and no one blinked about his behavior in Hollywood is just gross. Take out Woody Allen’s position and fame and turn him into a joe schmo. If this was a regular guy he would be demonized and villified and thrown into jail.

  46. sweetpea says:

    Woody began an affair with Soon Yi. He was a father figure in that household and dated Mia for what, 8 years? So if he had no trouble looking around Mia’s family for his next partner – like a true predator, I believe he molested Dylan. It is probably infuriating when he gets honored by Hollywood.

  47. Mrs. Darcy says:

    First off, her letter is heartbreaking. And so, so angry. I believe she is telling the truth as she believes it. The irate tone, the accusations towards actors who work with him, scream Mia to me though. They speak of a woman who has not found peace, who has been encouraged to let this fester instead of treated for it with therapy. Whose mother has never allowed her to heal or move on, who has used her daughter’s abuse as she claims to conduct a smear campaign 20 yrs after the fact. This to me is also abuse. No evidence of physical assault was found on the child. So this leaves one incident of inappropriate sexual touching. Which she remembers vividly,in great detail, which I find odd. Along with the other incidences which frankly could be verbatim from Mia’s book. My memories before 10 are a blur at this point. And my childhood wasn’t all roses. The only way I remember certain things is if they were re-told to me over and over again.

    This case was dismissed, if Mia wanted to pursue it further back then she could have. She put her small child through an arduous investigation, she took her testimony over the course of several days, which did not help her case, and she seems to have raised all the children with
    this horrible story as part of their history, as something to cling on to and be vengeful about, rather than placing the mental welfare of her children first. Of course if he did it it is horrible, he should have been punished, jailed, everything and more, but it is too late. A felony sexual assault could be re-tried but of that he is not guilty as per the facts of the case. She has turned this life she brought all of these children in out of supposed generosity and love into a saga of tragedy and she is now finding reward in those who will support her publicly at last.

    The misinformation and ignorance of the facts are why people link to that admittedly biased article. Because it does contain the fact that Woody was not Soon Yi’s father, adopted or otherwise, that anyone who reads Mia’s own book of her time with Woody will see her own repeated admittance that Woody was not a family man, spent time with her children under much duress and basically they lived separate lives the whole time they were together. The only child he seemed to love was Dylan. She was Mia’s only weapon against him. I think he is a small man, a morally ambiguous man, but I do not believe the 20 yr old possibly implanted memories of a child who hasn’t seen him since are enough to tarnish him as a paedophile. I know that will vilify me, but I just don’t see what the Farrows hoped to gain from this. They now have a masthead of victimhood, and I do think she is brave and I feel awful for her whatever the truth is, but I do not think throwing blame around Hollywood is going to win them a bucketload of support, they overshot that one.

    • dagdag says:

      I also thought about Dylans´s memory being only 7 years old.

      What I can say: most of my past this age and earlier is blurry, but I can clearly remember some events that did effect me; bad ones and good ones. And none of these memories were re-told, I was in an orphange and my brother was younger than me, also, we never spoke about this period in our lives.

      • We Are All Made of Stars says:

        People have the capacity to remember traumatic or extraordinary events from as early as the toddler years. This is established scientific fact. For instance, there are individuals who will tell you that they vividly remember immigrating to the United States even though they were only three years old when it took place. The fact that somebody would suggest that a person wouldn’t remember events that took place at the age of six or seven is just weird. Who can’t remember first or second grade or some people you played with at that time?

      • Mrs. Darcy says:

        I’m not saying it’s not possible she remembers this happening or that it did happen. I’m saying this possibility alone is not enough for me personally to condemn a man given all of the tangled web that surrounds this situation. He was found innocent by criminal investigators. If this changes, if he is re-tried and found guilty then justice will be served. I nor anyone else not directly involved should be judge jury and executioner.

      • pleaseicu says:

        Mrs. Darcy, no villification. But Woody Allen was actually never found innocent by criminal investigators.

        The prosecutor in the case actually said the opposite and maintains that to this day. The prosecutor publicly said there WAS probable cause to bring charges against Woody but that he chose not to pursue the case because of how traumatized Dylan already was from the investigation and how she’d have to testify. She would’ve been destroyed by the trauma of testifying let alone what the cross-examination she’d face from Allen’s attorneys would’ve done to her.

        All of the doctors in the police medical team who said Dylan made the whole thing up or the idea was planted by Mia either destroyed or lost all of their records and notes pertaining to her and only one of them has ever been willing to testify that she was making it up or coached by Mia. The rest of the medical team have refused to testify.

        A custody judge reprimanded Woody and found that he had a “grossly inappropriate” relationship with Dylan. The judge had nothing good to say about Allen and denied Woody any custody and even the right to see her period and severely limited his right to see Ronan to only supervised visitation.

        Woody was actually in therapy months before Dylan said anything about the molestation to specifically deal with and address his fixation and obsession with Dylan that he’d been called out on by others.

        Everyone is going to have their own opinion and conclusion as to what went on based on their own experiences and background and analysis on the information available from all sides. I know I’m not going to change minds with what I post or others will change my mind by saying “he was never charged” or we’ll never know. But I do think it’s important to clarify that he was never deemed innocent by any criminal investigation or any court of law. Since the statute of limitations have lapsed (it’s only five years, so it lapsed 15+ years ago), he can never be tried on these charges.

      • Mrs. Darcy says:

        @pleaseicu I thought that all of the negative opinions expressed after the fact were ruled slanderous and forceably retracted/recanted? A prosecutor cannot make statements like that without backing them up. It’s very possible the case was mishandled and he was guilty, but the fact remains it was decided an untenable case. How is that not innocent uuntil proven guilty? I find the prosecutor’s statements confusing and misleading, surely a child that age who has already been subjected to invasive exams and several interviews has already been exposed to the worst of the case. She would not have had to testify in court at that age, hence Mia’s taped recordings?

      • pleaseicu says:

        Negative opinions? Nope. The facts tending to prove Woody stepped over the line with and abused Dylan have never, ever been ruled slanderous or retracted.

        He’s either never pursued or never been able to successfully maintain a slander case against the persons or authors of the articles discussing the abuse allegations and case. He’s probably never pursued it because in his type of slander case he’d have to be able to prove that what was said about him was untrue.

        It’s in the court records that the custody judge called him out for his behavior and told him he had a “grossly inappropriate relationship” with Dylan and thus he was to lose custody of her and have zero contact with her ever and that he was only to have supervised visitation of Satchel/Ronan but also no custody. Moses was given the choice by the judge, since he was 15, and he chose not to have any contact with his father at the time.

        More than one judge called out the mishandling and unprofessional behavior of the medical team who destroyed ALL notes and records of sessions with Dylan and who, all but one, refused to testify as to their conclusion in a court of law. One judge even called them “clearly biased in Mr. Allen’s favor”, especially when none of them could provide anything to support their findings since they destroyed all of their notes and records and only one doctor was willing to testify that Dylan lied or was coached by Mia.

        In late 2013, the prosecutor stated that he still stands by what he said in 1993, that there was probable cause to charge Woody but for the sake of Dylan’s well being and knowing what she’d have to face on the stand, he didn’t pursue the case.

        I’m pretty sure Dylan would’ve had to testify because of the constitutional right for a criminal defendant in a criminal case to confront his/her accusers. She would’ve been subjected not just to reliving the abuse on the stand in her own testimony but would’ve been subject to cross-examination from Woody’s team of attorneys whose sole goal would be to discredit her on the stand. Her only protection would’ve been testifying in a separate room so she wouldn’t have to face Woody in the courtroom during her testimony but she still would’ve been subject to reliving the abuse during her testimony and Woody’s attorneys’ cross-examination of her.

      • mommak918 says:

        As a sexual abuse victim myself, her letter and details rang true to me…as did the tone. And to Mrs. Darcy, I have very vivid details of my childhood I can recall that were traumatic. ..that no one coached me or told me. In fact, I recall being 7 and seeing my mother kiss another man instead of my father. . And she tried telling me I was wrong and tried telling me a different version of events …so that id not tell my dad. I still remember that day very vividly….

    • Jaded says:

      @Mrs. Darcy – it doesn’t vilify you to state the obvious; that Allen was not a family man, that he had little or nothing to do with Mia’s horde of kids, that Dylan was the only real child, apart from Satchel (Ronan) that he was involved with. He is definitely lacking an “ethics” chip and this is at the crux of the problem with Soon-Yi, who appears to lack one as well. A perfect couple. No man with any kind of moral compass would do what he did but Soon-Yi was a willing participant and they seem to have made a good life together. He very likely transgressed a physical line in his love/obsession with Dylan/Malone that made her uncomfortable but without evidence of sexual penetration, we can’t categorically say that she was “raped” in the true sense of the word. However, even being fondled and touched the wrong way by a father is a terrifying, confusing and hideous thing to happen to a little kid and that may very well be what went down. We’ll never know because Mia has a never-ending rage-on against Allen and has continually fanned the flames of hatred both within her family and publicly. In the old days he would have been hung or burned at the stake – this is the 21st century version of it.

      • Mrs. Darcy says:

        @Jaded I NEVER said or implied that sexual touching isn’t abuse. I do believe that it would be less vividy,memorably traumatic than rape or repeated offenses. The inappropriate touching Dylan recounts is word for word how Mia described it in her book, so I don’t understand why she is implying her mother was unaware when it is on public record she was very aware to the point of forcing therapy on Allen for it. Quite why a woman so concerned for her child would then leave her side during the father’s visit is frankly odd. And the nanny insists, at risk of much personal slander no doubt, that the two were alone for no more than 5 minutes and Farrow’s allegation about the missing underwear is untrue. So forgive me if I see holes in the story, or don’t. I am a regular contributor here for years and a female btw. My only motive here is not to get swept up in hysteria and condemn a person when he was like it or not not prosecuted for any crime despite an exhaustive investigation.

    • Recept says:

      And we can talk about why after 20 years of calling this person Malone, we are calling her Dylan now? She tweets to Ronan and Mia as ‘MaloneyBerry,’ so I’m pretty sure that her identity is a secret.

    • hmmm says:

      @Mrs Darcy,
      Your comments show me that you know nothing about the effects of sexual abuse or abuse of any sort.

      This is not about ethics. It’s not about morality, This is about perversion and pedophilia. And you ascribe rage to Mia. Even if it were true, would you, as a mother, not feel rage?

      • Mrs. Darcy says:

        @hmmmm You are wrong there. And I know it’s directed at Jaded, but I as a mother would feel great rage indeed. I would not sit on it for twenty years and allow my child’s siblings to post about their abuse on twitter to gaud and appall, while I participated. I would hope to nurture my child and not raise a near 30 yr old woman into wondering why an injustice was done and feeling so powerless that all she can do is try to shame Hollywood.

        If Mia wanted to she could have pursued this further at the time. I appreciate if she was protecting her child, but if that was the decision that was made she should have found a way to move on and not raise her child in a climate of blame and victimhood. Whatever Woody did or did not do in his brief chapter in her life, Mia has had 20 yrs to try to resolve and mend her child. Her own child Moses now describes the atmosphere in the home as brainwashed. Her actions do not indicate a sound person who loves their child more than their own thirst for vengeance. I find that every bit as awful as what Allen did or did not do.

  48. Sway says:

    I believe her. I always have.

  49. eliza says:

    Please quit posting the link to the article written by Allen’s good friend.

    • Soporificat says:

      RIght?! Or at least I wish people would stop calling it an “objective” article. It is so laughably obvious that it is not an objective piece of writing. Sheesh.

      This article is worth a read:

      • Jennifer12 says:

        This is a genuine question, because I stopped to read the article. If Woody behaved in such a despicable manner, why just make the rule that he wasn’t to be alone with her? Why not throw him out and begin legal proceedings?

      • NorthernGirl_20 says:

        Give it a rest.

      • Erm says:

        (In response to Jennifer12, comment #83)

        This makes the assumption that Mia had power in the relationship. From what I’ve read, Woody was borderline (if not actually) emotionally abusive and had a fair amount of control over her. Otherwise, Mia actually did love him, and probably never believed that he would really do anything to Dylan, despite his obsession.

      • Jennifer12 says:

        I don’t know who had the power, but if she is saying repeatedly that she told the nannies never to leave Allen alone with Dylan, then I don’t get why she didn’t instigate legal proceedings. She certainly has the money to do so. And, if the nannies were given that edict, why it wasn’t followed. The whole thing just seems murky rather than clear.

      • madchen says:

        The nannies later recanted and one went so far as to say she felt terrible about implicating Allen. They also said Dylan was never out of their site for more than 5 minutes and was never missing her underwear.

        I want to believe Dylan, who clearly really believes she was sexually assaulted and may very well have been, but there are so many inconsistencies and this was handled horribly from the very beginning.

      • jade says:

        Well said. The timing of the allegations being brought up again is very suspect too.

      • Green Eyes says:

        ScaleSorry posted wrong area

      • Green Eyes says:

        @Jade (can’t get comment to post there sorry)

        Part of my post from above as to why She may be coming forward now. (Though spell check error changed rape to tape in last sentence)

        I believe Dylan is talking about it in detail and bigger forums now because he is being celebrated on a Grand Scale at this very time and more so than ever. So it’s time for her now (for her own piece of mind) to confront her fears NOW as an adult. It’s the only way she will ever truly have a sliver of peace. I say this as a survivor of molestation as a small child & tape. & attempted rape as a young woman.

      • Green Eyes says:

        Part of my post from above as to why She may be coming forward now. (Though spell check error changed rape to tape in last sentence)
        I believe Dylan is talking about it in detail and bigger forums now because he is being celebrated on a Grand Scale at this very time and more so than ever. So it’s time for her now (for her own piece of mind) to confront her fears NOW as an adult. It’s the only way she will ever truly have a sliver of peace. I say this as a survivor of molestation as a small child & tape. & attempted rape as a young woman.

      • asiont says:


      • Soporificat says:

        Oopps. This comment was meant as a reply to @eliza

      • Soporificat says:

        hmm, having computer issues. Can’t seem to post in the right locations. Sorry!

      • Mouse says:

        Yes it is…I just made a comment about the same without noticing your post. It really is fascinating and freaky

      • starrywonder says:

        Seriously that whole article made my skin crawl. Let’s just ignore facts and applaud WA

      • badrockandroll says:

        I don’t get the bias argument at all. Of course it is. The two Vanity Fair articles, and Dylan’s open letter are biassed also.

        Almost all human discourse is. Our job as thinking humans is to discover when the bias prevents the author from speaking the truth to us. Our own biasses may make us predisposed to believe one set of opinions more than others.

        As I said long ago, I don’t like any of the adults in this story: not Woody, not Mia, and not the prosecutor who really fumbled this case 20 years ago. Had he done his job properly and (irony alert:) behaved without bias and kept his mouth shut instead of playing to the press, Dylan likely would have seen something like justice 20 years ago. And the prosecutor would not have been disciplined for his conduct.

        Not on anyone’s payroll. Not a troll

      • madchen says:

        @badrocknroll This! Nicholas Kristoff and Maureen Orth are both close friends of Mia Farrow.

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        madchen, author after author, who have absolutely no connection to either Woody or Mia, lay out in black and white their reasoning and the facts damning Woody Allen as a child sex abuser. The evidence that Woody Allen sexually abused Dylan is compelling. You can read the official court papers of the original case of ALLEN v. FARROW (May 1994) here. – http://www.leagle.com/decision/1994524197AD2d327_1461

        Dr Brooke Magnanti – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10614585/Woody-Allen-sex-abuse-Why-I-want-to-believe-Dylan-Farrow.html

        Rebecca Hains – http://rebeccahains.wordpress.com/2014/02/03/why-the-daily-beast-article-about-dylan-farrow-and-woody-allen-is-dangerously-irresponsible/

        Frances Locke – http://www.mommyish.com/2014/02/02/dylan-farrow-open-letter/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+b5media%2FMommyish+%28Mommyish%29

        Aaron Bady – http://thenewinquiry.com/blogs/zunguzungu/woody-allens-good-name/

        This rush to defend Allen and to cast aspersions on Mia and Dylan doesn’t exist in a vacuum. Sexual violence is an everyday common occurrence, much more common than women making up sex abuse stories for their own petty, vindictive need to destroy a great man’s reputation. Now as always, we are in the midst of an ongoing, quiet epidemic of sexual violence. We are NOT in the midst of an epidemic of false rape charges. So it’s a lot more likely that the man who has spent a lifetime and a cinematic career walking the line of pedophilia (to put it mildly) is guilty of abusing his little girl than having to imagine a conspiracy of angry women are telling lies for no reason. It’s actually overwhelmingly more likely that he did it. The overwhelmingly less likely thing is that a pair of bitter females, driven by jealousy or by the sheer malignity of the gender, have been lying about him for decades.

        The burden of proof for assuming that a person is lying turns out to be quite high if you are a wealthy and influential famous film director. You don’t have to say a word in your defense because people who have directed documentaries about you will write lengthy essays in the Daily Beast tearing down the testimony of your accusers. You can just go about your life making movie after movie, and it’s fine. However, if you are a woman who has accused a great film director of molesting you when you were seven, the starting point is the presumption that you are not telling the truth. In the court of public opinion, a woman accusing a great film director of raping her has no credibility which his fans are bound to respect. He has something to lose, his good name. She does not because she does not have a good name. She’s been living in hiding under an assumed name, and when she is silent, the Daily Beast does not rise to her defense.

        In a rape culture, there is no burden on us to presume that she is not a liar, no necessary imperative to treat her like a person whose account of herself can be taken seriously. It is important that we presume he is innocent. It is not important that we presume she is not making it all up out of female malice. In a rape culture, you can say things like “We can’t really know what really happened, so let’s all act as if Woody Allen is innocent (and she is lying).” In a rape culture, you can use your ignorance to cast doubt on her knowledge; you can admit that you have no basis for casting doubt on Dylan’s statement, and then you can ignore her account of herself. A famous man is not speaking, so her testimony is not admissible evidence. His name is Woody Allen, and in a rape culture, that good name must be shielded and protected. What is her name?

      • badrockandroll says:

        If America is a rape culture, what do you call Iran? Or India?

        Hyperbole doesn’t do anyone any good.

      • Gail says:

        Most of human society is one big cesspool encouraging rape culture and yes, as you so thoughtfully pointed out, the land of brown people, a poor third world country like India.(my homeland)

      • Sloane Wyatt says:

        @ badrockandroll, rape culture exists right here in the United States. Rape culture is a mindset of the many; it’s a deep rooted outlook that we need to begin overturning from all angles. A common behavior of rape culture is victim blaming. Victim blaming is SO CLEARLY a product of this absurd mentality in which the blame is somehow shifted FROM the perpetrator TO the victim.

        It’s not hyperbole to call out Woody Allen’s overweening entitlement to Dylan’s body and his abject betrayal and grooming of Soon Yi, for that matter, for what is it is. The breathtaking irony of your comment is that, indeed, some radical Islamic cultures require rape victims to marry their abusers.

        However, the fear that Woody Allen is somehow getting falsely accused of sexually assaulting his child just doesn’t compare to the sobering real fear of an actual rapist or child abuser getting away with his or her crime. Dylan’s story made the headlines while the vast numbers of rape victims’ stories do not. The fact, not hyperbole, is that 10% of rapes are ever reported. Of those reported rapes, only 30% faced trial, and just 10% of these rapists are jailed. Here’s the stark graphic that lays it out. – http://theenlivenproject.com/the-truth-about-false-accusation/

        The reality of rape culture is that punishments are not just, when they are given at all, and sexual assault victims are too often criticized with sympathy doled out for the offender. We need to make proper examples out of each and every offender in order to teach consequence, presenting a unified “zero tolerance” front in order to begin shifting the mindset of the whole. The concept of right and wrong in these instances is very black and white, and it is everyone’s job to ensure that is the message being sent no matter who the perpetrator is.

        Whether highly publicized or not, rape IS happening all over the world and the perpetrators range from serial rapists to high school kids forming rape gangs to grown adults in positions of power like Woody Allen. No matter how many times one particular group, sub-culture or gender makes the news, 1.3 rapes per minute can only be accounted for by an entire population. Eradicating rape culture means shifting the mindset of every single American until no one believes that anyone is ever asking for it; until no one in any part of our society tolerates, condones or normalizes these behaviors.

  50. Sloane Wyatt says:


    This is a photo of Weide, the author of this bullshit story, arm around his shoulder good pal Woody Allen!

    We ALL SEE THROUGH Woody’s unconvincing PR.

  51. Agatha says:

    I’ve always always seen him as a very self concious man with a very low self esteem. Often times men who crave sex with children, really crave power. They don’t feel secure enough in relationships with adult women. Mind that Soon Yi had to be very submissive at age 19, coming from a poor non-western country, very young, propably not yet properly educated. I now know where that guilt that is present in lot of his work comes from. I will not support him in any way from now on. Thank you Kaiser for taking a stand.

    • videli says:

      I’m afraid you’re peddling a mail bride stereotype. Soon-yi was adopted as a toddler and grew up as an American girl. Of course, that doesn’t make it right for that predator twerp.

    • Ally8 says:

      There is a hideous moment in the documentary about Woody Allen’s jazz tour in Europe, as he and Soon-Yi stay in five-star hotels, where he says something about Soon-Yi (in her presence) like, “Can you believe this girl, she used to eat out of garbage cans.”

      • Gail says:

        He said what? That sentence alone displays what he actually thinks of his wife? Vile, disgusting man.

  52. Dreamyk says:

    I believe her. I’ve always believed her. I will never stop believing her.

    I’m glad that as adults, this family is standing strong in the face of WA and his revisionist history BS.

    For all the posters on here that have been abused themselves, for the husbands and wives who are married to a survivor, for all those who have friends and loved ones that are survivors..you are not alone. Live your truth. You are a survivor. And you have my deepest respect, always.

  53. shellybean says:

    I read some comments on another site that were criticizing her for calling out Woody’s co-workers, since technically they had nothing to do with what happened to her. While this may be true, I think it is important and BRAVE of her to call out people who work with him, and this is why…

    I and my sister were molested by a male family member when we were children. We found out a few years ago that ALL of the family knew. They didn’t actually know when it was happening, but they had known about it for many years, and most definitely since we’d been adults. During this time that they all knew, he was still treated with great regard, allowed to be around other small children in the family, and was generally given no consequences. Then when he died last year, a lot of them carried on about what a good man he was and how he was their hero. Unbelievable. My sister and I were of course dumbfounded and hurt. Their excuse for this has always been that my sister and I were easy targets, since we came from the fucked up home and had fucked up parents, but that he would never have done anything to anyone else. While they believed us, they also felt like it was our parents’ fault.

    Dylan calling people out who revere Woody and who work with him is unbelievably brave. So many of us are kept silent because of the person’s stature in the community or within the family. Everyone who has worked with Woody in the last 20 years has been aware of these allegations. Like my own family, they chose to disregard his victim and make excuses for him and still work with him because he is WOODY ALLEN. They ARE basically saying that his actions and his victim do not matter.

    I believe Dylan. I can’t even put into words why, and I still don’t think I’m conveying my thoughts clearly since it’s emotional for me, but every single sentence of what she wrote rings true.

    Especially her “Have you forgotten me?”. Especially her “Woody Allen is a living testament to the way our society fails the survivors of sexual assault and abuse.” This rings true to me because this is what happened in my own family. My sister and I were failed until the very end of the man’s life, and Dylan is being failed every time Woody Allen receives more praise and more top-tier actors to work with. It’s one big “fuck you” to the victims.

    • hmmm says:

      Oh, I so agree with you! Dylan named names. The names who supported him have turned me off them a long time ago. She challenges them, the great and powerful. She is amazingly brave. Amazingly. Will they respond, I wonder.

    • We Are All Made of Stars says:

      I just wanted to express my sorrow for you over what you had to go through. I hope you and your sister have received the emotional and therapeutic support that you need to deal with this and live peaceful and fulfilling lives.

    • Peppa says:

      I am stuck home in the snow storm with the house all to myself, so I have been reading about this all morning. Someone on Alec Baldwin’s twitter asked him if he was going to apologize to Dylan and he said he was confused at how people thought he had any right to comment on a personal family matter. When someone mentioned Dylan had named him in her letter, he told them they were full of sh*t. A few people came out to support him saying Dylan was only asking these celebs rhetorically, and didn’t really expect an answer. I’m torn on that because, in reality, it isn’t totally a personal family issue. There is a much bigger issue of Hollywood sweeping sex abuse (especially against children) under the rug. Someone also defended Baldwin by saying hindsight is 20/20 and how was Baldwin supposed to know all of this when he decided to work with Woody. This information has been out there for two decades. Yes this is the first time that Dylan has spoken as an adult, but Mia and Ronan have stated before that Dylan still stands by those twenty year old accusations. Lots of very talented people have worked with Woody in those twenty years since Dylan’s accusations were made public and surely they knew. I don’t blame those actors, but I would like to hear what their opinion is. What if it had been their child?

      • LILA says:

        This is why the Farrow-Polanski friendship strike me as odd. She KNEW about that case, it was in the early 70′s! and she still did not say a word against him, even after what happened with WA.
        I am curious if you have read Mia’s memoirs, what did she have to say about Polanski?

      • shellybean says:

        Peppa, exactly. What if it had been THEIR children? Or them? Dylan asked a valid question.

        The bigger picture IS that sexual abuse gets swept under the rug, because it makes people uncomfortable. “Oh, it happened to YOU, but it would never happen to ME, so let’s not think about it”. And when no one was ever prosecuted it makes it even easier for them to sweep it under the rug.

        I asked my aunt, when I found out they all knew, if she was SURE he hadn’t done anything to anyone else in the family. She got all flustered and said that HER girls would have told her about it, so no, of course he didn’t do anything. The thing is, my sister and I told our mother. My mother told my grandmother at some point. My mother was then ostracized. My sister and I weren’t, but my mother was. No one wanted to deal with it. No one wanted to believe that the great man of the family did this, even though they knew he did do it to us. For some reason, we mattered less (or I should say my mother did, since she was the vocal one, while my sister and I remained silent). I eventually moved 1,200 miles away and only have contact with some of my immediate family and family on the other side, and my sister eventually cut a lot of the family off. WE are the ones who continue to be cut off from the family. He never had to be. He was welcomed until the very end. Why is that?

        Same with Dylan. Why did SHE have to move to FL and change her name, while her abuser gets to live out in the open and receive accolade after accolade? Why does SHE have to live in the shadows? Same with Mia. Why is SHE the one being attacked and ostracized?

        I don’t even think that Dylan is expecting an answer from all of these actors. She is just making a point that people don’t want to see the monster in the room when it’s inconvenient for them. Obviously, it’s still inconvenient for Alec Baldwin.

    • kibbles says:

      +10000 Very powerful post and thank you for sharing your awful experience. I have experienced injustice that is minuscule in comparison to being physically abused, but even in minor incidences of injustice, it is hard not to feel bitterness towards people who know the truth but still will not take your side because the person at fault is more powerful. I can’t imagine keeping in touch with family members who excuse sexual assault and try to blame the victims or anyone else who has no direct relation to the crime itself. Absurd. I hope you have walked away from these people because they were never on your side when you needed them to be. The only right thing for them to have done was to have reported him to the police and put him behind bars.

    • Little M says:

      @shellybean: I am not very good with words but I just wanted to say that it was not your fault. I am sorry for what happened to you. Really.

      I hope you and your sister have healed and found the support you deserve. You are survivors.

  54. Aurora says:

    I love Woody Allen’s movies. I look forward to his next one with colin firth.

    • Kiddo says:

      The fact that you never addressed anything other than the movies, not even acknowledging a persons’ pain, whether or not you believe them, speaks volumes.

      • kibbles says:

        Right. This post is on Dylan’s alleged abuse, not a post on Woody Allen films. I guess some people (including many in Hollywood) can separate their work or entertainment with the abhorrent crimes of the man who creates the work. I personally cannot understand how people think it is okay to ignore a man’s crimes against innocent children.

  55. dorothy says:

    What a total creep and a perv. Just the fact that he married his adopted daughter should speak volumes. Why Hollywood continues to overlook this fact is a testament to how off their priorities are. If you recall Roman Polanski raped a young girl, and yet Hollywood still supported everything he did. Sick town.

  56. Juliette says:

    The power dynamics of this abuse story are so skewed against Dylan that its shocking to me anyone would think those of us who believe her need to be more “objective.” Dylan was a child, Woody was an adult. A very rich, very famous, very well connected and powerful adult. Dylan was dragged through redundant medical and court proceedings because Woody could hire lawyers and doctors to combat every expert opinion and litigate the case into oblivion.

    Some people are saying that Dylan’s memories cannot be trusted because they are a result of a bitter custody battle and are all Mia’s fault. I think that’s insanity.

    DYLAN, the victim, is now coming forward and publicly telling her story. Not her mother Mia. People’s opinions of Mia have nothing to do with Dylan’s story. Although I will say that attacking the victim’s mother, who only tried to do her best to protect her daughter is really low. Mia’s character has absolutely nothing to do with Dylan’s suffering. If anything, Woody’s horrible letter attacking Mia just shows that he really is grasping at straws. He knows he’s guilty, he’s a caged animal resorting to lashing out at whoever he can lash out at and trying to turn the blame onto anyone else but himself.

    This story exists because it happened.
    It destroyed a family, and tortured a little girl.
    Now, as a young woman, Dylan feels ready to tell her truth as she remembers it and confront her abuser. If she was uncertain about the memories, she would not have written such a public attack of Woody. If she was uncertain, she would have stayed in the shadows as she has for many, many years. Its enough. Victims do not need to suffer silently, blaming themselves for the awful behavior of their abusers.

    Dylan is the victim. Dylan deserves support.

    • Dimebox says:

      Kudos on your comment. I have been too sick and angry over this to comment, so I just want to recommend yours.

    • Shannon1972 says:

      Yes, yes, a million time yes!! Thank you Juliette – this is what I have been trying to say all morning.

      • Gail says:

        Thank you for your words Juliette. I am not good with words. In fact the more I feel, the more they get stuck inside me. But kudos to for saying your piece that I agree with wholeheartedly so eloquently.

  57. LadyJane says:

    Celebitchy – can you let us (regular commenters) know if you have had an upsurge of new accounts commenting solely on this article today? It seems there are A LOT of new faces, here, and all in support of Mr Allen.

    • Janet says:

      They are all over HuffPo as well, posting comments in defense of that dirtbag. Interestingly, they are all guys.

    • kibbles says:

      +1 I’ve noticed this too. I don’t think these people are regular Celebitchy readers. There are probably a lot of Woody Allen fans who will spend this week trolling the web and commenting on various sites in support of their favourite freaky pedophile director. Just ignore them.

      • Peppa says:

        I saw a lot of mostly male fans of Woody Allen defending him on another site, but they were facebook comments (so not troll accounts). I think people don’t want to feel guilty about enjoying his movies.

    • We Are All Made of Stars says:

      Yes, there are a ton of new accounts commenting exclusively on this article, and they are all supporting him. There are maybe two or three regulars who are casting doubt on Allen’s guilt.

      • Dimebox says:

        I’ve certainly noticed them, and some of them are commenting multiple times in support of their creepy hero.

      • lili says:

        well, i am a regular reader of this site, just don’t find it fair some of you constant posters are accusing people who rarely post as being paid by woody or whatever…
        this is an important debate, and many of you woody haters are not considering all the facts because this is such an emotionally charged issue.

        and dear celebitchy, please note, trying to comment on this page is a tenuous practice, maybe it’s my Android, but don’t have the same delay and

      • Soporificat says:

        Yeah, I have that impression, too. But, it’s hard to pin down, because even though I have never seen some of these people, that could just be because I don’t normally read the same threads that they do (like, I never ever click on any Kardashian post, lol!)

        And, of course they’ll never cop to it. They just get huffy and make excuses. Anyway, whatever, even PR people have a right to make comments, I suppose.

    • cr says:

      If you’re so curious about this, you can actually do your own research by using Google’s advanced search, just type the name of the name of the poster and narrow the search to Celebitchy. Not as precise as being able to go into CB’s records, but it can give a basic idea
      There have been a lot of newish names in recent months, not only on Woody Allen posts. And some of the newer ones are definitely not pro-Woody.

      • lili says:

        must say the comments I’ve seen that many have accessed as pro woody, are actually just setting folks straight as to the facts.

        in regard to soon yi, i was in my twenties when that went down, and was disgusted for years… but then i saw them together in the street in a private moment and what i witnessed was a happy couple with some serious chemistry. and now they have been together for over twenty years! in our modern American society we may frown upon may December rom, but fact is they have been the norm throughout history…. maybe woody and his wife truly do belong together, despite the rather unsavory stay of their relationship

    • Seagulls says:

      I find it interesting that anyone who is saying that they don’t 100% believe Woody is guilty is immediately charged with being a newbie here, or that, per another poster, we’re here for “our hero.” It’s insulting.

      This article at Salon shares my doubts and reservations about this better than I can http://www.salon.com/2014/02/03/the_uneasy_ambiguity_of_the_woody_allen_case/. He may well be guilty, but until something is decided in a court of law, then I am not going to stomp all over him.

      • lili says:

        please forgive typos, can’t edit anything beyond the first few lines
        ROM = romance
        stay = start

      • Jennifer12 says:

        It’s an interesting article and I feel the same way- don’t like branding someone until I know for sure- but it doesn’t matter because if you’re just trying to explore the situation and ask questions, you’re going to get jumped on.

  58. Mingy says:

    In Mia’s memoir, when she was talking about Woody’s obsession with Dylan, it infuriated me how naive she sounded. If what she said was true; how on earth could she have let Woody anywhere near Dylan or her other children after witnessing his behavior???……It just didn’t make sense. I don’t know, but I feel really bad for Dylan. Her letter was heartbreaking.

    • Recept says:

      Also keep in mind that the alleged assault against Dylan happened after Woody and Soon Yi’s relationship was common knowledge. I don’t understand why Mia continued to have contact with him (they were filming a movie at the time and she didn’t quit the project!) and permit him to come visit the children in her vacation home.
      I feel badly for Dylan. The Vanity Fair article from last fall shows that she is still in a great deal of turmoil.

      • Mingy says:

        Yes! she continued filming “Husbands and Wives” after finding the photes of Soon-Yi! WTF!?!

      • videli says:

        I remember reading that initially she refused to set foot on the set, and went practically in the hiding for a short while, but then was coaxed back by the producer and others, who played the professional card. I also remember Mia being described as afraid of Allen, who had a sort of emotional abuse spell on her.

  59. hmmm says:

    I have always believed her and always believed Mia. When this first came out, Woody did what all rich and powerful men and pedophiles do- infer that Mia was unstable, crazy, vindictive- not in her right mind. This is what men like that invariably do to women.

    Dylan is so brave. Like all the survivors who step forward. And here it is, her word against against a titan. Remarkable!

    As for the Woody apologists- they just illuminate how twisted our world is- that this is what survivors have to deal with on top of the endless damage to their lives and those around them. I want all those hyenas to experience the same thing Dylan did and then get back to us. There is a special place in hell for their willful ignorance. This just confirms, as always, that there is rarely justice in this world of ours.

  60. Jeanette says:

    Connecticut Prosecutor Won’t File Charges Against Woody Allen
    Published: September 25, 1993

    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.
    The state’s attorney in Litchfield, Frank Maco, said he had drawn up an arrest warrant for Mr. Allen, but then decided not to pursue the case. He said the girl’s mother, Mia Farrow, had agreed that dropping the charges was in her daughter’s best interest.
    “This was no time for a damn-the-torpedoes prosecutorial approach,” Mr. Maco said at a news conference in Wallingford, Conn., yesterday.
    But Mr. Maco seemed to go out of his way to say publicly that he believed the child had been molested. He was not obligated to make his decision, or his reasoning, public.
    1 day ago

    Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2014/02/01/woody-allen-daughter-dylan-sexual-assault-open-letter-mia-farrow/#ixzz2sHRMEgOO

    • madchen says:

      Maco was later disciplined for prosecutorial over reach because the case had little merit. It was high profile and he was grand standing. That info never makes the news stories. These guys never come out when it’s some kid in foster care but when it’s the child of someone famous, their mouths are right in front of the mike. T

  61. NorthernGirl_20 says:

    I am completely disgusted with the people that support WA, and who are defending him .. I can’t believe that anyone would defend this POS especially after reading Dylan’s letter. This man is disgusting and I have never (knowingly) watched a WA movie after finding out about him and Soon-Yi and I never will. Some of the above comments have me so angry I am seeing red. You should be ashamed of yourselves.

    • madchen says:

      You don’t know any more about this than the rest of us do. Those readers who don’t automatically jump on the ‘guilty’ bandwagon don’t need to be ashamed of themselves. This particular story of abuse is far more complicated and nuanced than most.

      • deehunny says:

        ok, I can understand that, but why are people actively defending him and blaming the mother for not protecting her child? she is also a victim and was not the one that molested her daughter.

        it’s pretty clear that the overwhelming evidence supports the idea that he molested Dylan, took nude vag shots of his teen step-daughter (legally or not, still a father figure) and then married her. like ugh, people open your eyes

  62. laura says:

    Woody Allen married his own adoptive daughter so as far as the molestation accusations i believe them completely! He is a sick guy

    • Janet says:

      Um, no. Let’s keep the facts straight. Soon-Yi was not his adoptive daughter. He never adopted her. He was not married to Mia Farrow, who did adopt her. He was not living with Mia Farrow; they maintained separate apartments in Manhattan.

      However, he was in a long-term relationship with Mia Farrow; some of her children did see him as a father figure, and he chose to betray his relationship with Ms. Farrow by banging her own daughter, thereby not only destroying his relationship with Ms. Farrow but destroying her relationship with her daughter as well. And he tried to justify all this by whining “The heart wants what it wants.”

      Allen is despicable. End of story.

      • Terry says:

        To always bring up the ‘fact’ woody wasn’t her ‘adoptive’ father is annoying – it doesn’t matter. Sure, he didn’t adopt her, yes yes we get that from the zillion other ‘fact givers’ on this thread. Psychology – in any socalled normal family unit – the adult male hanging around mom usually has great influence over her children. Doesn’t matter if he’s in relation by blood, nor does it matter if he paid for the papers, the guy is a role model – during the time she was a child, woody was an adult. He clearly influenced her in all the wrong ways.

  63. Pandy says:

    While Soon-Yi was not adopted by Woody, he was brought into the family in a parental capacity. The fact that he “married” her, at a grossly young age, makes me think he is a molester. He molested her as well but covered that by marrying her once the Dylan allegations came out. Soon-Yi is apparently mentally handicapped. I doubt this is a love match – it was a cover up and it allowed him access to adopt more young girls. Pedophile.

    • emma says:

      Pandy, totally agree with your take on this. And, sick sick people are defending him, with all kinds of pathetic twisted arguments it seems…”technically, she wasn’t his adopted daughter, and Mia can’t be trusted, and Dylan must be in la-la land, and he just happened to fall in love with his lover’s teen daughter, and you can’t prove it happened, and blah, blah, blah” . You twisted shits.

  64. homegrrrrl says:

    I’m so unbelievably proud of Dylan for coming forward. May WA, an entitled POS rot in HELL

    In terms of his Art, WA “Sleeper” was a sign of the times, and interesting. But that era of drugs was also the era of loose sexuality; even rock stars were overtly having sex with twelve and thirteen year old girls, and it was considered “cool”. (baby groupies) The entire break out drug era was convoluted and sometimes ugly; no wonder his art had fertile ground.
    But his films since then haven’t been oscar worthy in my opinion. The film with Kate Blachette, blue whatever, was pure Misogyny, thinly veiled. It portrayed an educated woman as having no sense, no resources, who fell apart when she had to work a nine to five job- so unrealistic and pure stupidity.
    That said, he’s a MILLION PERCENT pedophile, creepy, slimy and entitled. Now finally it’s out in the open Let’s hope Dylan and her family prosecute him and he serves a prison term for the rest of his life!!

  65. lili says:

    well, i am a regular reader of this site, just don’t find it fair some of you constant posters are accusing people who rarely post as being paid by woody or whatever…
    this is an important debate, and many of you woody haters are not considering all the facts because this is such an emotionally charged issue.

    and dear celebitchy, please note, trying to comment on this page is a tenuous practice, maybe it’s my Android, but don’t have the same delay and tracking issues with other sites’ comment areas..

  66. Nymeria says:

    I’ve always wondered about people who bluster about this being a “family matter” (yes, that includes you, Cate Blanchett and you, Alec Baldwin) and claiming to be neutral toward Allen, or even contemptuous of Dylan – Would they trust him to be alone with their young daughters?

  67. lili says:

    and i don’t understand how correcting some peoples’ misunderstandings of the facts can be cmisonstrued as being a woody supporter

    and may dylan heal from the horrors of her childhood, whomever is to blame….


    • Tara says:

      Maybe because your woody-bot “facts” aren’t facts and are instead repeated misrepresentations and/or completely unsubstantiated flights of fancy?

  68. Al says:

    I am tired of this Mia took a man away from his wife and her daughter did the same thing mentality so many people seem to have.

    No, Soon-Yi Previn is not Woody Allen’s daughter, adoptive or otherwise. She is the daughter of the woman he was in a relationship with. She is the sister to Woody Allen’s children.
    Mia Farrow had an affair with Andre’ Previn while he was married.

  69. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    I have no idea why Allen was allowed to adopt two girls with Soon-Yi. Even IF he never molested Farrow’s daughters, his relationship with Soon-Yi (whom he helped raise) shows that he does not consider non-biological children to be HIS children. That is not how adoptive parents should view children.

    But, he’s rich and famous, so he gets to adopt, even with previous abuse charges that were inconclusive, and his relationship with Soon-Yi herself. It must be nice to be rich and famous.

  70. qtpi says:

    He’s a creeper. Plain and simple.

    If I was an actor I wouldn’t go near him or his movie set.

  71. Ginger says:

    As an abuse survivor I find this whole thing sickening. The victim is made to feel as if she doesn’t exist and it was all on her head. Her mother is deemed crazy and that’s the end of it. It’s hard for me to believe that in this day and age women and children are still being abused by their supposed loved ones and then abused again by society and a corrupt judicial system. I applaud Dylan for continually telling her truth! And she is so lucky to have her family stand up for her time and again. It’s no surprise that victims of rape, incest and sexual abuse are hesitant to come forward because society still does not protect women and children. There’s a lesson to be learned here and I think Dylan’s statement says it all.

  72. mercy says:

    It looks like the attempt of Allen’s friend to rehabilitate WA’s image during awards season via the Daily Beast has backfired now that Dylan has spoken up for herself. I don’t pretend to know what happened, but I can only applaud the courage of this young woman for standing up for herself and speaking her truth to power.

    What I know for certain about Allen: he’s a talented and powerful man who employs a lot of people and as a result has a lot of outright defenders, or people who are willing to look the other way; he has a fascination with young girls and women; he puts his needs first and is lacking a moral compass (see: Soon-Yi affair). Taken as a whole, he fits the profile of a person who would indulge his desires and believe he could get away with it. Under the circumstances, I’m less inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt and more inclined believe Dylan.

    • aquarius64 says:

      The fact that it was Allen’s friend that wrote that article ruins the credibility of his arguments to me.

  73. whateveryouwantittobe says:

    I watched the Golden Globes and turned it off after Diane Keaton’s little song for him, it really disgusted me. I have lost respect for her and all the people who continue to work with him. The way he’s gotten away with being an abuser is an injustice and completely unacceptable. His films will never find an audience with me.

  74. kkimber says:

    As an incest survivor, I believe her. Some of these posts make me want to scream.

  75. Melymori says:

    I can proudly say that I’ve never seen any of his movies, and don’t intend to do it in the future. It really doesn’t matter if the claims are true or untrue, just the fact that he married his step daughter makes him a creep, so it wouldn’t be too crazy if he molested Dylan… I hope for the sake of all abuse survivors that Hollywood would just stop honoring these child molesters, it’s repulsive.

  76. Just Me says:

    Fact: Undeniable Fact: Woody Allen was an Adult . . . . Dylan, a child!
    One Adult Male, an authority figure, the other an Innocent Child!
    One a Coward playing a Victim, the other a Brave Survivor!

  77. hairy woman says:

    do you remember what he said about Ellen Page? you know, sweet-faced Ellen, who looks like she’s teenager:P
    “I wanted someone who was not sexual in a heavy-handed way. If I wanted an overtly sexual actress, I would cast someone like Scarlett Johansson. There are many actresses who blind you by how sexy they are. Ellen is a very sweet girl, but she can project something complicated and mysterious. You don’t know too much about her – she gives you this neurotic feeling – but you know that sex with her would be an interesting experience. ”
    I mean, wtf?

  78. HK9 says:

    Who here would leave their 7/9/16 year old daughter/niece/cousin/godchild unsupervised alone in a room with Woody Allen? What….no takers????
    We all know who he is and what he does.

    I was molested at age 9.
    I remember everything.
    I am not confused.

    I believe Dylan, and now that she’s stepped forward with what happened to her, I do believe those around her will step forward, with their continued encouragement and support.

  79. MAC says:

    I feel for her and what she has endured. “But sexual abuse claims against the powerful stall more easily.”

    I do not agree with this statement. The way the United States has treated sexual abuse, rape etc of any human being is wrong, the system does not work. It is now in the news daily about neglect and abuse by parents and abuse by teachers.

    I am not that old I remember a time no parent, teacher, clergy, garden variety rapist, tv personality, etc got convicted. They did not even get reported and when they did how many walked…………

  80. samr says:

    Send him to hell where he belongs!

    • madchen says:

      Oh please. Your voice would be better used in the defense of voiceless victims – read any major city’s issues w/abuse in foster care and get yourself involved. This ‘hang the witch’ mentality doesn’t help anyone.

  81. Snappyfish says:

    The state of CT found probable cause in this case but backed off stating. “The victim was too fragile” which translates to Allen is famous. While I believe Mia to be dodgy I DO believe Dylan.

    The pig is married to another child he ” molested” naked photos of an under aged girl who thought if you as a father figure. This is called grooming & it’s what pedophiles do.

    Not that it matters but I have boycotted all his work since the Soon Yi situation

    • Liberty says:

      + 1

    • constance says:

      Agreed. This is what I see. [Age ain't nuttin' but a number...]

      His first marriage: Allen married 16-year-old Harlene Rosen.
      He then married Louise Lasser, who is known for her signature image of wearing childish pig-tails and clothing styles. The look was crafted during their time together.
      Stacey Nelkin claimed her relationship with Woody began when she was 17 and in high school.
      Dylan, a 7 year old girl and the daughter of his girlfriend, claims to have been molested by a man in a step-father position.
      Soon-Yi was adopted in 1978, making her about 8 years old when introduced to Woody Allen as a step-fatherly figure.
      Mia Farrow claims their relationship hit the brick wall when Woody left out images of a nude Soon-Yi (aged 16 or 17) out for her to find.
      Sadly, I haven’t seen many images of Allen with his newly adopted daughters where they looked happy and thrilled to see him, or be touched. Perhaps that is the fault of the situation being captured, but it is strange to me, and could be part of the pattern.

      To me, this seems like a pattern of a man being attracted to young, innocent-looking women to fulfill a desire to be trusted, older figure who can control the situation, and craft the woman into a specific look- like his actors/actresses.

    • madchen says:

      I need to be clear that I’m NOT defending Allen but please get your facts straight. Woody Allen was never a step-father figure to Soon-Yi. He never even stayed the night at the Farrow households (confirmed by Mia) and didn’t see them daily. He didn’t have much of a relationship with the older children. Mia encouraged Soon-Yi and Allen to get together because she was concerned he had no connection to her. The rest is history.

      Also, Soon-Yi was between 7-9 when she was adopted – so born approximately in 1970.

  82. aquarius64 says:

    I checked the blogs. So far none of Allen’s family and Hollywood friends have gone on the record to defend him, saying the allegations are false. Even Michael Jackson, when he was on trial for child molestation, had celebrities come out and defend him. Some went to his house and partied as a show of support. This speaks volumes to me – either some of his friends knew (or have an inkling) or they don’t want to risk their reputations or careers by giving a full-throated endorsement of Allen and more information comes out. Dollar bet none of his Hollywood friends want to be photographed with him now.

  83. RubyGloom says:

    This f*****g creep. His enablers can jump of the cliff.
    On this sick planet almost everything is more important than girls and women:
    - sport
    - art
    - imaginary fairies (voices in people’s head aka religions)
    - politics
    - coins (money)
    What else? Oh yeah, men’s wishes and choices.
    So f*****g disgusting!! :( :(

  84. Tiffany :) says:

    I had heard about his relationship with Soon-Yi, but I had NEVER heard of these accusations regarding Dylan (I think I wasn’t quite old enough for this kind of news when they surfaced). I love films, but never watched Woody Allen ones because he always seemed irritating in commercials…

    So I can’t really say I am going to boycott his films because I didn’t watch them to begin with. Dylan’s story does seem fairly credible to me. I hope she makes it through all of this new attention to the story.

  85. Luce says:

    I think there are inconsistencies with all versions of the stories involved, including WA’s. And as much as I want to believe Dylan (because I believe WA is a neurotic and paranoid individual who is capable of behaviour that, while the rest of us deem abusive, he probably views as acceptable because it suits his blind sense of morality, as great geniuses tend to do), I’m hearing different versions of of what’s happening here. Dylan is saying that WA hid his actions so well from Mia that she was unable to protect her daughter, which she obviously would have done. But then I’m also hearing from Mia that she observed how Woody was obsessed with Dylan over the other children and acted completely inappropriately with her… inviting her into bed with only his underwear on, putting his thumbs in her mouth, entwining his body around hers etc. If I were a mother and my partner was doing these things to my daughter, I’d be well aware that something wasn’t right. So which is it? Was it hidden well or was it very obvious to everyone, including maids and other witnesses? I don’t know… it just doesn’t add up. Seems like they’re both playing each other and Dylan is the victim no matter what.

  86. Luce says:

    And might I add… Woody Allen wasn’t formally charged with anything. I’m not defending him, but it’s not right to vilify someone who was never convicted because he was never brought up on charges. I won’t stop loving Annie Hall until there’s absolute proof determined by a fair and objective judicial system. I don’t’ think calling out actors that work with him is a productive way to get your point across because they really don’t know the truth. It’s all just accusations. I guess those who have already labelled him guilty also don’t listen to Michael Jackson or read Alice in Wonderland (Lewis CArroll had a weird relationship with Alice Liddell – the inspiration for the story).

    And using Soon-Yi as evidence of his sexual interest in young women isn’t convincing enough because soooo many people in the entertainment industry are sexually deviant and morally bankrupt in ways that would shock the regular person. Sadly, that’s the reality of the high-rolling, artist lifestyle, whether in Hollywood or on Wall Street. You just fall into it. I think Woody Allen and Mia Farrow are a part of that scene just as much as anyone else, and that’s why the full truth has never come out. There’s too much at stake for both of them.

    • elle says:

      I would vilify anyone who dares to molest and brainwash an impressionable young girl. And I’m talking about Soon-Yi. Don’t get me started on the 7 year old.

    • bettyrose says:

      “Sexually deviant” doesn’t even come close to describing a man who who raised, taught, and emotionally guided his own future wife. That’s something out of the dark ages.

      • Luce says:

        I’m not condoning it, I’m just saying that there are many types of these personalities in the entertainment industry because they have this weird power and boredom that enables it. Look at Justin Bieber. He’s well on his way to becoming a total sexual weirdo. I’m sure Leonardo DiCaprio will have an 18-year-old girlfriend when he turns 50. The Soon-Yi/Woody saga is hardly an exception, and Mia Farrow, what with her affairs with Andre Previn and Frank Sinatra, is probably no saint when it comes to her involvement with this very scene. If what happened to Dylan is true, yes Woody Allen is a sick monster and I will never watch his films again, but until it’s proven, I’m not sure I’m ready to start the boycott.

  87. elle says:

    I haven’t watched any of his films since the allegations first came out. I don’t watch any actor who has appeared in any of his films. I can now scratch Cate Blanchett off of my list. Damned! I applaude Mia and the kids for their bravery in their pursuit for justice. WA makes my skin crawl. I do not believe a word that comes out of his filthy mouth. If Hollywood continues to support him I will soon be forced to watch foreign films only.

  88. bettyrose says:

    I find these Woody Allen threads especially sickening because I grew up in a house of his fans, and saw many of his movies as a child. Even then, I use to comment that he seemed to really hate women, only to be told I didn’t “get it.” When he married a young woman who was – for all intents and purposes his daughter, and certainly psychologically under his control – I again made these points, but people acted like I was a traitor to my own for culture turning on him. This man is a disgusting misogynist who has never made any effort at all to hide it. Women are not human to him, so it’s no hard to believe he did this. At any rate, I don’t need to feel bad about having a “favorite” Woody Allen movie. I have always been disgusted by him.

  89. Meganbc says:

    Ronan Farrow’s interview with Miley Cyrun in W Mag is highly sexualized and accompanied by highly sexualized photos of a Miley, who, frankly, looks like she is a teenager. Ronan is right to support his sister in every way possible, but he is wrong to participate in the media’s sexualization of young women.

  90. mikeal says:

    Woody Allen, made this comment”If I was caught in a love nest with 15 12-year-old girls tomorrow, people would think, yeah, I always knew that about him.”

  91. mikeal says:

    I didn’t post the link above.

    Woody Allen, 1976: “If I was caught in a love nest with 15 12-year-old girls “…http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20066950,00.html

    It might have just been an attempt at a crass ‘joke’ but given his history, that statement reveals a certain thought process that he have.

  92. Santolina says:

    Sorry if someone has already posted this excellent essay from The Nation…

    “….once we start to believe victims en masse—once we take their pain and experience seriously…everything will have to change…. It’s easier to ignore what we know to be true, and focus on what we wish was. But the more we hold on to the things that make us comfortable and unthinking, the more people will be hurt—and the more growing room we’ll create for monsters.”

    Note: This is not the article written by Allen’s good friend!

  93. Soliloquily says:

    This whole situation has made me lose respect for so many individuals, like Simon Pegg, Barbara Walters and Stephen King. Simon said Woody was being “vilified”, Barbara claimed Dylan COULDN’T have been molested because ‘OMG woody is such a nice guy’! Barf. And Stephen King who disappointed me so much and cast doubt on Dylan’s claims by saying there was “an element of palpable bitchery there.” WTF.

    • Nate says:

      Yeah. How dare a woman, who has been through so much (whether you believe she was abused or not, SHE believes she was, and by all accounts and evidence, she most likely was) feel anger toward her abuser. All women are bitches. A part of me feels like I’m dying inside to watch how stupid people are choosing to be when it comes to this. Allen has a strong history. The evidence against him was strong, or the judge would not have reprimanded him. The stories that came from staff members were downright vile. I don’t care what Mia did or what she does from now on. It can’t and it doesn’t excuse Allen. People will be sorry when his “new” daughters start talking against him later on…

  94. Moi says:

    Woody Allen is a sociopath. He feels that what he did was not wrong or inappropriate. If it takes him being publicly shamed, I truly hope he will realize that he has a sickness, will be put away and receive help, and I so worry for the two little adopted girls that are living with him. Real question- why did he not adopt a boy at all? Frightening, just frightening.

  95. MyLittlePony says:

    Could someone please explain why so many child molesting accusations and cases do surface during custody battles, why not before? Or after for that matter? I do feel for Dylan, and hope she does pull through after all that she has had to experience. I do not doubt her words, but I am not sure what what was it exactly that happened in that family. And if Mia had given such instructions to the nannies, why on earth did she not leave the man to protect her children?! Personally, I think they should not have dropped the case twenty years ago, but should have gone through with it. Now, there is nothing but accusations flying in the air , and no way of finding out the truth or convicting Allen either.

  96. poppy says:

    fwiw, i believe dylan -what does she stand to gain by her very public letter calling out her abuser? why anyone would think she’s doing this for her mother after this many years, after decades of therapy? to maintain this sort of fabrication this long would be exhausting and if it were something she made up as a child she would definitely not want it brought up ever, let alone bring it up, publicly, herself. WA hurt dylan tremendously.

    that said, what a completely f*cked up family to be brought up in. WA is vile and her mother isn’t near as bad but still far from what we all wish for of a mother/parent for any child.
    as another commenter said, there were definitely many very negative patterns repeating. sad.
    i had never known MF’s brother was an abuser. smh. the more details emerge, the more believable dylan’s horror. so many unfortunate patterns. it seems unbelievable but i think it is actually worse than what is being revealed.

    my heart goes out to all of you that have suffered and are suffering. you didn’t/don’t deserve it.

  97. Nate says:

    I feel so sorry for all women (and some men/boys) who have to put up with this. The statistics show that victims who are abused rarely come forward, and why should they when most people will choose not to believe them? All I can say is this: girls or boys, if you are raped, run right down to the police station and tell someone. Insisit, INSIST that you be given a vaginal or rectal swab so as to have the perps DNA. Then, accusing them will most likely stick. Especially if you have them document defensive wounds or trauma that couldn’t support their claims of “consensual” sex. Mothers should encourage their children to tell them if anyone touched their bodies or spoke to them in a way that made them feel uncomfortable. So many children are scared. If you are abused or harassed, it’s still likely, the way the system is set up, that it will fail you. But if you can get DNA, get it and nail these mofo’s to the WALL. God bless you, Dylan.

  98. mytbean says:

    540 comments and, as usual, this doesn’t seem to have been said….

    Woody will always, on some level, feel justified in his actions, as long as society vilifies what he genuinely feels is natural. We know why it’s not but we need to understand that he is responding to something physiological. His arousal trigger is not something he can control anymore than someone can turn off their affinity to feet, scat or leather. He CAN control his actions but his economic status provides him both opportunity, insulation and probably community in his affliction – while the rest of the 99% offer him rejection and condemnation.

    As a society, we’ve yet to really attempt a genuine fix for this kind of sad corrosive problem. Instead, our public outrage drives it underground where, instead of going away, the deviant behavior is acted out in private. The only way this is going to stop is when we start treating this affinity as an illness, drop the torches and pitch-forks and allow these sick people to come out and get help. It’s obvious that the way our society reacts to these people today is ineffective and actually seems to create groups of solidarity, pushing those of like minds together (think NAMBLA).

    Our angry voices will never prevent this… it just makes it worse. Any thinking person can see that the routine “Justice” aka locking up the people we can catch is NOT an effective solution.

  99. Green Eyes says:

    Hubby & I have NEVER nor will NEVER watch a Woody Allen film. We have flyways found him “creepy” for lack of a better word.

    I believe Dylan is talking about it in detail and bigger forums now because he is being celebrated on a Grand Scale at this very time and more so than ever. So it’s time for her now (for her own piece of mind) to confront her fears NOW as an adult. It’s the only way she will ever truly have a sliver of peace. I say this as a survivor of molestation as a small child & tape. & attempted rape as a young woman.

  100. Green Eyes says:

    Sorry for multiple posts this morning Trying to reply. Wow some serious internet issues today, think it took a snow day and can’t function either;)