Cate Blanchett on #MeToo: Social media is ‘not the judge and jury’

86th Annual Oscars Press Room

In February 2014, Dylan Farrow wrote an op-ed for the New York Times about how Woody Allen, her father, had molested her when she was a child. This was not the first time most people had heard *something* about Dylan and the accusations, but to be fair, that was the first time Dylan ever came out as an adult and told her story. She did so by name-checking Cate Blanchett, who was then in the middle of what would be a successful Oscar campaign for Woody Allen’s Blue Jasmine. Blanchett swept up all of the awards, across the board, for her performance. And I tend to believe that will be the last Woody Allen film to ever win an Oscar.

While I believed Dylan then and I believe her now, I sort of thought (and I still think) that it’s possibly the wrong strategy to target the actresses who worked with Woody. By all means, ask the actors and actresses about why they chose to work with Woody overall, especially after February 2014. But Blanchett’s line remained the same: she had no clue about Dylan’s accusations when she worked with Woody, and clearly, she hasn’t done it since. Blanchett sat down with Christiane Amanpour recently and Amanpour asked her about Woody and Dylan.

Cate Blanchett sat down for an interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour where she spoke of the man she worked with on Blue Jasmine—a film that ultimately earned her an Oscar win for Best Actress in 2014. “How do you juxtapose being a #MeToo proponent, a Time’s Up proponent, and staying silent or having worked with Woody Allen?” Amanpour asked the 48-year-old star.

In response to the question, Blanchett revealed, “I don’t think I’ve stayed silent at all. At the time that I worked with Woody Allen, I knew nothing of the allegations. At the time, I said it’s a very painful and complicated situation for the family, which I hope they have the ability to resolve… If these allegations need to be reexamined which, in my understanding, they’ve been through court, then I’m a big believer in the justice system and setting legal precedents. If the case needs to be reopened, I am absolutely, wholeheartedly in support of that.”

And while speaking on digital hashtags like #MeToo, the star made her opinion clear regarding platforms including Instagram and Twitter.

“Social media is fantastic about raising awareness about issues, but it’s not the judge and jury,” Blanchett said. “I feel that these things need to go into court, so if these abuses have happened, the person is prosecuted and so someone who is not in the shiny industry that I am can use that legal precedent to protect themselves,” Blanchett continued. “Always, in my industry or any other industry, they’re preyed upon because they’re vulnerable.”

[From E! News]

Let’s take it point by point.

Re: “If these allegations need to be reexamined which, in my understanding, they’ve been through court, then I’m a big believer in the justice system and setting legal precedents.” They didn’t go to court. The prosecutor didn’t want to traumatize Dylan any further, so he dropped it.
It’s not like Woody was ever charged with child molestation, put on trial and found not guilty. The way Cate incorrectly summarizes this is pissing me off. So she had never heard Dylan’s story before February 2014 – okay, I’ll believe Cate. But how can she have not, like, read a few articles about Dylan’s case in the years since then?

Re: “Social media is fantastic about raising awareness about issues, but it’s not the judge and jury.” STOP SAYING THIS. No one is saying that someone should be found guilty of criminal charges based on a tweet. Literally no one is arguing that. #MeToo sprang up in part because women were tired of being disbelieved by the justice system, by lawyers, by the men in charge, by their bosses (some of whom were the abusers), etc. The argument of “well if you want to call yourself a victim, then you better go to the cops and file a report” disregards just how disbelieved women have been historically. Now that being said, I understand the larger argument Cate is making, which is basically that telling your story in public and being believed is the first step, and now you should seek justice legally and criminally so that abusers will have to be penalized beyond “needing to hire a crisis manager to weather a social media storm for six months.”

The Evening Standard Theatre Awards 2017

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

112 Responses to “Cate Blanchett on #MeToo: Social media is ‘not the judge and jury’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Rapunzel says:

    Sit down, Care. And STFU.

    • NameChange says:

      Okay, she’s officially canceled for me now.

      • citney says:

        I liked Cate until I saw her “adopted” baby girl, it was clearly obvious she was the spitting image of Cate and their sons, meaning they had a surrogate carry the child but Cate was not willing to admit that.

        Another thing was when Cate’s husband was photographed out on a “date” with a younger woman, yet Cate insisted they had a “wonderful” marriage, when in fact it was clear it was an open marriage.

        This last “I never knew about Woody being accused of child molestation” is too over the top.

      • Kit says:

        @citney ignoring all else, I just wanted to point out that paid surrogacy is illegal in Australia, so to bring the child home it may have been adoption for legal reasons (if she was born by surrogacy – I dunno, you are right though, she does look a bit like her dad and her mum, and brothers…)

    • Nicole says:

      Canceled. Bye.
      If the US did their job and actually put away rapists we wouldn’t need the court of public opinion. Let’s look at how Brock Turner got six months when he was CAUGHT raping the victim by two men. Are you serious?!?
      There is no recourse for rape victims in court. So no. Also those accounts by Dylan were around long before she worked with Woody. She sounds so dumb

    • GigiC says:

      This dumb af statement and rationalization (I looked at this word so much it quit making sense, sorry) is because she wants to tread a line. She wants to pretend to be oblivious yet at the same time that allows her to cite the justice system because of her feigned naivete. Judge and jury my ass, you complicit mf’r.

  2. T.Fanty says:

    Please. She didn’t want to upset her Oscar chances and now realizes that she looks indifferent. I lost a lot of respect for her work she so willfully turned a blind eye to a HUGE scandal that she could not have been unaware of.

    • courtney says:

      she is trash for this whole thing. can’t stomach her. cancelled indeed. i have no tolerance left for indifferent/self interested people, especially women who look the other way and put an acting job over common decency. done.

    • LetItGoo_ says:



      Also, now we know she doesn’t just “look indifferent, ” we know she IS indifferent.

      Her entire comment was shade for Dylan. Let that marinate. She’s issuing edicts on what should happen regarding accused pedophiles, and ignoring and gagging the alleged CHILD victim that addressed her personally.

      Basically saying, ‘Sorry little girl, he was never prosecuted, so shut it and keep my name out your mouth (as she blows a kiss to Allen).’

    • Milla says:

      She is indifferent. And i guess that’s ok, her opinion or lack of it. If she doesn’t wanna be bothered, she doesn’t have to say a thing.

      Is anyone always kind of scared for Dylan when someone talks like this?

  3. Zapp Brannigan says:

    So has she always being a trash person, or is this new?

    • Angela says:

      Nope she just has a different point of view which I believe we are all entitled to.

      • Krill says:

        Well Cates opinion is trash built on trash research and trash reasoning all to protect her own trash career interests.

        Oh and by the way, in the same way that she is entitled to hold this trash opinion, is the same way that commenter is entitled to hold the opinion that Cate Blanche is a trash person.

    • annabanana says:

      Just because she doesn’t share your opinion doesn’t make her a trashy person.

      • Nikki J. says:

        She made a blatantly false statement about Dylan’s case going through the court system, and then she said all sexual assault victims should go through the court system, which is an absolutely oblivious and asinine thing to say. 1. No victim of sexual assault HAS to go through the court system if they choose not to, she has no right to tell victims how they should deal with their trauma and 2. The legal system has consistently failed rape and sexual assault victims. That’s the WHOLE reason things like #MeToo exist. The kind of rhetoric she’s pushing spewing here is extremely harmful, and it’s downright offensive to me. So yeah, she does have the right to her opinion. And people like Zapp Brannigan and I have the right to call her out for being insensitive, oblivious, and clearly having no understanding of how the legal system works in cases of sexual assault.

      • Fera says:

        And how exactly are you going to punish the criminal if you don’t go to court for a trial? This is what she’s saying, she’s not saying that sexual abused people should not be believed without a trial, she’s saying that these cases have to be solved in the court following a certain procedure otherwise we end up wronging people while trying to do justice by ourselves in the streets, on social media or based on rumours.

    • BlueNailsBetty says:

      She’s a Polanski supporter so yes, she’s trash. I cancelled her when she signed the petition to free Polanski when he was captured a few years ago.

      • Scal says:

        She also named her kid after Roman Polanski. So yea she needs to take all the seats.

      • msd says:

        No, she didn’t sign that petition. She didn’t name her kid after Polanski either. And she’s never worked with him. She isn’t Winslet or Swinton or Portman. Allen is the issue here.

      • Cranberry says:

        She did not name her kid after Polanski. That is absolutely false and was totally taken out of context to use as gossip mill trash talk.

  4. Lala says:

    Like the dresses in the pictures above…she disappoints me…

    • K. T. says:

      I actually like her style but you are right this dress is bland on mayo. I’m inserting this comment here, celebty’s don’t know Aussie celeb news but Cate is forever OVER in my eyes because at her Woody Oscar speech she THANKED her long time Australian agent Robyn Gardiner. Gardeners husband was a star (like a Cosby on a show called Hey Dad) had JUST been convicted of being a pedophile for abusing kid stars and girl family members. Its kinda like she worked with Woody Allen and then thanked Mrs Cosby. One of the girl victim’s was horrified and said “would she [Cate] let Robert babysit her daughter? “. Cate doesn’t care about victims or feminism, she’s just careerist and opportunistic. Why doesn’t she donate money to her agent’s husband victims…oh…*crickets* I wish people knew more about international gossip! Fuller picture people! Lol

      • Cranberry says:

        So the wife, Robyn, is to be held in contempt for the crimes her husband did? ? Yeah, that sounds really progressive for the feminist cause.

      • Cara says:

        Cranberry you don’t seem to understand. Robyn isn’t a wife who was shocked and had no idea. She KNEW what her husband was doing to little girls. One of them was her OWN NIECE. She was tipped off so many times and caught him, yet she STILL stood by him, and called the little girls, as young as 6, liars, when they told their stories of Robert making them touch his penis. She stood by him, and supported him.

        So yes, a person who knows someone is a molester and accepts it, chooses to stay with him and does nothing about it, turning her back to the cries of the little girls, is contemptible and even worse than the person committing the crimes.

        I think most people can understand that much at least.

  5. BaronSamedi says:

    I think this part of her comments is very important too: “…can use that legal precedent to protect themselves.”

    I see nothing wrong with stating that social media is not the judge and jury because it obviously isn’t. If it were the agent who molested Terry Crews would not have gotten his job back after being suspended. And now Crews is fighting his battle in court. But Terry Crews can afford the lawyers, has the backing of sponsors and fans.

    Pressure from the public is important to change people’s minds, the #me too movement is great for that. Ultimately the pressure needs to lead to better regulations and laws to protect the people who are not in the public eye though. I think Cate is making that point.

    I am also tired of dragging people who have recently worked with Woody Allen. He basically should not have had a career right after the thing with Dylan happened. He did though and it wasn’t Cate Blanchett who gave him opportunity after opportunity to keep at it through the decades.

    • Anon33 says:

      If only the legal system worked in situations like this. The problem is that it doesn’t, or we wouldn’t be here.
      And I’m “tired of” men who abuse their power in Hollywood. That’s what I’m tired of. Woody wouldn’t have the “opportunities” you speak of without the backing of actors and actresses who want to work with him. If everyone said no there would be no more woody Allen movies.

      • BaronSamedi says:

        I don’t actually disagree with you? But it’s like Cate said: It is a very complicated issue and it serves nobody in the long run when we act is if a social media storm and performative outrage is enough.

        Fine, the legal system doesn’t work right? Let’s get loud about it and fix it. Push your representatives to implement better protections. Write emails demanding better oversight over the police. Vote in district attorney elections and push for candidates who promise to go after the predators. Social media can be a part of all of these efforts but direct action needs to be the next step after putting your phone down.

        And where in this #me too mess have you seen actresses wielding any kind of power please? They are the victim pool it’s the men financing the movies who kept giving him the opportunities.

        Feel free to perform your outrage about Cate Blanchett. I will continue to focus on the predators behind the curtains.

      • Marty says:

        This “#me too mess”? Really?

        Whew, take some time and learn how to talk to someone. Not only are you invalidating Anon’s opinion by calling it a ‘performance’, but you are also being callous to the women you have come forward by dismissing a movement that has at the very least brought awareness to victims of sexual assault and harassment in the industry.

      • BaronSamedi says:


        I think you need to reread my comments again. I specifically mentioned the value of social media in bringing awareness several times. My point is that awareness only goes so far when nothing changes.

        Awareness does not make the justice system any fairer on victims of harassment or assault. Awareness does not hold anyone accountable without direct action and pressure being applied.

        And yes, I think that commenting about how an actress is canceled because she worked with a predator (at this point 90% of actresses in Hollywood have worked with a predator, THAT IS THE PROBLEM) is an empty gesture. It is performing outrage and makes people feel good about having ‘done something’ when in reality it is completely worthless.

      • perplexed says:

        I haven’t outright cancelled anybody (or at least said the words), but I do find myself having less interest in most movies. Some of it might not be performative — people might be genuinely losing interest in these people. That doesn’t mean I’ve lost interest in all movies, but I do find myself less motivated to seek anything out.

      • Marty says:

        I read your comment just fine the first time. Nice way to sidestep that you called the #me too movement a mess, btw. And I said at the very least it’s brought awareness, not that it’s the only accomplishment from the movement, which guess what? The first stage to fixing any issue is with awareness. If it wasn’t for the #metoo movement the Weinstein company, one of the biggest production companies in the industry, wouldn’t have just filed for bankruptcy and their NDA’s dissolved. That’s real change, it’s not anywhere close to where we need to be, but it’s a start.

        And no, you actually don’t get to tell someone that they’re being performative when they cancel someone because it’s a meaningless gesture. If you cancel someone, they don’t get your interest or your coin. That actually does make a difference. Getting on your high horse about what does and doesn’t hold weight when it comes to an individual’s choice about who and why they don’t support someone just makes you look pompous.

        You have blessed day, dear.

      • Kitten says:

        What Marty said. ALL. OF. IT.

      • Cranberry says:

        I have no intention of cancelling Cate. If she makes a movie that I find interesting, I’ll watch it. I’m not a big fan or anything, but she’s a good actress usually makes good movies. Most people here seem interested in tearing down celebrities for any perceived offense no matter how disproportionate to the real crime/problem.

    • Hoopjumper says:

      I read it that way, too. I think she’s trying to say that #metoo doesn’t offer the same protection for victims that a legal precedent in court would. I think her point about the”shiny industry” is that they’re the ones who should be going to court because they’re relatively privileged. I actually don’t agree with much of that, but I don’t think she’s saying victims of harassment need to file police reports.

    • Misti says:

      @BaronSamedi – Agreed 100%.

    • Krill says:

      You are bending over backwards to make her sound halfway reasonable but it isnt working. Like the vast majority of child abuse cases, Dylan no longer has legal recourse available to her. Of course legal reform is essential and those of us who arent trying to win stupid PR points off MeToo like Cate have been fighting for that and will continue to do when its no longer a cool cause. But legal reform is only a component of Dylan and any victims case. The first principle must be that victims should be believed and their voice must not be suppressed to protect the pepetrators reputation and career. Cate fails the entire first principle. She is using legal reform as a diversionary tactic and she is doing it for the most self centered reason; so that her precious Oscar isnt tarnished.

  6. Astrid says:

    Wow, that’s really disappointing.

    • Lacia Can says:

      I sometimes miss the days when we didn’t hear every brain fart that passes actors’ lips. I really, really like Cate as an actress but she is apparently not a great person. So disappointing. I’m one who has trouble separating art from the artist so now I find it hard to watch her. But I guess the more knowledge we have, the better. I hate to spend my money on people like Tom Cruise and Matt Damon. And lately, Cate. She’s just so “I got mine, so eff other women.”

  7. Lizzie says:

    why can’t these brats just say “i made a mistake and while i attribute a portion of my career accolades to his talented direction, i am disappointed to learn of these allegetations. i stand with dylan and am deeply sympathetic to her experience. i am donating 50k to time’s up and will never work with him again”


    • Megan S says:

      Did she actually make a mistake? Blue Jasmine was before any of the explosive first hand revelations. Sure, I can buy that many of her responses over the years have been questionable, but why are we asking this FEMALE to publically admit that she made a mistake and make financial compensation for it?

      • Lizzie says:

        in my opinion – she made a mistake. she willfully turned a blind eye to a story that was pretty well known. he has a long history of complicated and disgusting relationahips outside of the molestation. he married his step daughter who he started a realationship with when she was a barely legal teen and that story is extremely well known.

        but – also – she won an oscar and made it until now with no one asking her about this. i think that even if she, or other actors/actresses don’t see this as their mistake, for PR purposes why can’t they just eat a shit sandwich with a smile and just say they made one? to keep making these arguments around what they did or didn’t know or the legal system or whatever is stubborn and rings equally as hollow. if i were her – why not just say “going forward i will more deeply consider who i work with” and call it a day?

      • Krill says:

        She was in her 20s when the assault occurred. I was around the same age, I dont live in the US and I am not connected to the industry. I can tell you that this was the biggest story of that year. You couldnt hide from it. Even sitcoms would reference it for years to come. She is shameless to claim to not have known that one of the most famous directors was accused by one of the most famous actresses (who used to be Frank Sinatras wife) of molesting his daughter and that he then married her other daughter.

        And even after Dylan wrote her op-ed as an adult she intentionally snubbed it. She just wanted that Oscar too much to care.

        And with regard to Woody, men ARE being asked to do the right thing. Michael Cain was asked just last month and he responded with compassion for Dylan. Same for Colin Firth and that kid in Call Me By Your Name. Even Justin Timberlake was smart enough to shut his trap. Its stupid rich white women like Kate Winslet and Cate Blanchet who want to ride the MeToo movement for cred and present themselves as feminists, who think they shouldnt have to stand in solidarity when their Oscar is on the line.

      • Lady D says:

        Brilliant comment, Krill.

    • BooRadley says:

      Hmm someone has a bright future in PR

    • Mia4s says:

      “i am donating 50k to time’s up”

      Ehhhhh, can we not with the making this some sort of requirement or prerequisite? Times Up is closely aligned with CAA who I think it’s pretty clear more than happily sent their clients to Weinstein’s hotel room for years. And that’s just problem number one. Has anything changed at CAA? Well they support Times Up! Yeah….OK…we will see.

      I’m cautiously optimistic about the group, but I have zero problem with any celebrity taking a wait and see approach or donating elsewhere.

      • Lizzie says:

        i see my mistake in not clearly thinking through that fact with my deeply considered, tirelessly crafted professional PR statement on an anonymous celebrity gossip message board.

      • Mia4s says:

        Nothing personal @Lizzie. It’s just I see the whole “they must donate to TimesUp!” a lot and I’m just not sure I’m comfortable with that being the be all and end all. I would guess many of these actors know people involved in the movement who…probably shouldn’t be. I think we need to leave room for that. Hollywood has done nothing to earn the benefit of the doubt.

  8. Margo S. says:

    She’s being purposefully ignorant. Really not ok for someone in her position who’s won an award for an Allen film to not read about this and form a valid opinion. Actors are condemning Allen left and right, but not her…. C’mon Cate. Get a better pr rep.

    • Lady D says:

      Ignorant, dishonest and now cancelled scum. There is no way in hell she didn’t hear the stories about Woody. No way.

  9. Lucy says:

    What she says here bugs me, not gonna lie. I do believe her when she says she didn’t know about the accusations before working with him, though.

  10. Megan S says:

    She worked with him BEFORE the big first hand essay came about – she hasn’t since. I don’t have a problem with what she is saying here and I think she has been pretty consistent.
    She should lay off of the judge and jury, courts, guilty blah, blah, blah because we all know exactly why this case never went to trial. (we also know that victims rarely get a voice in the justice system).
    At the time though things weren’t quite so clear, there was a compelling and successful campaign to cast doubt on Dylan’s story and framed as a deranged Mia planting lies as retribution.

    **and here we go again asking another actress to answer for this troll

    • MellyMel says:

      Agreed on all points!

    • Frome says:

      The molestation was very widely known looooong before she signed on for that film. Furthermore the story would bubble up every few years. The most notable one pre-2014 was the Vanity Fair article. The molestation was also often mentioned in trade paper articles on him and film critiques of his work.

      Even on this site you can find archive stories BEFORE 2014 where everyone on the comments questions why Woody Allen is still drawing actors to his projects.

      Stop acting as though 2014 was the first we knew of this. Unless you were a kid in 2014, you knew.

    • magnoliarose says:

      I am not angry with Cate. She doesn’t completely get it. She misspoke and parroted what a lot of people erroneously say and think about these situations. Cate isn’t the molester and deviant she is just an actress being asked to defend her actions from 5 years ago as if she made a movie with Woody Allen all by herself. But because she is at the top of her game, SHE has to answer for it while I guess the editor and producers are exempt because no one is ever going to make them publicly explain themselves.

      But I fail to understand why she is asked about Woody Allen over and over when the only actress I think needs to go away be ashamed is Kate Winslet, the other Kate who tried to defend him AFTER metoo. When the Woody Allen thing after 2013 became more public, there was still sweeping under the rug and excuses made for him. No one was shaming anyone. But Kate Winslet actually tried to campaign for Woody Allen, actively excusing him over and over. Because she didn’t gaf and is a raging self serving a-hole. Now she is canceled for her actions.

      Why aren’t any ACTORS being asked over and over about Woody Allen? Mr. Darcy, the dreamboat is ok, and Jude Law, who I know is a skeeve himself just sort of dodges the questions. How about the producers and studios who put money behind him? The Academy who has not expelled him from their ranks. Men gave Woody Allen cover and power to continue to be regarded as a genius, and a must have prestigious name on an actor’s CV. He kept getting nominations and critics kept calling his movies great and gush all over him which gave him something close to immunity.

      Dylan called out Cate because she was hurt and she is a victim who has been dismissed for decades. It is easier to do because she is famous and a face people can connect to and is esteemed for her talent. She hasn’t worked with him again. I don’t believe Dylan meant for actresses to be sentenced to career doom because of working with Allen back then but she wanted to bring attention to what was happening. We call on other women because we don’t expect men to understand or care because they have failed us on that front consistently. So we ask women because we think surely SHE will feel my words and get where I am coming from.

      I just think we need to stop canceling people for effing up interviews since not everyone gets asked or is given the same opportunity to say something stupid. Yet women are given the burden and task to answer for men, and they better get it right. Meanwhile, Woody Allen, the villain, and predator who has more victims than Dylan carries on.
      Cate isn’t an activist. She’s an actress and a flawed human being who is wrapping her mind around all this like the rest of us. Her mistake and possibly shame and regret is something she is forced to live with and reconcile. I never worked with Woody Allen so I don’t know how I would feel today if I had. But I have worked with predators, and I would hate to be asked publicly, on the record about them.

      She needs to do better. She needs to examine this and understand what metoo really means. I am giving her the chance. I am giving women a lot more chances and opportunities because we are the ones who have been victimized the most by toxic masculinity. We have been groomed to be the fall guys and take on the responsibility for men’s actions.

      I want every single person who worked with him to be on record since 2013. Let’s see what they ALL say before putting it all on women.

      • Anners says:

        Agree with everything you’ve said here magnoliarose

      • Cranberry says:

        Agree, Agree. Agree.

        Except I am aware of actors being put on the spot and questioned about working with WA too. Although it does seem that the attention does seem to be more on the the actresses to account for their choices. Something to remember is that WA has also written good, main roles for women. I don’t like many of his movies, but from an actress’s pov, that’s not something to just turn away from in an industry like this. I know everyone thinks Cate and all women are supposed to fall on their sward, but as you say that’s not really a fair or realistic expectation to hold of women in cut-throat, corrupted, film industry.

    • Geekychick says:

      She worked with him before 1994. VANITY FAIR Expose? Really? Becase let me tell you, I’m 30, and I knew about Allen even in early oughts. And I’m from Europe and have no connection to the industry.
      it was always the third or fourth story that came up when you googled Woody Allen. Even in 2008. And 2010. 2015.
      I mean, I’m tired of pretending information isn’t easily accessible these days-for her not to know anything she’d have to be informatically challenged in a way that actually demeans her agency.

  11. Corrine says:

    I’m curious if anyone who says “I’m a big believer in the justice system” has ever actually had to be involved in the dinosaur we call the American justice system.

    • Lizzie says:

      i know right – i agree with you completely!

      as we all know its just so easy to open up a court case on something! lets just reopen all the cases and throw the book at them!!! its just so simple! forget about double jeaopardy, the statute of limitations, non-disclosure agreements and past settlements. forget the further victimization to accusers by defense high powered attorney. forget about the fact that victims are more shamed in the court of public opinon than perpetrators. forget all the details – just – open a court case if you’re so sure you were attacked! its SO EASY.

      the justice system for victims of sex crimes is FUCKED and anyone who says “i believe in the justice system” when talking about a sex crime is essentially totally dismissing the whole thing.

    • Marty says:

      Taking it a step further, going into our court system as a victim of sexual assault.

    • lucy2 says:

      Agreed – that’s a cop out from having to take a stand, IMO. I agree that people who can should try to pursue things legally, but we can’t all throw our hands up and declare the courts will take care of it.

    • magnoliarose says:

      No, they haven’t. They haven’t seen it up close.

      I spoke here before about my father being involved in prison reform and restoring voting rights and the issue of mass incarceration. It is a humanitarian crisis that no one seems to care about because it affects minorities. It is an example of just how flawed and effed up our justice system is. Wally Lamb wrote a book about women in prison and his experience teaching writing to inmates and told their stories. Before they even became criminals, they were victims.
      Most people in our society don’t really care about the justice system because it never affects them and the people most affected are poor and brown and women.

      Women and children aren’t served by a justice system meant to protect wealthy white people. It starts the minute a victim tries to make a report.

  12. perplexed says:

    It seemed like she doesn’t want admit that Allen is guilty (or that she thinks there’s a possibility he could be guilty). In this particular case, we may never get an answer from the legal system because of the circumstances cited by the prosecutor. That may apply to other cases as well. She said a lot without really committing to an answer of his guilt, imo.

    I suppose she did skillfully redirect the question towards the notion of legal precedent, but as I said we may never have an answer by judge and jury in this particular case. Is it possible for this case to be reexamined in court now?

    She’s a good actress, but she does sound kind of obtuse sometimes. She’s either a slick liar (to herself) or wilfully naive, Even in her “shiny” industry people have had to stay silent for a long time for a myriad of reasons.

    • TrixC says:

      I think, like a lot of people in the entertainment business, she doesn’t want to admit that she cares more about her own career than taking a stand against someone who’s committed a crime or behaved inappropriately. She knew Woody was dodgy before taking the role, even if she didn’t know for certain he was a child molester. She made a decision to work with him anyway.

  13. Lizzie says:

    can we also pause on the “i didn’t know” stuff? i mean – we all know he married his underage stepdaughter…right?

    • LetItGoo_ says:

      Thank you @lizzie

      Yea, I’m going to need them to stop with the ‘I didn’t know,’ too. Everyone knew he was boning his girlfriend’s sheltered, shy virgin teen daughter who reportedly had learning disabilities. Beyond that it would have been really easy to look into the details, where you could have learned that Allen took p0rn pics of the girl’s genitals and had her spread eagled all over his pad. Beyond that you could have read more that when confronted by Mia, he wailed and cried and curled up in a fetal position and begged her to forgive him and take him back by saying, ‘it was nothing, it didn’t mean anything!!’

      Yea read that last line again. He’s trying to get back w/his gf by telling her, her daughter actually meant less than zero and he didn’t care about her just wanted some poon.

      This is the guy, these actresses want to work with.

      The same women who Are always the first to tout how pro-woman they are and cry ‘sisterhood!!’ are only to happy to tell Mia Farrow and her family to eff off to get those woody allen accolades.

  14. Arianna says:

    I think one of the points she is making is missing:
    “if these abuses have happened, the person is prosecuted and so someone who is not in the shiny industry that I am can use that legal precedent to protect themselves”
    She’s saying that in the end allegations on social media don’t help “normal” people. Sure, when celebrities are accused it’s going to make headlines, but there’s abuse in every industry and a “nobody” accusing another “nobody” (on sm) isn’t going to have much effect. If we focus on the hastags and the whole social media stuff and think that’s enough there’s not going to be any change in the real world and the movement is going to slow down, because hey, we’re already doing enough, ain’t we?
    Celebrities with their means and privilege are in a (better) position to take legal actions and if they win a case, there’s going to be a precedent that others can use to win their case as well.

    Not saying women have to take action and I see why they chose not to (in some cases it’s just not possible), obviously there’s a whole set of different problems celebrities face when deciding to confront their abusers as well. I also recognize that me too is about awareness, changing the way society views abuse allegations and preparing them to believe women more. There are huge flaws in the justice system especially regarding sexual assault/abuse, but is the solution really to just to give up and not try it at all…forever? (I don’t have an answer to that obvi) I thought all of that was to lay the groundwork for women actually legally charging their abusers. At some point allegations on social media aren’t enough anymore.
    (I’m sorry, English isn’t my first language plus I’m tired so I don’t really know how to express myself properly. No intentions to offend anyone, I feel this is worded very clumsily)

  15. LadyT says:

    I think Kaiser’s analysis of her comments is right on the money.

  16. minx says:

    Over the past few years she has gotten a veneer of smugness that is not appealing.

  17. Valois says:

    Didn’t she name her son after Roman Polanski? Or was that some rumour?
    And her agent, who still represents her, allegedly covered up for her husband until he was finally convicted of abuse/assault.

    So, yeah… she’s problematic.

    • Tommy says:

      I think everyone needs to STOP with the whole “she named her kid after Roman Polanksi” unless she is on the record for having said that. This may be hard to believe, but there ARE other people named Roman in the world.

      And are you saying Cate Blanchett’s husband has been convicted of abuse/assault or her AGENT’S husband? Your wording is not clear. If it’s the former, then you are asking me to hold a woman responsible for something someone she employees may or may not have known about her partner at the time.

      • Valois says:

        Tommy, that’s why I asked for clarification. She did say it but I remember it wasn’t clear whether she was joking and the video was taken down.

        And please read K.T’s comment because she explained it much better than I ever could.

    • K. T. says:

      Omg finally someone references Cate’s agent Robin Gardiner famous husband Robert Gardiner. I JUST left a comment above, international gossip unite!! He’s famous like a dad in Full House or Cosby Show in Australia and was convicted of years of child molestation with his preteen costar, plus other girls! The court case and press was ugly and Robin Gardiner such a famous and influential agent and many of the victims found it hard to talk because if that fear of never working again. While not proven, parents of other victims who never went to court said they told Robyn that her actor husband was doing stuff to kids in their swimming pool. She stood by her husband in court. So, some of the victims said Cate’s agent was complicit in the molestation or at least turned a blind eye. He also was protected because or her power in the small Aussie acting field. Therefore, CATE thanking her dear friend Robyn at her Woody Allen Oscar speech was just another slap in the face for some victims… I feel like I’m a old timey gramophone harping on about old news!

      • magnoliarose says:

        This makes no sense.
        What does Cate have to do with her agent’s husband? That would be like shunning Alyssa Milano for being friends with Georgina Chapman because of her husband, Harvey Weinstein. I can see having issues with the wife, but I don’t see having issues with her clients or associates.
        Cate’s agent’s husband was found guilty and went to prison which is probably why she thinks the legal system actually solves these issues. Maybe they do a better job in Australia. I don’t know much about the legal system there. I am very glad the monster was thrown in prison where he belongs, but it should have been a much longer sentence in my opinion.
        What she said in this interview in the article was uninformed and obtuse. It still has nothing to do with what her agent’s husband did.

      • Cara says:

        Robert Hughes. Not Robert Gardiner.

    • K. T. says:

      In regards to what does Cate thanking her agent in her 2014 (Oscar speech:”To my agent Robyn Gardiner, I love you so very much” and she thanks Woody too) have to do with seeming to be cavalier about child abuse…
      Well, the agent’s husband’s victims were still giving evidence in 2014 and Cate just clearly supported her friend/agent in front of millions. Except her agent had been for years defending her pedophile actor husband in court. Victims and their families said in court they had told Robyn about her husband behaviour with little girls in the eighties and nineties. Multiple times! Many think she was complicit or at the very least shielded him.
      As the previous child costar said of Cate’s Oscar speech: “That’s just a slap in the face to a lot of us, because we all knew that Robyn knew what was going on…then you have got someone on TV, right as we are going to court, thanking her and it was just such a stab in the heart.”

      Don’t worry, there are plenty of ‘Straya’s who think Cate is a goddess! Just for others who followed that trial, and plus her continued support of Woody and Polanski, its just too. darn. much!!
      If Georgina Chapman went to court at a Weinstein trial, testified in his defence while families stated they told her years ago that her husband had been molesting pre-teens…then Georgina was thanked in an Oscar Speech for Woody Allen film… Yup, I’d cancel whatever actor said that etc.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Everyone has their line in the sand for their own reasons. So I can respect your point of view without agreeing with it.

        I believe that an actor or celebrity can practice a prepared speech and say all the right words but mean none of it. They lie all the time. James Franco had the nerve to put on a Time’s Up pin, and he is a predator. There is so much hypocrisy going on with lip service and insincerity that it seems that the people with the real power aren’t forced to answer for their part in creating the entire system. The majority of them are men.
        My line is the sand is what people do now and what happens as we go forward. I want to see what is going to be done about Woody Allen. I want Dylan to be able to continue to speak and advocate for herself and be believed. Finally.
        But I have noticed women seem to be held more responsible and inspire more outrage and criticism than men. I believe more focus is put on their words and behaviors or mistakes.
        What I want to know is what is being done to create a healthier, safer place for women to pursue their careers without being exploited and abused. I want victims to be able to speak up and be believed. Then I want action.
        The men in power in entertainment would much rather our focus be on the talent and celebrities instead of on them, and they escape without ever explaining themselves or being confronted about their complicity.

        But my opinion is my own, and we all approach the issue in our own way.

      • Cranberry says:

        Amazing. She thanked the director/writer of the role she won an Oscar for, AND she thanked her agent that probably got her that role. How shocking, except that’s what is expected and proper of her and every actor to do when they win an Oscar.
        Granted sometimes an actor might go rogue and say whatever the hell they want and even use their time in the spot light to protest for social justice, and that’s great! But just because Cate plays it safe and just follows the industry protocol doesn’t mean she supports pedophiles.

        The fact that you hold her accountable to these circumstantial issues related to her line of work, makes me think you’re too invested in punishing her, as a public person. In short was she says about social media being used as judge and jury making a mess of #metoo is not a totally unfair assessment imo, at least in certain respects.

  18. hey-ya says:

    …she knew Woody was shacked up with an adopted daughter….end of…also Id love for someone like Amanpour to put some questions to the strangely silent Soon Yi herself…

  19. klc says:

    I could have some sympathy for the women who work with Woody Allen if they were desolate and this was their only means to earn an income. That is not the case. These women have privilege and earning power that the rest of us could merely dream of.

    It seems to be convenient to say, “I didn’t know” when discussing Woody Allen and Harvey Weinstein. I just don’t buy this. I knew and I am just a person living in small town Texas, it is unreasonable to believe that Hollywood didn’t know.

    • otaku fairy says:

      The two cases are very different though. With Woody Allen, the story of the abuse is actually coming from the victim and the truth hasn’t been hidden behind years of rumors about prostitution and philandering. With Harvey it was about which rumors you heard (and from whom).

  20. lucy2 says:

    “But how can she have not, like, read a few articles about Dylan’s case in the years since then?” It’s early so my reading comprehension may not be 100%, but I’m not seeing where she said she hasn’t.
    I’m going to believe her that she didn’t know about Dylan’s accusations prior to working with him. I hadn’t heard of it before the 2014 article either, and Cate spends most of her time in Australia and possibly didn’t follow that sort of news.
    But she did know he married his step daughter, and at the time of all this coming out could have been much, much more supportive of Dylan. She also seems to be hesitant to support Me Too, pushing it off onto the court system rather than focusing on actionable things now.

  21. HK9 says:

    Me Too isn’t judge and jury but it is when a man says so? These men have ruined careers by what they’ve said about women and people took them at their word with no ‘legal’ proof because of the power they had in the industry. She needs to stop.

  22. Rumi says:

    We need Court of public opinion, because the justice system is broken. Its there to mainly serve a certain class / group Similar to the police.
    Cate knew he married his daughter right?
    So did all these celebrities.
    How does anyone think that’s ok?
    Its incest. Adopted or not.

    • CrazyCatLady says:

      He married his step daughter. Soon Yi was adopted by Mia farrow with her then husband Andre Previn. Mia left Andre for Woody Allen I believe,

      It’s still yucky though of course, but your statement was inaccurate.

    • magnoliarose says:

      It is gross, and I thought he was disgusting all along because his story was reported in the New York papers and talked about for a long time. I never understood why he was ok after that. That should have been the end of his career right there.
      Remember though; someone was going to see his movies or else he wouldn’t have been to keep making them. The public didn’t shun him or say much of anything about him. People still bought tickets and shrugged.
      There are a lot of people who have a hand in keeping his lech going.

      • Cranberry says:

        Agreed. She didn’t make the system, but she had to work within it as best she could as did many other actresses in HW. Not saying they all deserve a button, but they do deserve the benefit of the doubt and to not be prosecuted for a system (capitalistic film industry and patriarchy) they had very little if any control over.

  23. holly hobby says:

    Ugh nope Cate just nope. The victim spoke out. This wasn’t conjecture and the public can certainly judge away. Do not support that pervert’s films. He is old as dirt and he made a lot of money. He can go retire now.

  24. CrazyCatLady says:

    The court system is flawed indeed…..but the court of public opinion is equally if not more so. #MeToo is important without question.

    But if we sit ourselves on the jury of The Court of Public Opinion we should do so responsibly, with thoughtfulness and maturity. Things are not always completely as presented; I spent years in a profession dealing with personal disagreements and found that truth was almost always somewhere between the two stories, Not the smack middle every time…..often closer to one or another…..but the truth and FULL story was seldom as told the first time.

    So I actually see a point in there somewhat.

  25. mannori says:

    she’s very calculated and calculating, and this is so disappointing.

  26. JRenee says:

    She wasn’t living under a rock even before Dylan posted her story..

  27. SlightlyAnonny says:

    I wish, I really do wish that just once someone would say, “I knew about the allegations but I didn’t believe them so I worked with him.” Or “I knew about the allegations and I believed them but I wanted to work with him anyway so I did.”

    I disagree with both statements but just be HONEST. I do not believe that anyone, ANYONE, over 32 in the western world did not know about these allegations and I refuse to believe that any adult is so incurious that they wouldn’t use sweet mother Google to find out more about someone they were being offered a role with. Annie Hall was great but it’s also OLD, wouldn’t you want to know about someone’s current work? Googling Woody will bring up Dylan in about five clicks. You knew, and you didn’t care. You wanted the Oscar bait option more but you knew. Stop the verbal gymnastics and own up to it. AND STOP ASKING JUST THE WOMEN.

  28. Kitten says:

    I love her as an actress but as a person she epitomizes white feminism/white privilege. Like Perplexed said above, I’m not outright canceling but I find it hard to be interested in her work anymore because I’m distracted by her problematic personality.

    Shame because she is truly talented.

  29. jenn says:

    Maybe one day we’ll stop punishing women for the crimes of men.

  30. Nope says:

    And this is one of the main leads for Ocean’s 8. This is Hollywood’s idea of feminism. A white woman who has consistently defended sexual predators Woody Allen and Roman Polanski. Can we replace this white male apologist with Angela Bassett, Octavia Spencer, Viola Davis, Karimah Westbrook, Salma Hayek or h*ll, I will even take Christopher Plummer at this point? This is why so many movies are bombing right now. The public has evolved and liberal Hollywood is stuck in the white male privilege past. I cannot relate to this woman and do not want to spend money to see her in movies.

  31. ariel says:

    I hate this shit. On the surface, it is presented as a fair, reasonable thing. And I am all in favor of nuance, fairness, logic and reason.
    But the subtext is- I don’t believe the victims, and I don’t want to be questioned. My taste in people is perfect, there is no way someone I admire could be a child molester.
    That second part I call the Diane Keaton position.

  32. Mia says:

    I stand by Dylan and by her methods of calling actresses out. They are contributing to the system of patriarchy when they work with him and I think they need to see the violence of that act. The act is one of ‘symbolic violence’ as Zizek would say and is insidious and and it is brutal imo because it is so normalized.

    I am just tired of the excuses made to coddle these men and women who commit varying degrees of pain upon Dylan and other victims lives. All they had to do was acknowledge her pain but they could not even do that without getting in their damn feelings or just ignoring her.

    Now some actors and actresses are saying they will no longer work with Allen. But if I were in her position I would say too little too late. It is easy to do what is right when everyone else finally decides it is time for the paradigm to shift. But it really counts for little and says a lot about one’s own character.

    MLK Jr. said it best. Although he was speaking in regards to race relations I think it applies to this whole situation as well:

    ‘I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice’.

    Both men and women who are passive and only focused on pointing out the extremes of patriarchy and giving themselves pats on the back for not being the extreme are the road blockers to any change in the system. They are the majority who are willing to accomodate these toxic systems because they have very little to gain either way.

    Cate and a lot of these actresses just don’t really want to rock the boat. They seem to want victims to stop speaking their truth and anger because it is disrupting the order of things. Forget that the order is toxic because it is making them uncomfortable bringing it up. And in bringing it up those who do nothing will always find a way to feel attacked and play the victim. It is B.S.

  33. manta says:

    It will be interesting to see how her cancellation works. I mean , she’s the next president of the jury for Cannes.
    Will people boycott any post about her red carpet appearances?
    Anyway I smell a very appeasing list of prizes,unusually diverse for Cannes, maybe a female Palme d’Or winner, and all will be good in the world again, she’ll be back being a darling.
    And if that doesn’t work, there’ll be the Ocean’s 8 promo tour, with the can do no wrong Rihanna and Bullock. She’ll at least be cool by association and earn a box office win, if comments on this site are to be believed, since many claim they’ll be first in line to support an all women cast.

    • Megan S says:

      I had to slip into a light jacket with that subtle shade — Ghost Busters gave us an indication of how many women would truly turn out for an ‘all female’ cast. Granted, it was astrocious, but very few turned up to find out.

  34. Anon says:

    At the end of the day most actors and actresses have worked with abusive (alleged or confirmed ) people but the public think it’s the actresses job to answer for the abusers and why they worked with them etc. They get called out and “cancelled” but abusers (alleged or confirmed ) still go about their daily lives. The hypocrites are Scarlet johanson and Natalie Portman who jump up and down about misogyny but were happy to work with woody and sign free Roman Polanski petitions. I may not agree with Cate but atleast she is not a hypocrite.

  35. Shannon says:

    Isn’t she from Australia? I live here in the U.S. and I had never heard anything about Dylan until these past couple of years. The only thing I knew about was his creepy relationship with Soon Yi – and since I got old enough to buy my own magazines, I’ve been pretty into celeb gossip, so I can easily believe her on this one. Dylan was young and it was probably pretty easy for Woody to sweep it under the rug until now that she’s an adult. I’m honestly asking – should actors and actresses do in-depth research on those they choose to work with? Because I’m honestly thinking it would have been quite easy for her or other actresses who’ve worked with him to just be like, “Woody Allen? Cool, I’ll take it” without knowing about any of this. Maybe not *now* but in the past yes.

  36. EMau says:

    We’re not looking at a great intellect here. I don’t understand why people are shocked when actors express idiotic and uninformed opinions. Acting is not an intellectual profession. It’s a profession for narcissists and individuals who have a sense of self entitlement – to be paid hideous amounts of money – to begin with. In other words, not the nicest people in the world. Very few actors are decent and informed. Cate is not one of them.

    • perplexed says:

      She “looks” smart so unfortunately I think we (erroneously) expect her to be. She kind of looks like a prettier version of a history professor. Maybe the way her husband looks plays into this myth too. To be honest, I used to think she was above getting awards and was just about creating a great performance. But I guess she likes fame and accolades as much as anyone else.

  37. Pear says:

    I agree with you all saying she’s cancelled. Always thought she was so magnanimous in interviews and her (over)acting was overrated. Just admit you made a mistake instead of saying you didn’t know.

    • Jayna says:

      She’s not canceled for me. I like Cate. At the end of the day, I can roll my eyes at things, but unless they are a Johnny Depp beating women, Harvey Weinstein, etc., I am not canceling someone’s work I truly enjoy like Cate’s just because she doesn’t spout off everything exactly how I or someone else wants to hear it in interviews or soundbites.