Last night, The New York Times posted Woody Allen’s response to daughter Dylan Farrow’s allegations that he molested her as a child which, he writes, will be his final word on the matter. If it is, then he has done himself no favors. The entire thing is a revolting display of arrogance and entitlement, and, in my opinion, only further supports Dylan Farrow’s story, as Allen’s justifications, mistruths and attacks fit those of an unrepentant sociopath and child abuser. If the Times actually edited op-eds, they would have had a fact-checking mess on their hands. It’s worth noting that almost every defense/excuse Allen makes in his piece was also used in that godawful piece on The Daily Beast, which led me to wonder if Allen used it as a reference.
The vast majority of Allen’s op-ed, which is long, rambling, and seemingly unedited, focuses on Mia Farrow, namely that she is a bitter, angry shrew who brainwashed his daughter into thinking he molested her, because Mia was mad he had fallen in love with a younger woman. That is, a younger woman who also happened to be Mia’s adopted daughter, a fact which Woody glazes over and does not acknowledge as being even a tiny bit problematic. In fact, Allen all but calls Mia a hypocrite for thinking his relationship with Soon-Yi Previn is “improper” — after all, Mia once married the much older Frank Sinatra. That Woody Allen thinks the two relationships are comparable says a lot about his moral compass, or lack thereof.
Allen twists the truth throughout the piece, using legalese or just outright lying to distort the actual facts of the case, and then tries to distract the reader with repeated attempts to defame Mia Farrow. He even uses the rumor that Ronan Farrow’s real biological father is Frank Sinatra to attack Mia’s character, nevermind the fact that it has nothing to do with Dylan Farrow’s actual 20-year-long memories.
Oh yes, Dylan. Her allegations are simply brushed aside as the result of cult-level indoctrination at the hands of her mother. Dylan Farrow responded to Allen’s piece last night with one of her own in the Hollywood Reporter, using actual, documented facts to contradict many of Allen’s bullshit statements. You can read it in its entirety here. Dylan Farrow ended her response with the following:
From the bottom of my heart, I will be forever grateful for the outpouring of support I have received from survivors and countless others. If speaking out about my experience can help others stand up to their tormentors, it will be worth the pain and suffering my father continues to inflict on me. Woody Allen has an arsenal of lawyers and publicists but the one thing he does not have on his side is the truth. I hope this is the end of his vicious attacks and of the media campaign by his lawyers and publicists, as he’s promised. I won’t let the truth be buried and I won’t be silenced.
Dylan Farrow, I believe you. So many of us do. Continue to speak the truth, because the evidence does too. For those of you who are actually interested in that evidence, rather than Woody Allen’s distortion of it, may I direct you to the following:
- Vanity Fair: 10 Undeniable Facts About the Woody Allen Sexual-Abuse Allegation: Those undeniable facts include but are not limited to:
- Allen had been in therapy for alleged inappropriate behavior toward Dylan with a child psychologist before the abuse allegation was presented to the authorities or made public.
- Allen refused to take a polygraph administered by the police, insisting on one conducted by someone hired by his legal team (that’s the one he continually crows about as evidence of his innocence.
- Dylan’s claim of abuse was consistent with the testimony of three adults who were present that day, testimony that refutes what Moses Farrow has said in his recent defense of Woody Allen.
- Woody Allen lied and changed his story about ever going into the attic where Dylan claimed the molestation occurred.
- The Yale-New Haven Hospital Child Sex Abuse Clinic’s finding that Dylan had not been sexually molested, cited repeatedly by Allen’s attorneys and Allen himself in his New York Times op-ed, was not accepted as reliable by the judge in the custody case or by the Connecticut state prosecutor who originally commissioned them.
- The 1993 Woody Allen Custody Ruling In Its Damning, Detailed Entirety: This entire document, which has not been posted in full online until now, supports all of the undeniable facts presented in the Vanity Fair piece above and undermine many of the claims made by Woody Allen in his New York Times op-ed.
And with that, I’m off to take a much needed shower.