Trigger warning for talk of rape
Preface the victim’s open letter about the sexual abuse she suffered at the hands of her father with a statement saying that he deserves the presumption of innocence. Always approach situations like this with the thought that the victim might be lying; remind yourself and others that the burden of proof is on her.
Insist on referring to the victim as the rapist’s “adopted daughter,” as if that mitigates what he has done. Using subtle language cues like this, imply that though it might be rape, it’s not really incest because the the rapist is not the victim’s biological father. Pretend that adoptive parents somehow feel differently about their children than biological parents do.
Like the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, insist on your ability to differentiate between an artist and their art. As a spokesperson for the organization said, “The Academy honors achievement in film, not the personal lives of filmmakers and artists.” Tell yourself that many great artists have been problematic – for example, Picasso was an abusive womanizer, but you can still enjoy his paintings – and that a person’s behaviour should not influence whether or not we view their art as great. Perhaps you could even take this a step further and insist to yourself that a perpetrator of such violence could never make such wonderful art. Let the rapist’s popularly beloved films stand as a sort of character witness, proving that there is no way he could ever have harmed his own child.
If you have worked closely with the rapist, take a page from Cate Blanchett’s book and distance yourself from the accusations, pretend that it has nothing to do with you. Tell yourself that it’s a private family matter; your willingness to be friends with the rapist is certainly not a public statement either condoning his actions or dismissing the victim’s accusations. Make a statement similar to Blanchett’s, something like: “It’s obviously been a long and painful situation for the family and I hope they find some resolution and peace.” This type of conflict is not at all convenient for your career or the image you’re trying to build for yourself.
Blame everything on the only parent the rape victim is able to love and trust. Accuse her of being the truly abusive parent; say that she was and is crazy with jealousy. Insist that she orchestrated the entire thing as an elaborate revenge plot. Paint the rapist as a victim who has had his relationship with his children destroyed by their monster of a mother. Pretend to be sympathetic to the victim, the poor girl whose mother has planted terrible ideas in her head. After all, this certainly worked for Woody Allen and his lawyer, who issued a statement saying: “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.”
Write a lengthy article about how we don’t know the other side, the rapist’s side, of the story. Construct an elaborate argument explaining why the victim is a liar, knowing or not. Use a multitude of circumstantial evidence not even a little bit directly related to the actual assault described by the victim to discredit her. For example, insinuate that the victim’s mother is a hypocrite because she testified on Roman Polanski’s behalf when he was accused of rape; pretend that that has any bearing on whether or not Woody Allen raped his daughter. Using every anecdote and half-truth that comes your way to cast doubt in your readers’ minds. This won’t be hard; they are looking for a reason, any reason, to doubt anyway.
Or, like Diane Keaton, you could refuse to issue a statement, hide your head in the sand, and hope that this will all blow over.
Do not treat the victim as if they are a person with agency and thoughts and feelings – instead, treat them as an intellectual exercise, their life a puzzle to be solved, their words an argument to be defeated. Do not imagine yourself in their place, what it must be like to write a letter about the abuse they’ve suffered at their rich and powerful father’s hands. Do not try to think about what it must be like to have the entirety of the Hollywood machine working against you, swaying the minds of the population against what you are saying. Do not picture the anguish you might feel at seeing scores upon scores of people trying to discredit you, trying to trip you up, trying to defend the man who raped you, the man they all love so very much.
Do not think about the message that this, your willingness to doubt, is sending to all of the people you know who have also been victims of rape. They almost certainly number far more than you know, but try not to think about how your reaction might further convince them that sharing their story will only be met with derision and disbelief.
Tell yourself that this is not rape culture. Tell yourself that a knee-jerk reaction of you must be lying or remembering it wrong when faced with a victim’s accusations of rape is not a sign that our society is so very, very fucked up. Tell yourself that it’s rational and logical to want to know all sides of the story, though you never want to know the other side, the perpetrator’s side, when your house is broken into or your wallet is stolen or your child is hit by a car. Tell yourself that we can never know for sure what happened and since a man’s life can be destroyed by accusations of rape, it’s best to err on the side of caution. Do not think about the girl whose life was destroyed when she was seven.
Above all, never, ever, ever think about the ways that you might be complicit in this.
I stand with Dylan Farrow.
The Belle Jar 
Hollywood loves child-abusers and will bend over backwards to defend and applaud them. The media framing this as some sort of play by Mia Farrow to upset Woody Allen’s Oscar bid has been absolutely disgusting.
It’s been stomach-turning. Like, I actually feel sick.
I don’t think things will actually improve until the public is not only willing to blacklist the perpetrators of these crimes, but those who defend and associate with them. It would require people to smash too many of their beloved idols, though, from Johnny Depp to Whoopie Goldberg. But if defending these people became genuine career death, Hollywood could not longer hide behind the old “art, not the artist” cliche…
I think unfortunately this issue is not unique to Hollywood and the fact that this happens in Hollywood is indicative of a larger issue of rape culture in the US, in the world 😦 I wrote a post recently about Dylan’s letter and I totally missed the point that the letter is introduced with the notion he deserves the presumption of innocence (even though he was not allowed visits w/his own daughter). When I read that phrase, it didn’t sit well w/me but I figured journalists have to do that to avoid liability. Still. If that is true, that just goes to show how much and the many ways courts are set up to place the burden on the victim.
I know that it’s not unique to Hollywood, but there are few other places where there is large amounts of money and power and celebrity ready to defend perpetrators of crime. The guy down the street molests a kid, he doesn’t have everybody on the View raving about what a great guy he is.
If anything, Hollywood’s behavior and attitudes help reinforce the dangerous behavior of others. If people see Hollywood defend rapists, rapists outside of Hollywood feel better about themselves and their actions, maybe even to the point of feeling justified.
Yeah I agree there is a ripple effect 😦
‘Liking’ this post seems almost trite, but…well put.
agree…all good words.
“good” also implies, you know…thanks kindly.
Your comment about feeling sick sort of jerked me out of my complacent agreement and into commenting myself.
Because several weeks ago when I found out about a sexual harassment situation here on blogger in which a mutual friend was the perpetrator I did not speak up. I felt sick to my stomach and disgusted, but I did not have the courage to contact the person and explain why his actions were repugnant to me, why I no longer was interested in being friends. I did nothing. Which was a choice, and one that I am not very proud of.
I agree wholeheartedly with your post. But I also wonder about my reaction when I actually knew the perpetrator. Is it easier to avoid victim blaming when we do not know the parties involved? Do we all need to take a closer look at what is actually going on in our own lives?
Thank you for making me think very hard about my own actions today.
And by blogger I mean wordpress.
UH, I thought you might like this article, if you haven’t seen it yet – http://blogs.indiewire.com/shadowandact/when-an-artist-you-admire-is-an-accused-predator
I agree with what you’re saying — but… but… but what if you’re wrong? My take on this is that this is being tried in the media, not in the courtroom, where it belongs. The personal lives of celebrities, for good or evil, seems to be fair game for us to all be aware of, and I think that’s just sick.
It’s none of our business.
If that’s me sticking my head in the sand and not taking responsibility for Woody Allen’s behaviour, then so be it — I don’t know the man, I’ve never met him, I’m not in any way involved with him, and it’s not my place to either defend or condemn him.
I find it a bit cruel that you condemn Cait Blanchett and Diane Keaton — and for what? For not publicly denouncing someone they really only know professionally?
Anyhow, I’m not trying to jump down your throat, and I certainly agree with your take on rape culture, but the mob mentality that I’ve seen grow since the advent of the Internet is just as frightening.
Do I think Woody Allen is a creep and quite possibly a rapist? Yes. But as I am neither a judge nor a jury, nor Dylan’s mother, what business is it of mine?
Unfortunately, it can no longer be tried in the courtroom because the statute of limitations are up. It was not pressed in the courtroom, because Dylan Farrow was deemed too fragile to go ahead with the prosecution. The victim and her family are angry that the (alleged) perpetrator is being celebrated and recognized for a lifetime of achievement while ignoring or defending his behavior. The media is making it to be about trying to keep Cate B from getting an Oscar. At this point, Dylan’s only real recourse is to speak out for herself. She really doesn’t have anything to gain (unless you want to call her brother landing a spot at MSNBC a gain; that place is a den of iniquity if there ever was one).
I can see your point — and I don’t share the opinion that her writing her story is just an Oscar block — what a despicable thought — but neither do I agree with the idea of trying it in the media. There has to be a better way — because if (small if) Woody Allen IS innocent, it doesn’t matter, because he has already been convicted by the Internet, etc…
Similarly, it doesn’t really get Dylan any justice, either.
Sigh. I know I’m coming off as the Devil’s Advocate, but I’ve grown to realize that everyone’s a hypocrite — if someone whose art we love does something despicable, we will forgive them — but if it’s Justin Bieber — to give a recent, relevant example — then we’re quick to crucify. I’m sure that you, I, and everyone has art that you love, despite the fact of the person’s personal life. How can you stop loving Mozart’s music because he was a pedophile? Is Rosemary’s Baby any less of a brilliant movie because Roman Polanski had sex with an underage girl? And then you have to start asking yourself — what can you allow/what can you forgive? Do I stop watching movies with Robert Downey Jr. in it because I may be supporting his drug habit? Should Hollywood blacklist anyone who’s ever committed a crime or engaged in questionable behaviour? Who would be left standing?
Take a look at your music collection, your movie and book collection, and consider the private and public lives of the creators of these things — I would suggest that most of the people who create the entertainment we consume are degenerates in some way or another.
I say this only to illustrate a point — that ignorance is bliss, and that some things are none of our business. God forbid anyone ever drags my life publicly through the wash.
The sad thing is there’s no happy outcome for ANY of the individuals involved in this. Farrow will never get justice or her childhood back. Allen will always be regarded as a creep by anyone outside of his Hollywood friends and sycophants.
As for Polanski and his works, consider, for a minute that if Noah Cross is a Director Self-Insertion Character, Chinatown has a happy ending.
Forget it, Jake.
You’re right — and it’s certainly been an interesting experience reading the backlash — interesting, like watching maggots in a dead dog interesting. But then, I’m one of those sensitive souls that cries for how depraved society has become — to the point where I’d rather not know certain things. Cowardly? Perhaps.
Truth — Never “got” Woody Allen anyway — so I’ve never been a fan. So this doesn’t really affect my opinion of him other than it confirms my suspicion that he was a creep.
I can’t recall if it was you that said this (I’d have to back and read) but a valid point was made — what if someone like Johnny Depp’s career hinged on not making a film with Allen? (Incidentally, Depp DID make a film with Polanski)
Thought that was very challenging food for thought.
One thing I did take from the article written that tried to debunk the whole situation — that whole family is screwed up — not just Woody Allen. Not that that is any defense or excuse, if anything, it just made me feel even sorrier for Dylan — she didn’t stand a chance.
Until there is a systemic change in the behavior and attitudes within Hollywood and those who support it with their money, it will always be a system that will remorselessly exploit children, eat them up and spit them out because there are so few consequences for abusers and so much reward for those who’d come to the abusers’ defense.
Not to start a whole other discussion — but what you just described sounds a whole lot like France before the Revolution, and Rome before that, and Greece before that…. Hollywood is the best, brightest and worst of us. The excess will lead to destruction.
Awww, man, France before the Revolution… I’m not sure the veracity of it, but the most extreme accounts include Louis XV having ‘rape palaces’ that he filled with abducted peasant girls for him and his favored courtiers to enjoy. I sincerely hope we’re not that bad yet D:
not yet….
But then, they didn’t have 24 access to every possible shade of pornography and violence and violent pornography like we do. And we (that is, we as a society) condone this as a socially acceptable outlet for our baser urges.
Instead, they had a lot more access to bawdry entertainment in person, in the form of human oddities performances, sex shows, and rampant prostitution. Pornography was the realm of the privileged and the elite. Not having access to it didn’t make the common man any less depraved or violent. Interestingly, however, it may have lead to a greater surfeit of individuals interested in participating in the visual and linguistic arts; if my Bachelors of Arts taught me anything, it’s that the vast majority of creative human endeavor is simply sublimation of the everpresent and overwhelming desire to see people naked and doin’ it.
Nice talking to you Alex. Sorry but I have to run. I just saw two naked people wrestling in the snow in my yard and I have to go check it out. Ciao, darling…
I thought as much! Blessed is you
Now, to be fair, there was the debacle with Fatty Arbuckle, but I don’t think that’s the case here.
10 years ago, I probably would’ve been right there with you on this idea that what if we’re wrong and we can’t really know. But having done domestic violence work for many years now, I know that false accusations are so incredibly rare and that the notion that this is not my business is one of the main reasons domestic and sexual violence continue to be so prevalent in this world. I think it’s unfortunate that as a society we express doubt about guilt on the very off chance we may falsely believe someone has committed rape/domestic violence. And in the process, we ignore the very real chance that we are retraumatizing a victim by expressing any amount of skepticism. I also think that while there may be no resulting judicial justice from Dylan’s letter, the fact she’s publicly speaking about being raped and subsequently being heard and supported can in fact be very healing. And healing is true justice for survivors. I choose to think of situations like these as an opportunity for healing for the survivors, provided their disclosures are well-received.
I hear you, and I’ve never (intentionally) said that I didn’t believe Dylan’s story. What you’re talking about is a person standing up and telling their peers, the people around them — hey, this is what happened to me, and this guy that you all know did this to me.
What’s happening with this is that it has gone global, and millions of people who have no right to either accuse or defend are doing so — we are complete strangers to all the people involved. What right do we have to even comment on it, other than abstractly — that we feel horribly sorry for anyone who has to go through that, and that we find the actions of someone who has done that loathesome. Instead, I’ve seen this become something of a witch hunt, polarizing anyone who is not willing to publicly denounce someone (who they don’t even know) as being complicit in rape, and contributing to rape culture, and etc etc etc… If I don’t say “Castrate Woody Allen” I’m somehow a villain, likewise, if I don’t say “I stand with Dylan Farrow”. I don’t know these people. Frankly, I don’t give a flying fuck about either of them. That doesn’t change my feelings about rape — it just means that I DON’T KNOW THESE PEOPLE AND I DON”T CARE ABOUT THEM. And neither should any single person on this planet who is not in their direct sphere of connection — ie. family, friends etc… they’re fucking celebrities for god’s sake — the best thing we, as a human race, could do, would be to stop worshiping them — stop caring what they name their pets, or who they’re sleeping with or what clothes they wear. Maybe then we could focus on the poor girl next door whose father’s been touching her — what about her? Is she not important just because she’s not on the fucking television? Sorry, the whole celebrity pity thing just makes me sick.
Oh no, I didn’t think you didn’t believe her, sorry if I came off that way. And I definitely see what you’re saying, it’s absurd how much attention is paid to celebrities. I agree all victims/survivors are important. But I think there’s a difference between our obsession with celebrities and the way we as a society handle and address rape but the two issues are overlapping in this case. I think survivors should be able to tell their stories as privately or as publicly as they feel is needed for their healing, regardless of whom the perpetrator is. And no we shouldn’t care more about a survivor with a famous dad than one with a non-famous dad – I think they equally warrant the same amount of support. But it is silly how much attention is paid to celebrities – and the amount of our attentions we pay to their pets, clothes, etc distracts from a lot of things that actually matter…
On a side note – I was reading your earlier posts and I hope the issue w/your wrestling neighbors in the snow worked out – that sounds like a bizarre sight to see!!
Ha! No, that was just a segue to end the conversation — I had to leave. I’ve been thinking a lot about another article I read that challenged my way of thinking — if we are willing to say that the accused is “innocent until proven guilty” then we need to be equally willing to accept that the accuser is telling the truth until proven otherwise. It is a weird balance — like a Schrodiger’s Cat situation — but it seems to me to be the only reasonable thought process (for me, personally.) I’d likely take a different approach of these were people I know, because I could then apply what I knew about their character and make my own personal judgements. As I don’t know either Woody or Dylan, I’ll repeat that while I may sympathize, at the end of the day, I don’t give a flying rats ass about either of them, when it comes right down to it.
haha – I was wondering! Quite the creative segue-way. Nice talking to you 🙂
The courtrooms are getting this wrong in thousands of cases every year, giving sole custody to abusive parents in astonishing numbers. I’ve written about one case here
http://littlehostages.blogspot.com/2014/02/an-open-letter-from-dylan-farrow.html
Mo Hannah and Barry Goldstein have documented this issue:
http://www.civicresearchinstitute.com/dvac.html
http://timesupblog.blogspot.com/2014/02/dylan-farrow-speaks-out-about-sexual.html
along with the Leadership Council:
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org
Or you can base your half baked “feelings” on things that have been thoroughly investigated and proven false. Somehow your slanderous accusations are okay though because you probably know what’s true despite knowing nothing about the original investigation or the findings.
Deciding that a seven-year-old’s testimony about whether or not her adoptive father raped her is inconsistent is not “thorough”, nor is it exonerating. What it is is an admission on the part of the prosecutor that they don’t think they can prove him guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Doesn’t mean that they didn’t believe her at the time. Doesn’t mean it wasn’t true.
The allegations weren’t proven false. The judge at the custody hearing didn’t trust the report issued by the team of doctors, partly because they refused to testify and destroyed their notes.
The judge also found that Allen’s behaviour towards Dylan had been “grossly inappropriate”. If the descriptions in the Vanity Fair article are true, he was correct in his assessment.
The prosecutor was willing to take child abuse charges to trial but felt Dylan’s emotional state was too fragile to withstand the stress. (Yes, I know all about the misconduct accusation. It’s irrelevant.)
There are certain costs to having sex with your daughter. One of those is losing the benefit of the doubt that you didn’t have sex with your other daughter.
EXACTLY !
This whole scenario has been eating at me since I first read about it, because I’m
with you and all of the others defending Dylan–she has every right to tell her story and should be treated with respect and compassion. But at the same time, I don’t see any way to resolve the situation to anyone’s satisfaction.
Charges were brought years ago and they were dismissed. That may very well have been wrong, but all these years later, unless there is some magical smoking gun everyone has neglected to mention up until now, there is no way to prove the allegations to the satisfaction of a court or even in public opinion. Unfortunately, the other possibility here–a mother playing up or altogether fabricating a story of abuse to hurt an ex during a divorce–is rare and unlikely, but not entirely unheard of, and seven years old is an age where a kid is incredibly susceptible to manipulation. It’s horrifying and certainly undermines support of victims to acknowledge, but implanted memories of abuse are known to be a thing that happens.
I’ve never met Mia Farrow or Woody Allen, and I wasn’t exactly aware and following the story back when all of this happened, so I’m not really in the best position to judge how likely each scenario is, except by appealing to general trends as others have done–how common is it for sexual abuse to happen and be covered up, especially by a powerful person, versus be invented? I’m fairly certain the former is more common, and given that along with Woody’s other questionable behavior, I’d agree with other’s sentiments that most likely did happen.
But what can we, as the public, do about that, other than not treat Dylan like shit? We can’t put Woody in jail now. So what are we asking people to do… boycott his movies? Uninvite him to things? Stop honoring him? Or continue to allow him his career, but introduce him as “probably a pedophile”?
The more I read (I knew very little about the man prior to this latest revelation), the more I’m creeped out by the man regardless of what can or cannot be “proven”, and I wasn’t particularly a fan to begin with, so I personally have no problem with ignoring him and his work. But if we did manage to completely exile him, separating him from all his friends, making it so he never works again, wouldn’t that amount to sentencing him without a trial? And are we okay with that?
Given the response Dylan has received thus far, that “exile Woody Allen” scenario seems unlikely, and not something we should fret about on his behalf. But if not that, what are we advocating for?
Basically, I want to support Dylan. She was brave to share her story, and she certainly deserves more benefit-of-the-doubt than she’s gotten from a lot of people. But other than saying that… what the fuck am I supposed to do about it?
The way I think of it is – I don’t know Dylan Farrow, but I do know lots of abuse survivors, and I want my reaction to Dylan’s letter to reflect compassion for THEM. The idea of them having to hear so many people reflecting on the possibility that she’s lying, or was manipulated for revenge, or any of the other scenarios that exonerate Woody Allen, basically breaks my heart, because those are things that were told about THEIR stories.
This is about Dylan, for sure, but it’s also about culture, and I think our reactions to her letter can affect culture, and that’s especially important for those of us whose opinions will have no effect on these specific people’s lives. They do have an effect on our friends and family and coworkers, and we have to consider that.
“Tell yourself that it’s rational and logical to want to know all sides of the story, though you never want to know the other side, the perpetrator’s side, when your house is broken into or your wallet is stolen or your child is hit by a car. Tell yourself that we can never know for sure what happened and since a man’s life can be destroyed by accusations of rape, it’s best to err on the side of caution. Do not think about the girl whose life was destroyed when she was seven.”
I’ve literally never thought about it like that before. Fuck rape culture.
Oh man. I’d heard about this obliquely through Facebook posts & the like, but wow. Thank you for sitting down and writing about this. From every angle, it’s just disgusting. And how odd it is that the original letter from Dylan Farrow couldn’t just be posted like a normal letter a la Angelina Jolie’s op-ed. Why did it have to be funneled through the blog of a prominent male journalist who has nothing to do with the situation? It seemed like Kristof curtailed her voice instead of allowing Dylan to truly speak for herself. And that was just the tip of the iceberg.
Kristof is a Farrow family friend, and I presume Dylan Farrow trusts him to not reveal the new name she’s living under to any friends/defenders of Woody Allen, where she might not trust another journalist or editor to do the same. Also by publishing the letter in full on his blog, Kristof has access to the moderation tools for comments there, which he would not have on the comments for his column. By doing it this way Dylan has maximum control over the publication of her letter in the hands of someone her family fully trusts rather than in the hands of an editor they don’t really know.
Dylan has every right to reply. Child abuse is a horrific thing and abusers should be prosecuted. This is a difficult thing and I appreciate that quite a lot of the time abusers are cleared in the court.
That shouldn’t stop society trying to pursue abusers but nor should it stop us giving the benefit of the doubt to people accused of abuse and cleared after a thorough investigation.
To write about something like this, basically accusing a man of the worst thing he could be accused of, without seemingly full knowledge of the facts of the case, is both lazy and dangerous.
Thanks for this. Seriously.
There is a rhetorical term called prolepsis, which makes excuses in advance – which is what a rape apologist would do. However, every time this article points to the accused it uses the term ‘Rapist’ – the offensiveness of this tactic should be self evident. The fact that it is done in the guise of supposedly revealing the ways rape apologists hide from the the facts makes the tactic more suspect. From seeing that tactic in bold display and its use in the service of the supposed enlightenment of those needing it makes me want to dismiss the insights that the article is attempting to support, as well as to dismiss any of its substance. In this regard the attempt of the article is clearly manipulative rather than enlightening, while its benign intentions might have been to make us aware of how we all might be unconsciously replaying Rape Culture habits it rather draws attention to the dangers of doing the opposite -and makes me want to consider the details of the case again knowing how much people are willing to yell ‘Rapist’ whenever the words ‘accused’ should have been written, or actually, where the person’s name should have been used.
Digital penetration *is* rape.
Thank you, thank you, thank you for writing this. As a child victim who never spoke up, watching my worst fears confirmed through this case has been horrific. Sickening. Reading a well-written, informed piece on this issue means a lot to me.
Reblogged this on The Double Parent: and commented:
I, too, stand with Dylan Farrow.
So… it’s settled now? The blogger thinks that the guy did it, and that meets everyone’s standards for establishing culpability?
I think you need to check your rhetoric at the top of your post after re-reading Nicholas Kristof’s article in the NYT. He is clearly on the side of Dylan Farrow. And if you want to disagree look at his prior body of work. His entire career as a reporter has been dedicated to advocating for the rights of victims of sexual abuse around the world. Because of his line of work and research that’s put him in direct contact with Mia Farrow and has, therefore, made them close friends and allies. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/02/opinion/sunday/kristof-dylan-farrows-story.html
Reblogged this on Another Kind of Woman and commented:
I too stand with Dylan Farrow
I’m really tired of the “innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt” approach to stuff like this. I mean, even in the law, that standard only applies to criminal prosecutions. None of us is in a position to put him in jail. I think it is perfectly reasonable to say, “who is more believable?” (FWIW, this is the standard in civil trials.) Why should we give Mr. Allen the benefit of doubt, rather than Dylan? Given Mr. Allen’s demonstrated attitudes toward sex with minors, it’s hard to take his “she’s lying” very seriously. Yes, I believe Dylan. Her story is far more credible than his.
As for “court of public opinion”: that “court” can’t put him in jail. It can’t even get his buddies to accept its “judgements.” If we’re lucky, it might convince some people to stop admiring him, or to stop seeing his films, or to not give him “lifetime achievement” awards. But — this may come as a shock to some people — there is no constitutional right to being admired by millions, or to have people see one’s films, or to get film awards. (Most of us have to do without, even those of us who are known _not_ to be child molesters.) It’s perfectly reasonable to put the burden of proof on him to show that he is worthy of these perqs.
Thank you. #ibelieveher
I know how it goes–powerful, older man, “important”, thinks he’s got impunity (and he almost always does) –fascinated with his own sexuality as if it is a work of art—endows very young child or teenager with his feelings and his …. you know what. These cases follow a painful pattern. #ibelievedylanfarrow
Thank you!
Reblogged this on Feminist Students United!.
I agree with some of this article BUT the presumption of innocence is a very important part of our justice system & should be applied to anybody that is accused of any crime. If we get rid of the presumption of innocence cause it might imply the victim is lying then we will have to get rid of it for every crime. Someone says you stole from them? We don’t want to imply the victims lying so we’ll assume your guilty without evidence. If any of us were accused of a crime we would want the assumption of innocence and the burden of proof would be on the state – not the victim – to prove our guilt. If we leave it up to ourselves to decide who is guilty & innocent we set a dangerous precedent. I’ve been raped & what made me angry was not that people didn’t automatically believe me & turn against my rapist it was that people thought they had the right to judge when they didn’t. So I don’t support the court of public opinion. I don’t like Woody Allen. I never have & its far more likely he is guilty but the way to live in a fair society & support Dylan is to fight against rape myths & victim blaming that is mentioned in the article not to assume his guilt.
And while you’re at it, tell the victim (for her own good) she should forgive him and get on with her life, what good will bringing up all this do, it won’t bring back her childhood.
I agree with everything you said except about Mia Farrow testifying at Roman Polanski’s rape trial. I believe she testified in the case he brought against Vanity Fair, which implied he was hitting on women in NYC when his murdered wife’s body was not yet cold. Whether she was there willingly or not is not clear, and she has since stated publicly that she is no longer friends with Polanski.
Hi Anne!
My name is Kerri Lowe. I’m a writer living in Brooklyn, but I recently become content manager for a new website called StoryShelter: the social space to share life’s stories.
The site is currently in beta while we’re making adjustments and growing users. Basically, it’s a site that prompts you to tell stories from your life through a series of Q&A questions. You can save your stories and share them publicly, anonymously, or to a small group of your choosing.
The way we see it is a space for introspection and reflection, revealing the values in your life through the stories you tell and offering space for personal growth. It’s also a fascinating way to research what others have to say about a particular question. You can search responses by age, gender, location, topic, etc. People are very candid.
We’re starting a podcast to have exciting content to share with our users. Its called the Live Like You Mean It Podcast: Lessons in Living a Meaningful Life. We’re interviewing authors, teachers, thought leaders, etc. who have transformed their lives and aren’t afraid to tell their story.
Personally, I’ve been subscribed to your blog for at least a year, after my mom forwarded me one of your posts. I really love your writing and how you aren’t afraid to speak out for what you believe in and call out injustices in society. I’m currently writing my own piece relating to Farrow in the sense of having been complicit in staying silent about abuse to protect “artistic genius” – or at least great potential, in a man – my own abuser. I would love to interview you on this show.
We’re aiming to launch the podcast in March and I’ll be doing my first interviews this month. Would you be interested in being a guest?
If you are – let me know and we can set up a time for a quit chat (or go by email) about the format, answer any questions you have, and get you on the schedule at a convenient time for you!
Thanks! Kerri Lowe
This is so unbelievably important; victim blaming has to stop, and the only way to stop it is to make people aware.
In terms of this specific case, I completely sympathise with Dylan Farrow and the fact is that Woody Allen has a reputation for deviancy that is grounded in many of his own actions- both in his art and his life.
In terms of the issue raised by the article in general though, it is an incredibly complex issue where no side of the debate seems to come out of it without looking like part of the problem.
The problem with this whole issue is that declaring absolutes one way or another will always wind up harming someone who is innocent and getting the balance right is always difficult.
In fact the problem is that whenever you look at a “side” in this issue, you’re invariably dealing with a gendered and blinkered view.
To begin with the entire concept of “rape culture” as it has been hijacked by feminists (in fact it originally applied to the prison rape of men and its acceptability) is in itself a form of rape apologetics due to its narrow definition. I know what the response here will be – “but we argue that any form of penetration is rape” yet that is exactly what I am getting at – the absurd and victim blaming notion that the victim must be penetrated for it to be raped.
Under such a rape apologist narrative, if the victim is forced to penetrate their assailant (such as a woman taking advantage of a drunk man, or a female child sexual predator forcing an underage boy to engage in vaginal sex) isn’t classed as rape, but “other sexual assault”.
The argument is often used that if a man or a boy had an erection then he must have wanted it. That’s as rape apologist an argument as claiming that if a woman experienced orgasm or pleasure during a rape (which has happened in some cases) then she must have wanted it.
In fact society’s notions of rape and consent are so warped that in at least 6 US states, it is law that if a female child sexual predator gets pregnant and gives birth to a child as the result of raping another child, then her victim must pay her child support. Think about that for a minute, several US States have legalised turning child sexual abuse victims into child slaves.
In fact in places like the UK, this attitude has been so perversely ingrained in our society that it was found in the late 1990s that child sexual abuse victims of female predators were far less likely to be believed by even police, than child sexual abuse victims of male sexual predators.
Yet how does the notion of treating rape as a gendered crime, even remotely begin to accept the full scope of the problem – especially when start asking about rape in terms of being “forced to penetrate” as well as being “forced to envelop” and start to encounter findings where 40% of all rape is committed by women and men are found to be half the victims – like with the 2010 NIPSVS (which even then lied about its findings in its own conclusions).
People will respond here by asking how many studies since then have replicated those findings. My rebuttal would be to question how many of the other studies being referred to actually asked about those being “forced to penetrate” instead of the usual situation where only those who are “forced to envelop” is considered.
Some food for thought in that regard- a study in 2010 by Edith Cowan University was forced to prematurely end because it hit saturation. However what it did find was that an overwhelming number of heterosexual battered men were serially coerced into having sex with their female batterers (ie they were raped by them) on a regular basis.
If we’re going to talk about rape culture, then surely we need to start by challenging anyone who defines rape as anything other than a situation where a perpetrator forces a victim to engage in a form of sexual intercourse with them, regardless of whether it is the victim being penetrated, the perpetrator being penetrated, or in the case of female-on-female oral rape, devoid of penetration for either party.
Then you have the larger issue. I’ll deal with the false allegations side of things first before dealing with what it does to genuine cases.
Blindly accepting the testimony of someone making an allegation is not only a scenario where things like false rape allegations by adults, or allowing psychologically abusive parents to manipulate their children for the sake of using their children as weapons. In fact I recall one case where the children had initially made false allegations due to their mother’s manipulation (which were subsequently proven to be baseless). Yet despite several court psychologists finding the mother to be a danger to the children and even the judge handling the case admitting as much, the mother was given sole custody because she had manipulated the children into being terrified at the mere thought of being in the same room as their father.
How is that kind of outcome in that situation even going to remotely do anything other than severely harm a child and force them to endure the psychological equivalent of being frequently raped by a parent so said abusive parent can get their way. After all, if such a parent has been found in court to have terrorised their children to the point of giving them a phobia of a parent for the sake of getting sole custody, then when else are they going to find psychologically violating and torturing their children to be justifiable in their minds.
Yet how seriously are false allegations punished? They’re treated trivially- as nothing more than perjury. Never mind the fact that given the high rates of prison rape experienced by both male and female inmates, that false allegations effectively amount to several counts of attempted rape by proxy.
Of course that ignores the worst aspects of them – namely that they make it that much harder for genuine cases to come forward, and more importantly, to be believed.
Even if you were to argue that false allegations only amount to 1% of all cases; that’s still 1% of all cases which are one of the most perverse kinds of crimes (ie using the state/system to serially rape/beat an innocent victim) and in terms of what it does to the genuine cases, that 1% only serves to make it just that much harder for the 99% of genuine cases to come forward (working off the hypothetical breakdown of 1% false allegations and 99% genuine cases).
The blog post above might be dealing with someone rich, famous and powerful, yet it applies to even regular cases of child and adult abuse (ranging from abuse by family and friends and even spousal abuse)- something which as a survivor of child psychological abuse, a childhood sexual assault by another student which my school swept under the carpet and 18 months of hell in the form of domestic violence (which included being serially raped by my abusive ex girlfriend), I am all too aware of the barriers you face when disclosing abuse. People live in denial and want to make excuses.
When I disclosed that I had been the victim of domestic violence to a female roommate and girl I went to school with, both turned on me, with the later effectively accusing me of being a misogynist. When I spoke up about the sexual assault, I had my year coordinator turn on me and compare me to “women who cry rape” and had to deal with whispers behind my back that I was gay. When I spoke up about the child abuse I endured, most of the family turned on me and now I don’t speak to half of them.
However would I trade automatically having my abuse validated if it meant abusers being able to then use the system itself as a weapon with impunity? Never in a million years.
If we want to start dealing with this problem properly then we need to throw the gendered narrative out the window when talking about abuse and ensure that we exclude no victims of sexual abuse. We also need to send a strong message that allegations which have been proven to be maliciously false will not be tolerated, with strong sentences which send that message to both those who perpetrate them and those who might consider it.
However then there’s the third delicate problem- how do you get the balance right? How do you create a system and a climate where legitimate victims are given compassion and validation through the legal process while ensuring that we maintain the crucial legal principle of “innocent until proven guilty”. I’m not game to say I have the answer to that, however what I do know is that it will never be found in maintaining narratives and in polarising the issue one way or another.
However I do know that we’ll start to find it when society becomes far more interested in justice for all, regardless of age, gender, ethnicity or creed, than in advancing dogmatic agendas.
Since we don’t know either way (although I’m leaning towards thinking that he did it), what’s wrong with not judging either way until we have more information? Innocent until proven guilty is still the law of the land.
Smart, you did judge by saying you are leaning towards thinking that he did it…
But I don’t know for sure if he did. I just disagree with the internet lynch mob that’s being sent after him.
Perhaps you should have prefaced the victim’s open letter with the term ‘alleged’. The onus is either on Dylan to prove what she says is true or on Woody to prove that she is lying, If she is lying, how awful for him, if she is telling the truth, how awful for her. Either way, you’ve taken sides without the proof. It seems that Moses Farrow believes that it was Mia who was the abusive one in that family;. Two other children side with Mia., You see what a mess that is? If that family can’t make up its mind, why does the public believe it has the right to take sides?
that is how they gain more popularity
Thank you for writing this. Not only did this need to be said, it needs to be repeated frequently.
Rape is murder. A murder of the mind. A total assault on the brain. It is not love but pure animal intent. I have a wife and two female children, one female grandchild and I have strong feelings about the monsters who do this.
Excellent points. Thanks for posting this.
Reblogged this on Aw Laugh Think and commented:
Excellent points being made here.
I’m on Dylan Farrow’s side.
Wow! Rarely, if ever am I at a lost for words, but this powerful, emotional post speaks louder on the subject than i ever could. Thank you for sharing.
This is a good post.
I’ve read a couple of pieces elsewhere that try to paint the background of Dylan’s family as so dysfunctional how could you possible believe anything they said. Like the victim of rape can only be believed if they come from some sort of pristine background.
I too stand with Dylan Farrow!
What gets me most is Woody thinks what he did is OK, that his “marriage” is just that. I dont even like to think about him; its that “Ick ” factor….
Whether abusers and rapists get away with it depends on the gender of their victims. Do to boys what nature created girls to endure, and your ass is dog meat.
As a victim who was not believed, I am very sensitive to this subject. The scar of disbelief has stayed with me to this day. I also personally know of two women who lied. As a result the men’s lives were torn apart and they were themselves victims.
Our justice system (if you can call it that) is tilted toward the accuser rather than the accused. What’s fair though? One is lying and one is telling the truth. Is it fair to automatically side with one over the other? What if you side with the wrong one?
Perhaps they should equally be responsible for proving their innocence so neither one is forced into an unfair fight.
very well written!
Reblogged this on A Modern Ukrainian and commented:
All this Woody Allen crap is making me sick.
الوقاية خير من العلاج توقيع اقص العقوبة علي من قام بالاغتصاب اقصة العقوبة علي المتحرشين واهم من هزة تجريم عمل المرئة في الدعارة وكل ما يحط من صورة المرئة في المجتمع والتربية في الاسرة والمدرسة
I have only two points of disagreement with the author of this piece and that’s not to discredit it only to approach this awful business from a different and unpopular perspective that might be uncomfortable for superwomen mothers to hear:
1. I do not hold Mia Farrow blameless. Just how many children does a movie star and international traveler need to adopt? Just how big are her mother hen wings? Not being available, emotionally or otherwise in terms of being there to protect her child and to make a wise choice of husband/father, is a legacy of “Having it all” and the “superwoman” myth.
2. It is not a “rape culture” it is a culture where parents have ceded the duty to protect their children to government, industry, schools, and strangers, and where celebrities will say anything to keep their status because there’s nothing more important to Westerners than fame–not children, not anything. I am a survivor of a mother like this and a father like Woody except my father wasn’t famous. For my superwoman mother’s paradoxically delicate sensibility and pride I’ve kept my experience under wraps until recently. I stand with Dylan, but not with Mia.
Thankyou for writing this. It is so important, and your message is so clear. I hope it opens many eyes… xx
Reblogged this on Tarek Elbakry's Blog.
The only thing I disagree with is that you’re seem to be claiming that it’s not important to maintain the assumption of innocence until guilt is conclusively proven. Allen may be guilty but we still absolutely must inevitably maintain, at all times, that tradition from our U.S. criminal justice system.
So well written and articulate I agree absolutely.
As a survivor of child abuse I feel compelled to comment. I was emotionally and physically abused by my father and brother for many years. They were slow, insidious, painful years of my life where I was depleted of all self-esteem, self-worth, love, you name it. I had no confidence. When I spoke up about my experiences later in life, I was blamed and accused of lying, both by my parents, siblings and members close to my family. It was challenging, difficult and depressing. In no way do I fault anyone for this. They had a right to question and dobut me, and it didn’t further stigmatize me, or make me feel that I was a liar. I knew the truth myself, and that was enough. As I aged my memories morphed some of the facts a bit. I understood this and it took a long time for me to understand exactly what happened to me. The truth is no one came out a winner when I exposed what had happened. Not me, not my father, not my brother, not my entire family. What I find strange about the Dylan Farrow sexual abuse allegations is that accusations that anyone who questions her account is anti-woman, victim-blamers and so on. Some of these individuals are these things, but as my family had a right to defend themselves, so does Woody Allen. 5-8% of individuals who report sexual abuse turn out to be wrong. It does not mean that they were lying, but that they had interpreted the situation incorrectly. I do not believe that Dylan is lying, and I don’t believe that Woody is either. I’m not blaming Mia. We have a tendency to react hysterically to abuse, especially sexual molestation, and that can have a profound effect on the victim’s understanding of what has actually transpired. It’s just so sad that this entire debacle has been cast into the court of public opinion. What we believe is completely irrelevant. To be honest I do not know what “rape culture” means. It seems to be a deeply flawed concept uncritically treated as fact. Anyway, this was an interesting article and I will revisit it to further broaden my understanding of its content. Thank you.
It should be guilty until proven innocent, since she gains nothing from being known as a survivor of rape/sexual abuse.. And there should be no statute of limitations.. But it doesn’t matter what happens really, he will still be celebrated for his acting, as mike Tyson is celebrated for his boxing even after being convicted. What’s really annoyed me is that she is called a rape victim.. She has mostly got on with her life (until the open letter) and has a family etc.. To me she is a rape survivor, not a rape victim. Most people won’t think it makes much difference what word is used but to me, I’m a survivor, not a victim. And thanks for the trigger warning, though the title was good warning anyway. I can’t cope when it’s unexpected.
Thank you for this.