POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Woody Allen is... (Choose up to 2)

A Child molester
5
23%
A Child molester
5
23%
A Disgusting human being
2
9%
A Disgusting human being
2
9%
My Child Molesting hero / actor/ producer
2
9%
My Child Molesting hero / actor/ producer
2
9%
Poor old man that is just a little creepy
2
9%
Poor old man that is just a little creepy
2
9%
Other (Because I want to got blah blah blah)
0
No votes
Other (Because I want to got blah blah blah)
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 22
Hawt Sommer

POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Postby Hawt Sommer » Mon Feb 03, 2014 2:50 pm

Image
User avatar
HorizonNinetails
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 11:19 am
SL Name: Horizon Ninetails
Caste: Pirate
Role: Scoundrel
Home Stone: Deck beneath my feet

Re: POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Postby HorizonNinetails » Mon Feb 03, 2014 3:10 pm

Hawt Sommer

Re: POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Postby Hawt Sommer » Mon Feb 03, 2014 3:55 pm

So far that two posts from you saying the same thing.

You have anything better to contribute than...

"Derrrrrrrrr... Hawt is a Troll!" ?

(edit)

YAHOO ANSWERS:
Why do people call everyone a troll?
Chelsie asked 3 years ago

I haven't been on this site for about six months and when I came back, everyone is mentioning trolls... what exactly does it mean?


Best Answer:

answered 3 years ago
Troll: A person who posts to a forum or other form of online communication to disrupt or cause widespread argument, sometimes assholes like this simply call people trolls to disrupt communications or start an argument.
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Postby Glaucon » Mon Feb 03, 2014 4:20 pm

I get that Hawt is frenzied at Woody Allen. After all, the guy is a leftish NY sixties hero, one of the bad guys if you play team 'conservative' USA and now there is a renewed accusation (same source as the old one).

However, he was never convicted, never charged, even. The accusation may very well be true. But it might also be untrue. We have no way of knowing. So, I'd say that 'innocent until proven guilty' should apply.

The accusing girl and her mother insist that the world should treat Woody Allen as a sex offender, a child molester, that actors should not work with him, should not praise him, that he should not get awards, and that the public should not like the guy, should not appreciate his movies. Hawt probably never did, to begin with.

Is that a fair thing for them to ask? Even if it is true that he did what they claim he did?

I'd say it isn't. We charged the legal system with punishing people that do something wrong in their personal lives. It isn't our business, especially since this isn't a clear case of the legal system failing. What they are asking us to do is in fact a pretty shitty thing: judging someone publicly without a conviction, without knowing the truth.

So, for me, Woody Allen remains a famous director who makes movies that are often decent, sometimes mediocre and occasionally great, especially when he isn't starring in them.
Hawt Sommer

Re: POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Postby Hawt Sommer » Mon Feb 03, 2014 4:24 pm

Thank you for contributing Glaucon. I knew you could spit something out besides

"Derrr.. .HAWT ISSA TROLLLLLOLOLO!"
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Postby Glaucon » Mon Feb 03, 2014 4:39 pm

You are welcome. So, what is your take? (I kinda guessed already, given the poll options, the ones that made the thread into a trolling post for some, clearly, but... hey... I am asking anyway).
Hawt Sommer

Re: POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Postby Hawt Sommer » Mon Feb 03, 2014 4:49 pm

Allen divorced because Farrow discovered nude photographs that Allen had taken of Soon-Yi.

Farrow won custody of their children. Allen was denied visitation rights with Malone and could see Ronan only under supervision.

He then went on to marry his adopted daughter Soon-Yi

Those are the facts.

But hey, he's a great director.. sometimes and makes us laugh that's all that matters.

Just like all those Teens that mentally aquitted Justin Bebbbeeeber for assault and driving drunk and all that.. He's CUUUUUTE! So what if he split some guys lip!
User avatar
Elle Couerblanc
Posts: 619
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 10:55 am
SL Name: Elle

Re: POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Postby Elle Couerblanc » Mon Feb 03, 2014 4:56 pm

I think he's guilty as sin. This is what was quoted on CNN:

In 1993, Maco -- who's since retired -- told reporters he believed there was probable cause to arrest Allen. But he said he decided not to press charges, with Mia Farrow's support, "rather than exposing the child to possible harm."


Working in the field of Child Welfare in the past, it is not that uncommon for a parent to decide that prosecution of the offending, at that moment, is not in the best interest of the child.

FYI: I am a proud bleeding heart liberal too :P
"Old stories are like old friends. You have to visit them from time to time." Bran - A Storm of Swords, pg 315

Visit me at Elle's World http://ellecouerblanc.com/
User avatar
HorizonNinetails
Posts: 394
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 11:19 am
SL Name: Horizon Ninetails
Caste: Pirate
Role: Scoundrel
Home Stone: Deck beneath my feet

Re: POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Postby HorizonNinetails » Mon Feb 03, 2014 5:14 pm

You posted a thread with the same options

Is Woody Allen a:

A: Pedophile
B: Child Fondler
C: Secretly a Priest (indirect scandal insult)
D: A daycare diddler
E: A creepy human being who should be hunted and his skin used as a pelt.


Come on now. If you want to have a serious debate, give some decent options. You seem literate, and yet every time you want to have a debate you begin the argument with ridiculously biased or undermining positions.

If you want people to engage you, at least try to appear as if its going to be a conversation rather than you going on a rant just because you can. Scarecrow positions, just to make you look correct, tend to just undermine your credibility as a contributor. IE, they make you come off as a troll.

Just because the shoe fits twice doesn't mean the label doesn't suit what you're putting forward.
User avatar
Glaucon
Posts: 2832
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 9:07 am

Re: POLL: Woody Allen is.....

Postby Glaucon » Mon Feb 03, 2014 5:30 pm

That adopted daughter was 20 years old at the time. Not 7. Sure, it is plenty weird and possibly quite sordid (especially given Allen's age at the time), but it isn't evidence that he also molested the 7-year old adopted daughter. Apparently, he never molested the older daughter. They went on to marry and they are still together.

To me, a man of 56 starting a relationship with his 20 year old adopted daughter (adopted 'stepdaughter' I guess, he wasn't there yet when she was adopted) is a pretty selfish and shitty thing to, indicating that the guy is somewhat oversexed (which wasn't exactly a secret to someone that knows his movies) but it isn't something illegal, and doesn't give us any indication about him being a pedophile or something like it. It does indicate that this guy shows selfish behavior that is outside of the socially acceptable norms. It makes the story more likely, but that is about it.

Why would the adopted girl lie? Well, that is a hard one. But it seems that a good portion of such accusations are not true. The ex was really mad at him (with very good reason), so who knows. The fact that they are 'appealing' to people to treat Allan as if he was guilty does indicate that they have gone off the track, at least somewhat. The case wasn't pursued, legally. Presumably because there wasn't enough evidence. Which means that there was no way to 'know'.

So, the 'facts are' that we don't know. Why would you be keen to judge? With Polanski, I could understand you judging (because in that case, it does appear that there is plenty of evidence) but in this case, you should not.

I get that, by conventional standards, his behavior was pretty 'immoral'. And I get that it being that, you feel you know for sure he is also a child molester. Just as you probably feel that if gay people are allowed to marry, nothing will stop people from marrying 1 year olds and sheep. But for me, the one thing isn't evidence of the other thing.

@ Elle: Yes, that is common. But whatever the reasons for the lack of proscecution, fact is that he wasn't convicted and that we don't know. We don't know why Mia Farrow agreed. Maybe she thought her adoptive daughter's story might not hold up. Or maybe it was just compassion with her daughter. And now, we can't know. Because there will be no evidence left outside of her testimony and, after all this time, and her being on the 'side' of her adoptive mother so clearly, that testimony is probably not enough. Not enough for them to convict, and not even enough for us to know. With OJ, we pretty much 'knew'. Amanda Knox? I'd say we have a pretty clear idea (well, she is convicted again, now). Polanski? Fairly clear. This one? It is just guessing.

My guess is that he did it, btw. But I don't know.

Return to “News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron