Woody Allen Is Not Offended By Rape Joke At Cannes Film Festival

[marylander1940]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSipfLProFU

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjyjYMIl27g

[Kenny]

The rape joke, however, was offended by Woody Allen.

[+ WilliamM]

Apparently very little can offend Woody Allen, especially his own bad behavior.

[Kenny]

This week's Hollywood Reporter opinion piece by Ronan Farrow, Allen's son, is very good. A deft excoriation of media complicity in sex abuse cases concerning celebrities.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/my-father-woody-allen-danger-892572

[+ WilliamM]

A quote from the Hollywood Reporter piece by Ronan Farrow:

 

"Tonight, the Cannes Film Festival kicks off with a new Woody Allen film. There will be press conferences and a red-carpet walk by my father and his wife (my sister). He'll have his stars at his side — Kristen Stewart, Blake Lively, Steve Carell, Jesse Eisenberg. They can trust that the press won't ask them the tough questions. It's not the time, it's not the place, it's just not done."

 

Even I forget Woody Allen's earlier career on Broadway and a stand-up comic. And I saw Woody Allen and Diane Keaton on Broadway in "Play It Again Sam" in 1969. No wonder he turned to movies where he was in charge and seldom had to answer questions. I also recognize that was a different era and Bill Cosby chose a much more public life.

[+ quoththeraven]

This week's Hollywood Reporter opinion piece by Ronan Farrow, Allen's son, is very good. A deft excoriation of media complicity in sex abuse cases concerning celebrities.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/my-father-woody-allen-danger-892572

 

Thank you for posting this. I've been sitting on a link I got from Twitter for most of the week, but for various reasons felt I was not the right person to post this here.

 

I am embarrassed to say that at first I bought the idea that the allegations about Dylan Farrow, who was seven at the time, were made up by her mother because of the custody dispute. (There are obvious differences between allegations by adults and allegations on behalf of children, especially after the McMartin preschool case, in which the accusations were ginned up by overeager interrogators.) My perception of Mia Farrow was that she was weird and maybe a little unhinged, and the number of children she adopted in addition to the children she gave birth to didn't do anything to disabuse me of this.

 

Somehow, I missed learning, or forgot, that the family court later determined that Woody Allen was in fact a danger to his daughter and that the district attorney announced that charges would not be filed not because they weren't justified but because Dylan's family didn't want to put her through more occasions on which she had to recount her abuse. Dylan reaffirming her accusations as an adult finally convinced me.

 

Notice that a case that a family court judge and district attorney felt was meritorious didn't go forward because it wouldn't allow the victim to put it behind her. That is why cases and charges being dropped don't necessarily mean they are unfounded.

 

Nevertheless, I was done with Woody Allen at the time because of his behavior with regard to his current wife, Soon-Yi, Farrow's adopted daughter. At the same time he was involved in a sexual and romantic relationship with her mother, he was involved in a sexual relationship with her. It may have begun after she turned seventeen and therefore wasn't statutory rape under New York law, but given that he was a father figure -- given Farrow's divorce from Soon-Yi's adoptive father, Andre Previn, possibly her only father figure -- it was hella inappropriate. Put together with his sexual "grooming" of Dylan, it is nauseating. And the way Farrow found out -- from a photo of Soon-Yi's genitals Allen had in his living room -- shows his brazenness.

 

Also, notice that Dylan's brother feels compelled to defend her veracity. Her word alone -- consistent lo these many years -- is not enough. The family court decision is not enough. The DA's statement is not enough. Only a conviction would be enough, and even then people would feel sorry for the wasted talent.

 

Who is being protected here?

 

As an aside, this is also why I am leery about okaying incest between parents and adult children. Who's to say that the parent wasn't grooming the child sexually all along? Just because they're now adults doesn't mean there wasn't abuse and molestation earlier. I''ve also read about father/daughter relationships that started in adulthood that were ultimately destructive. (See the memoir by Kathryn Harris, The Kiss.) They have in common that the father was absent from their lives as children. While there are anecdotes about father/daughter relationships that are happy, that doesn't mean they will continue to be happy. It may be the case that they aren't happy or healthy in the long run, or that there's such a high risk that it's worth retaining legislation against it even when the parties are adults.

 

I haven't seen any descriptions of mother/son relationships, but they may have the same problems. One thing's for sure, they mess up the family dynamic. Once a parent is a lover, it's difficult to see them as an authority figure, and it changes the dynamic with regard to other family members.

 

Parent/child incest is best left as an erotic fantasy. In all cases, the line between voluntary incest and involuntary abuse is a thin one, especially when the incest begins before the age of majority. (That can also be true of sibling incest.)

 

I prefer to fall on the side of preventing abuse even if that criminalizes acts that some engage in freely.