IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags dylan farrow , mia farrow , sexual misconduct charges , woody allen

Reply
Old 3rd February 2014, 08:45 PM   #201
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 27,241
Originally Posted by jiggeryqua View Post
Nor does "suspicion of 'creepy' people who are probably guilty of all sorts of things" equal skeptically demanding evidence, which is what I posted and you quoted.
I don't dispute that; but then, nobody claimed it did. You stated that the "suspicious" people were arguing with people who were "skeptically demanding evidence". I am correcting that statement, because it's inaccurate; the "suspicious" people are arguing with individuals positively asserting that the adult accuser was coached as a kid and made by her mother to believe something happened which didn't.

Originally Posted by jiggeryqua View Post
I thought I'd seen report of relatively informed opinions from connected persons contemporaneous with the initial allegations that led to repetition of claims (rather than the somewhat loaded term 'insinuations', which surely is more appropriate in its inate contemptuousness here as a synonym for 'allegations') that 'the girl' (who probably has a name and is certainly an individual person rather than a gender) was coached (I believe that was actually the word used).
You saw a selected partial quote from a connected person. To wit: a possibility, described directly by one of the doctors as one of a set of "hypotheses", was that coaching had occurred. You will note that an "hypothesis", scientifically-speaking, is an "educated guess" which experimental analysis has not yet established as true or false. The fact that more than one hypothesis is mentioned should even serve to outline the fact that no conclusion had been formed. Despite this, a quick read-through of the thread will show you that this single hypothesis is being promoted here using terms the quoted individual himself never used, such as "most likely", "conclusive", being "pointed to" by "the evidence", that the doctor "claimed there had been coaching" (as you have done above), and so forth, to the arbitrary exclusion of even other hypotheses the doctor mentioned in the same quote. You will also note that the mother's act of asking her daughter what happened to her and attempting to record the answers on videotape, is likewise unapologetically depicted as "coaching", and further by extension that a witness describing the creation of the videotape thereby "claimed" that "coaching" had taken place; all vestiges of merely pointing out that it was a problematic method that left open the possibility coaching may have occurred lately thrown to the winds.

Originally Posted by jiggeryqua View Post
The notion of brainwashing, IIRC, came from one of the siblings and ought to be accorded the same weight, pro tem, as the utterings of any other sibling ('The girl', for example).
It cannot be; first of all, because the alleged victim is a claimant, whereas the sibling who allegedly used the word "brainwashing" was never alleged to have been a part of or present for the claimed crimes, making his opinion irrelevant; and second, because even the single-word quote "brainwashed" itself is presented entirely without context. It's not known whether it's meant to apply to the accusation of Ms. Farrow, or to the mother's attitude toward Allen, or what.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 09:14 PM   #202
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
Originally Posted by Cool Hand Luke View Post
.
Sorry John.

That was an "are you kidding (expresses common disbelief that people are still taking them seriously)" and not a "are you kidding (blatantly trying to be confrontational)".

Sorry, gotta either stop doing that or figure out which emoticon is most appropriate to distinguish between the two.

Mea culpa.
OK. I've done that meself.
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 09:16 PM   #203
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
Yeah, that's absolutely ridiculous. There is no correlation whatsoever between a man being interested in young women (like, 19 or 21) and being a child molester. I can't even believe someone would try to imply that dating a young woman like that means it's easier to believe that Woody Allen molested his daughter.

Maybe you have some stats to back-up that sarcasm?
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 09:28 PM   #204
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,405
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
Maybe you have some stats to back-up that sarcasm?
What sarcasm? There was none in my post.

And are you seriously asking me for stats to prove a negative? That's not how it works. Do you have stats showing a correlation between dating younger women and being a child molester?

Last edited by Doghouse Reilly; 3rd February 2014 at 09:49 PM.
Doghouse Reilly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 09:35 PM   #205
Vortigern99
Sorcerer Supreme
 
Vortigern99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Austin, Texas
Posts: 7,905
Originally Posted by Morrigan View Post
I snipped the rest of the post because I was laughing at the lie detector part specifically. You listed that as a "salient point", which is all kinds of LOLs. Anyone who takes a lie detector test seriously is painfully ignorant at best.
You make a fair point. I was uneducated about polygraphs. That deficit on my part has now been rectified.

That said, I can't help but notice you've continued to ignore the several other points I posted, factual points which you've decided not to rebut or even acknowledge as existing. Why is that? If your position is so sound, one might think it would be a simple matter to counter these statements of fact.

Here they are again, for your convenience:
On the stand, Allen’s attorney asked Mia about the second doctor’s findings: “There was no evidence of injury to the anal or vaginal area [of Dylan Farrow], is that correct?” Farrow answered, “Yes.”

... Kristie Groteke, another nanny. “She told me that she felt guilty allowing Ms. Farrow to say those things about Mr. Allen. (Groteke) said the day Mr. Allen spent with the kids, she did not have Dylan out of her sight for longer than five minutes. She did not remember Dylan being without her underwear.”

... As to why the team felt the charges didn’t hold water, [Dr. John M. Leventhal, who headed the Yale-New Haven Hospital investigative team looking into the abuse charges] states: “We had two hypotheses: one, that these were statements made by an emotionally disturbed child and then became fixed in her mind. And the other hypothesis was that she was coached or influenced by her mother. We did not come to a firm conclusion. We think that it was probably a combination.”

... He also said the child’s accounts had “a rehearsed quality.” At one point, she told him, “I like to cheat on my stories.” The sworn statement further concludes: “Even before the claim of abuse was made last August, the view of Mr. Allen as an evil and awful and terrible man permeated the household. ... It’s quite possible —as a matter of fact, we think it’s medically probable—that (Dylan) stuck to that story over time because of the intense relationship she had with her mother.”
__________________
"I'm 'willing to admit' any fact that can be shown to be evidential and certain." -- Vortigern99

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace." -- Jimi Hendrix
Vortigern99 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 10:06 PM   #206
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
For those wondering why this (letter to NYTimes, interview with Variety, etc) is coming back around after 20 years....http://variety.com/2014/tv/news/msnb...me-1201072724/

Quote:
The network, which has made several prominent shuffles to its daytime and early evening schedules in recent weeks, said it would launch (Ronan) Farrow in an hour-long program starting February 24 at 1 p.m.
Well, well, well. Imagine that.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 10:08 PM   #207
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
What sarcasm? There was none in my post.

And are you seriously asking me for stats to prove a negative? That's not how it works. Do you have stats showing a correlation between dating younger women and being a child molester?
If you weren't being sarcastic, then I apologize for the false accusation. It's hard to tell sarcasm from religious fervor at times.
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 10:08 PM   #208
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Oh, and for the Mia Farrow apologists, I'll just leave this here.

Quote:
(Stacey) Nelkin shared details of her own experiences getting caught in between Allen and Farrow, in which the latter's camp encouraged her to turn on her former lover:

"[They] asked if I would testify and admit that I was 15 when we dated, and I said 'no,' because I was not 15. I was 17, 18 and 19, and to me there's a big distinction between that, and I think they were looking for the fact that, you know, 15 is jail bait. Seventeen is a very different story," said Nelkin, who first met Allen on the set of the film “Manhattan." "I would not go along with that, so I think she was trying to create a pattern of, this is a man who looks for young girls and seduces them unwittingly and that's not true. I was very, very much willing to be dating him, I was thrilled."
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 10:13 PM   #209
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
Oh, and for the Mia Farrow apologists, I'll just leave this here.
That never happened.
__________________
"Sufficiently advanced malice is indistinguishable from incompetence. = godless Dave
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 10:20 PM   #210
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,405
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
If you weren't being sarcastic, then I apologize for the false accusation. It's hard to tell sarcasm from religious fervor at times.
Ha! I understand now. I thought you were disagreeing with me. No apology necessary.
Doghouse Reilly is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 10:20 PM   #211
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,302
There wasn't much need to wonder, as she explained in the letter that it was because of the awards ceremony.

If you are implying that this is all for a ratings bump (including mental health treatment last year, but I'm sure she is lying about that to) for her brother, well, that sounds highly implausible. I think that there is no evidence of her recanting in all this time (that has shown up) at least implies that she believes her claims.
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd February 2014, 11:09 PM   #212
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,773
Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
There wasn't much need to wonder, as she explained in the letter that it was because of the awards ceremony.

If you are implying that this is all for a ratings bump (including mental health treatment last year, but I'm sure she is lying about that to) for her brother, well, that sounds highly implausible. I think that there is no evidence of her recanting in all this time (that has shown up) at least implies that she believes her claims.
Why do you suppose she called out Blanchette, Baldwin, Keaton and Stone but not her own mother who also supported Allen in this awards ceremony?
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 03:19 AM   #213
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 8,900
Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
If you are implying that this is all for a ratings bump (including mental health treatment last year, but I'm sure she is lying about that to) for her brother, well, that sounds highly implausible.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...se-allegations

"The Vanity Fair piece effectively launched Ronan. Overnight he went from unknown to celebrity, shortly hired by MSNBC. Two weeks ago, he was given a permanent spot on the cable news network's schedule. He has, I am reliably told, promised a grateful MSNBC that his public fight with Allen is far from over."
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 06:06 AM   #214
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,302
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...se-allegations

"The Vanity Fair piece effectively launched Ronan. Overnight he went from unknown to celebrity, shortly hired by MSNBC. Two weeks ago, he was given a permanent spot on the cable news network's schedule. He has, I am reliably told, promised a grateful MSNBC that his public fight with Allen is far from over."
So a letter three days ago launched his career two weeks ago. Interesting.
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 07:33 AM   #215
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 8,900
Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
So a letter three days ago launched his career two weeks ago. Interesting.
What letter? The Vanity Fair piece is from October.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 07:53 AM   #216
A'isha
Miss Schoolteacher
 
A'isha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Birmingham, AL
Posts: 15,221
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
What letter? The Vanity Fair piece is from October.
The article you quoted has a link to another article where it says "the Vanity Fair piece effectively launched Ronan". And yet, when you actually read that article it links to, it says

Quote:
Last summer, when he got the call from MSNBC, Farrow was living in a charmingly musty room at Magdalen College, Oxford. He had left a job at the State Department for a Rhodes Scholarship, studying politics and international relations. Farrow assumed MSNBC wanted him to make appearances as a talking head on their shows. He had written articles decrying what he saw as the American government's obsession with secrecy and the partisan tenor of the Congressional hearings on Benghazi, and had been invited to talk about them on television. But Phil Griffin, the president of the network, had other ideas. He'd seen clips of Farrow giving interviews and speeches and was impressed. "I started following him on Twitter," he told me recently, "and loved the way he talked about things." When Farrow was in New York, the two sat down for a chat. "Within 20 minutes I wanted to hire him," Griffin says. "He's got it.
How can an article published in October have motivated the president of MSNBC to start looking at his television appearances and written pieces and be impressed enough to call him for a job the summer before?

Was time travel involved?
__________________
When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left I buy food and clothes - Desiderius Erasmus

"Does [A'isha] want to end up in a gas chamber, I wonder? Because this is where the whole thing will end" - McHrozni
A'isha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 07:54 AM   #217
Dissolution
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,306
Originally Posted by bumlet5 View Post
This guy put my brain into words.

In my mind, the fact that he started dating a young woman when she was around 19 and he was 56 hits pretty hard on the creepy factor. The fact that this young woman was the adopted daughter of the woman he was in a 12 year relationship with seriously ups the creepy factor. Nothing illegal, but seriously creepy.

With these FACTS about him making him suuuuuuper creepy, it's not that much of a stretch to think that he actually molested his daughter. I do tend to believe the victim in these types of situations because I have compassion for people who have been through these things because reasons.
I'm sorry, but that article basically says that anyone who's accused of rape is probably guilty and that any rape accusation must be assumed to be correct.
I can't go along with that.

Do I find it hard to relate to people that have romantic attachments to someone where there's a massive age difference? Yes.
I don't think that people that enter into relationships that wouldn't appeal to me should be treated differently, though.
That way lies bigotry, I'm afraid.
Dissolution is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 08:18 AM   #218
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by Dissolution View Post
I'm sorry, but that article basically says that anyone who's accused of rape is probably guilty and that any rape accusation must be assumed to be correct.
That's the A+ SJW party line. All accusations of rape/molestation against white men are to automatically be believed. Even more so if they are wealthy.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 08:18 AM   #219
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by bumlet5 View Post
Originally Posted by article
<snip>But “he said, she said” doesn’t resolve to “let’s start by assume she’s lying,” except in a rape culture, and if you are presuming his innocence by presuming her mendacity, you are rape cultured.

<snip>

His presumption of innocence can only be built on the presumption that her words have no credibility<snip>
lolwut? This guys doesn't seem to get the concept of burden of proof. That's the classic A+/SJW thing to assume every accusation is automagically true, because doing otherwise is rape culture.
It's a painful read.
__________________
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens.
TeapotCavalry is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 08:59 AM   #220
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
As a show of support for Woody, I've got Blue Jasmine on the way to my house for tomorrow. And I'm going to enjoy it.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 09:31 AM   #221
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,302
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
What letter? The Vanity Fair piece is from October.
The one that started this thread. Do you think she is conspiring to help her brother's career?
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 09:53 AM   #222
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,302
Originally Posted by Dissolution View Post
I'm sorry, but that article basically says that anyone who's accused of rape is probably guilty and that any rape accusation must be assumed to be correct.
I can't go along with that.

Do I find it hard to relate to people that have romantic attachments to someone where there's a massive age difference? Yes.
I don't think that people that enter into relationships that wouldn't appeal to me should be treated differently, though.
That way lies bigotry, I'm afraid.
Basically, you are making a strawman.
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 09:54 AM   #223
Dissolution
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,306
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
That's the A+ SJW party line. All accusations of rape/molestation against white men are to automatically be believed. Even more so if they are wealthy.
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
lolwut? This guys doesn't seem to get the concept of burden of proof. That's the classic A+/SJW thing to assume every accusation is automagically true, because doing otherwise is rape culture.
It's a painful read.
Rather well summed up by the first line of the first comment on it, I feel:

Originally Posted by Sarah Horrocks
That makes no kind of sense at all.
Dissolution is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 09:55 AM   #224
Dissolution
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,306
Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
Basically, you are making a strawman.
And because you're accusing me of making a strawman and we're not in court it's ok and you're probably right?
Is that how this works?

Please explain how I've made any kind of strawman.
Dissolution is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 10:05 AM   #225
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,302
Originally Posted by Dissolution View Post
And because you're accusing me of making a strawman and we're not in court it's ok
Yes. We shouldn't bind ourselves by the rules of criminal court in everyday life. Actually, I would argue it would be impossible.

Quote:
and you're probably right?
Is that how this works?
Since I accused your summation of being a straw man, it would be nonsensical for me to agree with it.

Quote:
Please explain how I've made any kind of strawman.
I searched the article in vain for your silly attributions. Perhaps you should have justified them, but I guess we are not in court and that is okay.
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 10:15 AM   #226
Dissolution
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,306
Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
Yes. We shouldn't bind ourselves by the rules of criminal court in everyday life. Actually, I would argue it would be impossible.
Didn't say that we should.

Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
Since I accused your summation of being a straw man, it would be nonsensical for me to agree with it.
I was making a comparison between your apparent thinking on the matter and that of the article.
Apparently you missed it.

Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
I searched the article in vain for your silly attributions. Perhaps you should have justified them, but I guess we are not in court and that is okay.
You obviously didn't search very hard, then. In fact you must've tried pretty damn hard not to notice the entire theme of the article.
Dissolution is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 10:26 AM   #227
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by Dissolution View Post
Please explain how I've made any kind of strawman.
It's a strawman because you don't want Woody Allen thrown in prison without a trial. Don't you get it?
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 10:32 AM   #228
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
Originally Posted by Dissolution
And because you're accusing me of making a strawman and we're not in court it's ok
Yes. We shouldn't bind ourselves by the rules of criminal court in everyday life. Actually, I would argue it would be impossible.
Now who's making a straw man?

I don't think we should bind our everyday judgement with the rules of criminal court, but that doesn't give us a free pass to assume guilt EDIT: without evidence (as suggested in that blog/article with a very tortured logic). That's a very dangerous road to go down. It doesn't make it ok just because we're not in court.
__________________
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” – Christopher Hitchens.

Last edited by TeapotCavalry; 4th February 2014 at 11:59 AM. Reason: the evidence part was unnecessary
TeapotCavalry is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 11:47 AM   #229
ABC10
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 1,038
I think this accusation is nonsense and unreliable. Now, she wants to tar Woody?
ABC10 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 12:17 PM   #230
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 14,744
Originally Posted by bumlet5 View Post
From the article:
Quote:
If you are saying things like “We can’t really know what happened” and extra-specially pleading on behalf of the extra-special Woody Allen, then you are saying that his innocence is more presumptive than hers. You are saying that he is on trial, not her: he deserves judicial safeguards in the court of public opinion, but she does not.

The damnably difficult thing about all of this, of course, is that you can’t presume that both are innocent at the same time.
This is an abuse of language. Allen's defenders are saying the accuser is, in all likelihood, innocently mistaken. It goes back to the ol' patronizing line, "I believe that you believe it." Another way of framing an apparent double-standard: If Allen's not telling the truth, then he's a monster. If the accuser is not telling the truth, then she's still a victim.

Earlier someone said Allen had forthcoming response to the blog... so, where is it?
__________________
Cain: Don't be a homo.
Diablo: What's that supposed to mean?
Cain: It's a heteronormative remark meant to be taken at face-value.
Diablo: You're a lousy bigot. Apologise and withdraw that remark.
Cain: Nah.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 01:34 PM   #231
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,317
The extract quoted by Cain seems to imply that we are compelled to believe one or the other story, or some story. Why? Why can't we just take the position that the whole thing is a sad mess and refuse to be pressured into conclusions about any of the people involved? That isn't believing Woody Allen and disbelieving her. I don't know him or her. Where is the compelling need to choose one side or the other?

Different people who we equally don't know have reached opposing views based on far more knowledge of the case than we have and better knowledge of the people involved. Are we in a better position to reach a judgement with the information we have, originating in large part from people who have agendas and viewpoints to push?

I really don't see on what basis, unless one actually knows the people involved and/or has more access to the details of the case than we have, one could make a decision on this unless it's based on ideology or emotion.
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 01:37 PM   #232
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
This is an abuse of language. Allen's defenders are saying the accuser is, in all likelihood, innocently mistaken. It goes back to the ol' patronizing line, "I believe that you believe it." Another way of framing an apparent double-standard: If Allen's not telling the truth, then he's a monster. If the accuser is not telling the truth, then she's still a victim.
Perfect example of this was the other night when Piers Morgan had Allen Dershowitz on (no relation). He was Mia's lawyer 20 years ago when these allegations came up the first time. He correctly noted that no one knows what happened, because no one (on the show) was there. Yet, for the rest of the interview, he kept referring to Dylan as a "victim". In order for there to be a victim, we have to have a crime. Even though he said no one knows what happened, which kind of infers that no one knows if there was a crime. Odd.

Of course, it could also be said that she was a victim of being raised by Mia Farrow.
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer

Last edited by The Central Scrutinizer; 4th February 2014 at 01:51 PM.
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 01:54 PM   #233
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,773
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
As a show of support for Woody, I've got Blue Jasmine on the way to my house for tomorrow. And I'm going to enjoy it.
Saw it in the theatre first week out. Great show! The funny thing about Allen's movies is that a lot of women get Academy Award nods from them. Wanna know why go many actresses disregard the rumours?
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 01:59 PM   #234
shuttlt
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 7,317
I found this page with an old picture of the house all this is supposed to have taken place in:
mia-farrow-house
shuttlt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 02:07 PM   #235
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
I found this page with an old picture of the house all this is supposed to have taken place in:
mia-farrow-house
Where's the "attic" where the crime is alleged to have occurred?
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 02:24 PM   #236
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
The extract quoted by Cain seems to imply that we are compelled to believe one or the other story, or some story. Why? Why can't we just take the position that the whole thing is a sad mess and refuse to be pressured into conclusions about any of the people involved? That isn't believing Woody Allen and disbelieving her. I don't know him or her. Where is the compelling need to choose one side or the other?

Different people who we equally don't know have reached opposing views based on far more knowledge of the case than we have and better knowledge of the people involved. Are we in a better position to reach a judgement with the information we have, originating in large part from people who have agendas and viewpoints to push?

I really don't see on what basis, unless one actually knows the people involved and/or has more access to the details of the case than we have, one could make a decision on this unless it's based on ideology or emotion.
Exactly.

This is a sequel of the recent SJW crusade, just with a different cast:

Woody Allen = Michael Shermer
Mia Farrow = PZ Myers
Dylan Farrow = ?????? (Shermer's unnamed "victim")
__________________
If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

Lupus is Lupus tor central scrutineezer
The Central Scrutinizer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 03:42 PM   #237
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by Dissolution View Post
Do I find it hard to relate to people that have romantic attachments to someone where there's a massive age difference? Yes.

A sidebar, undoubtedly, but an interesting question to me nonetheless: What constitutes a "massive age difference"? Twenty years? Thirty years? Does relative ago play a role in the "massive" assessment? That is, is a 50-year-old with a 25-year-old worse than a 65-year-old with a 40-year-old?

I expect there may be some interesting social attitudes to be found in answers to such queries...
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 07:07 PM   #238
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,773
Originally Posted by Corsair 115 View Post
A sidebar, undoubtedly, but an interesting question to me nonetheless: What constitutes a "massive age difference"? Twenty years? Thirty years? Does relative ago play a role in the "massive" assessment? That is, is a 50-year-old with a 25-year-old worse than a 65-year-old with a 40-year-old?

I expect there may be some interesting social attitudes to be found in answers to such queries...
Well, my wife's friend was 50 years old and was dating two men, a 65 year old and a 25 year old. Her advice to my wife . . . "If you have a choice between a 65 year old and a 25 year old, take the 25 year old. They're more fun to hang out with and they can **** all night!"

When I was 34, I dated a 20 year old. When I was 15 I had sex with a 35 year old. Both were awesome. Age is just a number.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 07:14 PM   #239
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,302
Originally Posted by shuttlt View Post
The extract quoted by Cain seems to imply that we are compelled to believe one or the other story, or some story. Why? Why can't we just take the position that the whole thing is a sad mess and refuse to be pressured into conclusions about any of the people involved? That isn't believing Woody Allen and disbelieving her. I don't know him or her. Where is the compelling need to choose one side or the other?

Different people who we equally don't know have reached opposing views based on far more knowledge of the case than we have and better knowledge of the people involved. Are we in a better position to reach a judgement with the information we have, originating in large part from people who have agendas and viewpoints to push?

I really don't see on what basis, unless one actually knows the people involved and/or has more access to the details of the case than we have, one could make a decision on this unless it's based on ideology or emotion.
The letter asking us as movie fans/critics/etc. to not support a child molester. We have to reach a judgement when it comes to interacting with him and his work. It certainly isn't limited between two extremes, but this philosophic denial just doesn't hold water.
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th February 2014, 08:14 PM   #240
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,773
Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
The letter asking us as movie fans/critics/etc. to not support a child molester. We have to reach a judgement when it comes to interacting with him and his work. It certainly isn't limited between two extremes, but this philosophic denial just doesn't hold water.
No, the letter attempted to shame actors and movie goers into shunning a man who quite probably did nothing wrong.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:24 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.