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 5th February 2014, 06:31 PM   #321
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa USA
Posts: 12,131
Originally Posted by colander View Post
Oh, please. The words "brainwash" and "convince" have the same denotative meaning. "Brainwash" has a negative connotation and "convince" does not.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/brainwash

cf

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/convince

Nice try. Better luck next time!
__________________
"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 5th February 2014, 07:45 PM   #322
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 14,744
Some people are strangely blinded to the possibility that Woody Allen achieved all this fame and power in order to do what he always wanted: **** children.
__________________
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 5th February 2014, 08:06 PM   #323
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
Some people are strangely blinded to the possibility that Woody Allen achieved all this fame and power in order to do what he always wanted: **** children.
In fact, there's a possibility that everyone who's ever been famous and powerful have achieved their success for the sole purpose of molesting children, and most everyone of them got away with it. Yes, yes, I can see the truth now.
__________________
“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 5th February 2014, 08:11 PM   #324
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by Dissolution View Post
Let's all fight bigotry with more bigotry. That'll work.
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Do you really think that comment has value?

Are you trying to say that rich white men are never subject to injustice?

If not, what are you trying to say?
If there's one group of people who never seem to get a fair shake, it's rich white men. Not a week goes by when one of them doesn't go to Macy's only to be tackled by security on his way out. And stop and frisk is a real problem for the folks with yachts. So seriously, yeah, rich white people can see injustice, but far less than any other demographic in the world. The idea that if you're rich and white you start off with a headwind against you is stupid and offensive. Sorry if I hurt your delicate sensibilities with that.
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie 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 5th February 2014, 08:14 PM   #325
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,773
Originally Posted by colander View Post
Do you mean the investigation team that didn't even interview Dylan? Yes, very convincing, that.
Ummmmmm . . . no. You are mistaken. The lead investigator did not meet with Dylan but other team members met with her 9 times. That is completely normal but pissed off Mia Farrow's team of spin doctors. When he stated there was no basis to the accusations, that was the best they could muster, he hadn't even met with Dylan.

The report stated that Dylan only talked about her father's molesting her in relation to her mother losing her career to her father's movies. Now, how do you suppose they could say that without having met with her and talked with her about what happened?

Quote:
It's from the 1994 Vanity Fair article that has already been linked to multiple times and that, unsurprisingly, most Woody Allen defenders in this thread apparently haven't bothered to read.
Yeah, I read that. So, they interviewed the family and this either wasn't mentioned or was for whatever reasons discounted. Then it gets repeated in a Vanity Fair hack piece later on and you take it as gospel.
__________________
"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."

Last edited by qayak; 5th February 2014 at 09:03 PM.
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 5th February 2014, 08:14 PM   #326
Doghouse Reilly
Adrift on an uncharted sea
 
Doghouse Reilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,405
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
If there's one group of people who never seem to get a fair shake, it's rich white men. Not a week goes by when one of them doesn't go to Macy's only to be tackled by security on his way out. And stop and frisk is a real problem for the folks with yachts. So seriously, yeah, rich white people can see injustice, but far less than any other demographic in the world. The idea that if you're rich and white you start off with a headwind against you is stupid and offensive. Sorry if I hurt your delicate sensibilities with that.
The original poster didn't even say "rich". Someone just decided to add that in there to be even more self righteous.
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 5th February 2014, 08:29 PM   #327
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by Doghouse Reilly View Post
The original poster didn't even say "rich". Someone just decided to add that in there to be even more self righteous.
I was responding to this:

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.
So yeah, rich white men. The most victimized out-group in history.
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie 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 5th February 2014, 09:59 PM   #328
fuelair
Banned
 
fuelair's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 58,581
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
In fact, there's a possibility that everyone who's ever been famous and powerful have achieved their success for the sole purpose of molesting children, and most everyone of them got away with it. Yes, yes, I can see the truth now.
Well said - and don't think I've seen a post of yours before...... Person of few words, ehh!!
fuelair 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 5th February 2014, 10:59 PM   #329
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by Cleon View Post
It came up during the Golden Globes, when Allen was receiving a lifetime achievement award.

So to answer your question: Because Woody Allen got his lifetime achievement award recently, not 8 months ago, not 3 years, and not next year.

Er, but aren't the recipients of such awards for a given awards show announced well in advance of the ceremony?
__________________
"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 6th February 2014, 12:14 AM   #330
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
If there's one group of people who never seem to get a fair shake, it's rich white men. Not a week goes by when one of them doesn't go to Macy's only to be tackled by security on his way out. And stop and frisk is a real problem for the folks with yachts. So seriously, yeah, rich white people can see injustice, but far less than any other demographic in the world. The idea that if you're rich and white you start off with a headwind against you is stupid and offensive. Sorry if I hurt your delicate sensibilities with 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 6th February 2014, 12:15 AM   #331
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by Corsair 115 View Post
Er, but aren't the recipients of such awards for a given awards show announced well in advance of the ceremony?
Yes.
__________________
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 6th February 2014, 01:09 AM   #332
asydhouse
Master Poster
 
asydhouse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Swansea in the UK
Posts: 2,371
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
If there's one group of people who never seem to get a fair shake, it's rich white men. Not a week goes by when one of them doesn't go to Macy's only to be tackled by security on his way out. And stop and frisk is a real problem for the folks with yachts. So seriously, yeah, rich white people can see injustice, but far less than any other demographic in the world. The idea that if you're rich and white you start off with a headwind against you is stupid and offensive. Sorry if I hurt your delicate sensibilities with that.


So according to you it's perfectly okay to falsely accuse a rich white man of child rape?
asydhouse 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 6th February 2014, 01:12 AM   #333
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 20,896
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
If there's one group of people who never seem to get a fair shake, it's rich white men. Not a week goes by when one of them doesn't go to Macy's only to be tackled by security on his way out. And stop and frisk is a real problem for the folks with yachts. So seriously, yeah, rich white people can see injustice, but far less than any other demographic in the world. The idea that if you're rich and white you start off with a headwind against you is stupid and offensive. Sorry if I hurt your delicate sensibilities with that.
I'll notice you didn't answer the question.

How about you approach each case on it's merits, or is that too difficult?

my delicate sensibilities are just fine. I'm sorry if I made you think.
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 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 6th February 2014, 01:20 AM   #334
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 20,896
Originally Posted by asydhouse View Post
So according to you it's perfectly okay to falsely accuse a rich white man of child rape?
Yes, because other rich, white men have got away with (many) things in the past, it means that, until further notice, rich white men will not be entitled to due process and will immidiately be considered guilty of any and all crimes of which they were accused.

It's the only way to be sure



(Really the quality of some of the 'thinking' round here is genuinely stunning)
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 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 6th February 2014, 04:15 AM   #335
Morrigan
Crone of War
 
Morrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,262
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
Because we're talking about the possibility that she coached and/or brainwashed Dylan when she was a child.
"Possibility", as in, unsubstantiated claims. There's also a possibility that a shapeshifting alien took Allen's form when he molested Dylan, so both Dylan and Woody Allen are telling the truth! Let's all discuss this possibility as if it had merit. (Yes, I'm aware of the hyperbole, but the point stands.)

Quote:
The more one reads about Mia, the more apparent it becomes that she has...ummm...."issues" of her own. So yeah, very valid points.
No, not really.

Originally Posted by jiggeryqua View Post
But not so much about those who start talking about irrelevant, barely tangential things such as Woody Allen's unusual relationship with Soon-Yi or his mantlepiece or tissue box?
Sure, those too. Did you see me endorse those claims, or point out their pertinence? No? Then what are you on about?

Originally Posted by Vortigern99 View Post
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?
Because I don't have anything to say about them and/or consider them irrelevant (lack of vaginal injury doesn't mean no sexual abuse occurred, and seriously, a nanny's vague testimony is "salient" now? please), and only wanted to address a point in particular and shrug off the rest. Besides, most of those have been discussed in the thread already. Read Checkmite's posts, for instance.

Thanks for taking me off ignore, anyway.

Originally Posted by asydhouse View Post
Funny how you kept quiet about all the false allegations about Allen and his current wife (you know, that she was his adopted daughter etc) which are actually less relevant to Dylan's story than the influence of Mia Farrow on her children's thoughts about Woody Allen etc.
Uh, what? Someone said that Korean girl was his adopted daughter, and it was promptly refuted and disregarded. What the hell more do you want?
Morrigan 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 6th February 2014, 06:22 AM   #336
Zelenius
Muse
 
Zelenius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 908
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
In fact, there's a possibility that everyone who's ever been famous and powerful have achieved their success for the sole purpose of molesting children, and most everyone of them got away with it. Yes, yes, I can see the truth now.
Some right-wing nut-jobs actually believe a version of this, especially about the ultra-rich gay Jewish pedophile liberals of Hollywood. The gay Jewish conspiracy helps them get away with it. And to them gay = pedophile. Over 30 years ago in Annie Hall, Woody Allen himself even alludes to such crazies, though its more about the Jewish liberals of New York.

Of course, Woody isn't gay, so...

Last edited by Zelenius; 6th February 2014 at 06:30 AM.
Zelenius 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 6th February 2014, 06:26 AM   #337
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by Morrigan View Post
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer
Because we're talking about the possibility that she coached and/or brainwashed Dylan when she was a child.
"Possibility", as in, unsubstantiated claims.
Just as unsubstantiated as the molestation accusation. Wouldn't you agree and why not?
__________________
“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 6th February 2014, 06:49 AM   #338
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by Zelenius View Post
Of course, Woody isn't gay, so...
Hey, we don't know that! Let's not be blinded to the possibility that he's gay. Or at least bi-curious. It's a possibility.

Originally Posted by fuelair View Post
Well said - and don't think I've seen a post of yours before...... Person of few words, ehh!!
I'm mostly a lurker, but these threads are a guilty pleasure. They are the few rare exceptions where otherwise skeptical people take their skeptical goggles off for a while and see the world through the colors of emotion. Because they are emotive issues. And because there usually isn't enough evidence to form an opinion, but we really try to.
__________________
“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 6th February 2014, 06:51 AM   #339
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by Morrigan View Post
"Possibility", as in, unsubstantiated claims. There's also a possibility that a shapeshifting alien took Allen's form when he molested Dylan, so both Dylan and Woody Allen are telling the truth! Let's all discuss this possibility as if it had merit. (Yes, I'm aware of the hyperbole, but the point stands.)
Remember, denial is not just a river in Egypt.

Quote:
On April 20, 1993, a sworn statement was entered into evidence by Dr. John M. Leventhal, who headed the Yale-New Haven Hospital investigative team looking into the abuse charges. An article from the New York Times dated May 4, 1993, includes some interesting excerpts of their findings. As to why the team felt the charges didn’t hold water, Leventhal 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.”
That has to be embarrassing.
__________________
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 6th February 2014, 07:41 AM   #340
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,773
I don't know if it's been posted yet but here's the People Magazine article with Moses Farrow who was present and 15 years old at the time of the alleged incident in 1992.

http://www.people.com/people/article...783306,00.html

Quote:
The day in question, there were six or seven of us in the house. We were all in public rooms and no one, not my father or sister, was off in any private spaces.
__________________
"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 6th February 2014, 08:42 AM   #341
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
Yes, the argument that we need to help poor beleaguered rich white men is tired and put me to sleep as well.

What's funny is that I agree with you about Woody Allen.

But to suggest that his problems are worse because he's rich and white is so stupid that I'm surprised it was you who said it.
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie 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 6th February 2014, 08:50 AM   #342
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by asydhouse View Post
So according to you it's perfectly okay to falsely accuse a rich white man of child rape?
What? This is the World Champion of strawmen.
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie 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 6th February 2014, 08:53 AM   #343
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I'll notice you didn't answer the question.

How about you approach each case on it's merits, or is that too difficult?

my delicate sensibilities are just fine. I'm sorry if I made you think.
Think about what? That rich white men have it worse than the general population? Are you sure this is where you want to go? For the record, I'm on Woody's side on this. But what Scrut said was pretty damned stupid and I'm surprised he's getting such support on it. Perhaps it's not me who needs to do some extra thinking.
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie 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 6th February 2014, 08:56 AM   #344
Dissolution
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,306
Who claimed that rich white men have it worse than the general population, Unabogie?
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 6th February 2014, 08:57 AM   #345
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Some further details about the custody case ruling

http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/02/2...w-verdict.html

Judge Elliott Wilk really paints a picture of Woody as a terrible father.

Originally Posted by article
On the other hand, Justice Wilk portrayed Mr. Allen as devious, hurtful and unreliable, a father who did not know the names of his son's teachers -- or even which children shared which bedrooms in Ms. Farrow's apartment. Mr. Allen lived in a separate apartment on the other side of Central Park.

"Mr. Allen has demonstrated no parenting skills that would qualify him as an adequate custodian for Moses, Dylan or Satchel," the justice wrote. "His financial contributions to the children's support, his willingness to read to them, to tell them stories, to buy them presents and to oversee their breakfasts, do not compensate for his absence as a meaningful source of guidance and caring in their lives.

"These contributions," he continued, "do not excuse his evident lack of familiarity with the most basic details of their day-to-day existences."
And Mia the opposite:
Originally Posted by article
Justice Wilk, however, had few unkind words for Ms. Farrow, whom he commended as a caring and loving mother who had tried to protect her children from what he characterized as Mr. Allen's manipulativeness and insensitivity.
(my bolding)

Ok, so it's Woody who brainwashed the family. This is one crazy case.
I presently have no reason to discredit the opinion of judge Wilk. But as Morrigan already said, professionals can mess up big time. Was the judge biased or fair?

I wonder what other professionals testified.

The Yale-New Haven Hospital team apparently lost/destroyed(?) notes and weren't willing to individually testify in the court. What to make of this?
__________________
“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 6th February 2014, 08:59 AM   #346
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
But to suggest that his problems are worse because he's rich and white is so stupid that I'm surprised it was you who said it.
__________________
“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 6th February 2014, 09:00 AM   #347
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
I don't know if it's been posted yet but here's the People Magazine article with Moses Farrow who was present and 15 years old at the time of the alleged incident in 1992.

http://www.people.com/people/article...783306,00.html
Why do you defend wealthy white men and hate women?
__________________
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 6th February 2014, 09:01 AM   #348
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 20,896
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Think about what? That rich white men have it worse than the general population? Are you sure this is where you want to go? For the record, I'm on Woody's side on this. But what Scrut said was pretty damned stupid and I'm surprised he's getting such support on it. Perhaps it's not me who needs to do some extra thinking.

Where did I say they had it worse than the rest of the population. I'm just advocating due process for everyone, regardless of financial status, skin colour or sex.



This is the start of the exchange.

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 Unabogie View Post
Poor beleaguered rich white men.

Your comment reads as if you have no sympathy for someone simply because they are rich, male and white. I think their status shouldn't matter.

I may have missed your point, could you expand on the quoted section of yours above?
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 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 6th February 2014, 09:01 AM   #349
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
It was an idiotic statement, wasn't 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 6th February 2014, 09:05 AM   #350
Dissolution
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,306
Originally Posted by TeapotCavalry View Post
Ok, so it's Woody who brainwashed the family. This is one crazy case.
I presently have no reason to discredit the opinion of judge Wilk. But as Morrigan already said, professionals can mess up big time. Was the judge biased or fair?
Mia Farrow seems to have given two of her children the name Wilk in tribute to him, so she was obviously impressed.
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 6th February 2014, 09:17 AM   #351
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Where did I say they had it worse than the rest of the population. I'm just advocating due process for everyone, regardless of financial status, skin colour or sex.
I was never talking to you, so I'm not sure where I said that you said anything.
Quote:
Your comment reads as if you have no sympathy for someone simply because they are rich, male and white. I think their status shouldn't matter.
Of course. But that's not what he said. He said:

Quote:
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.
As if white men have it rougher than non whites, and that poor people have it rougher than rich people when they are accused? That's literally insane.

Quote:
I may have missed your point, could you expand on the quoted section of yours above?
Jeez, you guys seem to have reading comprehension problems here. Scrut made a dumb comment that rich white men endure extra scrutiny when accused of sex crimes, because they face more skepticism about their innocence than non-white, non-rich people.

And yet the statistics clearly show that poor black men are far more likely to be falsely convicted of rape than their white counterparts.

http://www.thecrimereport.org/news/a...ful-conviction

And if you have money? If you have money you're FAR better off than anyone else. It's stupid to assert otherwise. This is a fun tangent, but unless you feel compelled to throw further strawmen at me, there's not much else to say unless you want to start a new thread about race and sexual assault accusations.
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie 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 6th February 2014, 09:22 AM   #352
Dissolution
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,306
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Jeez, you guys seem to have reading comprehension problems here. Scrut made a dumb comment that rich white men endure extra scrutiny when accused of sex crimes, because they face more skepticism about their innocence than non-white, non-rich people.
Someone does appear to have reading comprehension problems, but unfortunately it's you, Unabogie.
Scrut was clearly referring to the Atheism + party line and not to society in general or the justice system.
I really have no idea how you missed that, as you've quoted it at least twice.
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 6th February 2014, 09:26 AM   #353
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by Dissolution View Post
Someone does appear to have reading comprehension problems, but unfortunately it's you, Unabogie.
Scrut was clearly referring to the Atheism + party line and not to society in general or the justice system.
I really have no idea how you missed that, as you've quoted it at least twice.
Yep. Seemed pretty obvious to most people.
__________________
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 6th February 2014, 09:28 AM   #354
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
It was an idiotic statement, wasn't it?
Seemingly.

Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
Quote:
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.
As if white men have it rougher than non whites, and that poor people have it rougher than rich people when they are accused? That's literally insane.
What?

You probably meant "rich people have it rougher than poor people"

But still, what?

How on earth do you read that into what was said?
__________________
“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 6th February 2014, 09:28 AM   #355
Unabogie
Philosopher
 
Unabogie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 9,692
Originally Posted by Dissolution View Post
Someone does appear to have reading comprehension problems, but unfortunately it's you, Unabogie.
Scrut was clearly referring to the Atheism + party line and not to society in general or the justice system.
I really have no idea how you missed that, as you've quoted it at least twice.
And by saying this, he was implying that we should pity the state of poor beleaguered rich white people who are so unfairly attacked by the "A+/JSW party". Which again, is so stupid that it earned him a slap. It's funny that his defenders have responded by accusing me of supporting a dual system of justice in which rich white men deserve no trial, or that I support some form of bigotry, when his original comment reeked of white privilege.

And it's especially funny since I support Woody Allen on this.
__________________
Cleek's Law: Today’s conservatism is the opposite of what liberals want today, updated daily.

"Palin must now be considered the future of the Republican Party." ~ Brainster
Unabogie 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 6th February 2014, 09:28 AM   #356
desertgal
Illuminator
 
desertgal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,198
Originally Posted by colander
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
No, we're supposed to look at the evidence and see which side is supported.

Oh, right . . . there was no evidence that supported child abuse.
Then what the hell do you call this?

Quote:
One summer day in Connecticut, when Dylan was four and Woody was applying suntan lotion to her nude body, he alarmed Mia’s mother, actress Maureen O’Sullivan, and sister Tisa Farrow when he began rubbing his finger in the crack between her buttocks. Mia grabbed the lotion out of his hand, and O’Sullivan asked, “How do you want to be remembered by your children?” “As a good father,” Woody answered. “Well, that’s interesting,” O’Sullivan replied. “It only lasted a few seconds, but it was definitely weird,” says Tisa Farrow.
Seems to me like there were indeed substantial indications that something was not quite right with this relationship.
I call it an unsubstantiated claim.

That doesn't strike you as odd? Three women-mothers all, presumably-allegedly watch a man do this, and all they do in response is take a bottle of lotion away from him (which, sure, that'll get him to stop what he was supposedly doing, uh-huh) and ask him how he wants to be remembered as a father?

Speaking as a mother, that seems to be a rather mild, and odd, reaction to a perverse action. If I were standing there watching my husband do the same to a daughter of ours, my reaction would definitely be more aggressive. I think other mothers here would say the same.

It doesn't ring true.
__________________
"It's obvious that you seem to be threatened by me for some reason and I find that extremely amusing." - Jodie
desertgal 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 6th February 2014, 09:38 AM   #357
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 20,896
Originally Posted by Dissolution View Post
Someone does appear to have reading comprehension problems, but unfortunately it's you, Unabogie.
Scrut was clearly referring to the Atheism + party line and not to society in general or the justice system.
I really have no idea how you missed that, as you've quoted it at least twice.
I was going to say that!
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 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 6th February 2014, 09:39 AM   #358
jiggeryqua
Illuminator
 
jiggeryqua's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 4,107
Originally Posted by Unabogie View Post
As if white men have it rougher than non whites, and that poor people have it rougher than rich people when they are accused? That's literally insane.
No, 'as if' rich white men were also people, who deserve to be protected from injustice despite your discriminatory designation of them (Skin colour? Gender? Does anybody still divide the world in those ways? That's insane.)

Of course, there are always two ways to reach equality. But if your proposal is that some groups need more injustice, to 'balance' things out, you've chosen the wrong way.
__________________
"What follows is ever closely linked to what precedes; it is not a procession of isolated events, merely obeying the laws of sequence, but a rational continuity." - Marcus Aurelius Antoninus
jiggeryqua 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 6th February 2014, 09:48 AM   #359
The Central Scrutinizer
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Central Scrutinizer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 53,060
Originally Posted by jiggeryqua View Post
No, 'as if' rich white men were also people, who deserve to be protected from injustice despite your discriminatory designation of them (Skin colour? Gender? Does anybody still divide the world in those ways? That's insane.)

Of course, there are always two ways to reach equality. But if your proposal is that some groups need more injustice, to 'balance' things out, you've chosen the wrong way.
It's a perverse hatred of the rich, but that's (TRIGGER WARNING! WEALTHY WHITE MAN SPORTS REFERENCE) par for the course in SJW-land.
__________________
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 6th February 2014, 10:39 AM   #360
TeapotCavalry
Master Poster
 
TeapotCavalry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Estonia
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by The Central Scrutinizer View Post
It's a perverse hatred of the rich, but that's (TRIGGER WARNING! WEALTHY WHITE MAN SPORTS REFERENCE) par for the course in SJW-land.
Dammit, you triggered all those privileged golfing memories I don't have.
__________________
“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
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 03:31 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.