The Dylan Farrow Effect in Full Force in Personal Essays

I know that I've written a personal essay before about the breaking news of Dylan Farrow's letter, verbally expressing how her adoptive father, Woody Allen, sexually molested her at the age of seven. At the time, the public only had accessed to her past information in how Allen and Mia Farrow went to court for custody of their children...and how Dylan accused her adoptive father of molesting her at age seven.

During that time when I wrote the first essay about this, we (the public) had only accessed to Dylan's letter and the past information about Allen and Mia Farrow's custody battle....and how Allen was accused of molesting Dylan. Yet, now, we have many other players who have joined this story: her adoptive brother, Moses Farrow, who have sided with Woody Allen. Now, we actually have Woody Allen who has pinned a letter in the New York Times opinion section. And we have Dylan's response again defending her truths in the Hollywood Reporter against Allen's opinion piece.

Why I am writing about this again? It is because, again, I want to bring awareness. I understand for those who are on Woody Allen's side, especially those who have been accused of a crime. Especially those who have committed a crime that were innocent. The justice system we've been raised on sends us the message that one must be proven guilty. Cold hard guilty before a jury of his/her peers sentences them with a punishment. Yet, I empathized with that. That's one reason I am not for the death penalty. Do I think that guilty criminals should be punished? Yes, they should. However, there are some individuals who are in prison who have been wrongly accused of a crime.

In this situation, Allen has been "exonerated" of his crime since 1992. One could called his punishment in not having custody of Dylan and Ronan Farrow. With what started with Ronan and Mia Farrow commenting on Allen molesting his seven year old adoptive daughter concerning him winning the Golden Globe lifetime achievement award from Dylan Farrow actually commenting on what happened herself, I believe the dialogue needs to still be going.

People who have been sexually, physically, mentally, and emotionally abused live with those throbbing scars everyday. Even with therapy on how to live with the abuse, it still is a low pulsating pain they have to live with. I have never been extensively abuse; yes, I've experienced emotional and mental abuse from a few people, but it was not chronic abuse. But the abuse that was inflicted on me, well, I will say that it affected my life. It used to be very difficult for me to sometimes trust people or accept people because I was not trusted and accepted in other people's eyes. Does this make some of these people evil? No, they just have bad or awful behavioral patterns that tend to hurt people.

How does this make Woody Allen different from what I am describing? Well, I think that his New York Times opinion piece says it all about what type of person he is in this firestorm situation. In an article, from the Women's HuffingPost, by by Laura Duca, her close reading of Allen's written opinion piece is stunning. I want to start with her last commentary, summarizing and analyzing her view on Allen's piece:

"No one can ever truly know what happened in the attic besides Dylan Farrow and Woody Allen, but with this unabashedly arrogant defense against her claims, Allen wholly fails to treat his daughter as more than a mere pawn used to further a plot against him. He defiantly refuses to argue logically against her allegations in favor of unfounded personal attacks that ultimately come off as petty and no less vitriolic than he endeavors to paint Mia Farrow. He positions Mia as the aggressor, in claiming she is responsible for coaching Dylan into believing her experience was a reality, but then further robs Dylan's right to experience anguish over the incident (real or coerced), by questioning whether her speaking out was ever "really a necessity" in the first place. At best, Woody Allen is an arrogantly unsympathetic yet innocent man. At worst, he is a monster, who sexually abused his daughter and feels he only needs to respond by painting her mother as the cause of two decade's pain." ("A Close Reading on Woody Allen's New York Times Piece: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lauren-duca/woody-allen-dylan-farrowb4749664.html?ir=Women).

What stands out to me in Allen's piece is that he is accusing Mia Farrow of how she is responsible for poisoning Dylan against him. From my standpoint, he is trying to be clever and not further "traumatize" Dylan by actually confronting her letter directly. Now, some of you will say...Sophia, that indicates he cares."

Well, I am sorry, and you guys are going to have to respectfully agree to disagree with me, but I believe that is pure horseshit. More than ever, Allen should have kept his mouth shut. Just like I suspect how he "seduce' Dylan Farrow, he is using his New York Times piece to once again "seduce" the public reading audience by laying it into Mia Farrow, humiliating her...and putting her character on trial instead of writing a letter pleading with his daughter not to accuse him of a crime he thinks she misunderstands.

Anyone who bashes their ex and not goes directly to the source who has accused him of molesting or inflicting painful harm on them...is highly suspicious. Along with Duca, I agree that Allen does little to try to prove that he is INNOCENT for what he has done. If you know anything about molesters, they love to seduce people. They are charming. What they also will do is, if they are clever and smart enough, put the blame on someone else if they are called out in public. Usually, they will say that the child they are victimizing is wrong. They don't know what they are talking about. In this situation, Allen, it appears to me, is being quite clever in how he frames his response.

Allen is pretty damn smart all. Think about it. He is not going outright call out Dylan Farrow for lying about his character and his actions. If he directly confronts her and says that she is mistaken, he creates an uproar with fans and critics who support Dylan's claims that her father sexually abused her. So, what does he do?

He takes the attention away from Dylan...ignoring her claims and her voice and comes back with verbal assault on Mia Farrow full force. Look at how he begins his defense:

"TWENTY-ONE years ago, when I first heard Mia Farrow had accused me of child molestation, I found the idea so ludicrous I didn’t give it a second thought. We were involved in a terribly acrimonious breakup, with great enmity between us and a custody battle slowly gathering energy. The self-serving transparency of her malevolence seemed so obvious I didn’t even hire a lawyer to defend myself. It was my show business attorney who told me she was bringing the accusation to the police and I would need a criminal lawyer" (Woody Allen Speaks Out: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/09/opinion/sunday/woody-allen-speaks-out.html?hp&rref=opinion&_r=0).

The way that Allen constructs his introduction pretty much dismisses Dylan's own letter by saying that "Twenty-one years ago, when I first heard Mia Farrow had accused me of child molestation, I found the idea so ludicrous I didn't give it a second thought."

Yes, Mia Farrow (and Ronan Farrrow) did bring up that they were giving a lifetime achievement award to Allen who molested a seven year old Dylan Farrow. However, that's not all to the story, either. Dylan actually, after the firestorm hit, submitted a letter to New York Times blogger, Nicholas Kristof, to publish her response. Okay, if it was just Mia and Ronan with their gripes, I can understand that them being out of turn with their comments. Yet, a young woman who hasn't said anything for over two decades, writes a letter stating that she was sexually molested by her adoptive father? Come on...and let me tell you, it doesn't help that Woody Allen has a quirky reputation, either...one that involves seeing very young girls. A commenter pointed out to me that marrying a very young woman who is beyond the legal age is quite different than molesting a seven year old.

I agree; it is different unless you are a fifty-six year old man who is creeping with and sleeping with your girlfriend's adoptive daughter--your girlfriend that you are still involved with. I look at an entire picture before I standby my educated assessment of them. I find that, along with the recent information that has came to light, it would not be far stretch of an educated guess that Woody Allen has molested his adoptive daughter.

And let's look how Allen could fit this patten:

"Rather than appearing to be “monsters,” perpetrators usually try to be very charming and friendly. After gaining widespread trust, over time, some eventually even head nonprofit organizations of various kinds dealing with youth, giving the molesters not only easy access but also free rein.

Child molesters tend to rationalize their sexual interests and validate their behavior. They tend to show an excessive interest in children, and often seduce children with attention, affection and gifts. They lie and manipulate, typically very skillfully.

It is normal for children to learn early on that their survival depends on adults. Besides fulfilling the emotional and physical needs of children, adults are bigger and stronger. Children are instructed to respect and obey adults, but the exceptions to this need to be clearly taught as well.

Teen/adult child molesters exploit their size and status to influence and control a child’s behavior, enticing the child into sexual activity. Clever and experienced child molesters lower a child’s inhibitions by gradually seducing them, easily exploiting a child’s natural curiosity and the lack of prevention education that a particular child may have" (from Things You Need to Know about Child Molesters: http://www.chabad.org/theJewishWoman/article_cdo/aid/1707466/jewish/Things-You-Need-to-Know-About-Child-Molesters.htm).

Child molesters groom their victims. They also have predatorial instincts in how to hone in our children who are lonely, quiet, sad, etc. They know these children may not be getting the type of attention that they should at home. So, they gain their trust by being the "special adult friend" and paying intense attention to them. Child molesters ARE NOT the boogeymen or the Wicked Witch of the West, either. They are people who are your next door neighbors. They work full time jobs. They are successful people. Highly successful people like Woody Allen.

Is it hard to believe for some of us that Allen could do this? As I said in my essay prior, Allen has created and contributed to film cultural history in a very significant and impactful and meaningful way. His films are significant in how we look at men and women. However, to me, at least, he fits the profile of a child molester in this case. Can I not say that his New York Times piece communicates that he looks guiltier and guiltier? Of course, no one should be condemned for a crime unless there's evidence, but for those of us who have been seduced by child molesters, we know all too well they will do ANYTHING to admit that they aren't a predator.

Most people would say that Allen is the normal "quirky" successful guy. He has a wife and two kids. They live a good life. Allen is still being creative with his works. However, if you read Corey Feldman's memoir, Coreography, you see how some adults act in Hollywood concerning kids. From adult children's chaperones...and from even big industry names, Feldman hints around to that there are many pedophiles in that business. It is not hard for me to imagine Allen being one of them. Some of his personal decisions he has made in his life and what has been coming to light, doesn't make him look less guilty in my eyes. If anything, my antenna is standing straight up that he is looking more guilty than innocent.

As for Mia Farrow allowing him to use clips of her in his films for his lifetime achievement award presenation, I have to honestly say I don't know what she was thinking. Allen uses that example against her in his defense, but it is pretty weak on his side when he starts off his argument attacking Farrow instead of addressing his daughter and voicing his concerns to her in his opinion piece. Mia gets more mentioned than Dylan concerning the sexual abuse allegations. Anyway, it would have made more sense if Mia said no to the clips instead of allowing the clips to be played to honor Allen. So, yes, I do want to know why she said yes. Did she want to be honored in her work even though Allen has his scent all over it? To me, if I was in her position, I would tell them hell no you cannot use them because he molested my daughter. You hope she has a good explanation for that.

Other than that, again, Allen is looking increasingly guilty to me. And Dylan Farrow has not let up her stance, either. After Allen's opinion piece was published in the New York Times, Dylan voiced her opinion again in The Hollywood Reporter. She pretty much broke down her father's statements and clarified them with what happened:

"Once again, Woody Allen is attacking me and my family in an effort to discredit and silence me -- but nothing he says or writes can change the truth. For 20 years, I have never wavered in describing what he did to me. I will carry the memories of surviving these experiences for the rest of my life.

His op-ed is the latest rehash of the same legalese, distortions, and outright lies he has leveled at me for the past 20 years. He insists my mother brought criminal charges -- in fact, it was a pediatrician who reported the incident to the police based on my firsthand account. He suggests that no one complained of his misconduct prior to his assault on me -- court documents show that he was in treatment for what his own therapist described as “inappropriate” behavior with me from as early as 1991. He offers a carefully worded claim that he passed a lie detector test -- in fact, he refused to take the test administered by the state police (he hired someone to administer his own test, which authorities refused to accept as evidence). These and other misrepresentations have been rebutted in more detail by independent, highly respected journalists, including this most recent article here:

http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2014/02/woody-allen-sex-abuse-10-facts

With all the attempts to misrepresent the facts, it is important to be reminded of the truth contained in court documents from the only final ruling in this case, by the New York Supreme Court in 1992. In denying my father all access to me, that court:

Debunked the "experts" my father claims exonerated him, calling them "colored by their loyalty to Mr. Allen", criticizing the author of their report (who never met me) for destroying all supporting documentation, and calling their conclusions "sanitized and therefore less credible". 
Included testimony from babysitters who witnessed inappropriate sexual behavior by my father toward me.
Found that “there is no credible evidence to support Mr. Allen's contention that Ms. Farrow coached Dylan or that Ms. Farrow acted upon a desire for revenge against him for seducing Soon-Yi. Mr. Allen's resort to the stereotypical ‘woman scorned’ defense is an injudicious attempt to divert attention from his failure to act as a responsible parent and adult.”
Concluded that the evidence "... proves that Mr. Allen's behavior toward Dylan was grossly inappropriate and that measures must be taken to protect her.”
Finally, the Connecticut State prosecutor found "probable cause" to prosecute, but made the decision not to in an effort to protect "the child victim", given my fragile state.

From the bottom of my heart, I will be forever grateful for the outpouring of support I have received from survivors and countless others. If speaking out about my experience can help others stand up to their tormentors, it will be worth the pain and suffering my father continues to inflict on me. Woody Allen has an arsenal of lawyers and publicists but the one thing he does not have on his side is the truth. I hope this is the end of his vicious attacks and of the media campaign by his lawyers and publicists, as he’s promised. I won't let the truth be buried and I won't be silenced" (Dylan Farrow Responds to Woody Allen: Distortions and Outright Lies."

My observations are this:

Why is it that Dylan Farrow's letter had to be published by a New York Times blogger on HIS blog instead of being published by the New York Times itself? Why did Woody Allen get to have an actual New York Times official form than Dylan? What does that say about how we treat abuse victims, still, in this society and culture?

Why is that some of us are quick to jump and defend the abuser or let the abuser slide without really questioning him in the first place especially when he or she is a very successful person?

When are we all go to pitch in and destroy the perception of that a molester doesn't look like an evil Michael Meyers? That your typical molester is your next door neighbor or even a boy scout leader: (http://onlineathens.com/local-news/2013-02-23/athens-boy-scout-now-grown-and-fighting-demons-childhood-victimization). For years, this Athenian boyscout master molested this little boy and others boy scouts for years.

I am here to tell you that it is like this: molesters are usually, as I've pointed out from the information I provided you in the characterizations of molesters, the ones who are scout leaders. Brothers. Sisters. Mothers. Fathers. Uncles. Aunts. Cousins. Little League Coaches. Priests. Teachers. Band Directors. Principals.

Movie Directors.

And I can go and on. Don't be starstruck by who you think is talented and successful. Darkness is only prevalent when you do not shut it in the dark and ignore it. You have to recognize that it is there in order to actively do something about it. And it starts with..."Open your eyes."

Regards, SMF