1. People who believe that her daughter Dylan/Malone was sexually abused by Mia's ex-partner Woody Allen,I'm more impartial than Ms Farrow so I'd actually describe the groups as:
2. People who condone sexual abuse.
1. People who believe Dylan/Malone was sexually abused by Woody Allen, orBut I also believe there is at least one other faction:
2. People who do not believe Dylan/Malone was sexually abused by Woody Allen.
3. People who are really uncomfortable tossing aside the legal principle of "innocent until proven guilty."I'm in this latter group.
This doesn't mean I'm a rape apologist. This doesn't make me Woody Allen's stooge. This doesn't mean I found Dylan/Malone's New York Times' column less interesting than Robert B. Weide's Daily Beast post. It simply means that I'm uncomfortable voicing an opinion on a decades-old news story that is so muddled and convoluted it makes my head spin. I don't have an opinion about it. I should NOT have an opinion about it. None of us should. The American judicial system is flawed, to be sure. But in this instance I'm more than happy to throw my hands up in the air, announce "No charges were filed against Allen? Fair enough. I'm good with that!" and carry on.
Quite frankly I'm much more interested in the different names that the various Farrow/Allen children have adopted thru the years. Ronan = Satchel = Seamus. Malone = Eliza = Dylan. Moses = Mischa (I'm not sure about that one, actually). What does it mean that Malone reverted to 'Dylan' for the purposes of the NYT article? Same thing with the Vanity Fair article in 2013 (the one where Farrow dropped the bomb about having an affair with Sinatra). Meanwhile she tweets under her current alias and does not hide her connection to her famous mother. Huh.
And as I promised...
Just a reminder, everyone: Ronan Farrow's new show debuts February 24 on MSNBC! And Woody Allen is nominated for an Oscar!