Dylan Farrow called out the “New York Times” columnist who thinks she made up her allegations against Woody Allen
As a result of Time’s Up — a movement throughout Hollywood to hold sexual abuse perpetrators responsible for their actions — Woody Allen’s seedy past has resurfaced. (Not that it ever went anywhere.) Four years after she penned an emotional letter detailing her account of sexual assault, Dylan Farrow is still trying to prove Allen’s guilt. But for some reason, people are making it extremely difficult for her. Diane Keaton is still defending Allen. And some, like Alec Baldwin, have taken things way too far by tweeting unacceptable things about Farrow.
On Friday, February 9th, New York Times op-ed columnist Bret Stephens published a story called “The Smearing of Woody Allen.” And it’s extremely problematic. Stephens claims that accusing Allen of being a molester without excessive evidence is wrong. Many people reacted negatively, including Dylan Farrow herself. She quickly jumped into the Twitter fray to point out the flaws in the opinion piece.
“If @BretStephensNYT is interested, there is much more information he can find on my case than what he cites in his piece, some of which I have posted here,” Dylan Farrow tweeted. “To presume I invented this story & convinced myself of it is no less insulting than calling me a liar. I’ve consistently stated the truth for 25 years, I won’t stop now. It’s Stephens’ right to doubt me if he so chooses but his incredulity doesn’t change what happened that day. What it does do is make it harder for the next victim to come forward.”
If @BretStephensNYT is interested, there is much more information he can find on my case than what he cites in his piece, some of which I have posted here. /1
— Dylan Farrow (@RealDylanFarrow) February 10, 2018
To presume I invented this story & convinced myself of it is no less insulting than calling me a liar. I’ve consistently stated the truth for 25 years, I won’t stop now. It’s Stephens’ right to doubt me if he so chooses but his incredulity doesn’t change what happened that day./2
— Dylan Farrow (@RealDylanFarrow) February 10, 2018
What it does do is make it harder for the next victim to come forward. /3
— Dylan Farrow (@RealDylanFarrow) February 10, 2018
Canada-based PhD student Kim Sauder also raised some problems with the op-ed.
Sauder pointed out that Stephens compares Allen to Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey. The difference, according to Stephens, is that Weinstein and Spacey were proven guilty with facts, not allegations. But Sauder says that neither were tried or proven guilty. So what’s the difference here?
Despite attempting to appear reasonable by presenting Spacey and Weinstein as clearly guilty.
His primary defence of Allen is that he was neither tried or convicted of assaulting Dylan
— Ashe “Anxious Crip Assassin” Grey MACDS (@crippledscholar) February 10, 2018
So to recap
You don't need to be accused by many for allegations to be credible
regardless Allen has exhibited a pattern of behaviour that put Dylan's accusations into context
— Ashe “Anxious Crip Assassin” Grey MACDS (@crippledscholar) February 10, 2018
Others highlight a glaringly disturbing line in the op-ed that compares Allen to Larry Nassar in order to exonerate Allen.
This has to be one of the most embarrassing things ever published by the New York Times:
"If Allen is in fact a pedophile, he appears to have acted on his evil fantasies exactly once. Compare that to Larry Nassar’s 265 identified victims." —@BretStephensNYT
— Brandon Friedman (@BFriedmanDC) February 10, 2018
It should not be this hard to believe Dylan Farrow. Period.
Perhaps Jessica Chastain said it best:
I'm so sorry that you're still dealing with this. I believe you @RealDylanFarrow
— Jessica Chastain (@jes_chastain) February 10, 2018
Hopefully, time will be up for Woody Allen soon. We believe and support you, Dylan.
