If Music Could Talk

Silent Majority wrote: ↑

10 Nov 2017, 4:43am

I've just started watching Parks and Recreation for the first time, unaware that CK was a recurring castmember, and have been able to throw a mental protective bubble around his appearances. It's easier because the cop he's playing is so divorced from his masturbating stage persona or true self. I watched his whole FX series aware of the allegations and there were uncomfortable moments. It's interesting how dated that show already feels.

Man, I adore that show. Parks & Rec that is, have seen very little of CK's other work. If memory serves, he only features in one series, though it was around the time the show was at its peak.

Silent Majority wrote: ↑

10 Nov 2017, 6:13am

101Walterton wrote: ↑

10 Nov 2017, 5:30am

Silent Majority wrote: ↑

10 Nov 2017, 4:43am

I've just started watching Parks and Recreation for the first time, unaware that CK was a recurring castmember, and have been able to throw a mental protective bubble around his appearances. It's easier because the cop he's playing is so divorced from his masturbating stage persona or true self. I watched his whole FX series aware of the allegations and there were uncomfortable moments. It's interesting how dated that show already feels.

Which CK?

Calvin Klein.

Now I know that isn’t true I watched the news last night. No idea who the guy is just pleased it isn’t Chris Knowles.

Low Down Low wrote: ↑

10 Nov 2017, 7:08am

101Walterton wrote: ↑

09 Nov 2017, 10:15pm

Low Down Low wrote: ↑

09 Nov 2017, 9:39pm

As regards Woody Allen specifically, the more serious allegations levelled against him by members of the Farrow family remain unproven and vehemently disputed, right? I did watch Manhattan not so long ago and found it a bit creepy, but otherwise I'm not convinced he's the unrestrained monster some folk have painted him out to be. I can't help but love his films and some of his recent offerings are up there with the great movies of the 80s and 90s.

Sorry but whilst it may not have been illegal, having a relationship with your partner’s daughter 40 years your junior and for whom you are / were, a guardian is wrong on so many levels.

I dont believe Allen was ever her guardian or even had much contact with her before the relationship started. But dont get me wrong, i wouldnt be advocating him for a gallantry award or anything like that, on a personal level there is much i'd find creepy and disturbing about it, but at the same time, I don't think it makes him into the monster he's sometime portrayed as or that it should negate his art in any way. Just my two cents really.

Whether he was a legal guardian or not he had a 12 year relationship the girls mother which started when the girl was less than 10 years old.
That is predatory behaviour.

Double post.

Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi isn't even the worst skeleton in his closet. It is undoubtedly the accusation of abuse by then-7 year old Dylan Farrow that should ban him from civilized society forever. These are allegations Dylan has not recanted and has reiterated as recently as 2014.

Addendum: I misread some of the original post. Low Down Low acknowledges these accusations. I wouldn't be so dismissive about them, though. The Woody Allen defense sounds an awful lot like what we're hearing from defenders of Roy Moore, Louis CK, Harvey Weinstein, etc (or heard up until the second these folks who admitted their wrongdoing).

Flex wrote: ↑

10 Nov 2017, 3:56pm

Allen's relationship with Soon-Yi isn't even the worst skeleton in his closet. It is undoubtedly the accusation of abuse by then-7 year old Dylan Farrow that should ban him from civilized society forever. These are allegations Dylan has not recanted and has reiterated as recently as 2014.

Addendum: I misread some of the original post. Low Down Low acknowledges these accusations. I wouldn't be so dismissive about them, though. The Woody Allen defense sounds an awful lot like what we're hearing from defenders of Roy Moore, Louis CK, Harvey Weinstein, etc (or heard up until the second these folks who admitted their wrongdoing).

CK admited his accusers are correct today.

The only slightly (and I do mean slightly) nagging thing with Woody Allen is that Mia Farrow could be seen as having manipulated Dylan's story, that there was coaching and confusion of a young child. I can't remember the full details, but I recall thinking that she was giving WA some semi-plausible way out by not stepping back. But that doesn't open the door that wide for me, only just a hair.

Isn’t the fact he groomed his partners daughter enough?

Right, CK defenders made the exact same defenses of Louis that allen defenders make of Woody... right up until about an hour and 42 minutes ago.

If I sounded dismissive of those allegations against Allen, it was entirely unintended. That would be to suggest Dylan Farrow is by implication a liar and I wouldn't in all conscience stand by such a position. But I always found some of the details of the case against him troubling and inconsistent, one of them being the aforementioned video in which there is a strong suspicion of coaching in the making of it. I'm not necessarily saying he should be given the benefit of the doubt, just that there's a due process he's entitled to as a basic right here. He might well be an odious creep with a head full of perverted thoughts, but that doesn't automatically make him a child abuser.

Dylan Farrow allegations aside he had a sexual relationship with his partners daughter.
He was found out by accident when she found naked photos of her daughter on his phone.
At the time she was at best 21 but could have been as young as 19.
He was 56.
What kind of 56 year old has naked photos of his sexual partner aged 19-21 on his phone?
What kind of 56 year old has a sexual relationship with someone who he has acted as a father figure for since she was as young as 7 behind the girl’s mother’s back.
Without even questioning her legal age when he crossed the line and began the sexual relationship, it is grooming and it is predatory behaviour.

101Walterton wrote: ↑

10 Nov 2017, 7:29pm

Dylan Farrow allegations aside he had a sexual relationship with his partners daughter.
He was found out by accident when she found naked photos of her daughter on his phone.
At the time she was at best 21 but could have been as young as 19.
He was 56.
What kind of 56 year old has naked photos of his sexual partner aged 19-21 on his phone?
What kind of 56 year old has a sexual relationship with someone who he has acted as a father figure for since she was as young as 7 behind the girl’s mother’s back.
Without even questioning her legal age when he crossed the line and began the sexual relationship, it is grooming and it is predatory behaviour.

The only thing I would say is I'm not sure Allen was ever a "father figure" for her or ever intended to fulfil that role. From memory, his absence from Farrow's childrens lives was actually a bone of contention between them. From that perspective I'm not sure the notion of grooming and predation is applicable in this instance. Beyond that, I think your sense of disgust is rational and entirely justified. I wouldn't' dispute that side of things at all.

Low Down Low wrote: ↑

10 Nov 2017, 8:02pm

101Walterton wrote: ↑

10 Nov 2017, 7:29pm

Dylan Farrow allegations aside he had a sexual relationship with his partners daughter.
He was found out by accident when she found naked photos of her daughter on his phone.
At the time she was at best 21 but could have been as young as 19.
He was 56.
What kind of 56 year old has naked photos of his sexual partner aged 19-21 on his phone?
What kind of 56 year old has a sexual relationship with someone who he has acted as a father figure for since she was as young as 7 behind the girl’s mother’s back.
Without even questioning her legal age when he crossed the line and began the sexual relationship, it is grooming and it is predatory behaviour.

The only thing I would say is I'm not sure Allen was ever a "father figure" for her or ever intended to fulfil that role. From memory, his absence from Farrow's childrens lives was actually a bone of contention between them. From that perspective I'm not sure the notion of grooming and predation is applicable in this instance. Beyond that, I think your sense of disgust is rational and entirely justified. I wouldn't' dispute that side of things at all.

True I don’t know the day to day make up of the family dynamics and I am aware he did not live in the Farrow family home but he did he have daily contact with them and by virtue of the fact he is in a long standing relationship with her mother makes him a father figure.
I don’t know US Law but under NZ Law he may well have committed a crime if she was under 20. A law that is intended for that very scenario.
Do you have to break a law to be a paedophile? I would argue not.

Low Down Low, sorry didn’t mean to sound as if I was having a go at you I just can’t believe (well actually I can) that a Hollywood director can behave the way he has and carry on as if nothing has happened and people rock up to watch his movies!!
Yeah Woody Allen, bit weird but hey great film!!!

I'm with 101.

101Walterton wrote: ↑

10 Nov 2017, 8:37pm

Low Down Low, sorry didn’t mean to sound as if I was having a go at you I just can’t believe (well actually I can) that a Hollywood director can behave the way he has and carry on as if nothing has happened and people rock up to watch his movies!!
Yeah Woody Allen, bit weird but hey great film!!!

No bother mate, I didnt take it that you were having a go and wouldnt mind anyway. I get that collective amnesia is simply a morally convenient way for folk to get on with their lives and avoid the road less travelled, I don't believe that is in any way confined to the Hollywood cesspit.