At various points in his life he sounded more racist than was the norm at that time.
Um... 1890s. American South? Jim Crow laws? Lynchings? I think the norm was not very un-racist at all. He was born only 25 years after the 13th Amendment passed!
At various points in his life he sounded more racist than was the norm at that time.
Kids are sponges and can pick up stuff in unexpected places. People can also convince themselves of false memories. Farrow can just be a supporting mother to a child who was lying or deluded itself.
The truth is we have no clue what happened and are in no position to take a side.
Okay, so how about stuff she edited? MZB was for many years editor of a fantasy magazine that gave voice to loads of good new authors - do we boycott those works too, since she touched them? Would doing so be fair to the authors who worked with her, who had no idea what was going on at the time?
And how about this - the publisher of MZB's digital backlist is donating all income from sales of her works to Save the Children. Going forwards, sales of her ebooks are *helping* kids. The author who is continuing to write in MZB's Darkover universe is similarly donating proceeds to charity.
Hypothetical: What if the proceeds from those works were going to her estate, and her heirs included those who accuse her of abuse? Boycotting her works would then be taking financial support from those she allegedly harmed.
These things are often not simple.
The man was also born in 1890 - he was born, lived his life, and died before what we now think of as the civil rights movement started. You have to work a bit to find authors (or even just people) from that time who *weren't* racist (or sexist) by today's standards. I think we should give thanks to those who are ahead of the curve, but it is hard to fault someone for failing to be ahead of his or her time.
There is a point where we are no longer avoiding support of a repugnant person's ideals, and stepping into whitewashing history - in the "those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it" sense. What's better - to avoid the work and forget, or read it and remember?
We can then also apply that thought to Card. What's better - to not support his work, or to read it and use it as a teaching/learning opportunity?
Er. Fact? "Innocent until proven guilty," is a pretty important cornerstone of our justice system. It isn't perfect, but the known alternatives are worse. So, I don't think it is washing away anything to stick by that, recognize how little we in the public at large know as fact about what really happened, and acknowledge there are other possibilities. Folks may frequently state that position poorly, but not accepting the abuse as "fact" should still be okay.
To be clear - I don't think I've seen a Woody Allen movie in decades. I really don't care about the guy one way or the other. I've read little, if any, of MZB's work. I speak here only in terms of the ethics - MZB and Allen are accused, but not convicted. It is not unethical to treat them as if they were not guilty.
In this case "fact" of abuse that Elf Witch is referring to is that either Dylan was molested by Allen... OR she was manipulated into believing so by Farrow - which would also be abusive. The poor kid is in a no-win situation here - she was abused by someone it's just the nature of the abuse and the perpetrator that are in dispute. But even asserting his innocence (and even if he IS innocent), Allen fighting for custody of a girl saying she was molested by him to save her from Farrow's manipulations (if that's what was occurring), would probably have been severely traumatic to the girl as well. There's no winning in that situation either. It was a mess no matter how you looked at it and I wouldn't blame even an innocent Allen from backing away from that particular conflict.
No argument that it was a mess. No argument that the kids went through something awful.
But, in a thread that's talking about what an individual consumer should do about such things, questions of guilt and innocence become pretty important. My point isn't really about Allen and Farrow, or MZB - they re merely the examples at hand. The point is about how we are based on, "innocent until proven guilty," in general.
I say this because I have, in the past, seen fan turn upon fan for not finding someone guilty in the court of public opinion.
(...) - ouch1) Polanski's plea includes testimony that he was fully aware she was 13.
Not every false accusation by a child comes from manipulation.In cases of false accusations of child abuse what has been found is that they child has been manipulated by an adult this can be done accidentally as in the case of the Martin preschool case by the very therapists meant to try and get to the truth or quite deliberately.
Actually, I can have doubt that she wasn't abuse by anyone. People can do amazing things to themselves without outside help. The only reproche I could make about Farrow is that feed and fostered these emotions and false memories Dylon had. But I'm not even sure that is the case.In the case of Dylan Farrow it went to the police and to experts who felt that the child may have been manipulated by her mother to get her to make a false statement of abuse. As an adult Dylan has maintained she was abused and spent many years in therapy. She has a diagnosis of PTSD now because of the circumstances it is hard to say what happened but we can say without a doubt that Dylan Farrow was abused either sexually or emotionally as a child. She has been called a liar and maligned in a horrible fashion by Allen's fans and I think that is wrong.
Not every false accusation by a child comes from manipulation.
Actually, I can have doubt that she wasn't abuse by anyone. People can do amazing things to themselves without outside help. The only reproche I could make about Farrow is that feed and fostered these emotions and false memories Dylon had. But I'm not even sure that is the case.
All I know is that we do not know what happened.
TV, friends, school yard, listening to adults talking, etc. What she said wasn't very complicated. He put fingers in me.Then please tell me how a seven year old knows what sexual abuse is and can describe acts that they would have no knowledge about?
We like to think that, but reality is far ore complexe. You even have kids who are sexual predators at that age, kids who were not abused by anyone.Children are not sexual creatures at that young age and don't know how sex works unless it happens to them or they are told.
Different case. Doesn't mean much.In the McMartin case the therapist used dolls and ended up leading the kids with them by putting words in the kids mouths. They thought they were doing the right thing.
Kids can hear that fingers can go into vaginas at that age from a lot of places.In Dylan Farrow case she described acts of a abuse taped by her mother before she ever saw an therapist.
False accusation existed before the internet.I would like to point out that this happened in 1993 that was before the internet so it is not like the child could look this kind of thing up.
You'd be surprised.And the sexual acts she described was not something any seven year old could come up with.
And some said there wasn't enough evidence against Allen. That means they believed the kid, but lack other evidence to charge him.Some of the experts thought she had been couched some thought she had been abused but not one thought that this child was making it up on her own.
Not true.The State of Connecticut found probable cause to bring charges but decided because of the fragility of the child not to follow through and since Allen did not fight for custody Mia Farrow chose not to to push for criminal prosecution.
I didn't say she should shut up. I said I'm not sure why we are talking abut Allen in this thread. I said that to Danny.You are right that we can't know what happened and that has been used so many times to silence victims when they finally speak up.
They can. Kids are smarter than we think they are.I can't say how Dylan was abused but I know she was because seven year old's can't make up a story like she did on her own
I'm not a professional and I never had sessions with her, so I won't make a diagnostic.and she has every symptom of a child who went through some kind of abuse from the eating disorders, cutting, to the suicide attempts.