|
|
Post by SoonDragon67 on Feb 17, 2014 17:19:08 GMT -5
innocent until proven guilty is for the court of law, not the court of public opinion.. Unless you're in the military, in which case you are considered guilty until you prove your innocence. |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 18, 2014 23:03:24 GMT -5
... I'd also like to point out that "proof" is subjective, but IMO there is PLENTY of proof of Allen's guilt. These slimeballs always reveal themselves through their behavior. If I'm supposed to wait for the courts to actually go after someone before I speak on the issue... yeah, that's not going to happen. I don't trust the government to know right and wrong for itself, much less to tell me what's right and wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by miketheratguy on Feb 19, 2014 0:45:19 GMT -5
Obvious pedophile is obvious. Don't be mad at us just because every British man looks like a pedophile.
|
|
|
|
Post by skylerb97 on Feb 19, 2014 8:20:40 GMT -5
Obvious pedophile is obvious. Don't be mad at us just because every British man looks like a pedophile. Daniel Craig? |
|
|
|
Post by miketheratguy on Feb 19, 2014 12:12:40 GMT -5
Okay fine, Daniel Craig is dreamy. But every OTHER British man.
|
|
|
|
Post by monkeywool on Feb 19, 2014 13:12:46 GMT -5
I'm just saying that it's a pretty poor state of affairs and a shocking commentary on society today when someone is accused of something as abhorrent as pedophilia, without any proof or even taken to court and exhonerated and is still branded as one.
It's actually akin to what we did 500 years ago to witches. I'd like to think we actually have evolved as a society since the dark ages.
|
|
|
|
Post by TomJohns on Feb 19, 2014 13:20:41 GMT -5
Obvious pedophile is obvious. Don't be mad at us just because every British man looks like a pedophile. ....... |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 19, 2014 14:01:46 GMT -5
I'm just saying that it's a pretty poor state of affairs and a shocking commentary on society today when someone is accused of something as abhorrent as pedophilia, without any proof or even taken to court and exhonerated and is still branded as one. It's actually akin to what we did 500 years ago to witches. I'd like to think we actually have evolved as a society since the dark ages. ... there is plenty of proof though. What part of that is it that you're not getting? Pedophiles have established patterns of behavior, and non-pedophiles don't follow those patterns to the letter. Woody Allen (and Michael Jackson, and others) did. Just because a court may or may not look into the case, and may or may not call them "innocent" does not mean that they are. It's not like we're talking about a guy who was accused once, dealt with it in a reasonable way, and it's just now coming up again. Woody Allen has been repeatedly accused throughout the past four decades, and in fact has been under treatment from multiple therapists for behavior described in their notes variously as things to the effect of "inappropriate behavior" with his adopted daughters. The efforts to which he has gone to cover up his behavior and slander anyone who speaks out about him clearly suggest guilt. |
|
|
|
Post by monkeywool on Feb 19, 2014 14:06:07 GMT -5
I'm just saying that it's a pretty poor state of affairs and a shocking commentary on society today when someone is accused of something as abhorrent as pedophilia, without any proof or even taken to court and exhonerated and is still branded as one. It's actually akin to what we did 500 years ago to witches. I'd like to think we actually have evolved as a society since the dark ages. ... there is plenty of proof though. What part of that is it that you're not getting? Pedophiles have established patterns of behavior, and non-pedophiles don't follow those patterns to the letter. Woody Allen (and Michael Jackson, and others) did. Just because a court may or may not look into the case, and may or may not call them "innocent" does not mean that they are. It's not like we're talking about a guy who was accused once, dealt with it in a reasonable way, and it's just now coming up again. Woody Allen has been repeatedly accused throughout the past four decades, and in fact has been under treatment from multiple therapists for behavior described in their notes variously as things to the effect of "inappropriate behavior" with his adopted daughters. The efforts to which he has gone to cover up his behavior and slander anyone who speaks out about him clearly suggest guilt. The fact he ran off with his wife's 19 year old daughter and she is clearly bitter about it many years later is irrelevant then? |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 19, 2014 14:09:16 GMT -5
The fact he ran off with his wife's 19 year old daughter and she is clearly bitter about it many years later is irrelevant then? ... what's funny is, I would suggest that is part of the pattern. |
|
|
|
Post by TomJohns on Feb 19, 2014 14:40:20 GMT -5
... there is plenty of proof though. What part of that is it that you're not getting? Pedophiles have established patterns of behavior, and non-pedophiles don't follow those patterns to the letter. Woody Allen (and Michael Jackson, and others) did. Just because a court may or may not look into the case, and may or may not call them "innocent" does not mean that they are. It's not like we're talking about a guy who was accused once, dealt with it in a reasonable way, and it's just now coming up again. Woody Allen has been repeatedly accused throughout the past four decades, and in fact has been under treatment from multiple therapists for behavior described in their notes variously as things to the effect of "inappropriate behavior" with his adopted daughters. The efforts to which he has gone to cover up his behavior and slander anyone who speaks out about him clearly suggest guilt. The fact he ran off with his wife's 19 year old daughter and she is clearly bitter about it many years later is irrelevant then? Yeah... That isn't weird at all.  |
|
|
|
Post by monkeywool on Feb 19, 2014 15:17:20 GMT -5
Not actually paedophilia if she was 19.
|
|
|
|
Post by TomJohns on Feb 19, 2014 15:30:12 GMT -5
Not actually paedophilia if she was 19. No. But still pretty strange, What considering he'd practically raised her from the age of 7 & She is legally his son's sister.... |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 19, 2014 16:14:02 GMT -5
Not actually paedophilia if she was 19. ... no, but multiple witnesses have pointed out that his behavior toward Soon-Yi was questionable and made them very uncomfortable well before she turned 19. Or, for that matter, before she turned 16. Several experts have pointed out that Soon-Yi Previn displays the behaviors of a woman indoctrinated by a sexual predator in her youth, to say nothing of the fact that the stories of Allen's predatory behavior are strikingly similar from case to case, even in instances where there was no way one supposed victim could have know the specifics of the others claims. Again, I think we're straying pretty far from the obvious here, and it feels very deliberate. Allen's own therapist has acknowledged treating Allen for "inappropriate behavior" with his adopted daughters. |
|
|
|
Post by TomJohns on Feb 19, 2014 16:29:44 GMT -5
Not actually paedophilia if she was 19. ... no, but multiple witnesses have pointed out that his behavior toward Soon-Yi was questionable and made them very uncomfortable well before she turned 19. Or, for that matter, before she turned 16. Several experts have pointed out that Soon-Yi Previn displays the behaviors of a woman indoctrinated by a sexual predator in her youth, to say nothing of the fact that the stories of Allen's predatory behavior are strikingly similar from case to case, even in instances where there was no way one supposed victim could have know the specifics of the others claims. Again, I think we're straying pretty far from the obvious here, and it feels very deliberate. Allen's own therapist has acknowledged treating Allen for "inappropriate behavior" with his adopted daughters. I don't get how MW isn't seeing clear as day that Alan is a pedophile. |
|
|
|
Post by monkeywool on Feb 19, 2014 19:23:26 GMT -5
... no, but multiple witnesses have pointed out that his behavior toward Soon-Yi was questionable and made them very uncomfortable well before she turned 19. Or, for that matter, before she turned 16. Several experts have pointed out that Soon-Yi Previn displays the behaviors of a woman indoctrinated by a sexual predator in her youth, to say nothing of the fact that the stories of Allen's predatory behavior are strikingly similar from case to case, even in instances where there was no way one supposed victim could have know the specifics of the others claims. Again, I think we're straying pretty far from the obvious here, and it feels very deliberate. Allen's own therapist has acknowledged treating Allen for "inappropriate behavior" with his adopted daughters. I don't get how MW isn't seeing clear as day that Alan is a pedophile. Because I don't judge people on hearsay. Basically, I'm sick to death of this culture where "oh someone accused him/her so it's gotta be true" |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 19, 2014 20:01:33 GMT -5
I don't get how MW isn't seeing clear as day that Alan is a pedophile. Because I don't judge people on hearsay. Basically, I'm sick to death of this culture where "oh someone accused him/her so it's gotta be true" ... so basically, you just ignore any and all bad behavior, no matter how obvious, until the legal system tells you it's okay to judge? I'm sorry, but that's not a logical OR ethical stance. It's fence sitting. |
|
|
|
Post by monkeywool on Feb 20, 2014 13:01:31 GMT -5
Because I don't judge people on hearsay. Basically, I'm sick to death of this culture where "oh someone accused him/her so it's gotta be true" ... so basically, you just ignore any and all bad behavior, no matter how obvious, until the legal system tells you it's okay to judge? I'm sorry, but that's not a logical OR ethical stance. It's fence sitting. Not at all. I just can't be bothered with the nonsense that is the witch hunt of being accused and therefore guilty. I just don't care enough about people I never met to assume they are basically evil based on hearsay. |
|
|
|
Post by wildknight on Feb 20, 2014 13:55:03 GMT -5
... so basically, you just ignore any and all bad behavior, no matter how obvious, until the legal system tells you it's okay to judge? I'm sorry, but that's not a logical OR ethical stance. It's fence sitting. Not at all. I just can't be bothered with the nonsense that is the witch hunt of being accused and therefore guilty. I just don't care enough about people I never met to assume they are basically evil based on hearsay. Again, there is a lot more than hearsay in play with the Woody Allen case. There is a well established pattern of behavior, and some pretty damning evidence. It's not about labeling someone "evil" so much as it is about being honest with ourselves as a culture to protect future victims. |
|
|
|
Post by monkeywool on Feb 20, 2014 18:05:01 GMT -5
Not at all. I just can't be bothered with the nonsense that is the witch hunt of being accused and therefore guilty. I just don't care enough about people I never met to assume they are basically evil based on hearsay. Again, there is a lot more than hearsay in play with the Woody Allen case. There is a well established pattern of behavior, and some pretty damning evidence. It's not about labeling someone "evil" so much as it is about being honest with ourselves as a culture to protect future victims. Protecting victims by ensuring that anyone remotely accused of a horrid crime is labelled as guilty for life, regardless of truth isn't really a good way of protecting future victims. |
|
