No one is exactly covering themselves in glory here. And gossip might truly be the new pornography. And Twitter (and friendface to a lesser but still significant effect) is the new bathroom wall of the internet.
There is nowt a objective voice to be heard. Instead we get the sound of axes grinding over the tumult and shouting of a family's tragedy.
This is no good, and is factually incorrect in spots.
This is disgusting, and should never have seen print. Ms Saunders is obviously using this family tragedy as a political football to apologize for the GOP's legitimate War on Women.
This, like so many others, presumes through statistics, that anyone who might disagree with her is blaming the victim.
Which brings me to this column, which Ms Valenti links to, which is one of the worst yet. It is appalling to me that someone could suggest to have it both ways, stating, "The second reason it’s okay if I’m wrong is that I’m probably not wrong. It’s much more likely that I’m right." Who says? This is your gut speaking? You have absolutely no bonafide or serious information to back you up on this issue. That someone pays this gentleman to write is an abomination.
This piece, reviled by the Farrow camp, and nonetheless actually full of hard facts about the case, is not be trusted due to conflict of interest.
This is not so bad, but still faintly smells of advertising and marketing. (And, let me say this: Any public carping that the NYT is selling right now about whether or not they should publish Mr Allen's response right now is reprehensible. It is only an excuse to sell newspapers. Allen's response will be in the NYT for sure. And, I am also disturbed by the notion that Nicholas Kristof and the NYT were the vehicle for Dylan Farrow's statement. As much as someone would like to chastise Mr Allen for being wealthy, white, and powerful; it is also good to point out that the Farrow's have a powerful media figure to proclaim their stories, as well.)
This is crap.
This is crap, too.
And, there is still so much more crap out there for all of us to enjoy!
But, this one by Molly Lambert for Grantland has got to be the absolute worst one of all. Ms Lambert needs to stick to her witty recaps of Mad Men. Seriously!
This was shitty. And, he did apologize.
The best thing I have seen on this issue was on Jezebel. Which many in the Farrow camp would be angry with because Jezebel said that Allen's marriage with Ms Previn should not be an issue in this case. (It is a massive difference between legal creepy and pedophilia. That is mds speaking.)
The next best thing I have seen on this is our nation's news leader, The Onion's, take on this: Boy, I've Really Put You in a Tough Spot, Haven't I? Of course, many in both camps probably see this faux editorial in bad taste. I see it as by far the most relevant conversation to the topic.
Say what you will about the justice system, but the only objective parties for this issue decided that there was no case to pursue. And, these allegations occurred during an extremely public and incendiary custody battle. Which makes this argument a matter of faith. I know where I stand on this question, and I respect the many others that might disagree with me. I sincerely hope that those that disagree with me would fashion me the same respect.
All my love,
Michael David Spitler