Woody Allen is a creep.

[newcrasher]

*Originally posted by Arnold Winkelried *
**Biggirl - if that was the situation, then yes it does say something about the intent of the pictures. I still say that there is nothing inherently wrong with taking a picture of someone in the nude, it’s the intent that matters.

Soon-Yi Previn is Woody Allen’s step-daughter only in a loose sense, since Woody Allen was not her adoptive father, Woody Allen and Mia Farrow were never married, and Woody Allen and Mia Farrow never lived together (as far as I know.) In that case, I would base my decision on to the degree to which Soon-Yi regarded Woody Allen as a father figure. And I don’t know the answer to that question.

Yes, age is relevant. Actually that is the part that bothers the most, the very large discrepancy in ages. Nevertheless, for better or for worse, society at large has decided that people of the age of eighteen are old enough to make their own decisions.

Finally, no, I cannot find it in my heart to spare you the pleasure of benefitting from my wisdom and valuable insight. **

How weasely. How slimy! How “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, definition of the word “is”” like.

Not you. Woody.

[Annie-Xmas]

The funniest, if untentionally so, line in Mia’s book: When Soon-Yi first lived with Mia, anything that caught her fancy–Cheerios, paper clips, rubber bands, etc–she would stash in her underpants. I guess Woody REALLY caught Soon-Yi’s fancy.

[Mojo_the_Monkey]

*Originally posted by Tranquilis *
**Let me put it this way:

Woody had a relationship with Mia. Then he had a relationship with Mia’s daughter.

I find that more than a little creepy. **

Hell, that’s nothing. I know someone in college who her mother met her father when her mother was dating her father’s son.

And yes, she was from West Virginia. What does that have to do with it?

[Wendell_Wagner]

Biggirl writes:

> They had two children. One adopted and one naturally.

You’re using a definition of “have a child” that differs considerably from mine. Besides, there were two adopted children.

She also wrote:

> I don’t understand how anyone can defend this.

To which I wrote:

> We’re not defending his actions. . . We’re saying that the fact that he’s morally disgusting has nothing to do with the quality of his films.

To which she wrote:

> I never mentioned his movies. I said he disgusts me.

O.K., look, perhaps some people here are defending his actions, but I’m not. I think he acted like a slimeball too. So what? Are you going to boycott the work of everyone who commits a similar act? Is it even possible to know the moral values of everyone whose work you might come in contact with?

My view is that I’m responsible only for my own moral values. I’m not responsible for researching the entire moral history of everyone I come in contact with. I think that people who commit crimes should be prosecuted for it. For those cases where no one was prosecuted though, I can’t possibly know the moral history of every filmmaker whose films I watch, or of every musician whose music I listen to, or the entire corporate history of every product I buy. I can either reject just those things that come from people whose moral misdeeds happen to be publicized, or I can decide to accept or reject things based on their merits and not the moral standards of their makers, and it’s the second option that I’ve taken.