You issued a lot of insults, but you did not actually respond to my post. You explicitly stated that anyone who would marry his daughter's legally adopted sister is the same as a pedophile. This is not scientifically or logically true. Calling me names does not change that.
It does, however, exhaust my patience. I won't be responding to you anymore.
What part is "reportedly?" Why did you need to qualify it? Do you not know whether or not she was post-pubescent at 21, when their relationship became intimate?
If you just want to say he's a perv for marrying a woman he knew when she was a teenager after she grew into an adult, then you can say that. I would even agree!
But it's not the same as accusing him of one of the worst possible of all crimes.
And btw, you are the typical Allen defender, trying to make people that believe Dylan look crazy because we've seen narcissists that destroy families up close and person. I HAVE NEVER BEEN MOLESTED. But I have witnessed the aftermath. So you can take your personal pain talking point and stick it up your pervert defending ass
You fucking dishonest cretin. I told you I didn't want to debate the charges against him and get in the weeds, but you insisted because you want to debate the child molestation to make Allen look better. He is a fucking narcissist that fucked his son and his daughter's sister, went to court to get custody of his kids and wanted to force them to live in a home where their sister is their mother. Sick fucking twisted shit right there. Now, you want to think that it is okay to fuck your kids sister, please don't reproduce
The judge said the only reason he wasn't charged was because of the trauma it would have caused Dylan to be forced to testify with him in the room. This is something I know quite a bit about. My niece was molested by a family member. They plead him down to save her from having to testify against him. If you do just a little bit of research you will see that is how the justice system deals with child molestations all of the time, because kids being forced to get on a stand in front of the person that molested them is psychologically damaging.
I have to decide who is credible. A man that has fucked his kid's sister. Never apologized for blowing up their life, had no remorse to the extent he expected a judge to make his kids live in a home where there sister is also their mother. A man that has continually slammed his daughter as being crazy and unable to remember, more or less said she was mentally retarded. I believe Dylan. Now, you can keep on trying to convince me that Allen isn't who Dylan says he is, at the end of the day it is a credibility fight, and Allen doesn't have any because he lacks boundaries, and has shown himself to be narcissistic.
This is why I used the qualifying language. I do find it a bit implausible that Woody had essentially no relationship with Mia's other kids; and at the least I think it's creepy to have a sexual relationship with someone who you, as an adult, can remember as being nine years old. The fact that one or both of them have described their marital relationship as "paternal" reinforces said creepiness.
You present a fact and a theory. However, those facts and theories were available to the investigations that ultimately chose not to charge him. You cannot try a man for a serious crime based on stuff you read on the internet. You cannot substitute a judge's opinion for a conviction. If the crime were as obvious as you think it is, then why didn't either of the two investigations result in charges?
You are literally setting yourself up as the expert in this case. The people on the spot, who have been trained for the job, who have first hand access to the facts - you know better than they do. Expertise is truly dead, I guess. Who needs detectives? Just crowd-source all trials on the internet.
It amazes me that you have first-hand experience of false memoreis and then separate out Dylan's case because "usually." Ok, sure, that's usually how it happens; but is that always how it happens? Is there no way for a parent to play the role of a unscrupulous psychiatrist?
Although we agree that Dylan is the victim here; we just disagree on who abused her.
And there it is: the explicit equation that someone who would do _this_ would molest a child. You have explicitly gone from "I don't like his choices in adult relationships" to "therefore he is a pedophile."
Even if I were to agree that his relationship with Soon-Yi was immoral, it still would not make him a pedophile. There are different kinds of bad guys. Pedophile is not a generic word for people you don't like. It has a specific meaning and it does us all harm to diminish or blur that specific meaning.
You literally cannot see past your pain to this distinction. It is like a huge vortex that just sucks you into the exact same spot when you get anywhere close. Which, actually, is exactly how neural networks behave when they are damaged by too much stimulus.
A judge. Meanwhile lots of other investigators said other things. Why do you privilege one view point over others? Well, we know why. But why don't you understand that is what you are doing?
This is not even remotely true. Allen had no genetic, legal or custodial relationship with Soon-Yi. Marrying your wife's daughter is not incest or illegal.
Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
You cannot simply assign any and all nefarious intent to people you don't like. That's not how justice, reason, or common sense work.
You are about three inches from "just asking questions." Any closer and you will be living in Glennbeckistan.
at 21, when their relationship became intimate
Reportedly.
You issued a lot of insults, but you did not actually respond to my post. You explicitly stated that anyone who would marry his daughter's legally adopted sister is the same as a pedophile. This is not scientifically or logically true. Calling me names does not change that.
It does, however, exhaust my patience. I won't be responding to you anymore.
What part is "reportedly?" Why did you need to qualify it? Do you not know whether or not she was post-pubescent at 21, when their relationship became intimate?
If you just want to say he's a perv for marrying a woman he knew when she was a teenager after she grew into an adult, then you can say that. I would even agree!
But it's not the same as accusing him of one of the worst possible of all crimes.
Well, you're right about that last one, at least. He's more accurately an ephebophile, because she was (reportedly) post-pubescent.
And btw, you are the typical Allen defender, trying to make people that believe Dylan look crazy because we've seen narcissists that destroy families up close and person. I HAVE NEVER BEEN MOLESTED. But I have witnessed the aftermath. So you can take your personal pain talking point and stick it up your pervert defending ass
You fucking dishonest cretin. I told you I didn't want to debate the charges against him and get in the weeds, but you insisted because you want to debate the child molestation to make Allen look better. He is a fucking narcissist that fucked his son and his daughter's sister, went to court to get custody of his kids and wanted to force them to live in a home where their sister is their mother. Sick fucking twisted shit right there. Now, you want to think that it is okay to fuck your kids sister, please don't reproduce
The judge said the only reason he wasn't charged was because of the trauma it would have caused Dylan to be forced to testify with him in the room. This is something I know quite a bit about. My niece was molested by a family member. They plead him down to save her from having to testify against him. If you do just a little bit of research you will see that is how the justice system deals with child molestations all of the time, because kids being forced to get on a stand in front of the person that molested them is psychologically damaging.
I have to decide who is credible. A man that has fucked his kid's sister. Never apologized for blowing up their life, had no remorse to the extent he expected a judge to make his kids live in a home where there sister is also their mother. A man that has continually slammed his daughter as being crazy and unable to remember, more or less said she was mentally retarded. I believe Dylan. Now, you can keep on trying to convince me that Allen isn't who Dylan says he is, at the end of the day it is a credibility fight, and Allen doesn't have any because he lacks boundaries, and has shown himself to be narcissistic.
This is why I used the qualifying language. I do find it a bit implausible that Woody had essentially no relationship with Mia's other kids; and at the least I think it's creepy to have a sexual relationship with someone who you, as an adult, can remember as being nine years old. The fact that one or both of them have described their marital relationship as "paternal" reinforces said creepiness.
Except he wasn't, according to Soon-Yi. So maybe we should take her word about her relationships?
You haven't read enough, then. Go read Elizabeth Loftus' work. It is not limited to young children.
You present a fact and a theory. However, those facts and theories were available to the investigations that ultimately chose not to charge him. You cannot try a man for a serious crime based on stuff you read on the internet. You cannot substitute a judge's opinion for a conviction. If the crime were as obvious as you think it is, then why didn't either of the two investigations result in charges?
You are literally setting yourself up as the expert in this case. The people on the spot, who have been trained for the job, who have first hand access to the facts - you know better than they do. Expertise is truly dead, I guess. Who needs detectives? Just crowd-source all trials on the internet.
It amazes me that you have first-hand experience of false memoreis and then separate out Dylan's case because "usually." Ok, sure, that's usually how it happens; but is that always how it happens? Is there no way for a parent to play the role of a unscrupulous psychiatrist?
Although we agree that Dylan is the victim here; we just disagree on who abused her.
And there it is: the explicit equation that someone who would do _this_ would molest a child. You have explicitly gone from "I don't like his choices in adult relationships" to "therefore he is a pedophile."
Even if I were to agree that his relationship with Soon-Yi was immoral, it still would not make him a pedophile. There are different kinds of bad guys. Pedophile is not a generic word for people you don't like. It has a specific meaning and it does us all harm to diminish or blur that specific meaning.
You literally cannot see past your pain to this distinction. It is like a huge vortex that just sucks you into the exact same spot when you get anywhere close. Which, actually, is exactly how neural networks behave when they are damaged by too much stimulus.
A judge. Meanwhile lots of other investigators said other things. Why do you privilege one view point over others? Well, we know why. But why don't you understand that is what you are doing?
This is not even remotely true. Allen had no genetic, legal or custodial relationship with Soon-Yi. Marrying your wife's daughter is not incest or illegal.
Why are you resorting to falsehoods?