Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Telegram Find&Fuck Waifus ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register

Manhattan Molestation Mystery (Patreon)

Published:
2021-03-23 20:13:07
Imported:
2022-01

Downloads

Content

The ladies tackle Allen v. Farrow.

Comments

Anonymous

listening to this makes me feel like a child again

Anonymous

Ugh do I HAVE to watch it?

Anonymous

My favorite thing is when the ladies correctly use a word but pronounce it incorrectly

Anonymous

Now I don’t have to watch it

Anonymous

Anna get Bunk on the pod

Anonymous

I didn’t expect them to defend woody Allen. Kind of disappointing

Anonymous

“we can speculate on woody all we want, it should be fair to speculate on Mia too” #MiaToo

Anonymous
>>56224122

Are you braindead or did you not listen past the first 5 minutes?

Anonymous

This was fantastic. This podcast is so refreshing. It’s nice to hear a nuanced analysis of this saga

Peter T.
>>56214025

I don't know. You should watch it. honestly anna and dasha are so busy looking for freudian aspects of woody and mia they're failing to recognize their own freudian desires about the story

Chad

Watched the doc largely not knowing the details of the Woody allegations. My takeaway was they’re both liars and creeps. If the allegations are made up I really can’t blame Mia. The man married her much younger adopted daughter.....one of the most twisted things a man could do to his wife/gf. I wish them well.

Anonymous

a fascinating, if not necessarily valid, parallel to the Mia-As-Baby-Gatherer situation is Josephine Baker who more or less worked a purse-seine operation to build her "rainbow tribe," of, what, a dozen children, including Jean-Claude, eventual proprietor of Chez Josephine and eventual suicide, and others who were badly damaged by her curatorial impulse. (Jean-Claude, it's true, was more or less grown and street-savvy by the time he entered her orbit.)

Doug Dee

Does anyone know the title of the Soon-Yi profile in the NY Times?

Anonymous
>>56231034

Oddly my comment disappears if I include a link but I think it's Introducing Soon-Yi Previn from New York magazine, which can be found on Vulture's site

Anonymous

Haven't listened to the episode yet, but I've seen the documentary. I think, he's probably guilty, but the fact that no one else has accused him of such things before or since does raise some questions in my mind. I've never heard of a one-off pedo.

Anonymous

Hope the ladies review "Chemtrails Over The Country Club," next episode.

Anonymous

I'm just going to point out that statistically, most people who abuse children aren't diagnosed with pedophilic disorder. Most people (from my understanding) who abuse children tend to have very low self control, who use children for their momentary sexual desires.

Anonymous

I think I like mia farrow because she reminds me of medea. she convinced two of her children, dylan and ronan, to think that one of them was molested, effectively ruining their lifes in the purcuit of punishing the lover who abandoned her. but it is, also, funny how all those art critics who are themshelves incapable of producing art come back as its policing: they want to dominate it with their morale panics in the sense that medieval monks did with philosophy and art.

Anonymous

Typically look forward to listening to your analyses, but after watching the series I was shocked about your idiotic take. Kinda lame that you’re questioning childhood videos/ tapes + credible interviews on actually troubling content matter. Yikes.

Anonymous
>>56243303

Wow, just wow. That gets a yikes from me sis, can we just not? Imagine if you were capable of thinking outside of the Disney Channel tropes you’ve been conditioned to view the world through. You might even begin to understand the edgy podcast you pay monthly for. More like “Low T”.

Anonymous

Beginning at 1:03. Anna's read is spiritual.

Anonymous

Lana album review when

Anonymous

“Adoption hoarder”.

Anonymous

No one here in the pod mentioned his pathological love for the shikse goddess, Mia included, and his obsession with Dylan and her light skinned blue eyed blonde haired disposition that Woody clearly fetishized and how he definitely could have primed/molested Soon-Yi when she was younger too...although the ladies of the pod don’t “believe” in priming it’s so clear that his multiple offenses included Dylan and Soon-Yi and that he could probably have molested many other young girls who were silenced....also, his “love for women” is classic love/hate Madonna/whore idealization/devaluation split of women that stems from misogyny and intimidation because he’s a pussy ass bitch himself as the ladies pointed out. Further, his need for control - including his need to control the narrative - is classic casual abuser. He is so textbook male of his generation it hurts and the ladies trying to make it more complex than it seems is too much of an effort, more effort than is needed in his case.

Peter T.

with all due respect, cannot understand how you could think Woody didn't molest Dylan after seeing even just a couple episodes of that doc

frozen charlotte

Congrats on your worst episode yet guys lmao

Anonymous
>>56292453

My own least fav was Cat Marnell. That one wins for being annoying. The present episode is more boring than annoying, imho

Anonymous

You won’t care about this topic in a week you corporate drone

Beatrice

If you watched the series and this episode pissed you off, I encourage you to counter the viewing experience with a youtube doc entitled, "by the way, woody allen is innocent"

Julian

“Cheap and unethical” lol where’s that early life section when you need it.

Anonymous

absolutely wild that dasha believes woody and not frank sinatra is the bio father of ronan

admiral stiffplank

I like Dasha, even though she can’t pronounce ‘naïveté’ correctly.

Anonymous

Are Satchel and Ronan the same person? I cant keep up with this family

Anonymous

Ronan closely resembles Mia’s father, not Sinatra

Anonymous

Whitney Webb reports extensive prolonged interactions Woody, Mia and Epstein. She's right there with them

Anonymous

I think it's unfair to judge Farrow for how she approached the possible grooming of her own daughter. It's already traumatic enough to come to terms with the idea that your own husband might be touching your own child, to even try to formulate an effective way to come to the bottom of the issue while trying to traumatize your kids the least possible way. Specially given the fact she already came from a fucked up family. That woman deserves some peace honestly.

Anonymous

It’s “ñàį\/ë7ę” you philistine

Anonymous

Really felt the analysis of Jewish men trying to simultaneously escape and search the suffocating love of their mothers lol

Anonymous

Tbh cover lana

Anonymous

You should read Mia’s autobiography, What Falls Away, just for the Hollywood history if nothing else. Both Mia and Woody are very weird. I had 2 different co workers who were adopted from Korean orphanages in the 1970s by Evangelical Christian families in the Midwest, old enough at the time of adoption to remember their Korean families. Apparently there was some sort of orphanage racket in Korea catering to Americans. Some of the Korean parents thought they were putting their kids in a day care, not giving them up. One was a divorce and the dad put the kids in the orphanage to spite the mother. Somebody needs to do a documentary on Korean orphanages in the 1970s. We don’t know if Soon Yi’s backstory is true.

Julian
>>56560247

Pretty sure the entire foreign child adoption thing is a scam of some sort or another.

Anonymous

I'm sorry but saying Ronan Farrow is more powerful than Woody Allen for being the journalist who broke #MeToo, when Woody Allen was literally homies with Epstein and god knows who elese...that deserved a little more thought. And that's like the frustrating thing, woody allen's main defense for why he couldn't have molested dylan, is based on his so called character that is honestly just a heavily curated persona, that most people who like his movies are heavily emotionally invested in. But his angle in which he tries to paint himself like a defenseless victim is ridiculous. He remains an incredibly wealthy man, with access to other wealthy and powerful people and a media saaviness / image consciousness that is greatly above the average person. I think it's funny how in the NY Times article, as well as in one of his later movies, he mentions being a democrat and donating money to Clinton's campaign...as though cosplaying as a liberal is another tool in his media kit for people to think he's just a harmless little guy.

Anonymous

If this episode is unlocked I would send it to 10 friends, adding, "I didn't say it. They did."...It turns out SOON-EE is the correct pronunciation.

Anonymous

You should look at the lyrics of dory previns song daddy in the attic

Anonymous
>>56811134

Your 'arguments' are symptomatic of the absurd denouncement of Woody Allen. Look, he either committed a crime or he didn't. Police investigations and two separate child abuse expert instances, hired by the prosecution, yielded no evidence of any wrongdoing, and yielded the clear conclusion - in no uncertain terms - that Dylan had *not* been abused. Then here comes the 'cancel mob' with their invented 'arguments'. In spite of his clear exoneration, Woody Allen must be guilty because: - he is a powerful white male, and as we all know they are guilty of everything we allege them of; - he is rich, as we all can see from the shabby clothes he wears and the glaring NON-manifestation of his wealth and luxury (Allen puts all his money in his movies) and as we all know, rich people (like Mia Farrow) pull the strings; - his son is more powerful, and as we all know powerful white males must never be believed... oh wait; - he is 'homies with Epstein', an idea for which every serious factual argument is lacking, but hey, it sounds good, so why not just pretend? there's a paparazzi photo of him walking on the same NY pavement as Epstein, so *of course* they are part of the same child abuse network, no? - he is playing a character in his movies, so he must be a child abuser; - has been a democrat all his life, but let's not believe that, so we can hold him guilty of child abuse. It is truly absurd. But hey ,why care for the facts, if you can delude yourself with favorite memes?

Anonymous
>>58436933

Dory Previn's two songs "With my Daddy in the Attic" and "Mama, mama, comfort me" tell the story of a daughter who has been abused in the attic of the house (!) by a clarinet-playing father (!) while lying on the ground (!) and he gets his face really close to hers (!). He gave her an electric train (!) to play with. The daughter then takes revenge on her father (!) to soothe her mother's pain for having lost her father's love (!). As we all know, Mia and Dylan claim that Dylan has been abused in the attic by her father, who happens to play the clarinet, while Dylan lay down and he came close to her face whispering in her ear. Now Dylan seeks revenge on her abusive father and in her Yale interviews made constant references to her 'poor mama' who had lost his love and her movie career. The problem is that Dory Previn wrote these songs halfway the 1970's. Dory Previn was a good friend of Mia Farrow at the end of the 1960's. Until Mia stole her husband, André Previn, by f&cking him behind Dory's back, then made him divorce Dory, and married him instead. Dory had a total breakdown and got institutionalized. Years later, when recovered, she wrote a song about Mia: "Beware of Young Girls". It is on the same album as "With my Daddy in the Attic". Mia has admitted that she knows Dory's songs. Now try to explain away this, ahem, 'coincidence'.