1923: The Art of Charm

[thirteen]

Originally Posted by OnmyojiOmn

Chemda's tone when she was debating with Pat quickly grew hostile and petulant. Keith attacked everything Pat said with snide, sarcastic remarks rather than even attempting to have a real conversation. Chemda's attitude in particular tanked the whole episode. I don't disagree with anything either of them said, but it was hard not to tune out.

Were you even listening to Pat? He was being just as hostile.

As much as I think Pat Dixon is hilarious, his attitude towards certain things, especially women, always leaves me unsettled. Just the fact that he made it a point to blame Soon-Yi for something tells us a lot. You can say things about her as an adult, but not about things that may have happened when she was younger than 20. Especially the beginning of the relationship (and..please...a flip doesn't just switch in your brain the day a girl turns 18; Allen had known her for years before that).

Regarding Pat's podcast: the humour is extreme and I do like that Jim Polk and some of the other guests. Right now I take breaks every couple of months because it gets to be too much if I listen to it every week.

To those people who are unsubscribing: it's not censorship if someone chooses to not have something in their lives. Pat is still free to do whatever he wants. I'm still going to listen, to be clear, but people have a right to decide when they want to cut something off. His show is also a lot of joking around...not the same as what happened on KATG yesterday.

Overall, I think Pat did a decent job getting his point across, but it doesn't have much to do with Woody's innocence. And Keith and Chemda did a good job opposing him.

[Barker]

I think that most people who listen to that episode are gong to suffer from a bad case of confirmation bias. They'll think that their belief was confirmed and the other side was making up points/being ridiculous.

In all fairness, their were logical fallacies everywhere and misunderstood points on both sides. I enjoyed the episode, even with all of the misunderstanding and other issues, I still came away from it better informed than I was when I started listening. Great episode.

Listening to the episode made me remember the Pat/Jesse rivalry. Can we have them both on the same episode? Please?

[Bucho]

Pat was utterly clear that he wasn't saying Woody didn't molest Dylan. What he did for the entire discussion was point out the holes in the "cases" being made against Woody by various media - holes which introduce reasonable doubt in the mind of a reasonable person.

For the record when it comes to Woody as a filmmaker I'm more Pat/Chemda than I am Keith. I'm not a fan and have seen very few of his films. And for the other record I think his relationship with Soon Yi is creepy as hell. I'm also with Keith, for side B of that record, that a relationshionship between a 19 year old dude and a 16 year old gal is creepy. Hot, sure. But also creepy.

Originally Posted by thirteen

As much as I think Pat Dixon is hilarious, his attitude towards certain things, especially women, always leaves me unsettled. Just the fact that he made it a point to blame Soon-Yi for something tells us a lot.

It definitely tells us something. It also tells us something that Chemda agreed with him.

[Thumbnail]

Love you guys, many hearts and shit but this was a very harsh episode. It wasn't a debate, it was just tossing inflamatory ideas into the mix. We get that you guys are friends and that friends often disagree but this was so "mommy, daddy, creepy uncle Pat, don't fight!"

[BrianAlt]

Originally Posted by Bucho

Pat was utterly clear that he wasn't saying Woody didn't molest Dylan.

Maybe so. But it was pretty clear that his personal opinion was that Woody did not.

[WhiskeyApprentice]

I never figured out why Pat's on Woody's side. Does he feel defensive for a dude who's being attacked in the media?

What a frustrating episode. Pat's defense was somewhat logical but was so dismissive of Dylan's letter. It made him sound like he would dismiss any person who was making an abuse claim like hers.

Plus Pat's understanding of how the police collect evidence for cases is pretty poor. It's not the D.A.'s job to find people guilty, it's their job to find the truth for the benefit of the public.

[ImStillToni]

Now that I finished that clusterfuck, I'd say let the Woody Allen shit GO already you guys lmao damn i love yall but I wanted to shake the shit outta both of your asses & found myself agreeing with Pat most of the time.

I just find it very dangerous when people state their opinion as fact, as though listeners who do not take the time to research said topic will by no doubt believe the opinions as fact....how could you guys go on and on about a crime when in fact the man was never even charged with a crime in 20+ years? Fact remains, he was never charged. So to continue going on and on like he was based on one person's claims is not the best thing to do imo....all you gotta do is throw in an "allegedly" beforehand.

[EllaMacFarlane]

This was very difficult to listen to.

Pat ignores K&C when they say that the doctor said it was INCONCLUSIVE, not FALSE, that Dylan was molested. He says it's "irrational" to think he came on her. I really hate it when people use "reason" incorrectly, and only to discount the other side's point. What part about that is so irrational?

Pat twisting around the reason why Woody wasn't prosecuted. The statement clearly said they that have probable cause, but they can't do it without Dylan's testimony, and she's too fragile to go on the stand and testify. Pat laughs off the fact that a 7 year old would be "too fragile" to testify against her molester. Because that's soooo fucking irrational.

Pat thinking that the police are only trying to get a conviction, and not to get to the bottom of things for the sake of the public (as WhiskeyApprentice points out). Pat rationalizing Woody's decision not to take the police's lie detector test because "that [the police] would be a hostile environment for Woody". Poor, poor Woody. He's actually very sensitive to hostile environments.

etc., etc.

Another point for Pat being a misogynist. People like him are the reason so many victims never speak out.

[vezione]

I, too, am sick of the continued Woody/Dylan debate mostly because I'm sick of people trying to defend Woody. The custody battle has been published and is out there floating in the ether and judge makes clear that Dylan needed protecting from Woody. That should be the end of the story. Pat's defense of Woody comes mostly from what Woody himself has to say which i say is a lot like a Christian quoting the Bible to prove that the Bible is really God's Word. One side has to be lying, right? Woody Allen was denied visitation BY A JUDGE so quite saying nothing legal happened.

[ghauck]

Originally Posted by vezione

I, too, am sick of the continued Woody/Dylan debate mostly because I'm sick of people trying to defend Woody. The custody battle has been published and is out there floating in the ether and judge makes clear that Dylan needed protecting from Woody. That should be the end of the story. Pat's defense of Woody comes mostly from what Woody himself has to say which i say is a lot like a Christian quoting the Bible to prove that the Bible is really God's Word. One side has to be lying, right? Woody Allen was denied visitation BY A JUDGE so quite saying nothing legal happened.

Vezione is the 3rd member to make their very first post in this thread.

1. FUUUUUUUUCK YOU and welcome to the form says the guy just welcomed 2 days ago.

2. Is anybody else getting a weird " Ashton Kutcher Butterfly Effect" vibe that starts with Woody molesting Dylan and ends with hundreds of people losing their forum virginity on KATG?

3. Hard hitting question of the day, would you rather be molested at age 7 or lose your arm in a vehicle accident at age 7?

Honestly, there is no ulterior motive with the question, it's just shit I think about when meditating on my initial reactions to stuff.