The Student News Site of University of Arizona

The Daily Wildcat

52° Tucson, AZ

The Daily Wildcat

The Daily Wildcat

 

    Your Views

    Online Comments

    From “Controversy taints Woody Allen’s Oscar nominations” (by Taylor Armosino, Feb. 16)

    Allen faces renewed accusations, which legal authorities decided more than two decades ago did not justify a prosecution. In the case of Mia Farrow’s friend, Roman Polanski, there is full evidence of his guilt. Before fleeing to Europe, he admitted to drugging, raping and sodomizing a minor. On the one hand, no more than an accusation; on the other an admission of guilt. Is not Farrow aware of a double standard here? Is she not conscious of her own hypocrisy?
    JBP

    Get your facts straight. “Legal authorities” did NOT decide that the accusations did not justify a prosecution at all — Dylan’s loving mother Mia decided that a high-profile trial was not in the best interest of her fragile daughter who had been traumatized by inept evaluators dragging her through exhausting, repetitive interviews about what happened. The DA was quite outspoken about his belief that there was “probable cause” to prosecute Allen for the crime, but he did not want to re-victimize Dylan with a circus of a criminal trial, which it would have been. The family court judge wrote a scathing opinion in ’92 denying Woody all access to his daughter (which is RARELY ever done), so there was plenty of evidence about his danger to Dylan that brought about that outcome.

    Allen’s alleged assault on Dylan has absolutely nothing to do with who Mia may call a friend — that is a classic diversion technique to take the focus off of Dylan and Woody. Woody’s daughter Dylan is courageous as hell for speaking out about her abuse now that she is strong enough to do so — and she speaks for so many in her situation (1 in 5 girls in the U.S., as a matter of fact). It is far past time that the crisis of child sexual abuse be discussed in this country.
    Kathleen Russell (in response to JBP)

    From “Breaking the silence surrounding suicide” (by Brittny Mejia, Feb. 19)

    Great article, but one suggestion for future publications involving suicide prevention … try to steer clear of using the phrase “committed suicide.” The accepted verbiage these days is “completed suicide,” or “died by suicide.” 🙂
    Thanks for covering such an important topic!
    Greg, Project Lifeline Intern, Campus Health HPPS

    From “Beantown brashness: Deal with it” (by Jazmine Foster-Hall, Feb. 19)

    Having been an accent anomaly myself, I was entertained by the experiences you shared. I am from the South, but don’t sound like it, so I am always asked by people, “No, where did you really grow up?” when I tell them where I’m from. However, the entertainment ended with your next to last paragraph, which shows not only the brashness (arrogance?) that you have assigned yourself, but is also grossly inaccurate.
    I believe you are completely discounting the First Nations populations, for which there is evidence of inhabitation 10-12,000 years ago in both Arizona and Massachusetts, although I am fairly certain that they “gave a shit” about both places. However, if you only “count” Europeans as being able to “give a shit” about a place, the first Europeans to arrive in Arizona were the Spanish who documented being in Arizona in 1539, 81 years before the Pilgrims arrived in Massachusetts in 1620.
    So while it is true that Massachusetts was part of United States before Arizona, I don’t think that really equates to “giving a shit” about a particular area long before another when you consider the actual human history of both places.
    Another Non-Native Arizonan

    More to Discover
    Activate Search