I’ve learned that men are far more concerned about the labels we give them than what they did to GET those labels in the first place.

The point is bad politicians are bad politicians. Why blame an entire party for one guy in one county most people have never heard of? It would be cosignable to say you expected it of the Georgia democratic party, but to say it like the Republican party is better is lazy. That guy is a criminal at most and a person…

“I feel disrespected by the memory of people pointing out I was a deadbeat, rather than the fact that I’m a deadbeat, so I guess my only recourse is to teach my ex a lesson and get her arrested”

If it was a stand up sheriff’s department, they would do an internal investigation because falsely swearing to an affidavit IS a crime.

Ok, but you also *haven’t* read She Said, so... Did you just want to complain about something?

“So I’m not going to waste my time reading his story! I haven’t read She Said, but I’m intrigued.”

What a very interesting pair of sentences back to back. Sounds like you’re not going to “waste your time” reading She Said, either. 

Maybe this is a good place to brag on my wife (slightly OT):

I’m guessing he still doesn't think he did anything wrong. Multiple people call this guy a rapist in public and he's pretty cool with it.

He wrote about their stories in his articles. This is his story about how people were trying to keep those articles from being published.  That’s an important story as well.

I think you are actually one of the commenters here who is missing the point of the book.. It’s about the process that people in power used to keep stories about harassment/abuse from being told publicly. If you want to read more about the specifics of what those amazingly brave women went through in being subjected…

I mean, that’s great. Don’t read it if you don’t want to. But his reporting told the victim’s stories, and this is a different thing.

Except this book is about all the people who were paid to line up and protect HW & Matt Lauer & Donald Trump & Bill Clinton - and while it covers the tremendous abuse these women faced, it is about the lengths that people (men & WOMEN!) went to to protect the abusers....I still don’t understand the push back.

I agree from what I’ve read (haven’t read the book yet.) If he tried to make it about both topics I think they both might have suffered. 

It seems pretty clear to me that in the course of reporting the Weinstein story - which was presumably first a piece for NBC TV, which by necessity morphed into a print article when it moved to The New Yorker - a second story started to emerge. It’s literally in the title of this book, “Catch & Kill.” Killing Farrow’s…

It was about the process of getting the story published and the institutional bullshit that protected people like Lauer and Weinstein. I don’t think it minimizes anything about the victims, it’s just about a different-ish topic? It’s like being mad at All the President’s Men for focusing on Woodward and Bernstein…

The book is about NBC killing the story and Farrow trying to get it published.

YES. I have so many things to say about Catch and Kill. But what they did to Rose is so disgusting - I did wonder if “Diana” was the one who sent Ronan all the Black Cube data info. I’d like to believe she ultimately had a conscience, because what she did to Rose was so incredibly fucked up.

The fact that the Pulitzer-winning reporters have now published books about the investigations surely helps bolster her filing. Having these two works fact-checked, published, and backed by their publishers gives her quite a raft of support.

The harassment she endured has been detailed and discussed here for years. That’s why I said “a victim is a victim”. It doesn’t give her cover for coming off as TERF more than once, various caping she’s done for sex offenders, and generally attacking other women and victims. Which has also been detailed here for years.

Finished up Rowan’s book over the weekend and Holy Shit