The thing is, he could have said something like, “At the time I was developing my style, women journalists weren’t really on my radar, even though I worked with a number of them quite closely. In retrospect, there was some good work being done by women at the time, as there continues to be, but at the time, no, I…

Actually, you’re wrong.

You’re basing your argument on the subjective semantics of a word he didn’t even say. ‘Gritty’ was not his word. It was the OPs paraphrasing.

His words? That women “aren’t interested in uneducated and anti-social types.” Much less subjective, and actually, factually false. I’m not going to…

Nonsense. Saying that women journalists don’t want to deal with the gritty side isn’t just an opinion, it’s a factual contention that’s obviously false, given the innumerable disproofs.

Let’s not forget about Martha Gellhorn. She was a war correspondent for 60 years. She was the only woman to land at Normandy on D-Day on June 6, 1944. She was also among the first journalists to report from Dachau concentration camp after it was liberated by Allied Troops.

He lied because there is no way he didn’t know his bullshit reason wasn’t bullshit. If Neil Armstrong said he enjoyed his trip to the moon because it tasted like cheddar cheese, he would be both giving a bullshit reason and lying. Gay Talese is not illiterate so there’s no way he wouldn’t know of any women writers who…

I think it’s hilarious that you are sad for an 84 year old white man, because his legacy is being tarnished, when the whole point is that women don’t get a legacy at all, and are essentially dead to the world even while they are alive.

He didn’t merely say he wasn’t inspired by any women , he explained why he wasn’t with a bullshit reason that is easy to disprove, that is what’s outrageous. Since his reason is bullshit but he expressed it anyways , he did it to disparage women writers.

Where in this piece did the author say Talese should be dis-credited for his early work? In fact she does the opposite, she gives him his due. Does this make him above criticism.

My issue? He then goes on to make a sweeping generalization about all female writers and their supposed inability to write about and talk to certain people.

And! He was IN the Nora Ephron documentary, Everything is Copy. I just...what??

It’s a big deal because he’s lying to demean women writers. The excuse he gives about their not wanting to deal with the gritty side of life isn’t true , even Harriet Beecher Stowe did that in the 19th century with slavery and was followed by a long line of writers and journalists such as Frances Fitzgerald on…

She [Gloria Steinem] describes sharing a cab with Saul Bellow and Gay Talese, who, according to Steinem, dismissed her as “a pretty girl who comes to New York and pretends to be a writer.”

I think I’m doing ok! But thanks!

Is it? I thought it was female writers who inspired him. But even so, Gloria Steinem wrote her Playboy piece in 63.

I mean, she is 61, and has been around for decades, mostly writing for the literary magazine The New Yorker, which I’m sure this asshole has heard of. She actually has a new book out about dirty money in politics focusing on the Koch brothers. So if he actually paid attention to his peers without a penis, he would…

Okay a couple of things:

Hi, my name’s Jonathan Franzen and I really don’t see what the uproar is all about.

In some jurisdictions, the legal definition of rape requires penetration (sometimes specifically vaginal penetration), so any other kind of sexual assault isn’t technically called “rape” in the law, even though it is morally the same damn thing to the rest of us.

I will never understand why anyone uses that term. Why don’t we just call stealing “nonconsensual borrowing” while we’re at it?

Yeah, when I read Kim’s response, I was like “oh no, rebuffed by a Kardashian, there goes Bette’s chance at fame."