The headline upset me because I remember MeToo wasn’t defeated by powerful men in 2019. It was canceled for being too white, too upper class etc. By 2019 progressives in SE Asia had moved to Karen and Terf issues as well, and now Epstein fits into the omnicause's conspiracy chart.
I guess American progressives want to forget the past failures and infightings toward 2028, and the e-mails are a convenient narrative: Powerful men sabotaged our path, we have always been smol beans, and now we can link the anti-woke and centrists to Epstein.
The "centrists" bit is remarkably, well, central to this discourse. As though the issue wasn't sex trafficking but not being sufficiently far-left or far-right.
"Epstein gifted Allen nearly $10k worth of (men’s!) quiet-luxury underwear."
Ew.
I like learning about how to manipulate rich people, though. Isn't there some old SATC episode where Samantha? or all of them? want a Birkin bag, and maybe Lucy Liu is in the episode? People who can easily afford luxury items still like them as gifts. So interesting.
George H.W. Bush maintained a lot of good will by sending handwritten notes to everybody and anybody. That's something I've tried to implement myself, since giving people Birkin bags is beyond my budget (and luxury underwear is creepy).
Right - this is exactly it though. Men whose guilt-guilt is doubtful suddenly seem guilty of *something* (even if all they're guilty of is bad judgment) the moment there is an Epstein-inner-circle angle. As for what men, or anyone, got out of this connection, I guess Woody Allen didn't want to spend 129 euros for his own underpants? I have no idea. This is also readily avoided by buying literally any other underpants including pretty high-end ones so it doesn't seem wise, but what do I know. I also couldn't have written "Annie Hall," so.
Yeah, that piece and your reaction to it, all of the guilt by association, isn’t why I think the people in Epstein’s orbit are scummy (not a legal term, to be clear). It’s simply acting as if everything’s just hunky dory with good ‘ol Jeff! Even if these people spoke away from him saying “WTF?!?”, they didn’t ghost him, for concern of losing out on favors, even assuming all of them were petty ones rather than monstrous ones assumed by that article.
The headline upset me because I remember MeToo wasn’t defeated by powerful men in 2019. It was canceled for being too white, too upper class etc. By 2019 progressives in SE Asia had moved to Karen and Terf issues as well, and now Epstein fits into the omnicause's conspiracy chart.
I guess American progressives want to forget the past failures and infightings toward 2028, and the e-mails are a convenient narrative: Powerful men sabotaged our path, we have always been smol beans, and now we can link the anti-woke and centrists to Epstein.
The "centrists" bit is remarkably, well, central to this discourse. As though the issue wasn't sex trafficking but not being sufficiently far-left or far-right.
"Epstein gifted Allen nearly $10k worth of (men’s!) quiet-luxury underwear."
Ew.
I like learning about how to manipulate rich people, though. Isn't there some old SATC episode where Samantha? or all of them? want a Birkin bag, and maybe Lucy Liu is in the episode? People who can easily afford luxury items still like them as gifts. So interesting.
George H.W. Bush maintained a lot of good will by sending handwritten notes to everybody and anybody. That's something I've tried to implement myself, since giving people Birkin bags is beyond my budget (and luxury underwear is creepy).
In your case, I’ll allow it, but with these chummy elite scumbags? Nah.
And I *still* maintain Allen didn’t do what he was accused of! But man…the gifts, the favors to be on set and getting kids into college…
Right - this is exactly it though. Men whose guilt-guilt is doubtful suddenly seem guilty of *something* (even if all they're guilty of is bad judgment) the moment there is an Epstein-inner-circle angle. As for what men, or anyone, got out of this connection, I guess Woody Allen didn't want to spend 129 euros for his own underpants? I have no idea. This is also readily avoided by buying literally any other underpants including pretty high-end ones so it doesn't seem wise, but what do I know. I also couldn't have written "Annie Hall," so.
Yeah, that piece and your reaction to it, all of the guilt by association, isn’t why I think the people in Epstein’s orbit are scummy (not a legal term, to be clear). It’s simply acting as if everything’s just hunky dory with good ‘ol Jeff! Even if these people spoke away from him saying “WTF?!?”, they didn’t ghost him, for concern of losing out on favors, even assuming all of them were petty ones rather than monstrous ones assumed by that article.
It's the underwear! I do not wish to know about Woody Allen's underwear.
The proliferation of pornography did far more to cover for Epstein and his ilk then me too. Be serous.