"It's a New York Thing" Part 2:

Elle writer Sady Doyle's Harvey Weinstein commentary reveals a woman more reminiscent of the white female upper class that Weinstein manipulated than of the type of journalist that eventually exposed him and has begun to hold him accountable.

Author's note: My cousin from west of Utica made a comment that as a New York State resident he feels that it's unfair to lump his home region in with the topic here. So to clarify, I mean New York City.

A few days ago I addressed the issue of the cavalier progressive liberal entertainment, media, and social sphere and its relationship to how they judge current events especially with respect to criminal justice. The Harvey Weinstein saga and the explosion of disgusting details about the licentious and coercive sexual and professional behavior that he displayed should have inspired a real thinking moment for the people closest to it, and I will grant that in many cases it probably has. But among those that are the pens, the microphones and speakers, and silver screens of America there appears to be an irrational resistance to that introspection, just as there have been for various other topics of recent times that are related to this but should not be thought of as the main issue.

In the first part, I proposed that writers like Michelle Goldberg of The Nation (writing in The New York Times) are not voices of a free press and society but willing pawns in the service of a ruling class of lords (and ladies) that apparently are not required to adhere to any moral standard whether it's their own or society's at large. Goldberg, taking a moment to show what's really important in the wake of this earth shattering scandal, hit out at "Republicans" for having "Phony Weinstein Outrage". Goldberg is hardly alone in this respect, as we have seen other denizens of high society like Lorne Michaels wave the Weinstein matter off as "A New York Thing".

It is important that we recognize that Goldberg and Michaels aren't the exception but rather the rule. They people comfortably ensconced in a society that claims to espouse a level playing field while at the same time guarding a giant pyramid. Like the cavaliers of 17th century England and Scotland, these creatures are flamboyant elites living a hedonistic lifestyle while seeking to impose their moral code on others, one that as I've stated before they have no intention of sticking to themselves.

So if the previous example was not enough, aside from Goldberg there is Sady Doyle who writes for Elle magazine, which like every other glossy publication has decided to trade entertainment for political shaming and cultural wars. On October 6, after the initial publication of the Weinstein bombshell, she wrote in "The Problem with our 'Good' Men" this: 

Can women ever really trust “progressive” male allies? This week, (1) The New York Times published an expose of indie film demigod Harvey Weinstein’s alleged sexual harassment, (2) Buzzfeed reported, based on an email cache they received, that multiple male journalists have at least at one point or another secretly corresponded with Milo Yiannopolous to gin up harassment mobs against female colleagues, and (3) these two stories broke within hours of each other. This week, the question of how to trust men is on the lips of just about every woman I know.

 Doyle goes on to acknowledge Weinstein's role as a donor for the Clintons and participant in the Women's March but claims that the outward feminist rhetoric of predators like Weinstein only acts as a "camouflage".

Well, no Sady Doyle, the only people acting as a "camouflage" are you and fellow media creeps that cape for the Democrats even when they're on their worst behavior. On September 7, Doyle claimed in an op-ed that Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters were vainly pretending that the two ex-candidates were still fighting each other and they should just get over it. She felt that Sanders supporters should overlook the pointless snipes that Clinton hurled his way in her new self-apologia What Happened? as honest critiques rather than shifting the blame away from her. The truth is that there is no amount of deflection and projection that can absolve the Democrats from manipulating every systematic tool in order to ensure Clinton's election: committing superdelegates her way, manipulating voting in Iowa, Nevada and elsewhere in her favour, and even vice-chair Donna Brazile leaking debate questions to her. Is it any surprise that at the Democratic convention in Philadelphia there were often more people outside protesting than inside or that some of them hurled a coffin over the protective barrier symbolizing the party?

Even more ridiculously Doyle implied on June 9 that Donald Trump had ordered a private meeting with James Comey in order to make him feel "alone, vulnerable, and intimidated" and compared it to the feelings of millions of women. Remember that we're talking about the head of the FBI, a man that is taller than Trump and has been at the reins of the main law enforcement agency that prosecutes organized crime figures, mass murderers, and other powerful people. If she thinks that he's a powerless waif, then why does she think could be accomplished by these ridiculous pussy hat marches?

So once the Weinstein case broke, who did Doyle claim was the real problem? Men. Always. . . men. In her response to the scandal she claimed that "men" were trying to blame Meryl Streep and Hillary Clinton. The reality is that these are two perfect people to throw stones and glass at (proverbially) on this topic. Clinton has lived for decades as the wife of a man considered one of the most egregious sexual predators and done everything to prevent him from receiving the proper consequences. Streep once referred to Weinstein as God and has praised Roman Polanski, a director that fled to Europe in the late 1970s in order to avoid with having sex with a minor. Nevertheless, Doyle tried to make the scandal a consequence of a "system where men have all the power".

OK, so if "men" have all the power in Hollywood, then how come Sony Pictures executive Amy Pascal was revealed to hold some of the same opinions in leaked emails that showed her saying racially disparaging things about President Obama? Pascal also claimed that the gender pay gap in Hollywood has more to do with actresses not knowing what they were worth than it has to do with discrimination. Pascal left Sony in 2014 following the email scandal, but now owns Pascal Pictures, a production company engaged in some of the same types of film production as at Sony.

If writers like Doyle don't understand the realities of business, then they have no hope of realizing why full-blown corruption as happened in the Weinstein scandal actually occurred. Hollywood was one of the most pro-liberal social circles in America; and yet hacks like her want to blame this on "men" just like Michelle Goldberg attempted to claim that faux Republican outrage was the real problem. These are the women in journalism that have failed at the most fundamental reason to understand that the media elite have become just as if not more disconnected from the average audience member as the entertainment and sports elite.