• thefartographer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      Y’all are being way too harsh. I’m sure he has a really good reason for why he enabled and protected Harvey Weinstein’s rapery. Something so convincing that we’d all say, “you were absolutely right to help blow up the lives of fellow artists. You’re really not a piece of shit!”

      Eta: Apparently, my sarcasm was too subtle. The fact that people aren’t catching onto that is incredibly depressing because that means this was a believably shitty take. I really thought the last sentence was a dead giveaway…

      Humanity and satire are dead, killed by genuine ghouls who are totally cool supporting monsters.

      • entwine413@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        There’s never a good reason to enable and protect rape.

        I just realized that you’re probably being sarcastic, though.

        • thefartographer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          I really thought that my sarcasm was obvious, especially with that last sentence… Apparently there are people out there who are more openly shitty than I realized.

          There’s never a good reason to enable and protect rape.

          Any standard set lower than this should be grounds to get throat-punched.

          • entwine413@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            Yeah, there are absolutely people who honestly believe that exposing Weinstein was a bad thing. Humans suck.