EW. I am trying to process my reactions to this one and they are all over the place. What a disgusting gentleman this guy is, and at the same time how predictable. I'm also having Some Thoughts regarding the writer of the Jane profile, but it's worth slowing that down to examine my own biases, in addition to how the cultural landscape has changed. Women are still expected to be such good sports about dudes like this, but it was even worse in 2005. I was recently thinking about the "we saw your boobs" song from the 2013 Oscars, and how of course those women had to laugh and pretend to be charmed by this frat boy garbage party person, otherwise they would be shunned. So I'm trying not to judge this person for trying to get a good story- she definitely got one. She really doubled down on it later though. I guess my summative takeaway is just EW.
All the Thoughts. If your biases are against a dude masturbating and receiving oral sex during an interview, I welcome your biases! I agree though that women are still expected to be good sports, but this is such an egregious example that it’s so hard to imagine this being okay. Talking about gross marketing about how sex sells and then full on sex acts in front of a reporter is a HUGE leap when you compare one to the other, but was the culture at the time conditioning us to accept small things all the time that when a dude you are working with masturbates in front of you that just becomes normal?
I would be interested to know what the editorial meetings were like on this. Did Ko and her editor sit down and discuss how to approach this event in the piece? Did they talk to lawyers or the authorities about what happened? I assume no on the latter, or they only discussed legal ramifications in terms of potential libel (but he did it and admitted to it so, you know, pinch of salt.)
It certainly requires an intense cultural complacency and patriarchal stranglehold to witness a sex crime then either think about or be forced to prioritise the headline potential of this experience. I did try to find some more recent thoughts from Ko on this piece but couldn't get any.
And at Jane of all places! This might be more presentism and the decline of print, but I have always had the sense that Jane was supposed to be the more enlightened one.
As a teen/young adult at the height of A&F, "the cool kids" was definitely not how I'd describe their customer base. More like boring future white Republican Chads and Karens, so about the farthest thing you can get from "cool."
Dov Charney is revolting, OF COURSE Kanye brought him on board to this brand.
EW. I am trying to process my reactions to this one and they are all over the place. What a disgusting gentleman this guy is, and at the same time how predictable. I'm also having Some Thoughts regarding the writer of the Jane profile, but it's worth slowing that down to examine my own biases, in addition to how the cultural landscape has changed. Women are still expected to be such good sports about dudes like this, but it was even worse in 2005. I was recently thinking about the "we saw your boobs" song from the 2013 Oscars, and how of course those women had to laugh and pretend to be charmed by this frat boy garbage party person, otherwise they would be shunned. So I'm trying not to judge this person for trying to get a good story- she definitely got one. She really doubled down on it later though. I guess my summative takeaway is just EW.
All the Thoughts. If your biases are against a dude masturbating and receiving oral sex during an interview, I welcome your biases! I agree though that women are still expected to be good sports, but this is such an egregious example that it’s so hard to imagine this being okay. Talking about gross marketing about how sex sells and then full on sex acts in front of a reporter is a HUGE leap when you compare one to the other, but was the culture at the time conditioning us to accept small things all the time that when a dude you are working with masturbates in front of you that just becomes normal?
I would be interested to know what the editorial meetings were like on this. Did Ko and her editor sit down and discuss how to approach this event in the piece? Did they talk to lawyers or the authorities about what happened? I assume no on the latter, or they only discussed legal ramifications in terms of potential libel (but he did it and admitted to it so, you know, pinch of salt.)
It certainly requires an intense cultural complacency and patriarchal stranglehold to witness a sex crime then either think about or be forced to prioritise the headline potential of this experience. I did try to find some more recent thoughts from Ko on this piece but couldn't get any.
And at Jane of all places! This might be more presentism and the decline of print, but I have always had the sense that Jane was supposed to be the more enlightened one.
As a teen/young adult at the height of A&F, "the cool kids" was definitely not how I'd describe their customer base. More like boring future white Republican Chads and Karens, so about the farthest thing you can get from "cool."
Dov Charney is revolting, OF COURSE Kanye brought him on board to this brand.