Hollywood’s Beloved ‘Gender Rights’ Nonprofit Time’s Up Closes After Years Of Siding With Alleged Democrat Abusers

Hollywood’s Beloved ‘Gender Rights’ Nonprofit Time’s Up Closes After Years Of Siding With Alleged Democrat Abusers

After a dramatic launch at the 2018 Golden Globes in the wake of the Harvey Weinstein scandal, the so-called “gender rights” organization Time’s Up raked in over $22 million from many of Hollywood’s most prominent names such as Oprah Winfrey, Meryl Streep, Shonda Rhimes, and Reese Witherspoon. Just five years later, Time’s Up is now officially closing its doors after the group was revealed to be nothing more than another partisan operation that opted to protect Democrats from the very type of sexual assault and workplace inequality allegations they claimed to be fighting against. Unsurprisingly, the celebrities who enthusiastically backed the legal fund are radio silent.

“Time’s Up will formally cease its operations by the end of January and direct its remaining $1.7 million in funds to the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund (TULDF),” The Hollywood Reporter reported this week.

Time’s Up first revealed its partisan bias during Joe Biden’s presidential campaign when former Senate staffer Tara Reade came forward accusing a married Sen. Biden of pushing her against a wall, kissing her, and forcibly penetrating her with his fingers under her skirt in 1993. Although the organization claimed Reade’s allegations should not “go ignored,” it was later discovered that its own public relations firm, SKDKnickerbocker, was headed by Anita Dunn, a top Biden campaign strategist.

Dunn was also reported to have previously given Weinstein “damage control advice.” The irony — that Time’s Up was created in response to the Weinstein allegations as an effort to stop and prosecute other predators — is lost on no one.

“I actually cried a little because I felt really betrayed,” Reade told Law & Crime at the time. “They never told me that their public relations was run by Anita Dunn. I found out in real-time reading Ryan [Grim]’s article.”

“From my perspective: the payments look like a way to silence me further from getting my story heard,” Reade said of the conflicting interests between SKDKnickerbocker and Biden’s campaign.

It wasn’t that they were staying out of politics. Time’s Up was of course proud to take bold stands against politicians such as Donald Trump and figures like Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, over whom it organized a “national walk-out” based on the thinnest of allegations.

But Time’s Up’s silence on Biden and other Democrats such as Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax would be small potatoes compared to revelations found in New York Attorney General Letitia James’ 2021 report that Time’s Up chief, Tina Tchen, and TULDF co-founder Roberta Kaplan were asked by former Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s office for guidance on how to respond to sexual harassment allegations brought by a former Cuomo aide, Lindsey Boylan.

Kaplan resigned from the Time’s Up board after the AG’s investigation found that Kaplan gave input on a letter Cuomo’s office drafted to rebut Boylan’s allegations.

“[Cuomo aide Melissa] DeRosa reported back to the Governor that Ms. Kaplan and the head of Time’s Up thought the letter was okay with some changes, as did [Cuomo ally Steven] Cohen, but everyone else thought it was a bad idea,” the AG’s report reads.

Less than a month after the AG’s report came out in the fall of 2021, Time’s Up’s A-list advisory board quietly dissolved. Celebrity names on the 71-member board included Witherspoon, Jessica Chastain, Natalie Portman, Janelle Monae, Brie Larson, Tessa Thompson, Padma Lakshmi, Laura Dern, America Ferrera, Kerry Washington, Tarana Burke, Alyssa Milano, Gretchen Carlson, Amy Schumer, and Julianne Moore.

According to Variety, Time’s Up co-founder Nina Shaw wrote an email to the members instructing them, “There is no need for your individual resignations, as the group no longer exists.” Further, she explained that “The goal behind a quick dissolution of the GLB [Global Leadership Board] was to shield all of you from unfair scrutiny.”

In other words, no need for the public handwringing and apologies that would normally be necessary had the accused not belonged to the Democratic Party. You may go quietly into the night.

Time’s Up’s disgusting partisan leanings ultimately disparaged and put an end to their own cause. They got what they deserved, but what about Hollywood’s most vocal and prominent #MeToo defenders and fundraisers? Will there be any repercussions or mea culpas about how their money went to support alleged predators like Cuomo? No, of course not.


Source

Is HBO’s ‘White Lotus’ A Reactionary Masterpiece?

Is HBO’s ‘White Lotus’ A Reactionary Masterpiece?

HBO’s “White Lotus” is the sharpest commentary on western decay in popular culture, a subtle and subversive invasion of America’s favorite medium. As the second season proved again on Sunday, Mike White challenges limp modern assumptions about sex, honoring the real “feminine mystique” as exactly that—an eternal mystery capable of bringing powerful men to their knees. 

There’s an irony in this visual feast, constructed to the tune of some $3 million a episode, training its arrow straight at the heart of American decadence. But writer and creator White deploys his ample resources for good, using all that sweet, sweet Warner Bros. cash to do something very simple: tell a great story that honors beauty and nature.

In “White Lotus,” we have an aesthetically stunning show that manages to captivate and castigate, to fill out stereotypes with nuance and honesty, to find where everyone is going wrong while doing so much right. It’s a rebuke of the self-serious “Handmaid’s Tale” era that dominated Me Too, as society’s wealthiest women stripped themselves of agency and saw only victimhood in their arcs.

Importantly, White’s human subjects are as complicated as the natural world he casts as their master, breaking in and out of the action with powerful shots of mountains and waves. He understands what Camille Paglia once wrote, that “everything great in western culture has come from the quarrel with nature.” Despite our best efforts, “White Lotus” reminds viewers, nature has yet to lose.

Where the show’s first season felt like more of a class commentary—albeit an excellent one—the second season, haunted visually by the ruins of Roman greatness, was more comprehensive. Indeed, in many ways, White seemed to be drawing from the same well as Paglia’s most important piece of writing, “Sex and Violence, or Nature and Art,” the first chapter of “Sexual Personae.” 

“The primary image is the femme fatale, the woman fatal to man,” wrote Paglia some 30 years ago. “The more nature is beaten back in the west, the more the femme fatale reappears, as a return of the repressed. She is the spectre of the west’s bad conscience about nature. She is the moral ambiguity of nature, a malevolent moon that keeps breaking through our fog of hopeful sentiment.” 

If you’ve seen the final moments of season two, that sentiment blares from the screen. Paglia’s vivid rendering of physical intercourse illustrates the emotional dynamics that drive “White Lotus” from beginning to end. “The basic mechanics of conception require action in the male but nothing more than passive receptivity in the female,” she wrote. “Sex as a natural rather than social transaction, therefore, really is a kind of drain of male energy by female fullness.”

Tempted and manipulated, the show’s men leave Sicily drained, above all else. (Financially, emotionally, physically.) The women? Sated. In White’s telling, it’s they who get the best of their men, wealthy or not. They’re intentional, they have agency, and they get what they want by wielding sexual power over men of all stripes.

While the women of “White Lotus” are not always heroes, they’re true to form. This, though, is where the show’s virtues become less clear-cut. Even as a graceful rejection of postmodernism, it’s not obvious whether “White Lotus” functions as critique or commentary. Of course, the show needn’t be one or the other to stand as art, but from a moral perspective the question lingers.

As our culture loses sight of beauty and nature, “White Lotus” succeeds because it honors both. More importantly, the show tells a great story, one that’s as compelling as it is true.


Emily Jashinsky is culture editor at The Federalist and host of Federalist Radio Hour. She previously covered politics as a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner. Prior to joining the Examiner, Emily was the spokeswoman for Young America’s Foundation. She’s interviewed leading politicians and entertainers and appeared regularly as a guest on major television news programs, including “Fox News Sunday,” “Media Buzz,” and “The McLaughlin Group.” Her work has been featured in the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, Real Clear Politics, and more. Emily also serves as director of the National Journalism Center, co-host of the weekly news show “Counter Points: Friday” and a visiting fellow at Independent Women’s Forum. Originally from Wisconsin, she is a graduate of George Washington University.

Source

Lisa Wilkinson and the Rule of Law

One of the greatest victims in this #MeToo age has been the complete undermining of the rule of law. With many in the media now acting as both judge and jury in the Supreme Court of Personal Opinion™, this fundamental tenet of the presumption of innocence has become all but null and void. The latest example of this is that of Lisa Wilkinson, and her speech at this year’s Logies:

Soapbox Antics

As reported in The Australian, the court has now ‘delayed the matter indefinitely on Tuesday, with Supreme Court Chief Justice Lucy McCallum saying Wilkinson had not heeded the advice and “openly referred to and praised the complainant in the present trial” in her acceptance speech.’

The article then goes on to state, ‘Justice McCallum warned the significant publicity had now “obliterated” the distinction between an allegation and a finding of guilt.’ Just as significantly, the article goes on to later state:

Mr Lehrmann has pleaded not guilty to the charge of sexual intercourse without consent and his legal team last year said the ex-Liberal staffer “absolutely and unequivocally denies that any form of sexual activity took place”.

Mr Lehrmann’s barrister, Steve Whybrow, said Wilkinson’s acceptance speech generated more than 800,000 online searches on Monday as well as a strong reaction on Twitter and Instagram.

How can Bruce Lehrmann ever receive a fair trial? What’s more, how can Lisa Wilkinson not be found guilty of being in “contempt of court”? Wilkinson has used her national platform to project — pun intended — a prejudgment on the accused and assume his culpability.

Lisa Wilkinson cartoon - Daily Telegraph

Warren Brown, The Daily Telegraph

Wilkinson and her team seem to be aware of just how serious her actions are legally, as she has now engaged the services of a barrister. As reported in The Australian:

On Wednesday morning, Matthew Collins, president of the Australian Bar Association, was interviewed on the Seven Network’s Sunrise program and said it was a “serious possibility” that authorities might look into charging The Project co-host Wilkinson with contempt of court after her Logies speech on Sunday night, which subsequently resulted in the delay of the trial of the man accused of raping former Liberal staffer Brittany Higgins.

Within four hours of his appearance on the breakfast TV show, Dr Collins was approached to represent the Ten Network and Wilkinson.

Sexual assault is an incredibly serious crime. And I don’t know if Mr Lehrmann is innocent or guilty. But that is just the point, is it not? Before a public trial in a proper court of law, neither does Lisa Wilkinson. And neither do you or I. In fact, the rule of law states that we should consider someone to be innocent until such a time in which they have been found to be guilty.

Misandrist Bias

Perhaps Lisa Wilkinson should re-read Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird. Indeed, maybe the majority of the Australian public would benefit from the exercise. Fellow journalists who’ve worked with Wilkinson seem to agree. In a now-deleted tweet, Tim Bailey wrote:

Tim Bailey to Lisa Wilkinson tweet

Mr Mehrmann not only proclaims that he is innocent of sexual assault, but that even no “form of sexual activity took place”. This means that not only is one of them lying, but if Mr Mehrmann happens to be found ‘not guilty’, then he would have every right to sue Wilkinson and Channel Ten for defamation.

Wilkinson’s legal transgression is so serious that it needs to be made a public example. Journalists need to stop abusing their positions of influence. And this kind of “trial by media” needs to be stopped. It is completely undermining the justice system of our country. And at the moment, it seems like men in particular are the victims of its targeted feminist assault.

Thank the Source

It’s Time to Hear from #UsToo

It’s Time to Hear from #UsToo

Men need good women to stand up for them and speak up against false allegations. The presumption of innocence must hold, otherwise, injustice will be perpetuated through the uncritical acceptance of horrendous lies.

In the days after the Ford-Kavanaugh hearing in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, social media as well as opinion editorials were filled with the angst of women “triggered” by their emotional distrust of men and their past experiences. Numerous women reacted in the context of their own sexual abuse experience, seeing and hearing — and reliving — their own trauma in Blasey Ford’s testimony. They were unable or unwilling to separate the two in order to evaluate the validity of someone else’s story. Corroboration is, seemingly, irrelevant.

Women described “wanting to throw a shoe at the TV,” being able to watch only briefly because they could “only take so much at once,” not being able to talk with their husbands about the hearing for “fear of losing control,” feeling that they didn’t want to “even speak to a man for weeks” and wanting to go “scream at every man I see.”

The cacophony of irrational, out-of-control voices reacting to Blasey Ford’s flawed testimony drowned out all rationality and reasoned arguments. Piers Morgan, the British television host, called the hearing a “viciously partisan bear-pit,” though, I’d say, at times it veered into a “cat fight.”

Emotion vs Reason

The #MeToo movement — which began with legitimate concern for women who have suffered harassment or abuse by an oafish, cruel, or evil men — has devolved into a movement where any woman can accuse any man of anything and she must be believed regardless of facts, evidence or corroboration.

Worse, the resulting toxic culture has made it impossible for men to defend themselves.

It’s time for an #UsToo movement where the voices of rational women are allowed to break through the shrillness and rancour of emotional outbursts from women who cannot separate fact from fiction.

Hundreds of #UsToo women spoke up for Kavanaugh, but their voices were ignored or ridiculed.  They gathered on Capitol Hill and made impassioned pleas for a fair hearing. Many sat and listen in the audience to every word of the hearings. Others sat in front of televisions taking careful notes. They are women who love their fathers, husbands, sons, brothers, cousins; they respect their decent colleagues and the wonderful men in their churches and communities. They are sympathetic to victims and condemn abusers, but they are not blind to reality.

They are aware that nobody’s perfect and women sometimes lie.  They saw what happened to the Duke Lacrosse Team.  They read the Rolling Stone account of the UVA fraternity “rapes.”  They’ve known about dozens of cases where girls are vindictive and, indeed, evil.

Some of us are old enough to remember the “casting couch” stories and to have seen plenty of sleeping around to get ahead.  We’ve listened to women retell events that we’ve shared and recognised that everyone has memories that are flawed and inaccurate. We’ve seen the women who will do anything and say anything to get attention or to get their way. We’ve seen women with mental and emotional illnesses who can seem normal at times but are not. We know that there are good women and bad women, good men and bad men.

Finding True Justice

The #MeToo movement has gotten seriously off-track.  The emotional, knee-jerk responses that assume Kavanaugh’s guilt because he is a man and the irrational acceptance of Ford’s testimony even though it is full of holes and has absolutely no corroboration is appalling.

Feeling sympathy or even empathy for a woman is not the same as hearing confirmation of the facts or having corroborating testimony from someone who was there at the time.

It’s time to end the self-centeredness of the #MeToo era as currently too often displayed. It’s not a sisterhood of saints.

It’s time to end the viciousness, bitterness, and vindictiveness of the #MeToo movement; it is destroying both women and men. It has destroyed civility and the assumption of innocence until proven guilty.  It has run roughshod over due process.

It’s past time to end the “politics of personal destruction” in the fear of any curtailment of abortion on demand. It was sad to see senators become caricatures of themselves as they preened in self-righteous arrogance, determined to destroy an honourable man of faith who had spent a lifetime building a reputation for sterling character and unimpeachable integrity.

Thousands of women expressed support for Kavanaugh; these are intelligent women who listen carefully and reason logically. Many of them have built successful relationships with men they love and with male colleagues and friends that they respect. Many are raising sons whom they love and of whom they are proud!

They don’t have an agenda other than Constitutional governance, and they recognise truth and facts.  They also recognise when a special agenda is being pushed and the public is being duped by slanted, biased media coverage and #MeToo knee-jerk reactions.

It’s time to hear from the thousands of women across the country who are saying, “Listen to #UsToo!”

We vote. We are actively involved in our churches, careers, and communities, and we have lots of friends.

___

Originally published at American Thinker. Photo: AP

Thank the Source

Pundits Declare Johnny Depp’s Victory over Amber Heard Means ‘#MeToo Is Officially Over’

Johnny Depp’s victory in his defamation suit against his ex-wife Amber Heard has media pundits and other commentators declaring the end of the reign of terror known as the #MeToo movement, which for years has elevated accusations over due process and replaced trial by jury with trial by media.

On Wednesday, a jury vindicated Hollywood star Johnny Depp, declaring that Amber Heard defamed him in an op-ed in The Washington Post in which she claimed to be a victim of spousal abuse. The jury awarded Depp $15 million in damages.

The verdict has launched a number of obituaries for the #MeToo movement, with commentators declaring that the era of believing all women is officially over.

“Depp won in the court of public opinion and in the court of law. Pirates of the Caribbean: The End of #MeToo,” quipped Rich Zeoli, a host on Philadelphia’s Talk Radio 1210 WPHT.

“#metoo is officially over,” declared journalist Michelle Celarier.

“#MeToo has been used as a weapon and finally women are learning that they will be held liable for false statements against innocent men,” tweeted commentator Carmine Sabia.

Fox News anchor Martha MacCallum said the Depp verdict “puts a bit of a stake of the heart in the notion that you believe all women.”

“We are moving toward #mentoo from #MeToo,” tweeted Nitesh Singh.

Even #MeToo supporters are acknowledging the damage that Amber Heard has done to the movement.

“Clearly this sets women back decades and erodes the progress we had made with #metoo this will have a chilling effect on abused women,” said attorney Areva Martin.

Musician Otep Shamaya called for removing the “toe fungus” known as Amber Heard from the #MeToo movement.

Vice News editor Chloe Angyal despaired at the jury’s verdict.

Follow David Ng on Twitter @HeyItsDavidNg. Have a tip? Contact me at dng@breitbart.com

Source

Johnny Depp Wins $15M Defamation Claim; Amber Heard Partial $2M Win in Counterclaim

The jury in a Fairfax County, Virginia, courthouse decided Wednesday that Johnny Depp and Amber Heard each wronged the other, though Depp was the more aggrieved party, in a defamation suit and counter-suit that captivated the country.

Depp sued Heard, his former wife, for a 2018 op-ed in the Washington Post that claimed she was a victim of domestic abuse. She did not name Depp directly, but it was clear from the context that she was accusing Depp of having abused her.

Depp sued Heard for $50 million. Heard filed a counterclaim for $100 million, complaining about statements his lawyers had made about her in answering her claims.

The trial lasted from April until early June, and featured sensational and shocking details their marriage. Depp’s side presented evidence that Heard had actually abused him, rather than the other way around, and refuted rumors that Depp had abused previous lovers, such as supermodel Kate Moss. Public opinion appeared to side with Depp.

The jury found for Depp on all three of his defamation claims regarding the op-ed, awarding him $10 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages. Notably, the jury found that a statement accusing Depp of sexual violence and domestic abuse was defamatory.

The jury found for Heard on only one of her two claims, awarding her $2 million in compensatory damages but no punitive damages, sending a message that they found her more at fault.

Joel B. Pollak is Senior Editor-at-Large at Breitbart News and the host of Breitbart News Sunday on Sirius XM Patriot on Sunday evenings from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m. ET (4 p.m. to 7 p.m. PT). He is the author of the recent e-book, Neither Free nor Fair: The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election. His recent book, RED NOVEMBER, tells the story of the 2020 Democratic presidential primary from a conservative perspective. He is a winner of the 2018 Robert Novak Journalism Alumni Fellowship. Follow him on Twitter at @joelpollak.

Source

Nolte: #MeToo McCarthyism Brings Down Ellen Degeneres

There was a time when Ellen Degeneres lashed out at the political right for criticizing the fact she turned her hit sitcom Ellen (1994-1998) into gay propaganda. Some of the criticism against her was valid (she did ruin a pretty good show), and some of it was way out of line, like calling her Ellen Degenerate.

But Ellen didn’t nosedive in the ratings because her critics stopped watching or launched a successful boycott. Instead, Ellen nosedived (and I was a fan) because every episode that followed the coming-out episode was about Ellen being gay. Although it tried, the show stopped being funny or insightful into the human condition. Suddenly a character that had identified as many things, complicated things, interesting things, decided to identify solely by her sexuality. And that’s tedious. Suddenly a sitcom that spent three seasons being about many things was only about one thing. And that’s boring.

Either way, all Degeneres was getting from the political right was criticized. She didn’t need a single one of her critics in order to hold on to her sitcom. She lost it because even her fans (like me), people who didn’t care she was lesbian (like me), stopped enjoying the show.

I wonder if she ever thinks back on that?

I wonder if she thinks about that now that the left destroyed her career, reputation, and legacy.

I have always liked Ellen Degeneres. She is endlessly talented, comes off as a decent human being, and has that rarest of qualities: an appealing personality. And I think that what the political left did to her is just as disgusting as what’s happened to Woody Allen.

The coincidence of when the public destruction of Ellen Degeneres launched is no coincidence.

In October of 2019, right in the middle of the left’s Defcon 1 Trump Meltdown, Ellen had the gall, the audacity, the cheek to sit next to former President George W. Bush at a football game.

And then….

And then….

And THEN!

She not only admitted to being friends with Bush, she refused to apologize.

THAT was the beginning of the end.

Ellen was mercilessly attacked as an apostate. Open, naked, blatant acts of McCarthyism followed, and after 60 years of walking the earth without a single controversy, all of a sudden — all of a sudden! — Hollywood and the corporate media told us she was mean, problematic, something akin to a monster, a #MeToo enabler who allowed her staff to prey and bully.

Even if the worst of the accusations were true (and per the usual, it was all accusations, many of them anonymous)  it was guilt by association for Ellen; and most of the accusations were nothing, just  the usual-usual crybabying we’ve come to expect from the crybully snowflakes that have infested the corporate media and left-wing Hollywood.

I’m friends with George W. Bush, and I’m not going to apologize.

Hey, that’s a nice career and reputation you got there; be a shame if anything happened to it.

This was an assassination, a warning to others in Hollywood, especially gay Hollywood, that you will do as you’re told.

I don’t like Ellen’s politics.

But what happened to her was fascist, un-American, and naked McCarthyism.

I wish her well and hope she remembers where true intolerance towards those who dare to be different comes from.

Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.

Source

#MeToo Could Kill Hookup Culture If We Let It

#MeToo Could Kill Hookup Culture If We Let It

The women of New York City have come for West Elm Caleb.

If you’re wise or fortunate enough to stay far away from TikTok, I’ll spare you the deep dive. The SparkNotes: After a TikTok user posted about being ghosted by a man named Caleb, her video was flooded with replies asking: “Is this West Elm Caleb”?

Turns out, a guy named Caleb who works at West Elm allegedly ghosted several women and dated multiple women at once, among other things, leading his former dates to bond on social media over their shared disgust. Of course, the guy they describe sounds like a jerk who doesn’t know how real men treat women, but even Buzzfeed came to his defense against the full-scale doxxing that took place.

If something is trending on TikTok it’s usually reliable proof that the topic isn’t worth your time, and for trends about people’s bad date stories, that rule almost universally applies. But in this case, the woes of West Elm Caleb and the story’s echoes of the broader #MeToo movement teach us something about how #MeToo can help the dating world and how it can’t.

I’m with Buzzfeed – a sentence I never thought I’d write – on the idea that we should be wary of letting the cancel culture craze drag a private individual’s reputation through the mud, especially based on hearsay or the subjective perspectives of social media snapshots. Does West Elm Caleb sound like a guy you shouldn’t let your daughter date? Duh. But doxxing dates-gone-wrong is hardly going to fix dating culture (I’m not talking about reporting harassment or other criminal behavior, here).

The saga of West Elm Caleb and the Women of New York, as Buzzfeed pointed out, isn’t that uncommon – and therein lies the problem. The problem isn’t just Caleb, and therefore the solution isn’t just doxxing/eliminating guys like Caleb. The problem is the system itself.

In some ways, the #MeToo movement didn’t go far enough. It called out the results but, if it recognized a cause at all, targeted the wrong one.

Old-fashioned ideas like commitment, monogamous and lifelong marriages, or concepts of strong, loving men who know how to decisively lead and capably provide for women aren’t what creates villains like West Elm Caleb. Men who treat women the way Caleb is accused of doing are the exact opposite of those ideals.

“I’m sorry but, like…we’re all grown-ups here, right?” Buzzfeed’s Katie Notopoulos wrote in Caleb’s defense. “If you’re shocked by the idea of a young single person in NYC having sex with more than one person they’re casually dating, there’s a whole TV show from the 2000s I’d love you to check out.”

Notopoulos is describing hookup culture, but completely missing the cause-and-effect connection. Men like Caleb are absolutely responsible for their actions, but such actions are also no surprise in a dating environment where short-term pleasure and self-serving desires reign supreme.

Caleb (again, allegedly) put his own flaky, have-it-all wants ahead of commitment, thoughtfulness, honesty, or stability towards the girls he dated. It’s no surprise Caleb’s former dates are miserable! That’s no way to treat a woman! But the fact that he’s getting called out for behavior that’s par for the course in hookup culture can’t help but indict the whole darn thing.

And that’s what #MeToo could do, if we let it.

Because the ugliness isn’t limited to predators like Harvey Weinstein. While not on the same scale, sin and selfishness (and the abuses to which they often lead) are inherent in a dating culture that idolizes self-indulgence and shirks from the sacrifices of commitment.

It’s also a culture that breeds loneliness, as “Sex and the City” author Candace Bushnell has admitted. “When I was in my 30s and 40s, I didn’t think about it,” she recalled. “Then when I got divorced and I was in my 50s, I started to see the impact of not having children and of truly being alone.”

West Elm Calebs are products of a world that tells them to date the way they do. Most Americans aren’t happy with the dating scheme – three in four daters told Pew researchers that they’ve found it very or somewhat difficult to find someone to date in the past year, and a full 50 percent of singles said they weren’t even looking.

But too many people discontent with dating in America are either trying to win the game with the same broken strategy, or giving up on playing altogether. Healthy romantic relationships (and their ultimate fulfillment, marriage) are built on sacrifice, commitment, and the active, selfless decision to devote yourself to someone else. You won’t find that from West Elm Caleb, nor in the empty promises of hookup culture itself.


Elle Reynolds is an assistant editor at The Federalist, and received her B.A. in government from Patrick Henry College with a minor in journalism. You can follow her work on Twitter at @_etreynolds.

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)