An addition to what I have above, the RH apology also fascinated me in what it said between the lines.
"I’ve gained a much better understanding of consequences and how people work, and the way I said much of what I said ignored the humanity of those on the receiving end."
I read this line and continued, and then I had to go back to it, because of what I realized it said, not about RH, but about those who defended and applauded her. She admits she dehumanized her victims, and so it becomes clear that her supporters defended this type of abuse from all angles. Not just harsh language, but dehumanization. I wonder if they still will defend what she did as being necessary, or "sometimes over the line," or whether they will apologize for their role in it. Or maybe they will disagree that she dehumanized anyone, and say that this is just a forced apology that shouldn't have been necessary.
The other less surprising aspect is what she leaves out.
"Yes, I did so to extremes in the sense of being relentless and insulting (“you illiterate fuck!” yes, “eat shit and die because your taste is shit!” no), and for this I very, very much do apologize."
I'd think that her saying certain people should have acid poured down their throats, be shot in the head, be stabbed, their bodies mutilated, their families attacked, etc., might be higher on the list than "you illiterate fuck" and "eat shit and die." Her choice of examples were either meant to downplay the ferocity of the attacks, or maybe she isn't apologizing to those people on purpose. I did notice that after mentioning that she dehumanized people, she specifically by name apologized only to authors of color. I can't help reading something into that.
Ah well. Maybe it's nothing. Maybe I'm just reading too much into it.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2014-10-20 05:45 pm (UTC)"I’ve gained a much better understanding of consequences and how people work, and the way I said much of what I said ignored the humanity of those on the receiving end."
I read this line and continued, and then I had to go back to it, because of what I realized it said, not about RH, but about those who defended and applauded her. She admits she dehumanized her victims, and so it becomes clear that her supporters defended this type of abuse from all angles. Not just harsh language, but dehumanization. I wonder if they still will defend what she did as being necessary, or "sometimes over the line," or whether they will apologize for their role in it. Or maybe they will disagree that she dehumanized anyone, and say that this is just a forced apology that shouldn't have been necessary.
The other less surprising aspect is what she leaves out.
"Yes, I did so to extremes in the sense of being relentless and insulting (“you illiterate fuck!” yes, “eat shit and die because your taste is shit!” no), and for this I very, very much do apologize."
I'd think that her saying certain people should have acid poured down their throats, be shot in the head, be stabbed, their bodies mutilated, their families attacked, etc., might be higher on the list than "you illiterate fuck" and "eat shit and die." Her choice of examples were either meant to downplay the ferocity of the attacks, or maybe she isn't apologizing to those people on purpose. I did notice that after mentioning that she dehumanized people, she specifically by name apologized only to authors of color. I can't help reading something into that.
Ah well. Maybe it's nothing. Maybe I'm just reading too much into it.