Read on Twitter
Here are some of the fanciful ways @nytimes waves away Jeffrey Toobin's decision to masturbate on camera during a work meeting with colleagues, in a lengthy, often fawning profile of the "leading man of legal journalism."
"A Zoom incident." A "fateful appointment with Zoom." A reason for others (men) to think "there but for the grace of God go I." An act of "sexual forwardness" that "surprised his colleagues." A "very 2020 human resources issue." "The Zoom transgression."
The story also quotes a number of Toobin's elite, highly insulated colleagues and friends saying he's being unfairly punished, a victim of "cancel culture," etc., as if they are experts on what is harassment, what is traumatizing, and what is appropriate punishment.
The idea that a bunch of elite six-figure types nearing the end of their careers are fit to determine penalties for their friend who got caught on camera doing something he certainly did more than once is ridiculous.
One last thing on what a bad take this story delivers: The writer compares Toobin jerking it on camera on a work call to the New Yorker's latest cover, which shows ("ironically") a woman wearing a nice top and ratty shorts for a Zoom call.
As if wearing a nice top and makeup paired with off-camera PJ bottoms is the same thing—or even REMOTELY COMPARABLE—to what Toobin did!!
Ugh. Sorry, y'all, but this just really irks me. Dr. Jill Biden gets castigated for using the title she earned in the same week that work-wanker Jeff Toobin's rehabilitation tour begins. No woman would be allowed to come back from something 1/10th as bad as this.
As @jezebel notes: "What Toobin did was the Zoom equivalent of removing one’s genitals from their coverings at a work meeting and fondling them in full view of co-workers because that is exactly what happened." https://jezebel.com/jeffrey-toobin-doesnt-need-sympathy-for-taking-his-dick-1845888294
