Know who needs to be shamed? All people shaming people who have to beg for their survival online. Oh that fucks up your viewing experience? They're leeches who need to get a job? Glad life's a piece of cake for you. You sound every bit the rancid selfish capitalist who's the reason folks need help.
I was vague tweeting about the Hempstead hoax because my tik tok algorithm is fucked.
The Epstein files exist so that means I get to continue to harass and stalk this random British family who have nothing to do with Epstein.
This sort of smug, dismissive superiority from pundits - "oh, you were naive to think anything could be better" - is defeatist and lazy. There are a million different ways the world isn't the way it should be. That is an invitation for improvement! Use your platform to rally people for change!
Damn, they're really sticking it to all the feminists who said abortion must be legal because men can't get pregnant.
Speculation, as there were no emails specifically saying Subject: Blackmail
The *best version* of the Epstein scandal is that a wide swathe of American elites was palling around with a known child predator and explicit eugenicist for years on end — and is now closing ranks to downplay the severity of his crimes and their own complicity.
Last week the far right started peddling a narrative that the outrage over Epstein is a moral panic. Today, like clockwork, a more polite version of that narrative appears in the Atlantic.
www.theatlantic.com/ideas/2026/0...
Glad I was not assigned the “yes he was a pedophile but people are being too mean to him and blowing things out of proportion” beat. Baffling that anyone would attach their name to this crap.
That’s Brett Ratner there on the right.
It's not a moral panic. Delusions about satanic sex abuse rings in daycares, that was a moral panic. Salem witch trials also fit the bill.
Epstein is about specific known people who are either directly implicated or at least suspiciously in his orbit for one guy who really was raping kids en masse.
They are trying to make this a thing. A "moral panic" is not just public outrage at immorality. It is a concept with independent meaning and history. An essential element of it is media distortion, which Lehmann and Soave are contributing to. See Stanley Cohen, Folk Devils and Moral Panics (1972).
The vibe is really that people love doing weird shadowy talking about controlling the world shit but now that there are these crimes (which they are NOT involved with) those emails and dinner parties are less fun, this has all made it seem a little weird I guess
Especially since we currently have about a dozen moral panics that have gone too far, THIS was the thing that made you mad?
It’s really weird for some corners of the media to do a whole “the Epstein files are a moral panic that has gone too far” thing when no one has faced any sort of punishment and doesn’t sound like they’re going to.
This happens with*everything* now. No matter how grave the crime or one-dimensional the injustice, after four days the hivemind of American punditry decides that the Real Story is how the people upset about it are the real villains.
“I do not think that 50 year old men should be having sex with 16 year old girls. But “
Sure, a wide array of American elites were palling around with a pedophile and eugenicist but did you know that a Pedro Pascal fan account on bluesky is being slightly hyperbolic when posting about it
There are a lot of cases where a murder is masked suicide to protect powerful people but it gets to a point where you’re just denying that depression is a fatal illness.
I think there’s conspiracies around bourdians suicide because people would much rather believe their hero died for his ideals than a man who betrayed his own moral conscience and couldn’t live with it.
The Epstein stuff is always so amazing to me because it's like "yes he was a sex criminal but if you can get past that, he was also an avowed eugenicist"
Brooks should be driven out of public life. The fact that he knew there were photographs of himself with Epstein and he didn't disclose that while also telling people that they should move on is just straight up unethical.
Member of the Epstein class says what
"where are the protests" is a reflection of how many people's sense of reality is intermediated by billionaire owned social media and billionaire owned news media, both of which have strategically suppressed cover of the scale and frequency of 2025 protests
An entire political movement founded on uncovering hidden messages in documents to discover the powerful secret pedophiles and meanwhile the powerful pedophiles out here sending gmails saying "Hi fellow pedophile when are we meeting to do pedophilia again"
Very similar dynamic to now, where people in the Trump Administration keep stating publicly, “I am doing this racist thing racistly because I love racism” and the entire media is like “his motivations, what could they possibly be?!”
markpachucki @markpachucki.bsky.social Follow I feel like someone’s gotta say something, so I guess it’s going to be me. I’m 100% certain that I either know, have met, or have sought meetings with people who have done horrible things in their lives, too. How about y’all? Association is not causation, and it's not guilt — of anything. (1/8) 4:02 PM · Jan 31, 2026 1 quote 3 1 Write your reply Monica Carmean @monicacarmean.com · 11m I’ve never knowingly sought a favor from a sex offender, no. markpachucki @markpachucki.bsky.social · 1h I've known @nachristakis.bsky.social , a scientist and humanist, virtually my entire professional career in the context of being a strong educator, devoted spouse and parent. He’s always struck me as a kind, thoughtful, curious, and humane person. (2/8)
markpachucki @markpachucki.bsky.social · 1h He's always (very) aggressively fundraised for his lab's research program, students, fellows, and staff. I benefitted from such support as an advisee, so would be a hypocrite to generically fault any scientist for seeking funding, as I (and many of us) do to support those we advise. (3/8) 1 markpachucki @markpachucki.bsky.social · 1h But yes, the devil is in the details, so going beyond generic acts to specifics: would I have sought meetings with that particular "philanthropist"? Unambiguously: no, that’s not a choice I, nor perhaps many of us, would have made.🤮 (4/8) 1 markpachucki @markpachucki.bsky.social · 1h I haven’t walked a mile in @nachristakis.bsky.social 's shoes, and live a different life, with surely different constraints, so I can't judge. As it looks now, this thread and these comments look pretty consistently like an online piling-on, and we know that can escalate pretty quickly. (5/8)
markpachucki @markpachucki.bsky.social · 1h Who knows what the best-available defense to this sort of thing is, @kjhealy.co ? I sure don’t. I'll offer (preaching to choir, I know) that many of us who study networks are perpetually vexed by the concept of homophily and why we end up connected with people like ourselves. (6/8) 1 markpachucki @markpachucki.bsky.social · 1h Fewer focus on its inverse, heterophily, and even fewer are willing to actively reach across some real or perceived divide to understand someone’s behaviors, especially when those behaviors might differ from their own. (7/8) 1 markpachucki @markpachucki.bsky.social · 1h I admire folks who do so, and admire even more those who can do so with a spirit of curiosity. Instead of subtweeting displeasure, has anyone here tried engaging in dialogue? (8/end)
I promise you, even if someone is your mentor and friend, you should have the ability to say they made a mistake in FUCKING COMMUNICATING CASUALLY AND ALL FRIENDLY WITH JEFFREY EPSTEIN NOT WRITE AN EIGHT POST THREAD ON HOW WE SHOULDNT JUDGE
