Bad Art Friend

[Anonymous]

Agree with a pp that what I took away from this is that I can't trust the New York Times.

Individual actors behaved badly, Sonya Larson and Ng are mean girls who took it way too far due to their own pathologies. But the main disappointment for me here is the NYT and its lack of integrity. I am soured on the Times, vaguely disgusted when I go to open the app, disappointed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone else getting targeted ads on social media from Masterclass for a class on - wait for it - Empathy, taught by Roxane Gay?
You just can’t make this stuff up.
I’m so tempted to leave comments about whether the class with cover navigating other people’s organ donations.

Better yet, you should directly email or contact Masterclass and let them know your concerns.

[Anonymous]

I believe Sonya is a psychopath and Dawn was the pychopaths supply. A naive person trying to always see the best in people. I have been that supply and so here is my thought. I am of course biased by my life experience. And I apologized for the length of the post...

To begin, organ donors are encouraged to talk about their journeys. She started a private facebook group. She didn't reach out to anyone but Sonya when she saw she hadn't responded because she thought Sonya was her friend.

She wrote a letter to her recipient. This is standard with donations. And she even said in the letter that she didn't expect the person to contact her back. But the letter is extremely vulnerable and appropriate and Sonya takes that very vulnerable letter and uses it to redefine this incredible act of selflessness as "a white savior thing." This is a gross misinterpretation and beyond cruel.. So right from the start Sonya is displaying an extreme lack of empathy. In it Dawn talks about abuse and trauma. No normal human would ever exploit a letter that revealed such vulnerabilities. No normal human would ever read narcissism into her words.

Psychopaths love naive do gooders. Especially if they lack social power or they are awkward. And it turns out, many organ donors are accused of ulterior motives. It is a phenomenon that exists in this world. No one wants to think people are selfless enough to do something so brave.

So Sonya, who comes from much better economic circumstances and is a better writer and a more sophisticated person targets Dawn. She chooses her as her supply. Because psychopaths have no feelings so their only fun is messing with people. So she decides to write a story she knows will humiliate Dawn. And she uses lines from her letter to her recipient. Because she wants to make the argument that Dawn has a white savior complex. From her letter. To the recipient of her organ.. She writes this brutal story. Takes several lines from the letter and lies to Dawn by saying her story isn't about her.

Meanwhile she's getting her friends to join in on the cruel attacks. I don't think any of these people even knew Dawn. They knew Sonya's version of Dawn. And they were mostly POC who have experienced what Sonya was describing so they easily believed it. And that's what psychopaths do. They manipulate people into believing that the victims of their perpetrations are actually the perpetrators. (Trump liked to do this)

So now they're talking trash ready to take this white karen down. They believe Sonya's story. They are trashing a woman they've never met. They are talking about how it's the Dawn story. Then denying it's the Dawn story. No, they tell her. It's an examination of race.

But Dawn knows that's not true. Her first clue - Sonya took some of the lines right from her letter to her recipient.

So she freaks out because the most important thing she's ever done in her life has been rebranded as an attention grab by a cruel girl. A beautiful sophisticated woman who she thought was her friend. Sonya wants everyone to know that Dawn wasn't her friend. But psychopaths charm people and I would not be surprised if Sonya did pretend to be Dawn's friend and then denied it.

So when Dawn freaks out and starts harassing Sonya - which is what a lot of people who are severely gas lit from psychopaths do - now Sonya gets to play the victim even more. In one of the text or email exchanges Sonya says something like she's becoming the main player in this show. I can't remember the exact words. But now Sonya has a bunch of minor literary stars championing her.

I'm not saying white women don't do a lot of the same things Dawn has been accused of. I'm just saying that this wasn't the case. The facts dispute this. And then Sonya starts accusing Dawn of being a white woman trying to take ownership of Sonya's work.

I don't know how the writer at the NY Times got involved. But I will say this. Dawn was probably acting just like a vulnerable person who has been gaslit and probably is visibly upset a lot during her interview. And Sonya I am sure charmed the socks off of that guy.

Then Twitter piles on. And the psychopath is having the time of her life. She's now the main event. A POC who is being dragged by a crazy white Karen. And we know for a fact from all the texts that this wasn't happening. Dawn really believed Sonya was her friend. And Sonya used Dawn to gain attention and for the fun of hurting another human. Dawn was Sonya's psychopathic supply.

So what if Dawn wanted to share about her journey and she was disappointed no one in her writer's community was up for hearing about it. It's a normal reaction to having this intense and incredible experience and no one wanting to hear about it.

All I know is that Sonya has been caught in numberless lies. And Dawn, everyone agrees, is way too forthright and honest. She is the perfect victim for the psychopath's supply.

A vulnerable, trusting do gooder who is never going to fit with the elite writer's crew Sonya is running with.

I wanted to share this because I don't think people who haven't been that supply know what psychopaths are capable of.

But the truth is that this is a vulnerable woman we're dealing with. And this woman is a human being. And I just wanted to share how I viewed the situation

[Anonymous]

Fantastic summary, PP. I have no knowledge of psychopaths so can’t speak to that aspect, but everything else you e said seems completely spot-on to everything I’ve read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree with a pp that what I took away from this is that I can't trust the New York Times.

Individual actors behaved badly, Sonya Larson and Ng are mean girls who took it way too far due to their own pathologies. But the main disappointment for me here is the NYT and its lack of integrity. I am soured on the Times, vaguely disgusted when I go to open the app, disappointed.

Totally agree. But then I've been turned off by the times for a long time now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe Sonya is a psychopath and Dawn was the pychopaths supply. A naive person trying to always see the best in people. I have been that supply and so here is my thought. I am of course biased by my life experience. And I apologized for the length of the post...

To begin, organ donors are encouraged to talk about their journeys. She started a private facebook group. She didn't reach out to anyone but Sonya when she saw she hadn't responded because she thought Sonya was her friend.

She wrote a letter to her recipient. This is standard with donations. And she even said in the letter that she didn't expect the person to contact her back. But the letter is extremely vulnerable and appropriate and Sonya takes that very vulnerable letter and uses it to redefine this incredible act of selflessness as "a white savior thing." This is a gross misinterpretation and beyond cruel.. So right from the start Sonya is displaying an extreme lack of empathy. In it Dawn talks about abuse and trauma. No normal human would ever exploit a letter that revealed such vulnerabilities. No normal human would ever read narcissism into her words.

Psychopaths love naive do gooders. Especially if they lack social power or they are awkward. And it turns out, many organ donors are accused of ulterior motives. It is a phenomenon that exists in this world. No one wants to think people are selfless enough to do something so brave.

So Sonya, who comes from much better economic circumstances and is a better writer and a more sophisticated person targets Dawn. She chooses her as her supply. Because psychopaths have no feelings so their only fun is messing with people. So she decides to write a story she knows will humiliate Dawn. And she uses lines from her letter to her recipient. Because she wants to make the argument that Dawn has a white savior complex. From her letter. To the recipient of her organ.. She writes this brutal story. Takes several lines from the letter and lies to Dawn by saying her story isn't about her.

Meanwhile she's getting her friends to join in on the cruel attacks. I don't think any of these people even knew Dawn. They knew Sonya's version of Dawn. And they were mostly POC who have experienced what Sonya was describing so they easily believed it. And that's what psychopaths do. They manipulate people into believing that the victims of their perpetrations are actually the perpetrators. (Trump liked to do this)

So now they're talking trash ready to take this white karen down. They believe Sonya's story. They are trashing a woman they've never met. They are talking about how it's the Dawn story. Then denying it's the Dawn story. No, they tell her. It's an examination of race.

But Dawn knows that's not true. Her first clue - Sonya took some of the lines right from her letter to her recipient.

So she freaks out because the most important thing she's ever done in her life has been rebranded as an attention grab by a cruel girl. A beautiful sophisticated woman who she thought was her friend. Sonya wants everyone to know that Dawn wasn't her friend. But psychopaths charm people and I would not be surprised if Sonya did pretend to be Dawn's friend and then denied it.

So when Dawn freaks out and starts harassing Sonya - which is what a lot of people who are severely gas lit from psychopaths do - now Sonya gets to play the victim even more. In one of the text or email exchanges Sonya says something like she's becoming the main player in this show. I can't remember the exact words. But now Sonya has a bunch of minor literary stars championing her.

I'm not saying white women don't do a lot of the same things Dawn has been accused of. I'm just saying that this wasn't the case. The facts dispute this. And then Sonya starts accusing Dawn of being a white woman trying to take ownership of Sonya's work.

I don't know how the writer at the NY Times got involved. But I will say this. Dawn was probably acting just like a vulnerable person who has been gaslit and probably is visibly upset a lot during her interview. And Sonya I am sure charmed the socks off of that guy.

Then Twitter piles on. And the psychopath is having the time of her life. She's now the main event. A POC who is being dragged by a crazy white Karen. And we know for a fact from all the texts that this wasn't happening. Dawn really believed Sonya was her friend. And Sonya used Dawn to gain attention and for the fun of hurting another human. Dawn was Sonya's psychopathic supply.

So what if Dawn wanted to share about her journey and she was disappointed no one in her writer's community was up for hearing about it. It's a normal reaction to having this intense and incredible experience and no one wanting to hear about it.

All I know is that Sonya has been caught in numberless lies. And Dawn, everyone agrees, is way too forthright and honest. She is the perfect victim for the psychopath's supply.

A vulnerable, trusting do gooder who is never going to fit with the elite writer's crew Sonya is running with.

I wanted to share this because I don't think people who haven't been that supply know what psychopaths are capable of.

But the truth is that this is a vulnerable woman we're dealing with. And this woman is a human being. And I just wanted to share how I viewed the situation

ITA. But hasn't the pendulum shifted back- isn't Sonya being dragged on twitter now? Or is she not? I dont have a twitter (it's a horrrible place) but at least in other spaces a lot of the consensus seems to be against Sonya. But maybe I'm being too hopeful about the horrific people on twitter

[Anonymous]

The twitter conversation has been largely silent because the blue checks mostly still back Larsen (and Castellani) even with all the evidence that came out (IMO because literary power is on Larsen's side) and have stopped engaging because it makes them look bad. There is a non-check discussion that supports Dorland but it's not large.

Grub Street remains appallingly unconcerned with their obviously problematic male executives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The twitter conversation has been largely silent because the blue checks mostly still back Larsen (and Castellani) even with all the evidence that came out (IMO because literary power is on Larsen's side) and have stopped engaging because it makes them look bad. There is a non-check discussion that supports Dorland but it's not large.

Grub Street remains appallingly unconcerned with their obviously problematic male executives.

But honestly this is a reason why Grub Street, Gawker, etc are almost universally irrelevant now. A lot of these Gawker writers and stuff were like Gen X icons in their day, and their incredibly mean, "sassy" attitude was considered extremely cool. Now, with young millennials and Gen Z, they find that ish absolutely disgusting and hate bullying or mean behavior. That's how someone like Chrissy Teigen got cancelled, even though she is a WOC and came for a white woman (at the time- Courtney now identifies as non binary). Their whole culture of insular, "you cant sit with us" meanness is extremely culturally out of date and i think with every year that passes they become shockingly more irrelevant compared to the stangelhold on the conversation they had back in the late 2000s- early 2010s. And this is just proof that they are well and truly cooked and they know it. The only ones that this type of behavior appeals to seems to be some out of touch contingent of liberal Xer women who thought giving BJs was empowerment and Terry Richardson was edgy/cool and SAHMs were cringe and pathetic.

They get ripped apart by women from younger spaces and just appear to be kind of fading into obscurity. I doubt any Gen Z person would even know what Jezebel is, save for the time FDS did a podcast excoriating the place. They would find it very cringe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree with a pp that what I took away from this is that I can't trust the New York Times.

Individual actors behaved badly, Sonya Larson and Ng are mean girls who took it way too far due to their own pathologies. But the main disappointment for me here is the NYT and its lack of integrity. I am soured on the Times, vaguely disgusted when I go to open the app, disappointed.

Dorland herself pitched the story to NYT. Bob Kolker is an excellent and empathic reporter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with a pp that what I took away from this is that I can't trust the New York Times.

Individual actors behaved badly, Sonya Larson and Ng are mean girls who took it way too far due to their own pathologies. But the main disappointment for me here is the NYT and its lack of integrity. I am soured on the Times, vaguely disgusted when I go to open the app, disappointed.

Dorland herself pitched the story to NYT. Bob Kolker is an excellent and empathic reporter.

NP. You're definitely in the minority in that opinion. Even the comments on the article (and follow up) directly call out his reporting quality on this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with a pp that what I took away from this is that I can't trust the New York Times.

Individual actors behaved badly, Sonya Larson and Ng are mean girls who took it way too far due to their own pathologies. But the main disappointment for me here is the NYT and its lack of integrity. I am soured on the Times, vaguely disgusted when I go to open the app, disappointed.

Dorland herself pitched the story to NYT. Bob Kolker is an excellent and empathic reporter.

Your view is out of date. Dorland didn't pitch the story. And Kolker has had a significant reputational hit due to shoddy reporting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with a pp that what I took away from this is that I can't trust the New York Times.

Individual actors behaved badly, Sonya Larson and Ng are mean girls who took it way too far due to their own pathologies. But the main disappointment for me here is the NYT and its lack of integrity. I am soured on the Times, vaguely disgusted when I go to open the app, disappointed.

Dorland herself pitched the story to NYT. Bob Kolker is an excellent and empathic reporter.

Your view is out of date. Dorland didn't pitch the story. And Kolker has had a significant reputational hit due to shoddy reporting.

She didn't? I thought that had been pretty much established.

[Anonymous]

Yeah the Kolker comment about who pitched the story wasn’t really a denial that Dorland pitched the story I think, just a statement that Kolker and his editor intended the story to show both sides of the issue, whoever had pitched it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yeah the Kolker comment about who pitched the story wasn’t really a denial that Dorland pitched the story I think, just a statement that Kolker and his editor intended the story to show both sides of the issue, whoever had pitched it.

NP. Perhaps, but Kolker certainly failed in that regard, regardless of who pitched it (which... I'm not sure why that would be relevant anyway) and his reputation has been seriously tarnished

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Agree with a pp that what I took away from this is that I can't trust the New York Times.

Individual actors behaved badly, Sonya Larson and Ng are mean girls who took it way too far due to their own pathologies. But the main disappointment for me here is the NYT and its lack of integrity. I am soured on the Times, vaguely disgusted when I go to open the app, disappointed.

The New York Times Politics section is untrustworthy because it platforms liars — conservatives lie and for some reason I don’t understand the NYT thinks it has to give liars a platform just because they’re in one party even though that party is an autocratic husk that is built on lying.

But much of the rest of the paper is great. This story wasn’t terrible— it just played up both characters as equals in order to drive clicks and ratings. The business of news is really what is killing us. All we have in the US is bothsides corporate media searching for profit like the NYT, or billionaire funded crap like DC Examiner. We are in a bad place with news.