For those of you that don’t get it.
His point is that, as the father of two daughters, that basically has nothing to do with his position on sexual assault in the workplace. It has to do with things he does with his daughters. The trick in this article is that the point is never mentioned. Why not? Because it’s a corollary argument:
- If it doesn’t make sense that politicians always say “as a father of daughters, I am appalled at the rape…” What? You can’t empathize and see the evil in rape unless you have a daughter? Daughters, therefore, should have nothing to do with the anger and condemnation we have for sexual predators like Harvey Weinstein.
- The corollary, which we saw here, is that an article about “as a father of two daughters” should have nothing to do with Harvey Weinstein, or other sexual predators…so it doesn’t. That’s it.
As of now, he’s got 530 claps, so at least that many people get it. But it’s not obvious, so don’t feel bad if you didn’t. Or, you know, I may be reading too much into it.