Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Libertarianism

'Mattress Girl' Emma Sulkowicz Walked Into a Libertarian Happy Hour. No, This Is Not a Joke.

Mattress girl's unlikely friendship with Reason folks is the subject of a recent piece for The Cut.

Robby Soave | 10.30.2019 5:00 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests
Sulkowicz | Reason
(Reason)

When Reason's Nick Gillespie mentioned to me that he had met Emma Sulkowicz—a Columbia University graduate and performance artist known to many as "mattress girl"—and invited her to social events for New York City libertarians, I thought he was joking.

But some days later, I found myself at one of those events—a happy hour at a bar in Manhattan—with Reason folks and friends. And there was Sulkowicz.

Sulkowicz's recent adventures in libertarian circles is the subject of a fascinating piece from The Cut's Sylvie McNamara, who interviewed both Gillespie and I for it. McNamara describes Sulkowicz as someone ideologically adrift, making new friends, and interested in ideas and perspectives she formerly would have rejected.

Regular readers of this website know a great deal about Sulkowicz. She was the subject of a series of Reason articles in 2015, after she became famous for carrying her mattress around Columbia's campus as a from of protest. Sulkowicz had accused a fellow student and former friend, Paul Nungesser, of sexually assaulting her during an encounter that began consensually but then escalated into unwanted sex and violence. She reported the alleged attack, but the university cleared Nungesser of wrongdoing and declined to remove him from campus. This triggered Sulkowicz's protest, which gained nationwide recognition. She even attended the State of the Union as a guest of Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D–N.Y.). (She later confessed disappointment that President Obama had not addressed the alleged campus rape crisis in his remarks.)

Suffice it to say, I was extremely critical of Sulkowicz, whose advocacy was, in my view, undermining important principles of due process and the presumption of innocence for the accused. I wrote that she was making life "a living hell" for Nungesser. I assailed some members of Columbia's administration for not merely tolerating but actively encouraging her "harassment campaign" against him. And while I never claimed that she had lied about what happened to her—I don't know, and still don't—I did cast doubt on her allegations.

I was not Sulkowicz's only libertarian critic. Cathy Young, a contributor to Reason, has also criticized her for many of the same reasons, in our pages and elsewhere. Young's piece in The Daily Beast prompted Jezebel's Erin Gloria Ryan to accuse Young of "writing virtually the same rape-is-a-hysterical-feminist-fantasy op-ed over and over again for years." Ryan was editor of Jezebel when one of her writers, Anna Merlan, called me an idiot for doubting the soon-to-be-debunked Rolling Stone story; I've subsequently had many pleasant social encounters with Ryan and one with Merlan, who has not been shy about continuing to critique Reason. It is indeed possible to like people or their writing, while maintaining very strong objections or reservations.

Young was also at the happy hour. In fact, I was talking to her when I noticed Sulkowicz. It seemed like we should say hello.

I can't imagine what it would be like to meet two of your biggest critics—two people who had not only criticized you, but had done so with reference to a deeply personal, disturbing subject. But if Sulkowicz was fazed by this, she didn't show it. She was friendly, even.

Well this has taken an interesting turn
I'm here with @robbysoave and Emma Sulkowicz a.k.a. Mattress Girl @esulk pic.twitter.com/oB5KvPECiB

— Cathy Young ???????????????????????? (@CathyYoung63) April 16, 2019

With this somewhat awkward but ultimately pleasant introduction out of the way, the next time I encountered Sulkowicz, it was like running into an old friend. This was despite the fact that the occasion was a party for me to celebrate the release of my new book, Panic Attack: Young Radicals in the Age of Trump, which included (among many other things) a chapter about how Sulkowicz's activism had negatively impacted the landscape for due process on campus. Sulkowicz was accompanied by McNamara, who writes:

This party is for Robby Soave, a libertarian reporter on the snowflake beat whose new book, Panic Attack: Young Radicals in the Age of Trump, is—per Soave's own description—"a book that is extremely critical of [Sulkowicz] and that I don't wish her to read." Soave met Sulkowicz a month or so before at another libertarian happy hour. Initially bewildered, he warmed to her, finding her to be inquisitive and even fun to talk to. "We exchanged contact information," he tells me later, "and talked about maybe becoming, I guess, friends or something?" He laughs incredulously as he says this, sounding a bit on edge.

As Sulkowicz swirls around the party, her presence stirs an obvious question: whether this is performance art. Soave brings it up twice when we speak on the phone afterward, acknowledging the possibility that he's being set up. While he's inclined to believe that Sulkowicz is moved by earnest curiosity, he's aware of her background in "elaborately planned performance art" and her reputation as a provocateur. Since graduating from Columbia in 2015, Sulkowicz has done around a dozen performances touching on issues like consent, anti-institutionalism, climate change, trauma, wellness, and female sexual desire. It's natural to wonder if she's currently breaking bread with this crowd to lampoon civility politics or to expose views she hates. Honestly, it might be harder to believe that she's simply trying to learn. …

Leaving Robby Soave's book party, I walk Sulkowicz home through the June heat and she wants to know how I'll describe her. "You're a trickster," I say, and she asks how I came to that word. I tell her that she seems to relate to the world on the level of mischief and play, rather than through any kind of ideology or strict moral code. I use the word "chaotic," and she doesn't object. A friend of hers wrote a book about tricksters, and she says she relates to it. Tricksters, he argued, can move unrestricted between any circumstances, because they're always playing.

McNamara was right to bring up the possibility that this all some sort of trick, or game, or even an art project. Sulkowicz's past art work—not just the mattress project—often involved elaborate setups, and the audience becoming not just passive consumers but part of the art themselves. I would not be completely shocked if that was the case here.

But I don't think that's what is happening, mostly because Sulkowicz's starting point for her journey of self-discovery was Jonathan Haidt's outstanding book, The Righteous Mind. It does not at all surprise me that someone, after engaging with Haidt's work for the first time, would subsequently find value in meeting new people and exploring different ideas. Sulkowicz even attended one of Haidt's talks and became friendly with him.

"My wife and I have gotten to know her well, can attest that she is open-minded, loving, funny, forgiving," he wrote on Twitter. "She is on a journey, guided by virtues badly needed these days."

Gillespie hit on this theme as well in his comments for the Cut piece:

Gillespie laments that, despite the "embarrassment of riches with how much we can communicate and explore ideas, we're having kind of shitty conversations." He hopes Sulkowicz's journey sparks "a movement, among younger people in particular, to broaden the types of conversations that happen." Asked about the value of these conversations, Sulkowicz's friends mostly resort to abstraction: the benefit of dialogue is to "bridge divides" or "build empathy," responses that are neither trivial nor satisfying. To be fair, not everything that is valuable can be easily explained. Several people tell me that, after knowing Sulkowicz, they have "more respect for people's personal narratives" and are less likely to see others in bad faith.

I think libertarians are a bit better at having these kinds of uncomfortable conversations and associations simply because we tend to have larger areas of passionate agreement and fiery disagreement with just about everybody. Indeed, those of us in the Reason orbit are sometimes accused by people outside the Beltway of zipping from one cocktail party to the next, happily clinking glasses with the very government policymakers and elite media class whose ideas we are inveighing against in our writing.

As a serial attender of ideologically-all-over-the-place social events, I'm guilty as charged here. I get drinks with Brooklyn lefties then head to Fox News to talk with Tucker Carlson about why Trump is right to pull out of Syria. I carve pumpkins with Vox writers and play Dungeons & Dragons with Federalist writers. I've dressed up for a gala featuring neoconservative stalwart Nikki Haley, and gone to a drag show with David French (OK, I made that last one up, but all the others are real). The simple truth is libertarians can't really afford to avoid being friends with non-libertarians. If I only associated with the people whose views very closely matched my own, I would only associate with a small handful of people.

There are, of course, critics of this kind of befriend-everyone feel-goodery, and many have reacted to the Cut piece with predictable condemnation. On the right, some were furious that we would seemingly welcome Sulkowicz without her having made any kind atonement for her perceived wrongs. On the left, many accused Sulkowicz of betraying her own tribe. Both extremes might be surprised at how alike they sound, if they could possibly listen to each other for even one minute.

Everyone else, I think, can take solace in the fact that it is possible for people with stark differences to be on friendly terms, and make strides toward better understanding each other. We often have more in common than we think, especially when we set aside politics—the art of bossing each other around.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: A Georgia Death Row Inmate Receives a Stay of Execution Amid Calls to DNA Test Evidence

Robby Soave is a senior editor at Reason.

LibertarianismMediaReasonCampus Free SpeechDue Process
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (227)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Marshal   6 years ago

    "She is on a journey, guided by virtues badly needed these days."

    Right. Since her notoriety didn't turn into an activist career as she hoped she's on a journey to find someone else who will give her a job so she can make a living avoiding real work.

    1. JesseAz   6 years ago

      So... work for Reason?

      1. Marshal   6 years ago

        Any port in a storm is my guess, but Reason seems to be her target.

      2. Ragnarredbeard   6 years ago

        Why not? Can't work for Deadspin after last night's debacle.

    2. Careless   6 years ago

      The story says she just started a four year master's degree course in traditional Chinese quackery.

      1. Marshal   6 years ago

        It also says she quit both making art and her fellowship at a museum.

        [She] was essentially unemployed for a time, drawing income from occasional speaking gigs, mostly about campus sexual assault.

        And she's writing a book.

        Sounds like she figured out which is the easier gig . But she already tried to get in on the left and failed. So now she's a Free Agent looking for a team.

        1. Hit and Run   6 years ago

          Quit, or was discovered that caring a mattress isn't art?

      2. Joe M   6 years ago

        The twist at the end of that sentence was fantastic.

    3. Kazinski   6 years ago

      She just seems highly impressionable. At Columbia she was hanging with SJW artist crowd, now she's hanging with a libertarian crowd.

      That's not really a criticism, she's young and it takes some time to to find out who we really are as adults, assuming we ever figure it out.

      1. loveconstitution1789   6 years ago

        "Hanging with" and "advocating for" are very different types of behavior.

      2. Careless   6 years ago

        She's a couple of years out from 30. Not young

    4. very good   6 years ago

      Searching for a supplemental source of income?
      This is the easiest way I have found to earn $6000+ per month over the internet. Work for a few hours per week in your free time and get paid on a regular basis.
      for more info visit any tab this site.☛ https://bit.ly/338oxZi

      1. TrickyVic (old school)   6 years ago

        Will you accept a former SJW with a mattress?

    5. Ragnarredbeard   6 years ago

      My thoughts exactly. There can't be a lot of money in carrying around a mattress (unless you're a prostitute but the mattress thing would make it kind of an obvious target for the popo).

  2. Adans smith   6 years ago

    You can cure ignorance but crazy is for ever, I'd stay away from that one.

    1. Zeb   6 years ago

      Just keep the right distance. Crazy can be interesting and/or fun.

      1. NashTiger   6 years ago

        Sounds like you want to bang her

        I don’t reccomend

        1. Finrod   6 years ago

          A friend of mine often says: "Never stick your dick in crazy."

        2. Zeb   6 years ago

          No, I really don't. Just a general observation.

      2. loveconstitution1789   6 years ago

        She comes with her own mattress.

        1. Hit and Run   6 years ago

          Wood not.

          1. StackOfCoins   6 years ago

            Wood berry, and then regret it forever, sad to say. Gnothi seauton.

        2. darkflame   6 years ago

          +100

  3. Metazoan   6 years ago

    Nice article. Also this:

    The simple truth is libertarians can't really afford to avoid being friends with non-libertarians. If I only associated with the people whose views very closely matched my own, I would only associate with a small handful of people.

    is a great point. If any lifestyle idea is libertarian, it's that politics should be subordinate to friendship.

    1. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   6 years ago

      She made her name by harming others. Why would anyone want to be her friend? Why would anyone trust her if she claims to want to be your friend? Why would anyone trust her for anything?

      Isn't her mindset generally called sociopathic?

      1. Metazoan   6 years ago

        I don't think one should trust everyone, far from it. I suppose I am responding to the broader point, that political disagreement should not be a reason to not be friends.

        True, in this woman's case it goes far from that. I still don't think he is in any danger by saying hi at a crowded event.

        1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   6 years ago

          I still don’t think he is in any danger by saying hi at a crowded event.</i.

          With witnesses.

          1. Hit and Run   6 years ago

            Non-feminist witnesses.

        2. Hit and Run   6 years ago

          Saying hi, maybe not. Exchanging contact information, possible rape accusation. WALKING HER HOME? why not just just take a roofie in Crusty's front yard?

  4. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf   6 years ago

    Right, and Lenin was a performance artist too. Hitler, maybe not.

    Should performance artists who cause harm get a free pass? Artistic immunity, shall we say?

    Good grief.

    1. ScribblerG1   6 years ago

      The moral confusion on display in this article is epic. While some here have pointed out that she caused harm to others, this really doesn't go far enough. She was highly deceptive and used the levers of power her university and then the social justice mob gave her to terrorize and hound a person for over a year. Her behavior was egregious as it was calculated and done that same dough-eyed look Robby Soave seems to find so endearing.

      What do you think sociopaths look like Robby? Drooling and fangs and crazy hair? Nah, they look like Sulkowicz. Keep in mind that people like her can be incredibly seductive and nice to get past barriers.

    2. mtrueman   6 years ago

      "Lenin was a performance artist too"

      Lenin always jumped at the chance to wear disguises, wigs, costumes, makeup etc.

      Emma's talent lies in her gift for self promotion.

      1. gaoxiaen   6 years ago

        I am the walrus.

        1. Deconstructed Potato   6 years ago

          I am the eggplant, cock-a-doodle-doo

        2. MatthewSlyfield   6 years ago

          I am the floorrus.

        3. Benitacanova   6 years ago

          I am the mattress.

  5. Eddy   6 years ago

    OK, how many events have you been to with, let's say, Jordan Peterson or Rick Santorum?

    1. Eddy   6 years ago

      Have you ever hung out at a social gathering with the National Right to Life Committee or the Family Research Council? Ever chatted on friendly terms with members of these groups?

      1. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   6 years ago

        Real libertarians don't associate with people who literally want to turn this country into The Handmaid's Tale.

        (I still don't know why they let Stephanie Slade work here.)

        1. Finrod   6 years ago

          Felony word crime, using literally figuratively.

          1. D-Pizzle   6 years ago

            The character portrayed as OBL would literally be using "literally" literally.

      2. Unicorn Abattoir   6 years ago

        You probably have, whether they/you realize it or not.

      3. Zeb   6 years ago

        You sound like you don't think he has.

        1. Eddy   6 years ago

          He could have, but maybe an article on the subject would be enlightening.

          The articles the Reason staff publish (except Slade's occasional contributions) don't really show a great understanding of the nuances of social conservative thinking.

          If he could talk at greater length with actual social conservatives he could at least know more about the positions he and his colleagues are arguing against.

          Rebutting the other guy's position is easier if you know what you're rebutting. That's why so many classic works have extensive quotations from their adversaries - to an extent which would probably violate copyright law today.

          1. Zeb   6 years ago

            I agree it would be better if they spent a bit more time covering the more conservative side of libertarianism.
            I tend to fall more on the libertine side of things, but it's good to be challenged and know what other people actually think.

            1. phillhamian   6 years ago

              To their credit, Reason did a nice video piece on Tom Woods, which I enjoyed and there was little to no backhanded compliments, but that was a year ago. The tone of the site was already changing well before then and it's only gone further down that path over the last 12 months. I'm not holding my breath for Nick Gillespie to interview Curtis Yarvin or Lew Rockwell any time soon.

          2. loveconstitution1789   6 years ago

            I would cut reason some slack if they did send staff to cover a wide range of groups and their talking points. Get some real views from average people in those groups without the usual gatekeepers in the MSM. That gets expensive and The Jacket refuses to skimp on leather oil. ONLY THE BEST!

    2. gaoxiaen   6 years ago

      You'd be surprised by people that you meet face-to-face. While in college I met G. Gordon Liddy, Dick Gregory, and Ralph Nader at receptions after they made speeches. G. Gordon Liddy was a charming guy. My left-leaning (and Liddy, shall we say, critic) French professor was captivated by him and his excellent French. Dick Gregory was pretty cool. Ralph Nader was kind of a dick, and I don't mean like Dick Gregory.

      1. Vernon Depner   6 years ago

        G. Gordon Liddy was a charming guy.

        Psychopaths often come across as charming on first encounter. Since their surface presentation is always fake, they can learn to "do" charming when it suits their needs. But as the saying goes, "a sane man can pretend to be crazy, but a crazy man can't pretend to be sane." Psychopaths can learn to imitate normal behavior, but they can never really "get" it and act normal instinctively, because they do not experience normal emotions and perceptions. If you hang out with a psychopath for long enough, sooner or later they will screw up and do or say something that a normal person never would. Then you know something's wrong.

  6. OpenBordersLiberal-tarian   6 years ago

    "Everyone else, I think, can take solace in the fact that it is possible for people with stark differences to be on friendly terms, and make strides toward better understanding each other."

    I only agree up to a point. For example, I argue with my progressive friends about the minimum wage, but that doesn't mean we can't still enjoy our Handmaid's Tale viewing parties.

    On the other hand, I have completely stopped talking to my Republican brother-in-law. Republican Presidents run concentration camps and put kids in cages; Democratic Presidents do not. There is no room for nuance here. Anyone who supports Drumpf is enabling crimes against humanity.

    I encourage other open borders advocates to completely "disconnect" from your conservative / Republican / alt-right friends, family, and co-workers ASAP.

    1. Nardz   6 years ago

      Good stuff

    2. Ragnarredbeard   6 years ago

      Would note that the only President to ever put people in actual concentration camps was a demorat. As for kids in cages, it was also done first by a dem. The truth hurts, don't it?

    3. Chili Dogg   6 years ago

      God, you're stupid.

    4. Chili Dogg   6 years ago

      BTW, I was referring to OBL. No, I don't mean Osama bin Laden.

  7. Unicorn Abattoir   6 years ago

    When Reason's Nick Gillespie mentioned to me that he had met Emma Sulkowicz—a Columbia University graduate and performance artist known to many as "mattress girl"—and invited her to social events for New York City libertarians, I thought he was joking.

    Joking about what? Inviting her, or about going to libertarian events?

    1. Fancylad   6 years ago

      "or about going to libertarian events?"

      Ow, my sides.

  8. JeremyR   6 years ago

    Unlikely? Virtually all your commentators consider Reason contributors to be extremely left in everything but economic issues (and even then, supporting government paying for things like abortions). Cosmotarian is the word people used.

    But beyond that, what does it say when you are willing to overlook that she absolutely tortured a guy for years while in college? It was performance art, it was basically a non stop case of harassment.

    1. JeremyR   6 years ago

      Dammit, wasn't performance art.

    2. Zeb   6 years ago

      extremely left in everything but economic issues

      I'm curious what you mean by that. A lot of people might call that "being libertarian". I haven't seen any support here for government paying for abortions.

      1. Metazoan   6 years ago

        I actually think that a lot of the "these people are leftists" complaints on the comments here come from two places:

        1) Prioritizing some issues where we happen to agree with the left in some way (like immigration)

        2) The fact that the articles are written in a style and with an angle so as to potentially appeal to left-leaning readers.

        The actual content, though, is almost always thoroughly libertarian.

        1. Mr. JD   6 years ago

          No, it's certainly not.

          1. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

            Yeah you're right. What we need are more "libertarian" articles like "How Trump Is The Most Libertarian President Ever" and "Why Leftists are Traitorous Commies Who Must Be Destroyed"

          2. Metazoan   6 years ago

            How is it not? Yes, I grant that there are a couple articles from time to time that are not doctrinaire libertarian. But nearly every one involves shrinking government.

            1. Ryan (formally HTT)   6 years ago

              The basic principle of open borders is an expansion of government through additional welfare benefits not only granted purposely up front but through buying votes from said welfare that promote policies to redistribute wealth

              Open Borders is peak beltway liberaltarian

              1. Freddy the Jerk   6 years ago

                Yes! I've yet to see a single piece from Reason addressing the enormous governmental cost involved with throwing the gates wide open. It's all "hardworking immigrant families are a net positive addition to our communities" bullshit (looking at you, Shikha, you shrieking harpy), when the data indicates exactly the opposite. Reason: talk about how we're going to pay for being the world's sugar daddy, or STFU about open borders.

                *** This mag/website brought to you by the Chamber of Commerce, and crony-capitalist Republicans everywhere ***

            2. loveconstitution1789   6 years ago

              Not only do private parties have property rights but so do states and the United States of America. Libertarians respect property rights but they are also not absolute because tiny and limited government is a necessary evil.

              The US Constitution grants states immigration control until 1808 and then the federal government gains that control. The residents of states through their Founding representatives established that.

              You can change immigration laws if you get enough support.

              1. Chili Dogg   6 years ago

                Limited government is an oxymoron.

        2. Nardz   6 years ago

          It also comes from fully cosigning Leftist narratives and embracing progressive perspectives/priorities...

          1. NashTiger   6 years ago

            Just yesterday, we had a “ to be sure, the valid criticism of a wacko leftist woman is misogyny”

        3. EISTAU Gree-Vance   6 years ago

          I wouldn’t say that libertarians who favor more immigration are leftists. I would just say they are wrong. People see what they see.

          For example, did you see the story a couple weeks ago where the Mexican army had to give el chapo’s son back to the cartel AFTER they had him in custody? These are the best and brightest people running this country? The same article said that 43 children were kidnapped from a Mexican school. Still unsolved. Really? Why some people think that we need more of this here just smacks of white guilt and virtue signaling to many.

          Oh, and it’s not the 1880’s anymore. There are 8 billion people on the planet. Enough. We can’t take them all. Or clean up their messes. That seems pretty libertarian too.

          1. Nardz   6 years ago

            +1

      2. Eddy   6 years ago

        "Libertarians Should Look Twice at Planned Parenthood Defunding Efforts

        "GOP move to "defund Planned Parenthood" isn't all it's cracked up to be.

        https://reason.com/2015/07/30/will-planned-parenthood-be-defunded/

        1. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

          You mean, an article pointing out that Republican efforts to "defund Planned Parenthood" aren't actually cutting spending?

          1. Eddy   6 years ago

            I'm replying to this claim: "I haven’t seen any support here for government paying for abortions."

            1. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

              That article does not advocate for government paying for abortions.

              1. Eddy   6 years ago

                She opposed a bill to defund Planned Parenthood, so, yes, she wanted Congress to vote to keep the money flowing - and Planned Parenthood would put the money in its "not abortion" account and use the money thus freed up to pay for abortions.

        2. Echospinner   6 years ago

          I don’t see anything non libertarian in the article. It is more a report of the political issues going on than anything else.

          1. Eddy   6 years ago

            It suggests there's no point in ending abortion funding since the money will just be spent on non-abortion-related purposes instead of being cut from the budget in true Libertarian fashion.

            Of course, one of the talking points for many libertarians is that the government shouldn't take sides on abortion, which includes not paying for abortion with tax money (even indirectly by giving the dough to abortionists for their other activities).

            1. Eddy   6 years ago

              "Libertarians also oppose the use of taxpayer funds or other government resources for abortion. Like other matters of individual conscience, abortion should be kept out of the public sphere."

              https://www.lp.org/libertarians-abortion-is-a-matter-for-individual-conscience-not-public-decree/

              (Of course, I don't think neutrality is possible, I'm just saying there are *some* libertarians who specifically say they're against tax funding for abortion)

            2. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

              Did we read the same article?
              Nothing in that article advocates for government funding of abortions.

              1. Eddy   6 years ago

                Opposes a bill to defund Planned Parenthood. But doesn't want govt to pay for abortions.

                OK, here's another one:

                "On Friday, Donald Trump is expected to announce plans to resurrect an old rule prohibiting federal grant money from going to any group that even discusses abortion as an option for pregnant women. The rule would also prohibit funds from going to health clinics or organizations that *share a space or affiliation with an abortion provider,* according to what White House officials have told the AP and other news outlets. [emphasis added]

                "Some libertarians will inevitably argue in favor of the move on the grounds that anything that cuts federal spending is good. But that rests on a faulty premise, since the change doesn't signal one cent of a reduction in federal funds overall. It would simply shift who is eligible to receive the money and how free their speech can be.

                "To the extent that this means more unintended pregnancies and more undesired births, we could actually see a net increase in federal expenditures on health care and family planning. There's no way this move is really a fiscally conservative one. For most pushing the change, it's about religious doctrine or morality."

                https://reason.com/2018/05/18/abortion-rule/

                1. Eddy   6 years ago

                  [there should be ellipses between the first and second paragraphs]

                2. Eddy   6 years ago

                  "Reason Staff Bitterly Divided on Planned Parenthood Defunding: Podcast

                  "Is President Donald Trump's plan to enforce a "bright line" separation between Title X funding recipients and even referring to the practice of abortion a good start or a self-defeating political stunt? It depends on who you ask. Including, at least to some degree, within the Reason staff.

                  "On today's Reason Podcast, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Nick Gillespie, Peter Suderman and yours truly duke it out over the lines between conscientious objection and hypocritical stunt, between government imprimaturs and nonprofit branding, between fungibility and non. The quartet also tangles over Trump/Russia, post-shooting argumentation, and Reason's staff dress codes over the years."

                  https://reason.com/podcast/reason-staff-bitterly-divided/

                3. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

                  Opposes a bill to defund Planned Parenthood.

                  The article doesn't even oppose the bill per se. It's just pointing out what the bill would *actually do*, and what it wouldn't do. Namely, it wouldn't cut funding, it would just shift the money around, and instead of money going to Planned Parenthood to pay for condoms, it would go to nonprofits to pay for "faith-based pregnancy advice". She's obviously frustrated with the Republican grandstanding on the issue. She's ALSO frustrated with PP's duplicity when it comes to OTC birth control.

                  ENB obviously views the Republicans as using this issue cynically and deceptively. She may be right, she may be wrong, but it's not the same as supporting government funding for abortion.

                  1. Eddy   6 years ago

                    I suppose you could say she looks forward to a Libertopia with much less spending, not even for abortion, so in that sense maybe she *isn't* for funding abortions.

                    But, yes, she opposed what was at the time the only option on the table to cut abortion funding - and she did it again with Trump's executive order.

                    So I'd say at minimum she wants abortion funding for the time being while awaiting in perfect faith the arrival of the Libertopian society.

                    1. Echospinner   6 years ago

                      Eddy there is no abortion funding and has not been.

                      PP has separate entity for that.

                      What it does provide on a sliding scale with government subsidy are three basic things. STD diagnosis and treatment, birth control, and basic Gynecology. They do not do obstetrics.

                      It can be argued that government has no business in any of that. Then we should also end subsidy for TB control, care of indigent patients, Medicaid, support for trauma services, the CDC, all money losers supported by tax dollars.

                      If not there is no principled argument for the above.

                      Furthermore consider birth control if you are concerned with abortion. IUDs are not that costly and prevent unwanted and unaffordable pregnancy. I am concerned with it and I think the discussion is worth having.

                    2. Eddy   6 years ago

                      "Eddy there is no abortion funding and has not been."

                      To repeat, ENB "wanted Congress to vote to keep the money flowing – and Planned Parenthood would put the money in its 'not abortion' account and use the money thus freed up to pay for abortions."

                      Try making a donation to ISIS's charitable arm with the assurance that they won't use the money directly to fund terrorism, and see how successfully you can defend yourself from an "aiding terrorism" charge.

                      "STD diagnosis and treatment, birth control, and basic Gynecology"

                      And they could continue to get federal funding for those services if they just gave up their abortion business. But they think abortion is more important than the things you listed.

                  2. TrickyVic (old school)   6 years ago

                    ""“faith-based pregnancy advice”. ""

                    Did that involve Nuns and rulers?

      3. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

        Calling Reason "extremely left" is code for "Ron Paul is the only one true libertarian"

        1. Hank Phillips   6 years ago

          Ron Paul wants men with guns to force women to reproduce against their will. He couldn't get elected dog-catcher in Catholic Ireland!

          1. phillhamian   6 years ago

            Are you claiming Ron Paul has advocated forcing women to have sex?

            1. TrickyVic (old school)   6 years ago

              He's no Bill Clinton.

            2. Vernon Depner   6 years ago

              Are you saying abortion should be legal for rape victims and minors below the age of consent?

  9. JesseAz   6 years ago

    My biggest hope is Gillespue and Soave are just theater subjects of her next performance art. Double mattress girl.

    1. Zeb   6 years ago

      Will there be a video?

    2. Dillinger   6 years ago

      dude no. worst 3some ever.

    3. American Mongrel   6 years ago

      Didn't realize he was gay. That explains a lot

      1. Nardz   6 years ago

        Gay or not, association with a woman whose claim to fame is falsely accusing someone of rape and harassing him for over a year makes one (or two in this hypothetical) quite vulnerable to false accusations of rape.
        It would be poetic justice if Gillespie and/or Soave were hoisted by their own petard

        1. Zeb   6 years ago

          Which petard is that now? Are you saying that they support the ease with which one can ruin someone's life with a false accusation? Have you ever read anything they have written on the subject?

          1. Social Justice is neither   6 years ago

            Robby is fully on board for every false rape accusation. His initial reaction to Jackie was how awful her experience was and we should believe her. He got savaged and changed his tune but still. He maintained the credibility of the accusers against Kavanaugh even as the stories all fell apart.

          2. loveconstitution1789   6 years ago

            Soave thinks the Red Brigade will never come for him if he just can get them to accept the olive branch.

            This mattress girl is not a team player because she pressured the Academic wing of Socialism. She is looking for friends and would likely suck a dick for one. Too bad for her, women are not Soave's flavor.

          3. Nardz   6 years ago

            Zeb,
            The petard I was speaking of was enthusiastically associating and endorsing a woman whose known for falsely accusing someone of rape, and trying to ruin his life, in their attempt to be accepted by Leftists.
            But, if the other shoe fits...

  10. Fancylad   6 years ago

    "Indeed, those of us in the Reason orbit are sometimes accused by people outside the Beltway of zipping from one cocktail party to the next, happily clinking glasses with the very government policymakers and elite media class whose ideas we are inveighing against"

    Reason writers aren't accused of traitorously clinking glasses with the elite media class despite opposing their ideas.
    They are accused of abandoning libertarian principles and parroting the ideas of the elites solely to get those cocktail party invites.
    Look at any Suderman, Shikha or Boehm article and you'll see not one whit of difference between what they're saying and what DNC party organs like WaPo and the NYT, are publishing.

    1. Zeb   6 years ago

      you’ll see not one whit of difference between what they’re saying and what DNC party organs like WaPo and the NYT, are publishing

      Oh, bullshit. They may not be your or my ideal libertarians, but they surely have a different take on things from the "DNC organs".

      1. Ryan (formally HTT)   6 years ago

        Russiagate anyone?
        was that a thing?
        Who fell for that?
        oh, everyone but Nick?
        cool

      2. Fancylad   6 years ago

        "but they surely have a different take on things from the “DNC organs”
        Never read a Dalmia or Suderman article, huh.

  11. jdd6y   6 years ago

    Wait, the same people who hate the President because he's crass are down to hang out with someone who maliciously tried to ruin someone else's life lies? Are we uptight Victorians or aren't we?

    1. Zeb   6 years ago

      Maybe they'd be down to hang out with Trump too. It's not as if they have a lot of nice things to say about this woman, even in this article.

  12. TomW   6 years ago

    This was an interesting read, but I have to admit my favorite part is Michael Malice devilishly grinning in the background of that picture.

    1. Ryan (formally HTT)   6 years ago

      Love your podcast, despite it being an extreme failure

      1. TomW   6 years ago

        lol, I'm not Tom Woods. We just have the same first name and last initial.

        Thanks for the unsolicited opinion though.

  13. Dillinger   6 years ago

    seeing a lack of "would" from Abattoir here ...

    1. Eddy   6 years ago

      He may be a tad eccentric, but he's not nuts.

      1. Unicorn Abattoir   6 years ago

        There are some things a gorilla just won't do.

  14. Bubba Jones   6 years ago

    Every time you mention the name of the man she slandered you should also link to her amateur porn.

  15. IceTrey   6 years ago

    If she's getting drunk I'd for sure stay far away from her else she starts sleeping on your yard for touching her elbow.

  16. Mr. JD   6 years ago

    Tomorrow at Reason:

    Robby Soave is no longer writing for Reason. He's been accused of rape!

    1. Vernon Depner   6 years ago

      The safest thing for him to do would be to go on the offensive and accuse her of rape before she can accuse him.

  17. edward   6 years ago

    Interesting piece. But what about "who interviewed both Gillespie and I for it."
    Where's your editor? And cannot believe I'm the first to notice it. Did I miss it in other comments?

    1. Fist of Etiquette   6 years ago

      It was the style at the time.

  18. AlmightyJB   6 years ago

    Yawn

  19. CE   6 years ago

    just make sure everything is in writing and signed with witnesses

  20. Eddy   6 years ago

    Related:

    John Legend updates 'Baby, It's Cold Outside' in wake of 'Me Too' movement

    https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/468120-john-legend-updates-baby-its-cold-outside-in-wake-of-metoo

    1. Eddy   6 years ago

      Also, it seems they have a softened-down version of Me So Horny -

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dhJ-7KIf6k8

      1. Eddy   6 years ago

        Of course, I myself was far too innocent to recognize the substitutions.

    2. Unicorn Abattoir   6 years ago

      Is it called, "Baby, I don't care if it's cold outside"?

      1. Eddy   6 years ago

        I Wanna Hold Your Purse

        1. Unicorn Abattoir   6 years ago

          I see it as role reversal, with her trying to stay and him trying to avoid a bogus sex assault charge.

          1. damikesc   6 years ago

            "My Wife's Boyfriend wouldn't approve..."

  21. Hank Phillips   6 years ago

    Yawn...

  22. Jerryskids   6 years ago

    We interrupt this comment thread to bring you:

    Just The Headline

    We now return you to your regularly scheduled comment thread.

    1. Eddy   6 years ago

      Prick up your ears.

      ALTERNATE JOKE: Fortunately she escaped before the ear, nose and throat doctor was finished.

  23. A Chest of Drawers   6 years ago

    Has she made things right with the guy she railroaded?

  24. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   6 years ago

    "and talked about maybe becoming, I guess, friends or something?"

    Be very... fucking careful Mr. Soave.

    1. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   6 years ago

      "You're a trickster," I say, and she asks how I came to that word. I tell her that she seems to relate to the world on the level of mischief and play, rather than through any kind of ideology or strict moral code. I use the word "chaotic," and she doesn't object. A friend of hers wrote a book about tricksters, and she says she relates to it. Tricksters, he argued, can move unrestricted between any circumstances, because they're always playing.

      Daniel Pearl was ultimately lured to his death by a person he met online with the handle 'badmash' which was an Urdu word for 'trickster' or 'troublemaker'.

      I'm not surprised she would relate to the term.

    2. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   6 years ago

      Several people tell me that, after knowing Sulkowicz, they have "more respect for people's personal narratives" and are less likely to see others in bad faith.

      *crosses arms, judges*

      I keep hearing this "personal narrative" phrase get thrown around in the modern era.

      It often seems to imply that the truth doesn't matter, but instead we respect what the person says or feels happened, even if the facts don't bear it out.

      1. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

        Well, I interpret "personal narrative" to mean that we should be mindful if at all possible to understand where a person is coming from in any particular situation, and not necessarily try to project our preconceptions of things onto other people's circumstances. It doesn't necessarily mean that we have to believe untrue things just because someone else sincerely does, but at least try to understand why a person might believe those things before offering a judgment or a correction.

        Just my 0.02 bitcoins in the matter.

        1. Nardz   6 years ago

          I fully expect a psychotic such as yourself to defend the absurd reality denial called "personal narrative"

  25. Diane Reynolds (Paul.)   6 years ago

    On the right, some were furious that we would seemingly welcome Sulkowicz without her having made any kind atonement for her perceived wrongs. On the left, many accused Sulkowicz of betraying her own tribe.

    I don't care if Sulkowicz shows up to an event that I'm associated with. Hell, I'll even chat with her. But every nano-second I'm in her presence I'm going to have six to eight of my very close friends chaperoning every goddamned instant of it, preferably with video from at last five angles.

    1. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

      preferably with video from at last five angles.

      Does that include the under-the-skirt angle?

  26. neoteny   6 years ago

    her perceived wrongs

    That's OK, Columbia Univ. still settled with Paul Nungesser. Hope he'd taken a big chunk of their monies & spent some of it on convincing girls to put out.

    1. Eddy   6 years ago

      "Have your lawyer call my lawyer."

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DxFU_fIUawM

      1. neoteny   6 years ago

        Yup, that's a classic.

        1. Eddy   6 years ago

          I think I learned about it from another commenter here.

          1. Eddy   6 years ago

            But really, you don't need a lawyer. There are several standard pre-coital contract forms available - all you need is a notary to witness the agreement, and a videographer to film the whole encounter to make sure it conforms to the contract.

            1. Eddy   6 years ago

              Of course, you still might need a lawyer to draw up the confidentiality agreement for the videographer.

  27. Ken Hagler   6 years ago

    Nothing about the article suggests that Robby is foolish enough to get within arms reach of Mattress Girl. And yet, there's the photo. Is he _trying_ to get #metoo'd?

  28. Brian Dixon   6 years ago

    Reading the headline, I had the wrong "mattress girl" in mind. I thought you meant the girl in the 9/11-themed commercial for Miracle Mattress, the Springtime for Hitler of mattress store commercials.

    Am I the only one whose mind went there? I can't be the only one.

  29. Unlabelable MJGreen   6 years ago

    Never forgive. Never forget.

  30. Eddy   6 years ago

    I noticed a slight problem with the article - it refers to Sulkowicz as "her" and "she."

    But it seems Sulkowicz "identifies as non binary (and uses they/them pronouns)."

    https://www.refinery29.com/amp/en-gb/2019/03/224564/louis-theroux-sexual-assault-the-night-in-question

    Isn't this known as "misgendering"?

    1. Eddy   6 years ago

      Furthermore, how can you call them "mattress girl" if they aren't a girl?

      Shouldn't it be "mattress entity"?

      1. Eddy   6 years ago

        Ah, the *Cut* article offers a way out:

        "Since 2016, Sulkowicz has identified as gender fluid, and she sometimes uses they/them pronouns. When I ask what to use for this article, she texts me, “Lol I’m not clear about it either,” before settling on she/her."

        1. IceTrey   6 years ago

          I'll call you sir or ma'am just fucking pick one and stick with it!

        2. Unicorn Abattoir   6 years ago

          I thought the gender fluid was on the mattress.

          1. Dr Fallout   6 years ago

            Full Stop....shut it down.... we have a thread winner.

            That is all.

          2. TrickyVic (old school)   6 years ago

            Out of the park homerun.

        3. Vernon Depner   6 years ago

          How often should you change your gender fluid?

          1. gah87   6 years ago

            At least get your objects and subjects straight: "who interviewed both Gillespie and I for it". How can we do gender pronouns if we can't even differentiate subjective and objective pronouns? Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

  31. nicmart   6 years ago

    The LP will now probably invite her to be the party's next presidential candidate. Anything for ballot access.

    1. Eddy   6 years ago

      Better than Weld.

      1. Eddy   6 years ago

        McAfee/Mattress Girl 2020 - we're crazy...for freedom!

        1. Unicorn Abattoir   6 years ago

          Vote for McAfee/Mattress Girl, or we'll shoot this dog.

          1. Eddy   6 years ago

            Mattress Girl/McAfee - we won't do anything to you without your express permission, unless you're a whale.

            1. Eddy   6 years ago

              Mattress Girl/McAfee - We're woke, stoked, and you won't believe what we just smoked!

  32. Echospinner   6 years ago

    So the story is - annoying busybody who put someone through hell for something he didn’t do is actually cute and charming after I’ve had a couple Manhattans.

    Got it.

    1. Sevo   6 years ago

      +1.
      When you earn it, you get it.

    2. Sal Paradise   6 years ago

      I'll add another +1

  33. Sevo   6 years ago

    "...With this somewhat awkward but ultimately pleasant introduction out of the way, the next time I encountered Sulkowicz, it was like running into an old friend. This was despite the fact that the occasion was a party for me to celebrate the release of my new book,..."
    Goody for you.
    Author spends 1000 words justifying some scumbag trying to ruin another person's life since that scumbag now might help the author?
    Pathetic.

  34. Rufus The Monocled   6 years ago

    She's a trickster now? A regular Till Eulenspiegel , eh?

    This is how her abhorrent behaviour that turned an innocent man's live up side down being characterized? I would like to know how his life is doing after that episode. I couldn't care less about her.

    A journey you say?

    Beatrice!

    "… a fair, saintly Lady called to me
    In such wise, I besought her to command me.
    Her eyes were shining brighter than the Star;
    And she began to say, gentle and low, …
    ‘A friend of mine, and not the friend of fortune,
    Upon the desert slope is so impeded
    Upon his way, that he has turned through terror,
    And may, I fear, already be so lost,
    That I too late have risen to his succor.’”

    1. Eddy   6 years ago

      "Signor Alighieri, you look like you've been to Hell and back!"

  35. Sal Paradise   6 years ago

    Reason magazine turned into the Huffington Post so slowly over the last several years, many people didn't notice.

    1. Longtobefree   6 years ago

      We noticed, yet we find the journey most amusing.

      Like Playboy back in the day, we definitely do not read for the articles. In this case, the pictures are no treat either, but our comment interactions are the stuff of legend.

      1. phillhamian   6 years ago

        As someone else pointed out, Michael Malice made his way into the picture like some sort of grinning troll. Totally made the article worth it. That's not happening at the Huffpo.

  36. Cyto   6 years ago

    Soooooooo......

    Literally so you can hang out with them at cocktail parties.

    I don't think people meant it that literally, but there ya go. I can see Sulkowicz -- she was a college student, after all. People learn things after they graduate and have to work for a living.

    But Jezebel writers? C'mon guys!

  37. Slocum   6 years ago

    I have mixed feelings about this one. My sense is that her intellectual journey is genuine, not calculated, avaricious, or a form of performance art. And, sad to say, but in our hyper-polarized times, treating libertarians with respect, humanity, and an open mind is a revolutionary act on the left. She may be excommunicated for it. So I don't think "Go fuck off!" is the right response here.

    As for what she did to Paul Nungesser -- that sucks. No doubt. But I think she could get to the point where she acknowledges something like, "I did not lie about the sexual assault -- at the time I firmly believed I had been assaulted. But my perception of the events was powerfully influenced by the extreme feminist hive-mind I was part of at the time. I probably would not perceive them the same way now." And I actually think that is something approximating the truth--some of these campus sexual assault accusations are of the 'vindictive psycho ex-girlfriend seeks revenge' variety, but a lot of others are 'impressionable young women under spell of extreme intersectional wokeness truly believes she has been assaulted'. Mattress-girl seems like she was the latter.

  38. BLPoG   6 years ago

    I understand what you're trying to do here, Robby. I respect the attempt.

    It's a terrible idea all the same. There are certain types of behaviors that shouldn't be dismissed so easily. It's not even contrition that is required, but some type of introspection, or else you're just facilitating the behavior.

    It's true that libertarians must be more tolerant than average because of our status as minorities of thought, but whereas that compromise must be made (and is, indeed, practical and potentially efficacious) in the political sphere, being overly tolerant of disgusting interpersonal behavior is not similarly justifiable.

    1. Slocum   6 years ago

      Because her mattress performance was a powerful public symbol of campus 'sexual assault' for the left, a change of heart on her part regarding what happened would be a powerful act. I'd say there's little harm to be done in giving her the space to get there.

      1. phillhamian   6 years ago

        Everyone can associate with whoever they want, but I draw the line at sociopathic narcissists. It's not as if they can turn a switch and become sincere and thoughtful people all of the sudden, no matter how many uppity cocktail parties they attend.

        1. Slocum   6 years ago

          But I just don't read her as a sociopath. It would have been much easier to continue on as celebrity victim. I'd have been surprised if there wasn't a 'tenured radical' position for her waiting somewhere if she'd continued down that path.

          1. phillhamian   6 years ago

            But she kinda is continuing as a celebrity victim. She's parlayed that pervious episode into passage at uppity Manhattan cocktail parties with journos where some networking is being done no doubt.

            Maybe your right. Maybe she's really sorry she smeared that boy so mercilessly, but I don't see evidence of it.

            1. Slocum   6 years ago

              Maybe your right. Maybe she’s really sorry she smeared that boy so mercilessly, but I don’t see evidence of it.

              Oh, I don't see any evidence of that yet, either. She's more at the oh-wait-these-people-really-arent-the-monsters-I-was-told-they-were stage.

  39. Trigger Warning   6 years ago

    This chick deserves as much empathy and forbearance as the man whose life she desperately tried to ruin with her psycho bullshit. Fuck you for wasting virtual space giving her attention.

    1. loveconstitution1789   6 years ago

      Goes to show that reason staff are more interested in giving Lefties attention and media time to further their Due Process and Free Speech destroying agendas.

  40. loveconstitution1789   6 years ago

    Cosmo parties are where you meet all the cool people!

    Reminds me of the "cool" Bohemian beer hall meetings that took place in the 1920s. Nobody really confronted these lunatics in one-on-one discussions and discussed how Socialism would lead to the death of millions. I mean, its not like one of these National Socialists actually said "Germany will either become a World Power or will not continue to exist at all "

    I guess some Cosmos need to find out for themselves what happens when you put Socialist dictators in charge of Nazi Germany.

  41. NOYB2   6 years ago

    “Sulkowicz's recent adventures in libertarian circles”

    If she went to a Reason happy hour and hangs out with Soave, she is not in “libertarian circles”.

    1. mad.casual   6 years ago

      At some outward radius from the location a circle with some libertarians in it could be drawn.

  42. mad.casual   6 years ago

    I know that libertarians aren't about purity tests but we like reading tea leaves relying on the information gleaned from tea leaves even less. I'd need some sort of clear *and direct* statement (McNamara's assertions don't count) from Sulkowicz to the effect that she's understands that her performance would cause people to mistrust her and/or that she's aware of some of the damage her 'performance' caused.

    Otherwise, the tea leaves suggest that McNamara is massaging 'lying shitbag' into the word 'trickster'.

  43. Social Justice is neither   6 years ago

    This is how you lie as a journalist. Detailed glowing uncritical characterizations of the accusations, short undefined statement of the outcome followed by more glowing detailed accounting of her being abused by the system.

    We get it, she read a book and is fun to drink with. What I don't get is the redemption arc of a vindictive SJW who refuses to recognize her lies and the damage she inflicted on another.

  44. mad.casual   6 years ago

    Does Paul Nungesser get invited to any of these parties? I'd bet the guy's probably got some pretty libertarian ideas that he might even articulate if you guys happen to know any libertarian journalists.

  45. user-mdw   6 years ago

    Looking forward to a follow-up post on Lobster Girl.

  46. Ron   6 years ago

    is she there to become libertarian or turn Reason into another SJW rag that it almost is now. or is Nick just trying to get laid. Curious people want to know

  47. Steve from Richmond, VA   6 years ago

    " . . . who interviewed both Gillespie and I . . . ."

    and me!

    ~Graham R. Crank

  48. darkflame   6 years ago

    Hey, maybe you can get Christine Blasey Ford and Anita Hill too and have a "Lying Bitches" segment. Fuck that crazy bint.

  49. NOYB2   6 years ago

    I think Robby should sleep with her and see what happens. Surely, she’ll be nice to the desperate libertarian guy, right?

  50. Intelligent Mr Toad   6 years ago

    Why isn't her mattress in the picture?

  51. hroark314   6 years ago

    The girl drastically harmed an innocent kid's reputation to further her career. The problem with the relationship between the Reason crew and Mattress Girl isn't that they're crossing political lines; its that they're forming a united front that holds public figures like them matter more than the lives of private citizens.

    1. Benitacanova   6 years ago

      I don't think it was for career purposes. I think she was just so narcissistic she couldn't accept a blow off without a total blow up. To paraphrase Greta the Grump, "you've destroyed my fragile ego, how dare you!"

  52. Sevo   6 years ago

    Has she apologized to that poor kid?
    If not, escort her out the door and tell her to fuck off; she deserves no civility from any thinking person.

    1. mad.casual   6 years ago

      Has she apologized to that poor kid?

      You think he still goes to parties? Hits on women at those parties? Seems like he might appreciate a party where the majority of women consider Emma Sulkowicz to be a flake and don't consider him to be a rapist/sexual predator.

      The most we can do is speculate because even Robby seems content to step on his own dick writing yet another a story about self-absorbed, sometimes destructive, non-entity that is Emma.

  53. XM   6 years ago

    I kept waiting for the part in the article where mattress girl owns up to her mistake at the party or at least offers her own perspective on her past allegations. It never became.

    It's commendable that Robby and Cathy were civil with their subject of criticism. The left loses their mind whenever one of their own is chummy with Bush or Trump. But this whole article just seems morally ambivalent. If she became interested in libertarianism for serious reasons she'd have to be introspective about the ordeal she caused by lying. If she's on some "eat pray love" journey where she tries to things that feel new or spiritual, she deserves our contempt.

  54. Trainer   6 years ago

    Sounds nice but it appears that libertarians can't even be friends with each other so I don't have much hope in reaching out to the rest of world.

  55. nosib66910   6 years ago

    I essentially started three weeks past and that i makes $385 benefit $135 to $a hundred and fifty consistently simply by working at the internet from domestic. I made ina long term! "a great deal obliged to you for giving American explicit this remarkable opportunity to earn more money from domestic. This in addition coins has adjusted my lifestyles in such quite a few manners by which, supply you!". go to this website online domestic media tech tab for extra element thank you >>>>> Aprocoin.CoM

  56. n00bdragon   6 years ago

    Am I the only one who seems surprised by just how many cocktail parties Reason writers seem to spend their time attending? Don't you have journalism to be doing? I don't really care if people are friends with Mattress Girl and, like with all people, I hope she has a fulfilling and happy life, but when the biggest complaint about Reason writers is that they seem more interested in attending cocktail parties than libertarian journalism maybe an article about who you met at last week's cocktail party isn't a great look.

    1. Ron   6 years ago

      in DC you party at night and wake at none work till 2 then start all over again

  57. mad.casual   6 years ago

    Thinking about this further, Reason has gone from being a libertarian lifestyle magazine to more of a libertarian lifestyle anthology or collection of short stories. Emma carries on not caring about Nungesser, Title IX, or actual rape because she's a millenial performance artist. Her brain can't grok a concept like integrity any more than it can grok the 5th dimension.

    Similarly, Robby doesn't report facts or write about stories and principles he actually believes. He's a narrator, a fiction writer. They're friends because Robby doesn't actually care about Nungesser, Title IX, or false rape allegations either.

  58. JesseAz   6 years ago

    It's not even good sarcasm. It's closer to whining.

  59. A Chest of Drawers   6 years ago

    Sadly sarcasm has become the lingua franca of a certain breed of internet commentator that has nothing worth hearing and wants you to know it. Jeff gives himself away Bo vociferously complaining about Trump when no one else brought him up.

  60. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

    Senator Hawley called, it's your turn under his desk

  61. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

    No, he's just brought up in about every single other discussion on these forums.

    In case you hadn't figured it out, I am mocking the people around here who seem to think that cozying up to Team Red constitutes a more "libertarian" approach.

  62. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

    Yeah I do think Reason gets a lot of unfair criticism around here. Some of it is from trolls and provocateurs who have no interest in liberty in the first place and come here only to have fun at our expense. (Such as yourself, for instance.) But some of it, I think, is from people who think libertarianism is inherently right-wing and are disappointed that Reason doesn't adopt a more Republican-friendly posture. I disagree with that assessment, obviously. Libertarianism shouldn't be about cozying up to either Team Red or Team Blue, it should be about promoting liberty.

  63. A Chest of Drawers   6 years ago

    If that's what you need to tell yourself to sleep at night you do that

  64. Nardz   6 years ago

    That exchange really can't be highlighted enough

  65. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

    Yes, I was caught performing sarcasm without a license. Fortunately, it's not illegal (yet).

  66. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

    I wasn't criticizing Trump. I was mocking those who scrupulously insist that Trump be praised to the heavens whenever he glances in a slightly libertarian direction. Do keep up.

  67. A Chest of Drawers   6 years ago

    CRI I can't see why more sarcasm helps in any way but go for it.

  68. A Chest of Drawers   6 years ago

    I wasn’t criticizing Trump.

    OK?

    To whom is this directed? I ask because I said "complaining" not "criticizing".

  69. chemjeff radical individualist   6 years ago

    Well then I guess I have a different definition of what your made-up word of "TDSing" means than what you do.

  70. Nardz   6 years ago

    chemjeff radical individualist
    October.30.2019 at 9:42 pm
    Well then I guess I have a different definition of what your made-up word of “TDSing” means than what you do.

    ☠
    October.30.2019 at 9:48 pm
    So it’s my made up word, but you’re still douchily insisting on your own definition. That’s like peak Jeff right there.

  71. Metazoan   6 years ago

    You know, I actually do think libertarianism does belong "on the right," if the definition of right-wing from wikipedia is to be believed:

    Right-wing political thinking holds that certain social orders and hierarchies are inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable,typically supporting this position on the basis of natural law, economics, or tradition. Hierarchy and inequality may be viewed as natural results of traditional social differences or the competition in market economies.

    and the definition of left-wing politics:

    Left-wing politics supports social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy. It typically involves a concern for those in society whom its adherents perceive as disadvantaged relative to others as well as a belief that there are unjustified inequalities that need to be reduced or abolished

    In the modern developed world, many "hierarchies" are coming from more or less natural orderings of people based on talent and ambition. If one is fighting that, one needs a gargantuan amount of force (and it still won't work).

    That said, I still don't think Reason is leftist at all.

  72. Ryan (formally HTT)   6 years ago

    you have no interest in our sovereignty, the only thing granting us the liberty you use to promote Utopian garbage

  73. phillhamian   6 years ago

    You don't think the writers or editors pull any punches for team blue?

  74. Eddy   6 years ago

    The monocles and moustache-twirling are also clues that libertarians are rightists.

    Plus the cigars.

  75. Ryan (formally HTT)   6 years ago

    you can spout logic to leftists all day long but their very definition includes the word "perceive" which means they ignore reality

  76. Finrod   6 years ago

    My rural friend's woodchipper called, it's your turn.

  77. Zeb   6 years ago

    Yeah, much better to just assume you know what people mean and then call them stupid. What good could actually trying to understand other people possibly do?

  78. damikesc   6 years ago

    I also have serious doubts about Jeff thinking. Period.

  79. Vernon Depner   6 years ago

    Ouch...don't say "buttsex" and "plank" so close together...

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

Georgia Couple Whose Daughters Were Taken After False Child Abuse Claims File Lawsuit

Emma Camp | 7.9.2025 12:52 PM

Warning: These Social Media Rules Will Erode Civil Liberties

Elizabeth Nolan Brown | 7.9.2025 12:35 PM

3 of the Worst Examples of Military Spending in the 'Big, Beautiful Bill'

Jack Nicastro | 7.9.2025 12:21 PM

How the Teamsters Cost 30,000 People Their Jobs

John Stossel | 7.9.2025 10:35 AM

Netanyahu Nominates Trump for Peace Prize

Liz Wolfe | 7.9.2025 9:30 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!