Wow. What a story this was. The readers at Slate are applauding WW Norton's decision to permanently "out of print" Bailey's books. What a creeper that Bailey is. But I don't see what his books have to do with being a serial creeper and alleged rapist.
Some people are not satisfied with anything short of complete destruction and excommunication of the accused. If he did in fact rape two women, he should be in jail. If he was a serial creeper who groomed and was inappropriate with 12 year olds, then he should lose his job as a teacher and any position that gives him access to children. Shame should be heaped on his head and everyone who deals with him should know what a danger he is to young girls.
If he's not a criminal, I'm not sure he should be prohibited from making a living at his craft, a craft that has nothing to do with his bad conduct. Why should the fact that he's creep mean his daughter gets punished by having her livelihood upended? I could see the argument if the book he was trying to publish cashed in on the very bad behavior he's accused of. But a biography of Roth has nothing to do with his tenure at the middle school.
Wow. What a story this was. The readers at Slate are applauding WW Norton's decision to permanently "out of print" Bailey's books. What a creeper that Bailey is. But I don't see what his books have to do with being a serial creeper and alleged rapist.
Agree about him, but also agree that wrong to cancel the book. Does this mean anyone convicted of any crime..like Edward Snowden can not be published?
Some people are not satisfied with anything short of complete destruction and excommunication of the accused. If he did in fact rape two women, he should be in jail. If he was a serial creeper who groomed and was inappropriate with 12 year olds, then he should lose his job as a teacher and any position that gives him access to children. Shame should be heaped on his head and everyone who deals with him should know what a danger he is to young girls.
If he's not a criminal, I'm not sure he should be prohibited from making a living at his craft, a craft that has nothing to do with his bad conduct. Why should the fact that he's creep mean his daughter gets punished by having her livelihood upended? I could see the argument if the book he was trying to publish cashed in on the very bad behavior he's accused of. But a biography of Roth has nothing to do with his tenure at the middle school.