The Editor’s Notes on Milo Yiannopoulos’ Rejected Manuscript Are a Glorious Act of Frustration
Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty
The publishing house Simon & Schuster gave alt-right provocateur (read: douchebag) Milo Yiannapoulos a $255,000 advance to write his memoirs, but rescinded the deal in February when they found out that Yiannopoulos had made positive statements about sex between “younger boys” and grown men. Milo (I’m calling him Milo because his last name is a pain to type) decided to sue, and court filings by Simon & Schuster attempt to show that the book was unpublishable as submitted.
Portions of those filings have now hit the Internet, and my God, they’re amazing. First off, here’s part of S&S’ general rebuttal:
This section of Simon & Schuster’s rebuttal to Milo’s lawsuit over DANGEROUS. ???? pic.twitter.com/JxydVQpx4f
— Jason Pinter (@jasonpinter) December 27, 2017
Per the editor, Mitchell Ivers, one chapter needed “a better thesis than the notion that gay people should go back in the closet.” Another required “a stronger argument against feminism than saying that they are ugly and sexless and have cats.” Another section felt “phenomenally petty,” another had “too much ego,” and another simply didn’t “make sense or pass intellectual muster.” In short, it was not acceptable…and that was from a conservative editor!
Then Twitter user Sarah Mei actually went to the clerk’s website and found the entire manuscript. Mei, clearly a hero, tweeted out the actual manuscript notes Ivers wrote. They’re even better:
I didn’t read the manuscript. Just the comments. They’re…amazing. Even better than the excerpts in the filing.
And a pretty good summary of the book I imagine. pic.twitter.com/2kPESxAlA9
— Sarah Mei (@sarahmei) December 28, 2017
Also I now know I can write a book, because ffs he wrote A WHOLE CHAPTER about how ugly people hate him