The Editor’s Notes on Milo Yiannopoulos’ Rejected Manuscript Are a Glorious Act of Frustration

By Shane Ryan  |  December 28, 2017 | 10:35am
Photo by Drew Angerer/Getty
Politics News Milo Yiannopoulos
The Editor’s Notes on Milo Yiannopoulos’ Rejected Manuscript Are a Glorious Act of Frustration

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& Schuster gave alt-right provocateur (read: douchebag) Milo Yiannapoulos a $255,000 advance to write his memoirs, but rescinded the deal in February when they found out that Yiannopoulos had made positive statements about sex between “younger boys” and grown men.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:

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:

This is all so amazing. And it proves a longstanding point—be careful when you sue, because everything you don’t want to be public? It’s gonna be public.

 
Join the discussion...