Did Maclean’s Fire All of Its Editors?

[Trigger warning for misogyny; "joking" about the perils of female sex work.]

If only a lack of editors, as opposed to a lack of decency, was the actual explanation for the incredible publication of a "humorous" piece by Scott Feschuk titled "Escort v. Hooker: How do they compare?" which was nothing but a side-by-side list "humorously" framing escorts as glamorous and hookers as garbage. (Example: An escort has a "Heart of gold," while a hooker has "Cirrhosis of liver.")

It was also one of the most-read pieces on the site, according to Maclean's front page, before the article was taken down a few moments ago:

Now the link just leads to a page saying "Page Not Found; Try These," with links to other articles, but no explanation or apology for what was once there.

You can view my screencap of the piece here. My favorite part is the advertising for their subscription at the end: "Get our thought-provoking opinions delivered." LOL sure.

I hope that Maclean's will do more than simply redact the piece and pretend like it never existed. Some accountability would be welcome.

Contact Maclean's.

[H/T to Eastsidekate, who got it from @emmamwoolley.]

Shakesville is run as a safe space. First-time commenters: Please read Shakesville's Commenting Policy and Feminism 101 Section before commenting. We also do lots of in-thread moderation, so we ask that everyone read the entirety of any thread before commenting, to ensure compliance with any in-thread moderation. Thank you.

blog comments powered by Disqus