The Day Felicia Went Away (For Five Minutes)

So the original joke can be updated to either bi-sexual, bi-polar or bi-felicia.

Posted by: Guy Mohawk

Felicia sounds like my kind of woman. Anybody have her phone number? Posted by: Johnny Depp

Seems likely that Bye Felicia is the one leaking her termination letter to the press:

Note they fired her by email. Which seems fitting. She seemed to prefer taking care of her private business online, right?

Josh Sternberg @joshsternberg

Just a terrible way to fire someone.

NiedermeyersDeadHorse aka NDH
@NiedsG

Why? They have no obligation to invite her into their offices where she can cause further commotion. They do not have to invite confrontation. They did it in such a way as to provide as little opportunity for her to disrupt further the operations of the business.

Ooh, ooh! Pick on me, teacher!

Everything the post does with the litigious and accusatory Mz. Somnez will be done by email. Or will be videorecorded.

No one will take any chances of being alone with her, permitting her the opportuning of claiming that something untoward happened that maybe did not.

One guy says that she made up a false account of their interactions together.

As I mentioned in the sidebar, if you type "FeliciaSomnez.com" into your google-machine the page for the Washington Post's jobs page comes up. I guess that's supposed to be some sick burn from Felicia.

Steven Miller talks about Mz. Somnez's prior history of suing the Post and attacking them on Twitter.

Somnez claims that she was barred from reporting on stories concerning sexual assault after speaking publicly about her own sexual assault. She also fell afoul of her paper's social media policy after a controversial tweet hours after the death of NBA legend Kobe Bryant, which she deemed an appropriate time to resurface the historic assault accusations against him from a hotel employee. Her tweet drew extreme backlash and condemnation not just from Twitter randoms, but from her colleagues as well. She then claimed that the Post took action to ban her from covering related stories based on her gender.

Sonmez named six of the Post's top editors as defendants -- Marty Baron (who has since retired), senior managing editor Cameron Barr, managing editors Steven Ginsberg and Tracy Grant, financial editor Lori Montgomery, and senior politics editor Peter Wallsten. Sonmez sought $2 million in damages. Baron had admonished Sonmez herself after the tweets about Bryant, saying, "A real lack of judgment to tweet this," he wrote. "Please stop. You're hurting this institution by doing this." Sonmez was backed by the Washington Post Writers Union by a letter of support. One of the signatories... Dave Weigel. Sonmez also leaked internal emails to the Post's chief rival, the New York Times, regarding the actions her paper took against her concerning her tweets about Bryant.

Clearly the situation between Sonmez and her employer remains volatile while she continues to appeal the decision. These factors cannot be ignored in Sonmez's decision to continue to ignore the direction of Washington Post's top editors to keep communications internal and respectful among staff. Sonmez has continued to tweetstorm grievances against the Post, in direct defiance of the orders of national editors Sally Buzzbee and Matea Gold.

Christopher Rufo puts forward this theory: She was bred to be an elite, but she was a failed elite. Oh, she had the job, but she wasn't any kind of standout.

So she began attempting to social climb using the Alternative Track now open to women of her generation: leveraging identity-politics accusations flung in all directions, seeing if she could shake the Privilege Tree until some money and prestige fell into her lap from it.

Sonmez is a Harvard grad who, despite pedigree and expectation, failed to become a "star." So she adopted woke psychodrama as a career strategy, ruining a colleague with a dubious MeToo allegation, filing a baseless lawsuit against her employer, and casting blame at "white men."

Her problem is one of proportion. She overestimated her intersectional identity ("white woman") and miscalculated by publicly embarrassing her superiors (faux pas in elite institutions). If she had simply been more subtle, she'd still be at the Post.

The question now is whether WaPo management sees wokeness as a problem of kind or a problem of degree. Almost certainly the latter. The paper will continue to be a snake pit of identity politics, but will draw the line at public reputational damage. Taylor Lorenz beware.

The interesting phenomenon here is the shift within elite institutions from rewarding archetypal masculine power strategies (direct bullying) to rewarding archetypal feminine power strategies (social-emotional manipulation). Sonmez's male ally exhibits this tendency perfectly.

I wonder how far down the media shit-pile she'll have to descend to find someone who will hire her.

By the way, that "male ally" who rode to Felicia's defense is the "man" who wrote this complaint about Stanford's dining hall system.

See, he gets stressed about having to select portion size himself, and so the buffet-style favored by Stanford's dining hall (and all college dining halls, pretty much) causes this Snowflake too much anxiety.

So he wants them to change from a buffet-style service to one in which they prepare individually-proportioned servings. Proportioned, meaning tailored specifically for each individual diner's eating capacity and hunger level? He does not say.

Opinion | Stanford's dining hall system did not work with my disordered eating. That can change.

Content warning: This column contains references to disordered eating.

Sharp stomach pains distracted me as I sit in a CS section during my first quarter at Stanford in the fall of 2017. I hadn't eaten enough that morning, as my mind convinced me to take a very small portion of the "healthiest" vegetarian food I could find in the dining hall. I was too stressed to even attempt a dining hall lunch, and was now stuck waiting until dinner.

After thinking about my hunger for most of the section, I made my way to the dining hall after class, but I could bring myself to eat only a plate of grilled cauliflower. And before I even finished that, it was time to go to my nighttime economics section.

The specific type of disordered eating I experience has not been diagnosed, but it can be described as a compulsion to eat less than needed when I'm either in social settings or when I have trouble estimating the amount of food I'm consuming.

In theory, Stanford's dining halls present students with the opportunity to eat as much as they need given its buffet format. Yet students like me may struggle to take enough of any of the available food when they are charged with portioning it themselves.

Disordered eating does not affect everyone in the same way. What helps me could make matters worse for others and vice versa. Still, there are basic actions the University could take to be more supportive of students who may not get enough food otherwise.

Provide pre-portioned options in dining halls, alongside their buffet-style counterparts, for students who experience stress associated with buffet-style dining. Stanford has been pre-portioning food throughout the pandemic, and it can continue that practice even when the buffet style returns. Like ordering food at a restaurant, receiving a predefined serving of something is much less stressful for me than portioning it myself, especially when surrounded by peers.

Give all students on any meal plan unlimited swipes so they may visit and revisit any dining hall whenever they choose. Stanford Dining says the meal plan is required to ensure students have "easy access to food." If that's the case, it makes no sense that there is a limit to the number of swipes students receive on any of the offered plans, especially from a health and wellness perspective. Punishing students who "didn't plan well" by withholding food is unacceptable. And it could be especially harmful to those who can't afford to buy food whenever they realize they need it. This practice would also assist students who leave a dining hall without eating enough and can't swipe back in for more.

Educate the student body regarding disordered eating and the resources available on and off campus. Before I began at Stanford, I received an email from the University about how I identified as someone who had experienced disordered eating. I didn't seek help and was never again contacted about it. The fact that this email was the only dedicated outreach, especially for someone with a history of disordered eating, is deeply concerning. Students could benefit from a session during NSO, but they need recurring outreach to remind them of resources available.

There's a joke that goes, "It's time to bring bullying back." And like most jokes, there's truth in it. No, we don't want to bring bullying back.

But we do need to bring something like bullying back, which is just telling the very sensitive and very strange among us: Toughen up, Buttercup, we are not going to endlessly reconfigure our lives to adapt ourselves to your peculiar proclivities.

They don't hear this. It's not that they don't hear this enough -- they don't hear this at all. They think every single complaint they have like this is something that the world must take account of and contort itself in order to make them not feel so triggered, because no one ever tells them, "Shut the fuck up and handle shit for yourself. Just get used to things not being exactly the way you'd like them to be, the way ten billion human being have managed to do before you got here."

A world of vindictive, demanding, puritanical self-righteous Sheldon Coopers. All of whom are being actively encouraged to be even more demanding of those around them, and inflexible in those demands.

Oh by the way: That guy's name is "Holden Saige Foreman." So he was pretty much fated to be a delicate twatflower.

Thanks to Lizzy for reminding me about that "fellow."

I want Felicia to go on and on and on and on, telling the world "Her Truth."

posted by Ace at 12:02 PM

| Access Comments