“This year we selected leaders in different fields. We honored men for the first time. We thought RBG’s teachings regarding equality should be practiced. We did not consider politics,” Julie Opperman, the chairperson of the org, said in a statement. “Instead, we focused on leaders, who, in their own way, have made significant contributions to society.”
I actually don't think that the issue was that it was being given to men. I think the issue was that if you think Elon Musk and Rupert Murdoch (!) are the people that Ruth Bader Ginsberg would have wanted to honor, someone needs to maroon you on an island somewhere all alone where you can't infect the others.
It's not that it was given to men, it's that it was given to dicks.
To be fair, the criteria didn't say positive contributions to society. It just says significant contributions.
In 2019, Ginsburg helped establish the award with the Opperman Foundation to celebrate “women who exemplify human qualities of empathy and humility.” The organization later opened the award to men, renaming the trophy as the Leadership Award while claiming to aim for gender equality.
Ah yes, because when I think of empathy and humility I definitely think of Musk and Murdock.
I was only talking about the quoted passage because I think it's funny in a sad way that the foundation deliberately left out the original criteria in their statement and that they don't seem to care whether the contributions to society created a positive impact.
Let me be clear. The only award those two deserve is the "Fuck you, Shitbag" award. If I had to guess, I'd bet they were chosen for the award by making significant contributions to someone's pocket book.
Yeah, the problem is that if they asked me to make a list of the top 10 people who definitely should not get this award, there’s a good chance I would have put these two dudes on that list. They might as well nominate Donald Trump at this point.
Koch brothers top of the list for next year's award.
Fortunately, one will have to receive his posthumously.
Wait, this award was supposed to be serious? Given the honorees I thought it was an ig nobel or Darwin award sort of thing, possibly run by the onion.
Julie Opperman according to Federal Election Commission filings, is a major Republican donor. In 2016, she donated $50,000 to Rebuilding America Now, a super PAC founded by Paul Manafort and Tom Barrack—two top Trump advisers—to support the Trump presidential campaign. That year, she also donated $2,700, the legal maximum, directly to the Trump campaign. In 2020 Opperman contributed $200,000 to Republican campaigns and PACs, including a $100,000 donation to the Take Back The House 2020 PAC and $92,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee.
Ok. Makes sense now. She's just trying to shit all over RBG's name. So, she gave the awards to a racist, anti-LGBTQ+ billionaire, the piece of trash that has been driving GOP propaganda since Nixon, a Wall Street fraudster, and a scab who crossed the picket line during the SAG strike.
Don't buy the claims of ignorance. This was intentional.
This needs to be the top comment. This is such an obvious ploy by a right wing extremist.
Those were serious nominees? AND they didn't see the problem? How excruciatingly tone deaf.
It's not just that they let a few questionable ones slip through, it's as is they were were positively selecting for scumbags. That's not tone deafness, that's flat out having contrary values.
So why is the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation handing out awards in the name of RBG?
Can just anyone do that?
She established the award with them, while she was still alive.
[Edit: they've since changed the criteria for the award.]
Another RBG L
Yeah, it’s nice that she did some good stuff decades ago, but her immediate legacy is dog shit.
I see - thanks for the info…
It was in the article. If you have a question like that, it's a good idea to read the article.
I did but I suppose I lost that section amongst all the ads interspersed through the article.
Thanks for the suggestion, though.
Might I suggest Ublock Origin? Never browse without it.
I do have ABP installed. I leave the “Acceptable Ads” option on which usually accomplishes what I want. Not sure how Rolling Stone’s ads are getting qualified as “acceptable” though.
I enabled “Reader” mode for RS by default in Safari now so it won’t be a problem again
Bah! Pros just fire off half-baked knee-jerk comments based on misunderstanding bad headlines!
That’s where the money is!
Ain’t nobody got time to rEaD tEh aRtIcUls!!!
Someone should make an RBG award for refusing to retire long after it's obvious you should have. First posthumous award to Diane Feinstein.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
An award named after Ruth Bader Ginsburg that was set to be given to Elon Musk and Rubert Murdoch has been cancelled.
And, while we believe each of the honorees is worthy of our respect for their leadership and their notable contributions, the Foundation has decided that the planned ceremony in April 2024 will be canceled.”
Along with Musk and Murdoch, this year’s awardees had included Sylvester Stallone, Michael Milken, and the only woman nominee: Martha Stewart.
“The justice’s family wish to make clear that they do not support using their mother’s name to celebrate this year’s slate of awardees, and that the justice’s family has no affiliation with and does not endorse these awards,” said RBG’s daughter Jane Ginsburg in a statement to the New York Times, describing the choice in this year’s awardees “an affront to the memory of our mother.”
Opperman previously told the publication that Ginsburg fought “for everyone” and they wanted to “honor both women and men who have changed the world by doing what they do best.”
Shana Knizhnik, the author of Notorious RBG, said that honoring Musk and his “anti-feminist and anti-LGBTQ sentiments” and Murdoch, who “has used his immense power to undermine democracy,” dishonors Ginsburg’s legacy.
The original article contains 495 words, the summary contains 204 words. Saved 59%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
I actually don't think that the issue was that it was being given to men. I think the issue was that if you think Elon Musk and Rupert Murdoch (!) are the people that Ruth Bader Ginsberg would have wanted to honor, someone needs to maroon you on an island somewhere all alone where you can't infect the others.
It's not that it was given to men, it's that it was given to dicks.
To be fair, the criteria didn't say positive contributions to society. It just says significant contributions.
Ah yes, because when I think of empathy and humility I definitely think of Musk and Murdock.
I was only talking about the quoted passage because I think it's funny in a sad way that the foundation deliberately left out the original criteria in their statement and that they don't seem to care whether the contributions to society created a positive impact.
Let me be clear. The only award those two deserve is the "Fuck you, Shitbag" award. If I had to guess, I'd bet they were chosen for the award by making significant contributions to someone's pocket book.
Yeah, the problem is that if they asked me to make a list of the top 10 people who definitely should not get this award, there’s a good chance I would have put these two dudes on that list. They might as well nominate Donald Trump at this point.
Koch brothers top of the list for next year's award.
Fortunately, one will have to receive his posthumously.
Wait, this award was supposed to be serious? Given the honorees I thought it was an ig nobel or Darwin award sort of thing, possibly run by the onion.
Ok. Makes sense now. She's just trying to shit all over RBG's name. So, she gave the awards to a racist, anti-LGBTQ+ billionaire, the piece of trash that has been driving GOP propaganda since Nixon, a Wall Street fraudster, and a scab who crossed the picket line during the SAG strike.
Don't buy the claims of ignorance. This was intentional.
This needs to be the top comment. This is such an obvious ploy by a right wing extremist.
Those were serious nominees? AND they didn't see the problem? How excruciatingly tone deaf.
It's not just that they let a few questionable ones slip through, it's as is they were were positively selecting for scumbags. That's not tone deafness, that's flat out having contrary values.
…Barbra Streisand?
She really has an effect.
She was last year's honoree for the award.
Okay that’s a sensible connection at least
Ao much so they should name it after her.
Brabra?
I am also curious how she is at all relevant to this. I guess she may bring some awareness to the issue via her eponymous effect.
So why is the Dwight D. Opperman Foundation handing out awards in the name of RBG?
Can just anyone do that?
She established the award with them, while she was still alive.
[Edit: they've since changed the criteria for the award.]
Another RBG L
Yeah, it’s nice that she did some good stuff decades ago, but her immediate legacy is dog shit.
I see - thanks for the info…
It was in the article. If you have a question like that, it's a good idea to read the article.
I did but I suppose I lost that section amongst all the ads interspersed through the article.
Thanks for the suggestion, though.
Might I suggest Ublock Origin? Never browse without it.
I do have ABP installed. I leave the “Acceptable Ads” option on which usually accomplishes what I want. Not sure how Rolling Stone’s ads are getting qualified as “acceptable” though.
I enabled “Reader” mode for RS by default in Safari now so it won’t be a problem again
Bah! Pros just fire off half-baked knee-jerk comments based on misunderstanding bad headlines! That’s where the money is! Ain’t nobody got time to rEaD tEh aRtIcUls!!!
Someone should make an RBG award for refusing to retire long after it's obvious you should have. First posthumous award to Diane Feinstein.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
An award named after Ruth Bader Ginsburg that was set to be given to Elon Musk and Rubert Murdoch has been cancelled.
And, while we believe each of the honorees is worthy of our respect for their leadership and their notable contributions, the Foundation has decided that the planned ceremony in April 2024 will be canceled.”
Along with Musk and Murdoch, this year’s awardees had included Sylvester Stallone, Michael Milken, and the only woman nominee: Martha Stewart.
“The justice’s family wish to make clear that they do not support using their mother’s name to celebrate this year’s slate of awardees, and that the justice’s family has no affiliation with and does not endorse these awards,” said RBG’s daughter Jane Ginsburg in a statement to the New York Times, describing the choice in this year’s awardees “an affront to the memory of our mother.”
Opperman previously told the publication that Ginsburg fought “for everyone” and they wanted to “honor both women and men who have changed the world by doing what they do best.”
Shana Knizhnik, the author of Notorious RBG, said that honoring Musk and his “anti-feminist and anti-LGBTQ sentiments” and Murdoch, who “has used his immense power to undermine democracy,” dishonors Ginsburg’s legacy.
The original article contains 495 words, the summary contains 204 words. Saved 59%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!