Charlie Rose may be coming back, despite no one wanting him to. And he’s reportedly bringing other accused harassers with him
Charlie Rose reportedly wants to interview other men caught harassing, exploiting and assaulting women. Page Six reports the disgraced former talk show host plans to sit down with accused harassers like Louis C.K. and Matt Lauer and discuss how the accusations of sexual cruelty levied against them has ruined their lives.
Rose is the latest #MeToo-ed man trying to crawl back into the public eye. As Fortune noted, “There’s been an ominous drip-drip-drip of stories reporting on how these men are fairing in ‘exile’ and speculating on how they might stage their comebacks.”
Matt Lauer was recently spotted back in Manhattan, reportedly “testing the waters for a public comeback.” The New York Times suggested the same of Mario Batali, that lecherous swamp monster who also cooks.
Fundamentally, the problem is that these men think they are owed a comeback. And we as a society agree. We keep asking when these men will get their careers back, not if.
To have a comeback, to receive “redemption” as many of Charlie Rose’s loyal supporters call it, you have to do something that makes you worthy of it. Aside from his pathetically scant 169 word statement to The Washington Post and a deeply mystifying tweet of the letter H that somehow garnered hundreds of sympathetic comments, Rose hasn’t done anything to make amends to these women. None of these men have. Lauer, C.K., Rose, Batali, none of them.
It hasn’t even been a year since WeinsteinGate unleashed #MeToo and Time’s Up. Meanwhile, the survivors who have come forward about all these men, about their horrible behavior going back decades, most of them haven’t had their comebacks. Most of the women whose careers were destroyed by Weinstein, for example, have yet to receive reparations of any kind. Rose’s show is more evidence, if we needed it, of how hollow these men’s apologies and denials are.
Rose’s comeback, like his fellow creeps, is being carefully planned and orchestrated. Matt Lauer’s reappearance, Louis C.K.’s return to the Comedy Cellar, all of these seedling tales of redemption are carefully crafted attempts to invalidate the women who have come forward. In choosing to interview his fellow serial harassers, Rose signals to his victims, to all survivors, that their experiences are irrelevant if it means destroying the man’s career.
Much like the decades of men helping other men cover up their sexual misconduct.
A source to People, for example, described Lauer as “devastated,” while the magazine itself vaguely referred to his serial sexual misconduct as “the situation that ended his career.” Meanwhile, the specifics of why his career ended are buried in a single graf. Instead of leading with the over ten women who have accused him of sexual harassment. Instead of leading with something like “Matt Lauer had a button under his desk that would lock women into his office so he could whip out his penis at them, and now he wants forgiveness.”
“Hang in there Charlie. Hope you get through this and come back stronger and better,” tweeted one Rose fan. Another asked of Rose’s detractors, “really? You’re saying that no matter what he says or does, how strongly he atones for his past and changes his behavior, Charlie Rose is irredeemable?”
Charlie Rose once reportedly lured a young woman to his secluded vacation home, under the guise of a job interview, where he allegedly got drunk, yelled at her when she cried about “abuses of power” and stuck his hand down her pants as she continued to cry. Incredibly, he reportedly asked her “baby, oh baby, why are you crying?”
So yes, in answer to that fan who asked if he is irredeemable. He is irredeemable.