It's pretty bad though comical at the numerous errors. I knew the writer was a hack when she tried to give some sort of credence to the Gold Dust Woman Book.
https://nypost.com/2021/09/11/ny-tim...its-hypocrisy/
PINION
Facebook
Twitter
Flipboard
Email
Copy
New York Times’ glowing profile of Lindsey Buckingham shows its hypocrisy
By Maureen Callahan
September 11, 2021 11:49am Updated
Maureen Callahan
Just when you think The New York Times couldn’t get any more hypocritical, here comes a glowing profile of a known abuser, a man who victimized his famous girlfriend-slash-bandmate over the years — but you won’t see one word about it.
In fact, the paper of record valorizes him.
“Lindsey Buckingham Has Survived It All,” goes the headline to Lindsay Zoladz’s profile. Incredibly, this female journalist plays along with Buckingham as he wonders why Stevie Nicks ignores him.
“Buckingham isn’t sure what it would take to get them to hash things out,” Zoladz writes, “but he is open to mending fences.”
How generous of him. How egregious of Zoladz and the Times.
Buckingham’s abuse of Nicks was an open secret in rock ’n’ roll for decades. It was finally documented in “Gold Dust Woman,” the 2017 unauthorized biography of Nicks.
Author Stephen Davis wrote that Buckingham bullied the then-25-year-old Nicks into posing topless on their debut album cover — almost causing one of rock’s true greats to quit before she started.
After the couple joined Fleetwood Mac, Buckingham “began to lose control” over Nicks, bandmate Mick Fleetwood said, adding that Buckingham “really didn’t like it” as her independence grew
He became abusive. Nicks told her mother in 1977 that Buckingham threw her to the floor.
Nicks told her mother in 1977 that Buckingham threw her to the floor.
He tried to trip and kick her while performing onstage in 1980. He also slapped and choked Nicks during a fight in 1987, in front of the band.
“I thought he was going to kill me,” Nicks said.
Yet The New York Times looks away.
Buckingham’s real problem with Nicks, I think, is that she’s a star in ways he won’t ever be. And he’s always been, in my opinion, a nasty piece of work.
To quote the late, great Elmore Leonard: “If you run into an asshole in the morning, you ran into an asshole. If you run into assholes all day, you’re the asshole.”
So Lindsey Buckingham keeps trying to bring Stevie Nicks down to his level. He blames her for ousting him from the band for good, not giving the fans what they want, for being bitter because — wait for it — he has children and she does not.
Over at Rolling Stone, writer Stephen Rodrick helps our so-called Great Man float this theory:
“Buckingham wonders if his ability to have a family in his late forties and early fifties was difficult on Nicks.”
Mick Fleetwood said that Buckingham “really didn’t like it” when Stevie Nicks' independence grew.
Mick Fleetwood said that Buckingham “really didn’t like it” when Stevie Nicks’ independence grew.
Newsday RM via Getty Images
There’s not much lower to go than that.
How can these publications — which pride themselves on being progressive and feminist, on the right side of history — venerate a man who presumes to know why any woman does or doesn’t have children? Who wonders this aloud, with the clear intent of humiliating Nicks? Of making her less than . . . what exactly? A woman? Is Lindsey Buckingham implying that all child-free women are inferior and angry?
I guess it still needs to be said: The reasons women don’t have children can be manifold and painful, or deliberate and freeing. But they are nobody’s business. Ever.
Like all abusers, Buckingham knew just where to hit, because Nicks felt compelled to address it.
“I was thrilled for Lindsey when he had children,” she said in part, “but I wasn’t interested in making those same life choices. Those are my decisions that I get to make for myself. I’m proud of the life choices I’ve made.”
Nicks should never have had to explain herself.
Buckingham should be ashamed.
But I’m sure he isn’t, and won’t ever be, because an adoring media refuses to put him where he belongs: in the shadows, with all the other monsters of #MeToo.
FILED UNDER DOMESTIC ABUSE FLEETWOOD MAC NEW YORK TIMES STEVIE NICKS 9/11/21
If look at the top of the article you cam email the author. I am writing a very strong rebuttal to that hack.