Far-left feminist website Jezebel is under scrutiny for an editor’s note added to a controversial article just days before the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The original piece celebrated the hiring of “Etsy witches” to cast curses on Kirk, whose criticism of feminism and women’s independence had drawn ire from the publication. The article, initially penned by Claire Guinan and later attributed simply to “Jezebel,” was provocatively titled “We Paid Some Etsy Witches to Curse Charlie Kirk.”
The piece did not shy away from personal attacks. Kirk was labeled a “far-right misogynist with a bad haircut” who endorses “regressive rhetoric” reminiscent of the 1950s. The glee with which the author described procuring curses—options included a “Karmic Revenge” spell and an “Insanity Hex”—made the article’s tone particularly alarming. One hex required Kirk’s birthdate for alleged “accuracy,” and the author relished the anticipation of its effects: “I just completed your spell, and it was successful. You will see the first results within 2–3 weeks.”
There’s a chilling quality to how the writer expressed enjoyment over the act of cursing. The imagery used was striking, conveying a blend of satire and menace. Details like an image of “Charlie’s ridiculous scrunched-up little face” surrounded by flames enhanced the absurdity but also hinted at dangerous undercurrents—“Trust the unseen,” she mused, engaging in a form of witchcraft that plays with real and symbolic violence.
On the day before Kirk’s assassination at a Turning Point USA event, the anticipation surrounding the curses took on a new gravity. Reports state that Kirk was shot while inviting attendees to engage in a debate—an act of open discourse now marred by tragedy. He was struck in the neck from over 200 yards away and tragically succumbed to his injuries shortly after being rushed to the hospital.
After the assassination, Jezebel scrambled to distance itself from the fallout. An editor’s note was added to the article posthumously condemning the violence. It declared, “Jezebel condemns the shooting of Charlie Kirk in the strongest possible terms. We do not endorse, encourage, or excuse political violence of any kind.” Critics, however, have dismissed this response as inadequate, suggesting it arrives too late and fails to reckon with the article’s initial tone.
This incident exposes the particularly volatile intersection between political commentary and real-world consequences. What may be seen as satire or hyperbole in one context can shift dramatically in the face of actual violence. The escalating nature of political discourse—where acts of satire blur the lines into potentially harmful rhetoric—raises questions about responsibility in media.
The initial piece hinted at delight in a dark fantasy, creating a context where curses are not just words but come entwined with the potential for genuine malice. Following the violence, the discrepancy between the original article’s jarring excitement and the editor’s note of condemnation casts a long shadow. It serves as a reminder that rhetoric can influence reality, and what begins as a digital expression may lead to dire, unforeseen outcomes.
The juxtaposition of levity in language about curses and the grim reality of Kirk’s assassination illustrates the complexities of modern discourse, where satire can spiral into tragedy. As more reactions come to light, the repercussions of this event reveal the dangers inherent in escalating political rhetoric—a lesson that those engaged in the current landscape of commentary would do well to heed.
"*" indicates required fields
