Editing Naomi Wolf (section)

===Defense of Julian Assange===
{{See also|Assange v Swedish Prosecution Authority#Harassment of complainants, lawyers and journalists|}}
Shortly after [[Julian Assange]] was arrested in 2010, Wolf wrote in an article for ''[[HuffPost|The Huffington Post]]'' that the allegations two women made against him amounted to no more than bad manners from a boyfriend.<ref name="NS20141007" /><ref>{{cite news|last=Wolf|first=Naomi|url=https://www.huffpost.com/entry/interpol-the-worlds-datin_b_793033?guccounter=1|title=Julian Assange Captured by World's Dating Police|work=The Huffington Post|date=December 7, 2010|access-date=November 17, 2019|archive-date=August 4, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200804060454/https://www.huffpost.com/entry/interpol-the-worlds-datin_b_793033?guccounter=1|url-status=live}}</ref> His accusers, she later wrote in several contexts, were working for the [[Central Intelligence Agency|CIA]], and Assange had been falsely accused.<ref name="NS20141007" />

On December 20, 2010, ''[[Democracy Now!]]'' featured a debate between Wolf and [[Jaclyn Friedman]] on Assange's case. According to Wolf, the alleged victims should have said no, asserted that they consented to having sex with him, and said the claims were politically motivated and demeaned the cause of legitimate rape victims.<ref>{{cite web | last = Goodman | first = Amy | author-link = Amy Goodman | title = Naomi Wolf vs. Jaclyn Friedman: Feminists Debate the Sexual Allegations Against Julian Assange | work = Democracy Now! | date = December 20, 2010 | url = http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/20/naomi_wolf_vs_jaclyn_friedman_a | access-date = December 22, 2010 | archive-date = December 22, 2010 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20101222072533/http://www.democracynow.org/2010/12/20/naomi_wolf_vs_jaclyn_friedman_a | url-status = live }}</ref> In a 2011 ''Guardian'' article, she argued that the accuser in rape cases should not retain anonymity. She said anonymity in such cases was "a relic of the Victorian era" which "serves institutions that do not want to prosecute rapists [...] this is particularly clear in the Assange case, where public opinion matters far more than usual".<ref>{{cite news|last=Wolf|first=Naomi|url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/jan/05/julian-assange-sex-crimes-anonymity|title=Julian Assange's sex-crime accusers deserve to be named|work=The Guardian|date=January 5, 2011|access-date=October 23, 2019}}</ref> In ''The Nation'', [[Katha Pollitt]] wrote that Wolf's argument was that anonymity "impedes law enforcement", which Pollitt said "is a little bizarre: doesn't Wolf realize that anonymity applies only to the media? Everyone in the justice system knows who the complainants are."<ref>{{cite news|last=Pollitt|first=Katha|url=https://www.thenation.com/article/naomi-wolf-wrong-again-rape/|title=Naomi Wolf: Wrong Again on Rape|work=The Nation|date=January 10, 2011|access-date=October 23, 2019|archive-date=October 23, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191023110856/https://www.thenation.com/article/naomi-wolf-wrong-again-rape/|url-status=dead}}</ref> [[Laurie Penny]] wrote in the ''[[New Statesman]]'' in September 2012 that "Wolf has done great damage by using her platform as one of the world's most famous feminists to dismiss these women's allegations."<ref>{{cite news|last=Penny|first=Laurie|url=https://www.newstatesman.com/laurie-penny/2012/09/problem-naomi-wolfs-vagina|title=Laurie Penny on the problem with Naomi Wolf's vagina|work=New Statesman|location=London|date=September 10, 2012|access-date=March 1, 2021|archive-date=May 17, 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210517122705/https://www.newstatesman.com/laurie-penny/2012/09/problem-naomi-wolfs-vagina|url-status=live}}</ref>