Was discussing with a female coworker why the public -- and media -- seems to be more judgmental of Anthony Weiner's wife, Huma Abedin, for standing by her man than they were of Hillary Clinton, whose husband had ACTUAL affairs with countless women. While we both agreed it was illogical, after some back and forth we figured out that it was because Huma's humiliation was happening so publicly, and taking place in real time -- with graphic dialogue and photos -- whereas Bill's affairs were more "traditional," i.e., out of the public eye and (seemingly) in the past. I really don't think what Anthony Weiner has done is that big of a deal, it's just not conducive for someone living in the public eye, let alone someone who wants to be mayor of the world's most important city.
Friday, July 26, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
New York is the world's most important city, but the mayor of NYC has very little global power.
He or she will be the mayor of New York City. It's a big job, but I think the world will survive if you make the wrong choice. It has for decades when you've done so in the past.
Sad to think, if a city problem became unattended, it would be because of the mayor busy with his history.
I was puzzled by this too until I saw Maureen Dowds' column today in the NYT.
Bill Clinton was the greatest Democratic politician and policy maker of his generation. Thus, in some respects is was appropriate for Hillary to guide us to overlook his flaws and let him lead us. Her judgment has stood the test of time and actually adds to her her stature now as we consider her as our leader.
Anthony Weiner, incomparison, is a detestable, pathetic, nothing. A suit that's empty except for narcissistic, overweening ambition. As Dowd says it: "In 12 years in Congress, he managed to get only one minor bill passed, on behalf of a donor, and he doesn’t work well with people. He knows how to be loud on cable and wave his Zorro sword in our faces."
Bottom line is that he's not special enough to deserve a pass for his ridiculous behavior. Instead, he should have the strength, humility, and decency to crawl back beneath the slimy rock from which he came. And Huma - for having stood by a nothing - reveals herself to be either absurdly in his thrall, or a co-conspirator in trying to bury his shit for her own overweening ambitions.
I think part of the problem is an age thing. For people over a certain age, there's an ick factor associated with with virtual sex that you don't feel with the real thing, even though having an actual physical affair does a lot more damage to a real relationship than some online fantasizing. So we were a lot more willing to forgive (or at least understand) Bill Clinton's affairs than we are to forgive (or even try to understand) Anthony Weiner's proclivities.
We all know people who have had adulterous affairs, and most of us understand that, as much as we may disapprove in theory, nearly everyone is capable of adultery under the right (or wrong) circumstances. So we understand why a spouse might choose to forgive a straying mate and try to salvage the relationship. On the other hand, it's very easy for an over-50 voter, hearing that a politician has been tweeting schlong photos to women he never even met, to think, "Ewww, what kind of jerk does that?" And since we're reacting so strongly, we're disgusted when the spouse chooses to forgive the jerk and try to salvage the relationship. By forgiving him, Huma se
Post a Comment