Note: This was written in October 2011 in anticipation of a mayoral candidate’s decades’ old personal history being released as a way to fling mud. It has sat dormant as a draft until now, since that “news” was just published elsewhere. I will be providing no links to that material and will let this piece speak for itself.
Reading through a long list of political sex scandals, I noticed that about half had no connection to the workplace. These politicians cheated on spouses — sometimes fathering children in the process — or sent ill-advised photos of themselves via the internet, but did not involve interns, colleagues, or taxpayer money.
When did we become so concerned with politicians’ private bad behavior?
According to the Christian Science Monitor, “until the 1980s, all but the most notorious sex scandals were viewed as a private matter.”
Now, sex does not even have to occur for a politician’s career to be ruined.
It’s not just politicians who find themselves open to public scrutiny in this way. Teachers are another group who are expected to behave like saints in their personal lives; those whose sexuality strays from the paradigm of heteronormative monogamy find their lives splashed across newspapers. Those employed in less progressive districts may be asked to resign. This is not unlike political scandals in which governors, mayors, and other representatives are forced out of work due to a moral failing unrelated to lawmaking or budget balancing.
If statistics point to nearly half of all people being unfaithful at some point during their married lives, why are only people in select careers shamed or forced out of their jobs as a result of their infidelity? With so many cheaters afoot, wouldn’t they worry about having their own skeletons dragged out of the closet?
There is something that happens when all sexual misdeeds are lumped together. Sex with a subordinate should not be equated with that of sex between two consenting adults who have equal power in the workforce. Hiring someone in exchange for sex should not be morally conflated with someone cheating on his spouse. One set of these issues concerns constituents; the other should concern only those directly involved.
It’s not a demand for moral behavior that prompts individuals to tip-off reports or expose such pseudo-scandal. It’s politics, pure and simple. It’s a candidate with a weak platform who can find no major flaws in an opponent’s work performance. It’s done out of retribution.
Is exposing another person’s private life a morally superior action when doing so is selfish and politically motivated?
Real Hartford does not endorse political candidates, but we will not hesitate to call out those who make thinly veiled homophobic attacks or attempt to create a ruckus over a whole lot of nothing.
Neo-Puritans and Political Sex Scandals
Note: This was written in October 2011 in anticipation of a mayoral candidate’s decades’ old personal history being released as a way to fling mud. It has sat dormant as a draft until now, since that “news” was just published elsewhere. I will be providing no links to that material and will let this piece speak for itself.
Reading through a long list of political sex scandals, I noticed that about half had no connection to the workplace. These politicians cheated on spouses — sometimes fathering children in the process — or sent ill-advised photos of themselves via the internet, but did not involve interns, colleagues, or taxpayer money.
When did we become so concerned with politicians’ private bad behavior?
According to the Christian Science Monitor, “until the 1980s, all but the most notorious sex scandals were viewed as a private matter.”
Now, sex does not even have to occur for a politician’s career to be ruined.
It’s not just politicians who find themselves open to public scrutiny in this way. Teachers are another group who are expected to behave like saints in their personal lives; those whose sexuality strays from the paradigm of heteronormative monogamy find their lives splashed across newspapers. Those employed in less progressive districts may be asked to resign. This is not unlike political scandals in which governors, mayors, and other representatives are forced out of work due to a moral failing unrelated to lawmaking or budget balancing.
If statistics point to nearly half of all people being unfaithful at some point during their married lives, why are only people in select careers shamed or forced out of their jobs as a result of their infidelity? With so many cheaters afoot, wouldn’t they worry about having their own skeletons dragged out of the closet?
There is something that happens when all sexual misdeeds are lumped together. Sex with a subordinate should not be equated with that of sex between two consenting adults who have equal power in the workforce. Hiring someone in exchange for sex should not be morally conflated with someone cheating on his spouse. One set of these issues concerns constituents; the other should concern only those directly involved.
It’s not a demand for moral behavior that prompts individuals to tip-off reports or expose such pseudo-scandal. It’s politics, pure and simple. It’s a candidate with a weak platform who can find no major flaws in an opponent’s work performance. It’s done out of retribution.
Is exposing another person’s private life a morally superior action when doing so is selfish and politically motivated?
Real Hartford does not endorse political candidates, but we will not hesitate to call out those who make thinly veiled homophobic attacks or attempt to create a ruckus over a whole lot of nothing.
Related Posts
Whose Quilt?
Nerds in the Caribbean
Learnings (and some unanswered questions) from the 2010 Election