Watching the press conference held by Congressman Anthony Weiner (D-NY) yesterday, my first reaction was "what is it with these male politicians who think with their dicks and think the rest of us just fell off the turnip truck?" And a half hour into it, my second thought was, oy vey, please stop talking already.
I also knew automatically that Weiner's actions would be immediately compared to those of other "fallen from grace" male politicians who did naughty things and tried to hide them.
But Weiner's case is vastly different from these other guys, and here's why.
Weiner, a recently-married man, sent photos of himself in various stages of dress or undress through Twitter and other media to women in various places. His sexual preferences appear to tend toward the voyeuristic and, he claims, his wife knew about them.
Is it dumb and poor personal judgment for a politician to send photos of himself in various stages of undress and arousal to women who are not his wife? In my mind, yes. Is it my business? Not really, unless he has, for example, raliing against "sexting," faulting women, contraception, abortion, and gay people with the downfall of America and earthquakes in far-off places, or has been seeking to restrict people's rights based on a bastardized version of morality. Is it even dumber to go on an "I-did-not-send-pictures-to-[that]-woman" pity tour to make himself look iike the victim of hacking? Oh, yeah.
But, as I have said here before, I really do not care in what sexual practices consenting adults engage or what agreements are forged between two consenting adults, especially if the spouse of a given Twitterer knows about and lives with her/his spouses preferences.
What I do care about is the "holier-than-thou" moralizing in which so many of these philanderers engage, and the fact that they both pretend to be better than the rest of us, and, even worse, to legislate our private lives.
Weiner did none of this.
The others did.
Elliot Spitzer waged a war against sex workers, while simultaneously paying sex workers for their services and paying for them to cross state lines.
Senator David Vitter (R-LA) is a proponent of some of the most egregiously misogynistic laws and policies being proposed and enacted and is a member of the fundamentalist religious right which, it appears to me, is fundamentally based on "do unto others what you tell them not to do themselves." Vitter seeks to deny women access to every form of reproductive health care, for example, while merrily screwing around outside his marriage. And he is a member of that august group that likes to expound on the "danger to the American Family" of recognizing gay, lesbian and transgender persons as human beings with human rights.
Senator John Ensign is a member of the C-Street tribe and not only a moralizing legislator but is alledged to have used campaign funds to pay off his mistress' family. As far as the rest of Ensign's hypocrisy, see Vitter, David, above.
Former Senator John Edwards played the happy family man while hiding his honey and their love child and also is now charged with using campaign funds inappropriately.
Ambassador Randall Tobias promoted policies--abstinence-only until marriage, the prostitution pledge--that endangered the lives of women in the poorest settings throughout the world. And then he had his masseuse.
Weiner may have used his digital camera in what many consider an inappropriate manner, and, yes, he lied about it, which was unbelievably stupid but also human. But unless and until he is found telling me and others how to live our private lives and unless and until we find out that digital camera was paid for by campaign funds, the Twitter-pix problem is between Weiner and his wife.