« Will Portman or Kasich Be McCain’s Thursday Surprise?
Civil Rights Roundup: 07/24/08 »



Edwards’ love child and the hetero/homo double standard divide

July 24th, 2008
By JOE WINDISH, Technology Editor

Print Print

A gay man, I had lots of interest in the Larry Craig story; far less in the John Edwards story. But I don’t see the double standard that my co-blogger Shaun does (be sure to check out the comments); or that Jack Shafer articulates in his Slate piece. In fact, I see Schafer stipulate the differences that count:

A cop charged Craig with a misdemeanor, and he pleaded guilty. [Emphasis mine.] There’s no denying the police blotter is always news, and there’s no denying that Craig deserved the hypocrisy scrutiny. Edwards, as far as we know, is guilty of nothing beyond running away from tabloid reporters in a Beverly Hills hotel stairway in the wee a.m. after visiting a female friend in her room. Also, all of the Enquirer’s published “evidence” of an Edwards affair comes from unnamed sources. And I should mention that an Edwards political operative, Andrew Young, claims that he is the father of Hunter’s child. (Young is married with children of his own.)

Furthermore, the fact is that the press is and will be all over the Edwards story. I bet it leads the morning shows tomorrow. These are the means and methods of the modern media machine. The press is doing the dance they always do — and indeed must do if they are to technically abide by their journalistic standards and not wholly succumb to those of the tabloid or blogger.

But I specifically take the time to write because of Shafer’s introduction of Larry Craig for comparison, and the deep, deep popular misunderstanding of the closet and the press, the notion of special privileges for gay people, and the confusion over the controversial practice of “outing” whereby gay activists make public the private facts of an individual’s intimate relationships.

You see, I do think there is a double standard I’d like to emphasize, but it’s not the one Schafer identifies. (And admittedly not relevant to this story — but then, I didn’t introduce Larry Craig into the story either!) Using the occasion of Jodie Foster’s public acknowledgment of her 14-year long obvious though unreported relationship with her lesbian partner, Chris Crain clarifies:

Here is the double standard on outing. When it comes to heterosexual celebrities, the entertainment media can’t get enough, reporting every salacious detail they can get their hands on.  And when closeted celebrities are caught in scandals, they’ll jump in with gusto. But gay celebrities in happy, well-adjusted relationships — whether Ellen or Rosie or Jodie (why are they all lesbians?) — the public is told nothing about until the celebrity says OK.  Even if the gay star shows up escorted in public by her partner at event after event.

The same type of double standard holds sway with closeted politicians as well, with those accused of shenanigans investigated without any regard to privacy. But it’s hands off on those with long-term relationships until they come out. Mark Foley is an example of both standards.

The alternative I have advocated for years is “equality.” Apply the same rules to gay and straight celebrities, and the same rules to gay and straight politicians. Ask about their personal lives, as they would otherwise, and report their answers, whether they lie, equivocate or refuse to answer. Then report the public facts that fit or contradict what they’ve said.

Digging deeper into their private lives is a judgment call, just as it is with straight politicians, that inevitably involves balancing the newsworthiness of the information versus how much personal privacy must be invaded to get it. It’s unthinkable that a heterosexual Hollywood celebrity of Jodie Foster would have a 14-year-relationship that went completely unreported. It’s way past time that it be unthinkable for gay celebrities, too.



This entry was posted on Thursday, July 24th, 2008 at 7:04 am and is filed under MSM, Scandals, Journalism, Larry Craig, Media, Homophobia, Media Criticism, GLBT Issues, John Edwards, Politics. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 4 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Breaking the ice eh?

    Just as long as your tricks don't turn up murdered when they "come out" about you if you decide to run for high public office. And speaking of high..I wouldn't recommend either gay or crack cocaine scandals if courting the middle vote.

    Just the gay thing isn't an issue..with me.

    I can't speak for millions upon millions of other people though..
    • ^
    • v
    Unless it involves criminality or the public good in some other way, I think outing the private lives of all types is despicable.

    That the media would be interested is understandable. That they would eschew responsibility for the consequences is inexcusable.
    Who is to judge except Jodie Foster what's best for her and the other people in her life?

    Beware of do-gooders messing with other people's lives, I say.
    • ^
    • v
    As I said in Sean's thread:

    The thing with the Senator Craig story was that he was in public a homophobic hard line Republican who had plenty of "Outrage(TM)" about the Clinton thing in 1998 but was in private "toe tapping" for probably years before he was caught.

    The hypocrisy of Senator Craig is what made that story stay in the news for so long.
    • ^
    • v
    The Republicans are very afraid because both Obama and Edwards ARE LOYAL to their wives, and McCain was not at all loyal to his first wife after she had been crippled. So the Republicans are starting early and going after one of the Democrats strongest strength–their loyal marriages with magnificent wives–and try to neutralize that. Just as the Republicans went after Kerry’s and Cleland’s war records to minimize the lack of military participation on the part of Bush, Cheney, and Chambliss. Rove’s fingerprints are all over this.

    And why do the Republicans make so much fuss about Edwards’ hair and house? Because they are obvious strengths of his--good health and being a self-made success. Again, go after the biggest strengths to neutralize them.
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« Will Portman or Kasich Be McCain’s Thursday Surprise?
Civil Rights Roundup: 07/24/08 »


By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.