KillerMovies - Movies That Matter!

REGISTER HERE TO JOIN IN! - It's easy and it's free!
Home » Community » General Discussion Forum » The Only Relevant Weinergate Perspective

The Only Relevant Weinergate Perspective
Started by: inimalist

Forum Jump:
Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread
tsilamini
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:

The Only Relevant Weinergate Perspective

I'm sure everyone has heard of this by now, but to recap, Anthony Weiner, a politician, engaged in consensual e-sex, and people found out.

quote:
The joys of repressed voyeuristic titillation

Glenn Greenwald

There are few things more sickening -- or revealing -- to behold than a D.C. sex scandal. Huge numbers of people prance around flamboyantly condemning behavior in which they themselves routinely engage. Media stars contrive all sorts of high-minded justifications for luxuriating in every last dirty detail, when nothing is more obvious than that their only real interest is vicarious titillation. Reporters who would never dare challenge powerful political figures who torture, illegally eavesdrop, wage illegal wars or feed at the trough of sleazy legalized bribery suddenly walk upright -- like proud ostriches with their feathers extended -- pretending to be hard-core adversarial journalists as they collectively kick a sexually humiliated figure stripped of all importance. The ritual is as nauseating as it is predictable.

What makes the Anthony Weiner story somewhat unique and thus worth discussing for a moment is that, as Hendrick Hertzberg points out, the pretense of substantive relevance (which, lame though it was in prior scandals, was at least maintained) has been more or less brazenly dispensed with here. This isn't a case of illegal sex activity or gross hypocrisy (i.e., David Vitter, Larry Craig, Mark Foley (who built their careers on Family Values) or Eliot Spitzer (who viciously prosecuted trivial prostitution cases)). There's no lying under oath (Clinton) or allegedly illegal payments (Ensign, Edwards). From what is known, none of the women claim harassment and Weiner didn't even have actual sex with any of them. This is just pure mucking around in the private, consensual, unquestionably legal private sexual affairs of someone for partisan gain, voyeuristic fun and the soothing fulfillment of judgmental condemnation. And in that regard, it sets a new standard: the private sexual activities of public figures -- down to the most intimate details -- are now inherently newsworthy, without the need for any pretense of other relevance.

I'd really like to know how many journalists, pundits and activist types clucking with righteous condemnation of Weiner would be comfortable having that standard applied to them. I strongly suspect the number is very small. Ever since the advent of Internet commerce, pornography -- use of the Internet for sexual gratification, real or virtual -- has has been, and continues to be, a huge business. Millions upon millions of people at some point do what Weiner did. I know that's a shocking revelation that will cause many Good People to clutch their pearls in fragile Victorian horror, but it's nonetheless true. It's also true that marital infidelity is incredibly common.

If Chris Matthews or Brian Williams or any politician ever patronized or even visited a porno site on the Internet or had a sexually charged IM chat with someone who isn't their spouse, shouldn't that now be splashed all over the Internet so we can all read it -- not just the fact of its existence but all the gory details? After all, this is about character, judgment, veracity: these are Important Journalists and Politicians, and how can we trust them if they're not even faithful to their spouse? Isn't that the standard now -- the one they're gleefully propagating?

Yes, Anthony Weiner lied -- about something that is absolutely nobody's business but his and his wife's. If you're not his wife, you have absolutely no legitimate reason to want to know about -- let alone pass judgment on -- what he does in his private sexual life with other consenting adults. Particularly repellent is the pretense of speaking out on behalf of his wife, as though anyone knows what her perspectives on such matters are or what their relationship entails. The only reason to want to wallow in the details of Anthony Weiner's sex life is because of the voyeuristic titillation it provides: a deeply repressed culture celebrates when it finds cause to be able to talk about penises and naked pictures and oral sex while hiding behind some noble pretext. On some level, I find the behavior of the obviously loathsome Andrew Breitbart preferable; at least he's honest about his motive: he hates Democrats and liberals and wants sadistically to destroy them however he can. It's the empty, barren, purse-lipped busybodies who cannot stay out of other adult's private and sexual lives -- while pretending to be elevated -- that are the truly odious villains here.

In The Atlantic, Conor Friedersdorf argues that the private consensual sexual activities of politicians are none of our business, and in reply, Megan McArdle insists that "society has [an] interest in whether people keep their vows" in marriage and thus it's a good thing "to use a few of our precious news hours to say, 'Hey, not okay'!" Except McArdle has absolutely no idea what vows Weiner and his wife have made to each other, and she shouldn't know, because it's none of her business, despite her eagerness to learn about it and publicly condemn it. Even if she had any idea of what she was talking about -- and she plainly doesn't -- nothing is less relevant than Megan McArdle's views of the arrangement Anthony Weiner and his wife have for their marriage and whether each partner is adhering to that arrangement. That a journalist at The Atlantic wants to talk about this, and dig into the details, and issue judgments about it, says all one needs to know about our press corps.

Can one even imagine how much different -- and better -- our political culture would be if our establishment media devoted even a fraction of the critical scrutiny and adversarial energy it devoted to the Weiner matter to things that actually matter? But that won't happen, because the people who comprise that press corps, with rare exception, are both incapable of focusing on things that matter and uninterested in doing so. Talking about shirtless pictures and expressing outrage about private sexual behavior -- like some angry, chattering soap opera fan furious that one of their best-known characters cheated -- is about the limit of their abilities and their function. And doing so is so easy, so fun, so self-justifying, and so exciting in that evasively tingly sort of way.

* * * * *

Let me add one point: I am not and have never been an Anthony Weiner fan. While I agree with him on many issues, his overriding concern always seemed to me to be his own career, and, as I've noted before, he is one of the most extremist AIPAC loyalists in the Congress, which is not an easy distinction to achieve. This is about the principle, not the person.


http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/g...iner/index.html

Greenwald sort of gets into it here, but covers what I think is the most relevant aspect of this "scandal" in another article:

quote:
It is because these inherently non-partisan and non-ideological principles have been deliberately warped into prongs in the partisan wars -- partisans care about anti-war and pro-civil liberties issues only when their party is out of power -- that no effective constituency for them can be created. Beyond that, trans-partisan and trans-ideological coalitions are extremely difficult to assemble because tribal loyalties render them sinful and heretical: the benefit of trivial, daily partisan bickering (the Weiner Scandal; Sarah Palin's "Paul Revere" comments) is that they prevent citizens with common interests from banding together against the political establishment and the financial elites who own it.


http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/g...ship/index.html

(good article, worth reading as well)

**************

So, while you might have personal opinions about infidelity or the sanctity of marriage, it is very difficult to argue that this scandal does little but distract and divide people.

That it arises at a time when there is bipartisan and grass roots support for exiting Libya, against the patriot act, and in general, against the "powers that be" security and corporate state is no coincidence. Issues like this serve to remind the public which side of the fence they are on and why they shouldn't get along with the other guy (who might be just as concerned about individual rights, but supports the guy with the cock shot on his facebook)

By constantly playing up scandal, or contentious issues, like abortion and gun laws that have no chance of passing in the first place, the political elite can prevent any real challenge to their power, and the corporate media establishment never has to ask "the hand that feeds them" serious questions about serious issues.

Again, you are allowed your own opinions of Weiner and his marriage, a relationship you know nothing about, but to pretend that this is an issue of any political relevance is nonsense. Yet, it is exactly this type of nonsense that the mainstream media and political establishment want you to be concerned with, because it further entrenches their interests; the political elite rule with no question and the media feels no pressure to ask those questions.


__________________
yes, a million times yes

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 06:41 PM
tsilamini is currently offline Click here to Send tsilamini a Private Message Find more posts by tsilamini Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Archaeopteryx
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: The Jurassic Period

Another politician caught being a pervert. Wonderful. Wooopeeee. Ha ha, More. More. More.


WTF ever.

Actually inimalist, you make a very good point about the distraction thing. People would rather gobble up shit like this than have to deal with what really matters.


__________________
There are more humans in the world than rats.

Last edited by Archaeopteryx on Jun 7th, 2011 at 06:54 PM

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 06:51 PM
Archaeopteryx is currently offline Click here to Send Archaeopteryx a Private Message Find more posts by Archaeopteryx Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
tsilamini
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:

quote: (post)
Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Actually inimalist, you make a very good point about the distraction thing. People would rather gobble up shit like this than have to deal with what really matters.


just to be clear, this last issue is the point of this thread, not the discussion of people's private sex lives

I, for one, couldn't care less about someone texting pictures of their penis to someone else, especially if they are consensual adults. This is behaviour we all partake in, and is hardly "perverted"


__________________
yes, a million times yes

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 07:06 PM
tsilamini is currently offline Click here to Send tsilamini a Private Message Find more posts by tsilamini Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

I agree. The only negative thing i see here was his lying. There is no reason he should resign over this and i support him.

Sex sells, so it is on tv all the time. I don't know if it's a "distraction" or something viewers were already asking for.


__________________

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 09:29 PM
King Kandy is currently offline Click here to Send King Kandy a Private Message Find more posts by King Kandy Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
tsilamini
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:

quote: (post)
Originally posted by King Kandy
I agree. The only negative thing i see here was his lying. There is no reason he should resign over this and i support him.


I understand what you are saying, I just... I'm not even sure I think there is something to "support" here, you know? like what, I support the rights of adults to have private lives?

quote: (post)
Originally posted by King Kandy
Sex sells, so it is on tv all the time. I don't know if it's a "distraction" or something viewers were already asking for.


well, if that is the case, it raises a pretty fundamental question about journalism: is the role of the media to provide people with the gossip stories that might titillate them? or are they supposed to provide a more fundamental service to society?

deliberate or not, this type of "news" doesn't do much to unite people around issues that actually matter, or to provoke/inform the public about the political landscape


__________________
yes, a million times yes

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 09:45 PM
tsilamini is currently offline Click here to Send tsilamini a Private Message Find more posts by tsilamini Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Bardock42
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves

Aww....Weiner...c'mon...sad


__________________

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 09:55 PM
Bardock42 is currently offline Click here to Send Bardock42 a Private Message Find more posts by Bardock42 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

Well, most news on TV is gossip news. I don't think it is supposed to take the place of actual political news. in the new york times, this had 1 front page article... but all the others were high interest to me. I don't think it is distracting anyone, anyone who is actually interested in politics will slide past while people who only care about celebrities will have something a little different for once.

I think that the situation was aggravated because his name is Weiner. It just seemed like too great of a story to pass up.


__________________

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 09:57 PM
King Kandy is currently offline Click here to Send King Kandy a Private Message Find more posts by King Kandy Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
Bardock42
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves

But he lied...he lied so much sad

I love that guy


__________________

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 10:00 PM
Bardock42 is currently offline Click here to Send Bardock42 a Private Message Find more posts by Bardock42 Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
tsilamini
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:

quote: (post)
Originally posted by King Kandy
Well, most news on TV is gossip news. I don't think it is supposed to take the place of actual political news. in the new york times, this had 1 front page article... but all the others were high interest to me. I don't think it is distracting anyone, anyone who is actually interested in politics will slide past while people who only care about celebrities will have something a little different for once.

I think that the situation was aggravated because his name is Weiner. It just seemed like too great of a story to pass up.


unfortunately, these "people who are actually interested in politics" make up a small minority of the voting public, if you are defining people who are interested in politics as those who aren't interested in these types of scandals.

to the rest of the "uninformed rabble", who may have similar concerns about medicare reform, or foreign wars, this is a distraction. imho its the same reason we saw a flurry of abortion bills, with no chance of passing, introduced in various states at the same time bipartisan support against the banks and tax cuts on for the rich started to swell at a grass roots level. As soon as people start to bridge partisan lines to challenge the elite, fluff issues come up and the media is more than happy to oblige.


__________________
yes, a million times yes

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 10:29 PM
tsilamini is currently offline Click here to Send tsilamini a Private Message Find more posts by tsilamini Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

quote: (post)
Originally posted by inimalist
unfortunately, these "people who are actually interested in politics" make up a small minority of the voting public, if you are defining people who are interested in politics as those who aren't interested in these types of scandals.

to the rest of the "uninformed rabble", who may have similar concerns about medicare reform, or foreign wars, this is a distraction. imho its the same reason we saw a flurry of abortion bills, with no chance of passing, introduced in various states at the same time bipartisan support against the banks and tax cuts on for the rich started to swell at a grass roots level. As soon as people start to bridge partisan lines to challenge the elite, fluff issues come up and the media is more than happy to oblige.

Are you saying that he had an affair, because politics were getting tense for the elite? I think this would have gotten big media play, regardless of when it occured.


__________________

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 10:46 PM
King Kandy is currently offline Click here to Send King Kandy a Private Message Find more posts by King Kandy Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
tsilamini
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:

quote: (post)
Originally posted by King Kandy
Are you saying that he had an affair, because politics were getting tense for the elite? I think this would have gotten big media play, regardless of when it occured.


in this case, it is more that the media is more interested in presenting these types of fluff stories, because it excites people with the taboo of... consensual adult sexual activity... but even more so because they can now get ratings without ever having to ask real questions to the politicians (which is generally not good for their careers).

For instance, I'm sure Weiner is happier answering no brainer questions about his sex life than digging questions about his relationship with AIPAC and the Israeli lobby.

I don't think the media is responsible for anything really, it merely just does what is easiest, and the "left/right", scandal based reporting of trivial details of people's lives is far easier than burning their political capital trying to do real investigative reporting, and in the end, probably gets better ratings.

The elite are just happy to play along because it serves their purposes. During this whole affair, the only person I heard say (outside of the John Stewarts and Glenn Greenwalds) "lets talk about something serious" was Weiner himself. Everyone else gladly played along, because its better than the GOP or democratic leaders having to answer what were calls to end the war in Libya from within their own parties, or to take a serious look at medicare reform in line with what the American people want, rather than corporate interests (which look like they will win out again, as Obama has said entitlements will be on the table for budget negotiations).

I'm not accusing people of manufacturing the news, I'm accusing them of making the least-important-but-most-divisive stories with the simplest narratives headlines, which tacitly supports the political establishment of both parties, because such stories and continuous scandals keep any pressure off, say, the fact that the democratic party, who 5 years ago pretended to care about civil liberties, just extended the very patriot act they, 5 years ago, rallied against.


__________________
yes, a million times yes

Old Post Jun 7th, 2011 11:26 PM
tsilamini is currently offline Click here to Send tsilamini a Private Message Find more posts by tsilamini Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

Like I said, sex sells. Haha, civil liberties don't. Its a sad state of affairs.


__________________

Old Post Jun 8th, 2011 03:48 AM
King Kandy is currently offline Click here to Send King Kandy a Private Message Find more posts by King Kandy Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
tsilamini
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:

for sure, but like, the "profit motive" is probably not the model we should be encouraging for the thing that is supposed to inform the public about politics and act as a balance against the "powers that be".


__________________
yes, a million times yes

Old Post Jun 8th, 2011 04:16 AM
tsilamini is currently offline Click here to Send tsilamini a Private Message Find more posts by tsilamini Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

Well that's what necessarily is, since media is delivered by private companies. Likewise, state sponsored television also has its strengths and weaknesses. I like independent journalists but often the quality is not as high.


__________________

Old Post Jun 8th, 2011 04:24 AM
King Kandy is currently offline Click here to Send King Kandy a Private Message Find more posts by King Kandy Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
tsilamini
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:

a media outlet doesn't need to be driven by the profit motive to be successful, imho. you just need people who love the idea of being "newsmen". and regardless, we need a media that doesn't just pander to the same low brow sensibilities that sitcoms do, profitable or not.

tbh, it's more a matter of journalists being unwilling to engage the politicians about serious issues more than people not wanting to know. I genuinely believe that real discussion about real issues would attract ratings, just the anchors don't want to be ostracized from the Washington "club", so they pitch soft ones to their guests.

hell, the prime example is the daily show or Colbert, but even shows like Conan do political stuff, and TYT is apparently huge in terms of internet news. or of course, AJE. I don't think it is a matter of money at all, but like some kind of nearly inscestous pseudo-cronyism.


__________________
yes, a million times yes

Old Post Jun 8th, 2011 04:40 AM
tsilamini is currently offline Click here to Send tsilamini a Private Message Find more posts by tsilamini Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

The Young Turks has put out many stories about Weiner...


__________________

Old Post Jun 8th, 2011 04:43 AM
King Kandy is currently offline Click here to Send King Kandy a Private Message Find more posts by King Kandy Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
tsilamini
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:

sure, nothing is perfect, TYT has lots of problems, like Cenk being too full of himself. in their defense, TYT has always had a mix of real and pop news, but point taken, they might not have been the best example.

greenwald did the story on weiner above, AJE has their biases, Stewart is a comedy program, etc. those were more examples of news agencies that are able to be successful without pandering to scandal and other "non news" issues


__________________
yes, a million times yes

Old Post Jun 8th, 2011 04:52 AM
tsilamini is currently offline Click here to Send tsilamini a Private Message Find more posts by tsilamini Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
King Kandy
Senior Member

Gender: Male
Location: United States

But, what would you say is the way it should be? Should they be state run? Volunteerism? Should it be set up like a wikipedia-inspired system?


__________________

Old Post Jun 8th, 2011 05:06 AM
King Kandy is currently offline Click here to Send King Kandy a Private Message Find more posts by King Kandy Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
tsilamini
Junior Member

Gender: Unspecified
Location:

like I pointed out above, there are ways to do it even in the current system, so long as the people running the news program/channel are interested in producing good media, rather than competing for ratings or being afraid to go after politicians


__________________
yes, a million times yes

Old Post Jun 8th, 2011 01:07 PM
tsilamini is currently offline Click here to Send tsilamini a Private Message Find more posts by tsilamini Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
lil bitchiness
-

Gender: Female
Location: Limassol, Cyprus

Moderator

Think of the children!! Won't someone please think of the children!


__________________

في هذا العالم ثلاثة أشخاص أفسدوا البشرية : راعي غنم , طبيب و راكب الجمال , و راكب الجمال هو أسوأ نشال و أسوأ مشعوذ بين الثلاثة

Old Post Jun 8th, 2011 01:50 PM
lil bitchiness is currently offline Click here to Send lil bitchiness a Private Message Find more posts by lil bitchiness Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote Quick Quote
All times are UTC. The time now is 08:35 PM.
Pages (3): [1] 2 3 »   Last Thread   Next Thread

Home » Community » General Discussion Forum » The Only Relevant Weinergate Perspective

Email this Page
Subscribe to this Thread
   Post New Thread  Post A Reply

Forum Jump:
Search by user:
 

Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is OFF
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON

Text-only version
 

< - KillerMovies.com - Forum Archive - Forum Rules >


© Copyright 2000-2006, KillerMovies.com. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by: vBulletin, copyright ©2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.