The "Tiger Woods" double standard
Equal Time
patted on the back and called studs; when women have lots of sex they
are ostracized and called sluts...."
As with most things feminist....the supposed double-standard is not
only false but completely OPPOSITE of the truth: it is men *not* women
who suffer when their sex lives are exposed to public scrutiny.
Tiger Woods is merely the most recent case-in-point.
In 2005, the CEO of Boeing (Harry Stonecipher) was forced to resign
over an extra-marital he had with a female employee who confirmed that
the relationship was entirely consentual and that she was fully aware
of his marital status. Yet, not only did she retain her job, most news
organizations declined to even reveal her name "out of respect for her
privacy".
Fast forward over a myraid of intervening examples to the celebrated
case of Elliot Spitzer, former Govenor of New York -- brought down by
an illicit affair with a prostitute. He looses his career; she gains
fame and notoriety.
And now we have Tiger Woods.
According to the adage, if anyone deserved the appellation of "stud"
and an accompanying pat on the back, its Tiger! Yet quite to the
contrary, a result of his supposed involvement with these 2...or is it
5...or 10...or 15 women....sponsor after sponsor are cutting their
ties with him. As these women come forward one after another for their
15 minutes of fame, his career -- at least as a spokesperson -- in
shambles.
It is of interest to note that another underlying theme of feminist
rhetoric is acceptance of personal responsibility for actions and
decisions (e.g. men must accept responsibility for "deciding" to rape
a woman -- irrespective of how much they feel she "led them on"). With
that being the case, why then are their no feminists calling for these
women to accept responsibility for their actions?
It would be so refreshing if just once when one of these opportunist
women came forward to grab the limelight, the interviewer would ask
them "If you knew he was married, why did you agree to the affair? Why
are you coming forward now? What kind of a person are you to do such a
thing?"
But it ain't gonna happen! .....Not with our present society of
extreme anti-male double standards.
Grizzlie Antagonist
Here's a question for you, Equal Time.
Why didn't Bill Clinton suffer from this double standard?
It's not necessarily true that a philandering president's personal
life is no one else's business because of the potential for blackmail,
etc.
But a philandering athlete -- well, unless his nocturnal activities
leave him physically exhausted, there's no reason to suppose that an
athlete's sex life would have any effect upon his ability to perform
on the playing field. There aren't any national security interests at
stake.
Yet Clinton's sex life -- in the eyes of some, anyway, -- arguably
enhanced his reputation while, as you say, Tiger Woods's sex life has
destroyed his.
Why do you suppose that is?
dd...@bellsouth.net
wrote:
(Denise) Since you've killfiled me, you won't see this, Grizzlie.
However, to anyone else with the same question in mind: Slick Willie
got a pass from most of the professional type of feminists because of
his public support for feminist positions. This actually makes his
sexual activities more thoroughly disgusting because they show
hypocrisy. Additionally, Slick seems to have actually sexually
harassed women like Paula Jones and Kathleen Wiley while Tiger is
simply promiscuous. The bottom line is that Slick's sexual wrongs were
excused for political reasons.
Jim Sumner
When a woman has sex with a lot of men it is usually other women
who call her a slut, none of these Feminist critiques ever seem to
mention this fundamental aspect.
dd...@bellsouth.net
(Denise) This reminds me of what happened years ago after
Congressional Rep. Wayne Hays was exposed as hiring buxom blonde
Elizabeth Ray ostensibly as a "secretary" but only to act as his
lover. My mother -- a conservative, anti-feminist, devout born-again
Christian -- denounced Hays for "using" Ray. My brother Dave said,
"Look what's happening to the user and look what's happening to the
used."
Elizabeth Ray said that she had initially been hired to be a secretary
but was incompetent to perform secretarial duties. She famously
admitted, "I can't type, I can't file, I can't even answer the phone."
Someone wrote to a magazine, "I fail to see what is so scandalous. If
you work in Washington, D.C., you often come into contact with
employees who can't type, file, or answer a telephone properly. At
least Wayne Hays makes his employees do SOMETHING to earn their money."
dd...@bellsouth.net
(Denise) I saw something like the following at Knott's Berry Farm:
"Here lies Ruby Mae
From whom the ladies turned away
But many tears were shed
When the men heard she was dead."
Heidi Graw
>"Equal Time" <male...@australia.edu> wrote in message
>news:4e5582f1-2832-4ed0...@f5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
(snip)
> And now we have Tiger Woods.
>
> According to the adage, if anyone deserved the appellation of "stud"
> and an accompanying pat on the back, its Tiger! Yet quite to the
> contrary, a result of his supposed involvement with these 2...or is it
> 5...or 10...or 15 women....sponsor after sponsor are cutting their
> ties with him. As these women come forward one after another for their
> 15 minutes of fame, his career -- at least as a spokesperson -- in
> shambles.
>
> It is of interest to note that another underlying theme of feminist
> rhetoric is acceptance of personal responsibility for actions and
> decisions (e.g. men must accept responsibility for "deciding" to rape
> a woman -- irrespective of how much they feel she "led them on"). With
> that being the case, why then are their no feminists calling for these
> women to accept responsibility for their actions?
I find it disgusting whenver I hear of women having affairs with married
men who they know are married. A married man should be "hands-off"
and these women should suffer the same amount of condemnation as
the married man having an affair with another woman other than his own
wife. And when a woman has an affair with a married man, she is also
demonstrating a decided lack of respect for his wife.
Stay away from married people. It's as simple as that. Don't lure
them, don't entice them, don't ask them for sex. Leave married
people alone! If you're single, find another single to mess around
with.
Christians should well bear in mind not to covet another's wife
(biblical commandment), just as non-Christians (Nordic/Germanics)
are advised not to entice another's spouse [Havamal].
Anyway, I have nothing but contempt for all those women who
lured Tiger into an affair and/or accepted if he had offered. All of
these women should have known better and stayed the hell away
from him.
Ah well...may as well be talking to a brick wall...it ain't gonna
happen. <sigh>
Heidi
jaimej78
In all three of the examples you mentioned, the men were in powerful,
high-profile positions, and the women were average Janes. If a
secretary were forced to resign her position, she wouldn't have nearly
as much to lose as a CEO, a governor, or an athlete benefiting from
sponsorships. All of those jobs require maintaining a certain public
image that a secretary or a prostitute doesn't have to have. To
compare apples to apples here, you would have to cite an example of a
female CEO, governor, or athlete who was discovered having one or more
affairs, and the resolution of the situation. The double standard
you're complaining about hasn't hurt Charlie Sheen's or Robert Downey
Jr.'s career, and Sheen just allegedly threatened his wife with a
knife.
Jaime
Andrew Usher
wrote:
> Here's a question for you, Equal Time.
>
> Why didn't Bill Clinton suffer from this double standard?
It's that he was basically excused for being a leftist politician.
That doesn't weaken the ordinary application of it.
Andrew Usher
Equal Time
wrote:
> Why didn't Bill Clinton suffer from this double standard?
>
Well...by most common measures...being investigated by a special
prosecutor and being censured by congress pretty much counts as
"suffering".....at the very least does NOT count as a congratulatory
"pat on the back"
Andrew Usher
> patted on the back and called studs; when women have lots of sex they
> are ostracized and called sluts...."
>
> As with most things feminist....the supposed double-standard is not
> only false but completely OPPOSITE of the truth: it is men *not* women
> who suffer when their sex lives are exposed to public scrutiny.
<snip demonstration>
What you have, I think, is the doublethink of hypocrisy. It happens
now to operate for (and is deliberately exploited by) the feminists
and other leftist causes.
It is the case that most people are able to hold in their mind two
contradictory position: one 'official story' and one real story. The
way people actually behave privately is normally in accord with the
way things actually are, but because of the resistance to any public
discussion of that, people are forced to behave publicly at odds with
it. This is one of the biggest causes of social problems, and always
has been.
Andrew Usher
Andrew Usher
> In all three of the examples you mentioned, the men were in powerful,
> high-profile positions, and the women were average Janes. If a
> secretary were forced to resign her position, she wouldn't have nearly
> as much to lose as a CEO, a governor, or an athlete benefiting from
> sponsorships.
This makes it MORE unfair to the CEOs etc., not less.
Andrew Usher
Equal Time
>
> When a woman has sex with a lot of men it is usually other women
> who call her a slut, none of these Feminist critiques ever seem to
> mention this fundamental aspect.
ABSOLUTELY CORRECT!!!
Thank you for pointing this out!
Equal Time
> In all three of the examples you mentioned, the men were in powerful,
> high-profile positions, and the women were average Janes.
Not true.
To the best I was ever able to determine, the woman Stonecipher had
his affair with was also very highly placed. Certainly *not* a "plain
Jane secretary".
> If a secretary were forced to resign her position, she wouldn't have nearly
> as much to lose as a CEO, a governor, or an athlete benefiting from
> sponsorships......
I guess I don't understand your point here. What does the amount
someone has to loose have to do with whether or not there is a double-
standard at play?Are you saying that its ok to vilify these men for
their sex lives BECAUSE they have so much to loose??
Grizzlie Antagonist
I'm not sure that this is a satisfactory explanation.
Clinton was excused by the public at large, not by just leftists.
Grizzlie Antagonist
He was IMPEACHED by Congress and not just censured but what I am
pointing out is that the public did not overtly resent him for it.
Grizzlie Antagonist
wrote:
There's no point in looking into a Rhodes Scholarship for your son
Steven either.
Ain't gonna happen.
Andrew Usher
wrote:
> >> Why didn't Bill Clinton suffer from this double standard?
>
> >It's that he was basically excused for being a leftist politician.
> >That doesn't weaken the ordinary application of it.
>
> I'm not sure that this is a satisfactory explanation.
>
> Clinton was excused by the public at large, not by just leftists.
Well, I think the media leads public opinion. OK, you first made the
point, what do you think the explanation is? This isn't a puzzle
newsgroup.
Andrew Usher
Grizzlie Antagonist
I have no real idea, but I suspect that you're onto the reason.
The conservatives may like to boast that we live in a center-right
country, but news media is liberal and the people are led like sheep
by what the media tells them.
So it's probably something along the lines of what you're saying.
Heidi Graw
>"Grizzlie Antagonist" <lloydso...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:9hr1k55ulke2j7fpr...@4ax.com...
(snip)
> There's no point in looking into a Rhodes Scholarship for your son
> Steven either.
>
> Ain't gonna happen.
...and that young man of mine has more on the ball than you do.
Heidi
Heidi Graw
>"Magda" <no-...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:1ck1k5h8sgj8qtg6n...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 10:31:49 GMT, in alt.gossip.celebrities, "Heidi Graw"
> <hg...@telus.net> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>
>
> ... Heidi wrote:
> ... I find it disgusting whenver I hear of women having affairs with
> married
> ... men who they know are married.
>Magda wrote:
> What affair? They were being paid!
Doesn't matter. If one makes a vow of fidelity, it behooves them
to live up to that vow...be that man or woman. If either one breaks
that vow, the oath-breaker and his/her accomplice should incur
a consequence of some kind. Vows mean something and I believe
that once made, every effort should be made to live up to those vows.
I realize today's society doesn't value vows, but I do. This is also
something I make very clear to anyone who would wish to pledge
an oath to me. If they break it, there will be a consequence. The
same goes for me, too.
Heidi
Grizzlie Antagonist
wrote:
>
And I have more on the ball than you do, so you've got to be ranking
pretty low on the vegetable food chain.
Heidi Graw
(snip)
>
> And I have more on the ball than you do, so you've got to be ranking
> pretty low on the vegetable food chain.
Well, I am a Kraut, plus I've got all four corners covered. ;-)
Heidi
Grizzlie Antagonist
Heidi Graw
> On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 21:15:02 GMT, "Heidi Graw" <hg...@telus.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>>"Grizzlie Antagonist" <lloydso...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:9c12k5h651v432o3d...@4ax.com...
>>(snip)
>>
>>>
>>> And I have more on the ball than you do, so you've got to be ranking
>>> pretty low on the vegetable food chain.
>>Heidi wrote:
>>Well, I am a Kraut, plus I've got all four corners covered. ;-)
>Grizzlie wrote:
> Of your head?
Well....I'm not the one wearing the dunce cap. Now, run along
and jump off that cliff with the rest of the herd. And may you fall
on your pointy little head. Hehehe...
Heidi
Grizzlie Antagonist
wrote:
>
>>"Grizzlie Antagonist" <lloydso...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:6h52k51q2evptt13c...@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 21:15:02 GMT, "Heidi Graw" <hg...@telus.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>>"Grizzlie Antagonist" <lloydso...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:9c12k5h651v432o3d...@4ax.com...
>>>(snip)
>>>
>>>>
>>>> And I have more on the ball than you do, so you've got to be ranking
>>>> pretty low on the vegetable food chain.
>
>>>Heidi wrote:
>>>Well, I am a Kraut, plus I've got all four corners covered. ;-)
>
>>Grizzlie wrote:
>> Of your head?
>
>Well....I'm not the one wearing the dunce cap.
You're not wearing the dunce cap for the same reason that you have to
be spoon fed.
Because when you try to feed yourself, the food ends up on your
forehead or on your nose. Your son's handicap is hereditary, and it
explains why you can't even put the dunce cap on.
Heidi Graw
> On Sun, 03 Jan 2010 20:49:09 GMT, in alt.gossip.celebrities, "Heidi Graw"> ... >"Grizzlie Antagonist" <lloydso...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> ... >news:9hr1k55ulke2j7fpr...@4ax.com...
> ... (snip)
> ...
> ... > There's no point in looking into a Rhodes Scholarship for your son
> ... > Steven either.
> ... >
> ... > Ain't gonna happen.
> ... ...Heidi wrote:
> ... ...and that young man of mine has more on the ball than you do.
> Magda wrote:
> Oh, you are a cougar!
Lol...nah...more like a lioness protecting her cub.
Take care,
Heidi
Heidi Graw
(snip)
> ... > Magda wrote:
> ... > Oh, you are a cougar!
> ... Heidi wrote:
> ... Lol...nah...more like a lioness protecting her cub.
>Magda wrote:
> Another paranoid parent...
Yup, there are bogeymen under the bed, skeletons in
the closets, every man is a potential rapists/serial killer/
pedophile, every Canadian is a potential terrorist, all
commercial airliners have bombs in their cargo holds,
all parked cars have the potential to explode, internet
crazies are out to get me...and what else? Ooops...
I almost forgot: every shoe contains a spider! Eeek...
and don't touch that door knob...it's contaminated with
deadly germs!
Ah well...what can I say? We live in a loony-tunes
world.
Take care,
Heidi
Andrew Usher
> On Mon, 04 Jan 2010 20:01:01 GMT, in alt.gossip.celebrities, "Heidi Graw"> ... >"Magda" <no-s...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> ... >news:4k14k5pnj0ojgihh5...@4ax.com...
> ... (snip)
> ...
> ... > ... > Magda wrote:
> ... > ... > Oh, you are a cougar!
> ...
> ... > ... Heidi wrote:
> ... > ... Lol...nah...more like a lioness protecting her cub.
> ... ... >Magda wrote:
>
> ... > Another paranoid parent...
> ...
> ... Yup, there are bogeymen under the bed, skeletons in
> ... the closets, every man is a potential rapists/serial killer/
> ... pedophile, every Canadian is a potential terrorist, all
> ... commercial airliners have bombs in their cargo holds,
> ... all parked cars have the potential to explode, internet
> ... crazies are out to get me...and what else? Ooops...
> ... I almost forgot: every shoe contains a spider! Eeek...
> ... and don't touch that door knob...it's contaminated with
> ... deadly germs!
> ...
> ... Ah well...what can I say? We live in a loony-tunes
> ... world.
>
> I didn't know any of it, but then, I took the pill...
>
> =====
> It sounds much better in French, but then, everything does.
I reckon that you belong here even less than she does.
Andrew Usher
PolishKnight
"Heidi Graw" <hg...@telus.net> wrote:
Hello Heidi (Happy New Year!)
I'm reminded of a line from The Doors:
Patricia: "Those vows were forever in the goddess' sight!
"Death does not part, only lack of love.""
Jim Morrison: "Come on, Patricia! I was stoned. It seemed like
a fun thing to do at the time."
regards,
PolishKnight
Scotius
<male...@australia.edu> wrote:
>An age-old feminist adage says "When men have lots of sex they are
>patted on the back and called studs; when women have lots of sex they
>are ostracized and called sluts...."
>
>As with most things feminist....the supposed double-standard is not
>only false but completely OPPOSITE of the truth: it is men *not* women
>who suffer when their sex lives are exposed to public scrutiny.
What a crock of shit.
Andrew Usher
> On Sat, 2 Jan 2010 23:43:22 -0800 (PST), Equal Time
>
> >An age-old feminist adage says "When men have lots of sex they are
> >patted on the back and called studs; when women have lots of sex they
> >are ostracized and called sluts...."
>
> >As with most things feminist....the supposed double-standard is not
> >only false but completely OPPOSITE of the truth: it is men *not* women
> >who suffer when their sex lives are exposed to public scrutiny.
>
> What a crock of shit.
Now that's a splendid argument!
Andrew Usher
Heidi Graw
>"PolishKnight" <mare...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:marek1965-9F98A...@news.giganews.com...
(snip)
>
> Hello Heidi (Happy New Year!)
...and a Happy New Year to you, too. May yours be
a prosperous and fecund one. ;-)
>
> I'm reminded of a line from The Doors:
>
> Patricia: "Those vows were forever in the goddess' sight!
> "Death does not part, only lack of love.""
>
> Jim Morrison: "Come on, Patricia! I was stoned. It seemed like
> a fun thing to do at the time."
LOL...Vows made while stoned or drunk I don't consider as
valid. One must have a clear and sober mind. I've also never
believed anything a drunkard (male or female) may have ever
told me.
Take care,
Heidi
knoxy
>
> >"Equal Time" <male...@australia.edu> wrote in message
> >news:4e5582f1-2832-4ed0...@f5g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...
> (snip)
>
> > And now we have Tiger Woods.
> >
> > According to the adage, if anyone deserved the appellation of "stud"
> > and an accompanying pat on the back, its Tiger! Yet quite to the
> > contrary, a result of his supposed involvement with these 2...or is it
> > 5...or 10...or 15 women....sponsor after sponsor are cutting their
> > ties with him. As these women come forward one after another for their
> > 15 minutes of fame, his career -- at least as a spokesperson -- in
> > shambles.
> >
> > It is of interest to note that another underlying theme of feminist
> > rhetoric is acceptance of personal responsibility for actions and
> > decisions (e.g. men must accept responsibility for "deciding" to rape
> > a woman -- irrespective of how much they feel she "led them on"). With
> > that being the case, why then are their no feminists calling for these
> > women to accept responsibility for their actions?
>
> and these women should suffer the same amount of condemnation as
> the married man having an affair with another woman other than his own
> wife. And when a woman has an affair with a married man, she is also
> demonstrating a decided lack of respect for his wife.
>
> Stay away from married people. It's as simple as that. Don't lure
> them, don't entice them, don't ask them for sex. Leave married
> people alone! If you're single, find another single to mess around
> with.
>
> Christians should well bear in mind not to covet another's wife
> (biblical commandment), just as non-Christians (Nordic/Germanics)
> are advised not to entice another's spouse [Havamal].
>
> Anyway, I have nothing but contempt for all those women who
> lured Tiger into an affair and/or accepted if he had offered. All of
> these women should have known better and stayed the hell away
> from him.
>
> Ah well...may as well be talking to a brick wall...it ain't gonna
> happen. <sigh>
>
> Heidi
I both agree and disagree with you. IMO, two people get married, they
make vows to each other, it's their responsibilty to keep those vows.
The 'other woman (or man)' did not make any vows or promises and have no
responsibility to keep someone elses marriage intact. That being said, I
still think it's wrong to go after a married man or woman. I'm a firm
believer in doing to others what you want them to do to you etc.
About Tiger Woods, I really don't see what the big deal is. This is
something that should be between him and his wife (and all 15 or so
other women he shagged).
--
. \
/| | , , __ __. _ .- , .
/ | ___ | / |' `. .' \ \,' | `
/__| ___\ |-< | | | | /\ | |
@@ e\ / / \_ / | `._.' / \ `---|.
@@@ { / \___/
@@.-<.-----__/
/ / ) )--./-/' knoxy
`.\) ( mhm34x10
.>) \ smeeter #6
/ \ #6 on mimus wanted poster list
/ | Best Newbie in alt.flame 2005
J | Snarky's Gutter Chix0rz #13
__`-._____/_\ ___________________________________________________
` made by VK kn...@post.com
George Orwell
> Anyway, I have nothing but contempt for all those women who
> lured Tiger into an affair and/or accepted if he had offered. All of
> these women should have known better and stayed the hell away
> from him.
What makes you so sure some other professional golfers who couldn't
beat Tiger fairly in golf didn't send those women his way to create
this scandal?
Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
https://www.mixmaster.it
dd...@bellsouth.net
> On Sun, 10 Jan 2010 16:24:53 +0100 (CET), in alt.gossip.celebrities, George Orwell
> <nob...@mixmaster.it> arranged some electrons, so they looked like this:
>
> ... Heidi Graw wrote:
> ... > Anyway, I have nothing but contempt for all those women who
> ... > lured Tiger into an affair and/or accepted if he had offered. All of
> ... > these women should have known better and stayed the hell away
> ... > from him.
> ...
> ... What makes you so sure some other professional golfers who couldn't
> ... beat Tiger fairly in golf didn't send those women his way to create
> ... this scandal?
>
> If these are really his children, Elin must have some very strong genes... They are both
> light-skinned and the girl has straight brown hair.
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1241859/Elin-Nordegren-a...
>
> =====
> It sounds much better in French, but then, everything does.
(Denise) Tiger has Asian and Caucasian ancestry as well as African
ancestry.
Michaela Mackenzie
> On Jan 3, 2:05 am, Grizzlie Antagonist <lloydsofhanf...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Here's a question for you, Equal Time.
>
> > Why didn't Bill Clinton suffer from this double standard?
>
> It's that he was basically excused for being a leftist politician.
> That doesn't weaken the ordinary application of it.
>
It's so much simpler than you would want to believe, but Hey! you
enjoy and relish and bask in your pov. Hell, I would.
- Michaela
PolishKnight
"Heidi Graw" <hg...@telus.net> wrote:
Is this the same lionesse who thought it was funny that her cub had a
funny T-shirt that says:
"Nine out of ten girls may slap me,
but I'm looking for the tenth one."
regards,
PolishKnight