« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
The Politics of Sex and Commitment
The cheating privileges given by Samantha, Sex in the City, to her young lover while she was undergoing chemotherapy underscores the devastating effects of treatment. Although I wrote about it for my monthly Op-ed column for the Providence Journal, “Of DNA and Desire” I had no idea that the John and Elizabeth Edwards story would surface. Today the issue is all the more poignant in the face of reality.
Despite the parade of infidelity scandals among politicians -- the outrage and finger-pointing with the John Edwards story is searing. Why? Because in most of the other scandals, there was always a question: Di d the wives know? Was there a silent arrangement?
John and Elizabeth seemed to portray a perfect marriage. Their family survived the tragedy of their teenage son’s death with an admirable sense of faith and love. Even though he wasn’t our presidential pick, we appreciated the family man.
Perhaps it is the loss of an image that really angers us most today. We have come to expect certain tawdriness in our politicians. And with George Bush we knew that one day a movie would portray the closet filled with skeletons. And Oliver Stone is giving us that movie with "W."
But John and Elizabeth were models. And we needed an icon. Are we really appalled at what he did to Elizabeth or what he did to us? What happens behind closed doors is a matter between husband and wife. But when one is a public figure running for president then it seems that all bets are off. Today newscasters are questioning their inability to do the digging to get at the truth.
But what is the truth? And what is the message? I like what Shmuley Boteach said in The Jerusalem Post a few days ago: He pointed out that Elizabeth believed John should continue pursuing his presidential dream despite her metastatic breast cancer. It was an example for their children to know that despite difficult battles, life goes on.
The Rabbi added: “But perhaps an even more important lesson to convey to our children is that what will truly make them special in life is not becoming president but being committed and loving family members who always put each other first.
As we sit and wonder and judge – I am reminded of an often-quoted phrase from my grandmother, straight from the Bible, “Let he who is not guilty cast the first stone.”
www.ritawatson.com/
Comments (7)
The cheating privileges given by Samantha, Sex in the City, to her young lover while she was undergoing chemotherapy underscores the devastating effects of treatment
Wow Rita. That is really screwed up. So you think that Elizabeth felt so bad that she would be unattractive and too sick to perform her "wifely" duties that she would allow John cheating privileges? Holy cow...I am truly disgusted.
Well that should be pretty obvious. Edwards knew he had this liability when he ran. As I mentioned in another post, I couldn't care less about where he sticks his..um..ethics. He just better thank his lucky stars that he did not get the nomination. If he did, there would be a whole mass of really pissed off democrats with tar and feathers with his name on them. How DARE he run for president when he knew he had this problem? How DARE he? When it is an absolute must that we win the White House and bring this country back from the brink of despair?
You're supposition on Elizabeth's acquiescence to John's...um..needs, is appalling.
August 13, 2008 2:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for asking for my feedback, Rita.
I did a whole post on this subject a few days ago. If you click on the red stillidealistic it will send you to my "post" page. Go down to "There's a Reason Why Men Name Their Privates" for my feelings on the subject...If you have a comment on my thoughts I will look for it here...
August 13, 2008 4:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
As long as private affairs have no bearing on public policy -we should leave our politicians alone.
August 13, 2008 5:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let me cast the first stone! -> SMACK!(YOUR HEAD)
How utterly disgusting and attitude to take over this sickening episode of John Edwards out screwing around on his cancerous wife. Your premise seems to be that if a woman allows herself to become ill, unattractive, or unable to perform sexually she should be kicked to the curb and wait with pride for her man to go out and get some strange. It is that attitude that has made women’s equality a joke for decades. In your eyes, and those that support you, if a woman is not a sex object she should be treated like a second class citizen and be proud of it. I guess if I treated my pregnant wife that way it would be okay. I mean she is not as attractive and too tired to perform so it should be alright for me to step out? Even if by some strange mental illness she agreed, it would still be the wrong thing to do during her time when she needs to be cared for, not forgotten. The argument that this should have no bearing on him as a leader is a load of crap. This shows the sort of human being that he actually is. “Oh well wife, you let yourself get sick so I am off to fulfill my dreams of power, glory, and some skank ass. I am sure you understand.” I had a friend who had breast cancer and after having her infected parts cut off and losing her hair to chemo her husband started taking jobs away from home. When she asked him why he was working away from home so often he told her “So I don’t have to look at what you’ve become.” Edwards is that sort of cold blooded, unfeeling, monster and should not be leading anyone, anywhere, at anytime. The last argument that “it is just between them” is also crap. If my neighbor is beating his wife and she continues to forgive him and live with it I guess I should not call the cops as it is between them and none of my business. After all she may have let herself get cancer, became unattractive, or unable to meet his sexual needs so she probably has it coming. People like you enable these male ego maggots and empower them and society to feel it is okay to degrade a woman’s worth. You sicken me and I only hope you are treated so poorly in your hour of need by someone you love so you can get an insight in to how stupid your opinion really is.
August 13, 2008 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hi, please stop for a moment and consider the known facts of the situation.
From Elizabeth Edwards' statement after the affair was revealed:
If the Edwardses had some arrangement going on, that would indeed add a dimension of complexity to how we should view the situation. But this dimension is simply not present:
1. The statements of both John and Elizabeth Edwards clearly and specifically indicate that Elizabeth was not aware of, and clearly did not okay, John's actions.
2. If you check Wikipedia, you will find that Elizabeth Edwards publicly revealed in November 2006 that according to her doctor, her cancer had been defeated (in 2007, her cancer returned). Rielle Hunter was first known to have been working with the Edwards campaign in December of 2006. It would thus appear that John Edwards' affair occurred in the period during which Elizabeth Edwards' cancer was believed to be in remission. Elizabeth's statement-- which indicates the return of the cancer in 2007 changed the situation-- supports this timeline. I thus have some difficulty seeing how Elizabeth Edwards' cancer treatments could have legitimately been a factor in these events.
I see no reason to make the logical leap you do in this diary except to make us feel better about John Edwards, and although, well, what do I know?, from where I'm sitting it simply does not seem fair to Elizabeth Edwards to assume such things about her relationship in apparent contradiction of both her own words and the facts of the situation.
August 13, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If they hate me, I make a difference."
-Don't know who said that. Think it was G.B.Shaw-Seems to apply here.
Anyway. What is all the fuss about? Samantha, is a fictional character! And, in many respects, so are politicians, running for office.....
In reading the above comments, I get the feeling that Rita never would have heard from any of you, without the aspect of Elizabeth's cancer.
Personally, I'm not getting the Shock and Awe of it. So another husband loses his way. Does that mean we have to lose ours.
Rita's grandmother says it for me...
August 14, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
In context -- "Of DNA and Desire" in Relationship Columns and posting on my blog takes more about chemotherapy and women and men. www.ritawatson.com
www.ritawatson.com
August 14, 2008 1:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment