So Eliot Spitzer is now a part of New York history.
A very spirited debate took place the other night between myself, Lynne of L&L and our neighbors Scott and Jessica.
The issue turned on whether the governor's wife should have stood by his side and been humiliated when he first appeared in public to state he'd done wrong and then to resign the NY governorship.
Lynne and Jessica were adamant that she shouldn't have done it, that she was there in
a private capacity and was being forced by people behind the scene to be there. They freely admitted they were acting from a woman's point of view.
My position was she is a smart, strong woman. She attended law school, practiced as an attorney and made a decision to leave her employment to stay at home and raise their daughters. Thus, she is the one who most probably made the decision to be at his side when he made his speeches of humiliation. There is no doubt she looked extremely pained.
Also, in the professional way she handled herself as the first lady of New York State, she probably decided to act continue to act professionally to the bitter end and appear with him as the spouse of the governor.
There is no right or wrong answer in these situations. What occurs in private between Spitzer and his wife is their business, but I imagine the people of New York probably appreciated she stood there at that moment and regard her very highly as a result.
Another question is Spitzer's conduct. Again, I feel this is a private matter although, given that he prosecuted Wall Street corruption and prostitution during his time as the NY Attorney General and had a 'take no prisoners' mentality, it would have been difficult to overcome the charges of hypocrisy and continue to govern.
It all boils down to the difference in viewpoints between the sexes at the end of the day, I think. While some men are utterly faithful in their relationships, I really do believe that this is not the norm as our society insists. It should not be that surprising to learn that many men get bored with their wives sexually after a period of years and start looking around (and probably vice versa, though I can't speak for women here). I think society should stop having these ridiculous expectations that people stop being attracted sexually to other people once they get married and that their marital sex lives are blissful from that moment onward. It only keeps sex therapists, psychoanalysts and psychotherapists and morning show hosts in jobs to try and 'advise' what people have to do to spice and enrich their sex lives when they get bored. Once you are bored, you are bored and nothing will change that. Sure changing position and dressing up might work for a week or two, but let's get real.
Love and sex are not synonymous. They can co-exist, certainly do at the beginning of relationships, but then they diverge as the years pass. One can love a partner and not want to have sex with them. There is no crime or negative judgment to be meted out by society when a spouse admits he or she has become bored sexually but still loves the partner and wants to stay in the relationship. It is adult behavior for the spouses to negotiate these situations and not do (as society expects us to do) which is running to shrinks for a fix and they then advise solutions based on the premise that monogamy is the norm and it is immoral to have sex outside the marriage.
My opinion is no one partner can satisfy his or partner sexually for life. People grow and change and their needs grow and change, including sexual needs. It's as simple as that. A minority of people are happy to be monogamous, but not all. And it's time we accepted that. It's time to accept that it's normal to get bored having sex with the same partner for years and to want to have sex and have sex with others outside relationships. It's time to stop buying into fictions created by societal and religious institutions for the sake of convenience and exertion of authority. The fact that children may or may not be involved cannot be used to support or maintain a status quo regarding human sexuality that is clearly failing. The existence of children and responsibility for meeting their needs must be factored into any conduct decided and agreed by the spouses.
Maybe then, we'll not have this constant parade of people in the media who have to make humiliating speeches when they've been discovered behaving humanely. And that would also resolve the spirited discussions about whether a spouse should or should not be present when humiliating speeches have to be made.
Showing posts with label New York State Bar. Show all posts
Showing posts with label New York State Bar. Show all posts
Tuesday
Friday
Is hate speech also free speech?
It was 'Survivor' night last night and we have this thing going with our neighbors for a couple of seasons whereby we go to their house or their come to ours beforehand. Last night was at our place and the conversation got around to Don Imus's firing for calling the Rutgers ladies basketball team a racial slur, namely "nappy-headed hors". I don't care that that is part of the 'rap' vernacular and thus invented and used by black rappers everyday. That is not a defense.
To be honest, when I first heard it, I got that 'hors' alluded to whores but I did not get that 'nappy' means kinked hair.
Anyway, our neighbors both thought that Imus had a right to free speech that was protected by the Constitution. Jessica said that people who hate have a right to make hate speech, to say something she does not like or agree with because hate speech is also part of the right to free speech. She said she was Jewish and there are many people who say hateful things about Jewish people that she does not like, but the right to free speech must be protected. Larry and Scott seemed to agree, Larry even saying that many people in America say horrible racist things about Puerto Ricans and he just ignores it or laughs it off. Their argument also followed the line of 'let the market decide', that if people don't like it, they can switch off the radio or TV or not buy the magazine or newspaper, etc.
I could see their point, but in the end I concluded that free speech must indeed be protected but there are some forms of speech that is so abhorrent, so derogatory, so destructive that it is not true speech at all. It is hate or prejudice, uttered to incite a targeted audience, and thus it is dangerous because, when received by that audience who may have the power to take action against the victims of the diatribe, it can lead to bloodshed and even murder. Moreover, the fiction or analogy of people being subjected to hate speech as being people operating in an open market is not applicable. Not everything in our society can be reduced to a question of market forces.
In my mind, the state has a compelling reason to prevent hate speech from occurring and can take all action available to it to remove the speech from the airways. I would even go further and add that the government should take action to remove such speech from private airways, such as those streaming cable TV, satellite radio, etc. into our houses.
I believe we, humans, are in a constant struggle to evolve, to become better, to reach higher levels of justice and compassion for our fellow human beings and hatred, discrimination and bigotry have no place in the evolutionary cycle. Neither does Don Imus's 'jokes.' He went to the trough one time too many and it is just that he pay a price and his time at CBS and MSNBC is now over.
Of course, politicians and other leaders in society should take a look at themselves and ask why they were prepared to overlook his jibes at African-Americans, gays and lesbians, and women in order to appear on his show and get their own messages out in the past yet stated they wouldn't again appear on his program before it was actually canceled. I'd say that is hypocrisy.
Can we hope Rush Limbaugh and others of this ilk are next?
To be honest, when I first heard it, I got that 'hors' alluded to whores but I did not get that 'nappy' means kinked hair.
Anyway, our neighbors both thought that Imus had a right to free speech that was protected by the Constitution. Jessica said that people who hate have a right to make hate speech, to say something she does not like or agree with because hate speech is also part of the right to free speech. She said she was Jewish and there are many people who say hateful things about Jewish people that she does not like, but the right to free speech must be protected. Larry and Scott seemed to agree, Larry even saying that many people in America say horrible racist things about Puerto Ricans and he just ignores it or laughs it off. Their argument also followed the line of 'let the market decide', that if people don't like it, they can switch off the radio or TV or not buy the magazine or newspaper, etc.
I could see their point, but in the end I concluded that free speech must indeed be protected but there are some forms of speech that is so abhorrent, so derogatory, so destructive that it is not true speech at all. It is hate or prejudice, uttered to incite a targeted audience, and thus it is dangerous because, when received by that audience who may have the power to take action against the victims of the diatribe, it can lead to bloodshed and even murder. Moreover, the fiction or analogy of people being subjected to hate speech as being people operating in an open market is not applicable. Not everything in our society can be reduced to a question of market forces.
In my mind, the state has a compelling reason to prevent hate speech from occurring and can take all action available to it to remove the speech from the airways. I would even go further and add that the government should take action to remove such speech from private airways, such as those streaming cable TV, satellite radio, etc. into our houses.
I believe we, humans, are in a constant struggle to evolve, to become better, to reach higher levels of justice and compassion for our fellow human beings and hatred, discrimination and bigotry have no place in the evolutionary cycle. Neither does Don Imus's 'jokes.' He went to the trough one time too many and it is just that he pay a price and his time at CBS and MSNBC is now over.
Of course, politicians and other leaders in society should take a look at themselves and ask why they were prepared to overlook his jibes at African-Americans, gays and lesbians, and women in order to appear on his show and get their own messages out in the past yet stated they wouldn't again appear on his program before it was actually canceled. I'd say that is hypocrisy.
Can we hope Rush Limbaugh and others of this ilk are next?
Saturday
Getting it done
I just LOVE productive weeks and this week has been such a week and it's not yet over.
A friend, Jessica, opened a smart, upmarket ladies boutique in town a few weeks ago and she asked me to help compose a press release she wanted to send to the newspapers and magazines, which I did. It's great to be able to help friends when they begin new exciting ventures. Hope it does its job!!
And I settled down and did a serious--I mean serious--amount of work on America and Me, the memoir I'm currently writing. The word count is now 55,300 and I'm now at Chapter 20--yes 19 whole chapters have been written--and I think I'll be able to complete the latest today. I'm going to work my arse off this afternoon and do it.
I'm having laughs and bouts of sadness writing it. And it's strange and thought-provoking going over old correspondence and uncovering documents in files that were once vital and critical and celebrated profusely--like notifications that I'd passed the Bar examination, etc--and realizing they've lost that vitality and importance.
Of course, once the memoir is completed, the really tough work begins because editing and redrafting is an essential part of the process. An essential, necessary pain in the arse.
A friend, Jessica, opened a smart, upmarket ladies boutique in town a few weeks ago and she asked me to help compose a press release she wanted to send to the newspapers and magazines, which I did. It's great to be able to help friends when they begin new exciting ventures. Hope it does its job!!
And I settled down and did a serious--I mean serious--amount of work on America and Me, the memoir I'm currently writing. The word count is now 55,300 and I'm now at Chapter 20--yes 19 whole chapters have been written--and I think I'll be able to complete the latest today. I'm going to work my arse off this afternoon and do it.
I'm having laughs and bouts of sadness writing it. And it's strange and thought-provoking going over old correspondence and uncovering documents in files that were once vital and critical and celebrated profusely--like notifications that I'd passed the Bar examination, etc--and realizing they've lost that vitality and importance.
Of course, once the memoir is completed, the really tough work begins because editing and redrafting is an essential part of the process. An essential, necessary pain in the arse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)