Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Being Voyeuristic
Who's business is it what goes on between Tiger Woods and his wife? I have been absolutely disgusted that the media will not leave this couple alone. Something has to be done about the intrusion into the personal lives of others. We have to change this voyeuristic culture. Why should Woods have to come out and admit to anything publicly? While he spoke of "transgressions," he should not have to have said one word. What kind of power do we give the media when we feel forced to respond publicly to a private matter? An admission of guilt won't end the speculation in his life or others.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
I agree we have no right to have access into his private life. When the public stops being completely obsessed with this type of media coverage there will no longer be a need. The viewers have to take some responsibility as well.
Unfortunately when someone is in the public eye we classify them as a role model. He is an excellent athlete, those aspiring to be like him on the golf course or any field for that matter his work ethic is commendable. But let's not forget Tiger Woods is human and for that matter we are all but men. Meaning we are not without flaws, let's leave that distinction to the one who it has been documented had no transgressions.
Beautiful comment, Pam. Thank you, my friend. It' good to see you.
"But let's not forget Tiger Woods is human and for that matter we are all but men. Meaning we are not without flaws, let's leave that distinction to the one who it has been documented had no transgressions."
I'm thinking that captures it perfectly. Actions have consequences. In this case, none that impacts me personally so why would I judge or critisize? You live, you learn, and hopefully you grow stronger and better from the experience.
"In this case, none that impacts me personally so why would I judge or critisize?"
Dave - I think I understand the whole of your statement. But let me also say with regards to the above statement that there are many things that may not affect me personally or directly that happens all around the world and even within our country or even in a community nearby that concern me greatly. I speak out and "act out" accordingly. Because a situation in this regard does not affect me directly does not inhibit me from acting or speaking out. The issue with Tiger is purely personal. It is simply NONE of our business who he's sleeping with or the number of women whether we like it or not. This is between Tiger Woods and his wife. The consequences are also his with regards to endorsements. Politics and policy are altogether different for me as politicians are leaders chosen by the people. But even here I am not one to condemn, although I despise the hypocrisy of some who are religious fanatics, while bedding the wives of others.
Judith,
Hypocrisy in any form is somehing to definitely be despised, to me regardless of profession, party affliation, celebrity status, or religious preference.
Only when it's not profitable to report and cover this type of "story" will it end!
Dave - Yes, I agree. All hypocrisy is not good. But of course all such indiscretions have to be justly measured. Intent matters. If not there would, for example, be no need for a court of law or for sentencing. Lies have to be justly measured--not that lying is ethical for in situation. The fact that Tiger lied to his wife is none of my business, although it's not good. The fact that politicians lie to their wives about affairs with consenting adults is none of my business but not good, unless of course the law is broken. It's not like I like it. But stuff happens and sometimes we get caught up and do not handle situations the best. This is what I meant earlier by saying while I don't like it when politicians and leaders lie, but I don't condemn them and think that they shouldn't serve because of it. There are many leaders in the past that have done great things and have had personal failures. We just didn't know about it. Would that invalidate their work? I don't think so. But for their families sake and for the sake of young people and children who look up to them, I would hope and pray that their lives would be openly worthy of leadership.
What I despise are leaders who talk about the unrighteous lives of others and have no compassion WHILE they themselves are doing the EXACT same thing. I despise those married men in Washington who preach purity but chase pussy. Vitter with his prostitutes, Sanford with more than one woman, although like Clinton with the other women he didn't have intercourse but did other sexual acts, and Ensign who carried on a long-term relationship with his best friend's wife who both worked for him while being a member of the "righteous" C Street where sins were covered internally and those of others expelled externally. Vitter, Sanford, and Ensign are all a part of the C street church, until being exposed for their hypocritical stance. By the way, C Street is no longer a "church." This changed recently with the light been shown on it with regards to their accounting. Perhaps with regards to the same some other "real" churches should also be looked into. I know of what mega church that lost its non-profit status for its practices as a political wing of the religious right, who are often wrong.
"Only when it's not profitable to report and cover this type of "story" will it end!"
I completely agree with this. But we shouldn't expect it anytime soon, eh? I do think that with the Internet we are receiving more of it continuously than ever.
I feel uncomfortable when this kind of story comes on the news. Why should we be privy to all the hurt and devastation in a family? It just feels wrong.
It IS wrong, Kelly!
Post a Comment