Who Cares?

I love that the discussion has now turned to whether Paul Stanley’s intern/mistress is a dirty slut.  As if there’s some “dirty slut” get-out-of-trouble-free card?

“Oh, yeah, Stanley abused his position of power and proved himself to be a hypocrite by trying to legislate morality for the rest of us while he was busy acting like his employees were also potential concubines, but don’t you see, Tennessee?  She was a dirty slut.”

“Oh, well, then.  Carry on, Stanley.”

As if girls who carry on with blackmailers normally have such unsullied reputations?

I mean, don’t get me wrong. I know there usually is a get-out-of-trouble-free card if you can prove the girl you got in trouble with is a dirty slut. That’s one of the reasons the howling on this thing is so loud.  It used to be and often is still the case that a man with a little power and authority could use that to get access to women who otherwise would not give him the time of day and if he crosses the line a little bit, if it becomes more coersion than seduction, he just reveals that she’s a dirty slut and everyone agrees that it was probably just a misunderstanding or that she really wanted it or that she deserved it and life goes on.

And when folks discover that the “dirty slut” revelation works on less and less of the population?  That the old rules, that they all agreed to and used to their benefit, don’t work as well as they used to?

Well, of course there’s some complaining.

That’s to be expected.

But here’s the weird thing, Tennessee, and the thing you ought to ask yourself.  As far as I can tell, Morrison’s not saying she was coersced into anything with Stanley. It seems to have been consentual.  And we already know that she runs around with married men and cavorts with blackmailers, so it’s not like the sanctimonious church crowd didn’t already have moral character issues to cluck about.

So, why is it so important to air her dirty laundry now?  Why is it necessary to show that, if you get caught running around with a legislator, your whole life is up for public examination and that everyone will know your dirty business?

The TBI is already involved. It’s too late for Morrison to keep her mouth shut.

So, why’s it necessary?

Whose mouths exactly need to be kept shut?

Times like these make you with there were women reporters on the Hill.


23 thoughts on “Who Cares?

  1. ‘So, why is it so important to air her dirty laundry now?’

    Because, and I think it’s in the AP stylebook, any sex scandal requires going over every little intimate detail of someone’s personal life.

  2. I’m still trying to figure out why we’re all suddenly so concerned with digging up this young woman’s life history — in many cases before the affair was even confirmed. She hasn’t broken any laws, and as you pointed out on Pith, we still have absolutely no idea what the circumstances of the relationship were aside from the fact that he was her boss. Is this what they call a slut-shaming?

    And for the record, that guy Watts has got to be the biggest dickhead in Tennessee. What a creep.

  3. Y’all are cracking me up. I have now reread my post three times and think it’s clear as day what I’m insinuating and yet y’all make me suspect maybe not.

    I don’t know if this means I’m just as “riddling” as my critics at Pith insist or if this is some man/woman difference in communication.

    But, yes, this is indeed a slut-shaming.

    But, more importantly, I think it is a message to someone(s) else and I think it would be worth-while for folks to be curious about who else might need to know that any political affairs being made public is going to result in the woman being run down as much as possible publicly.

    The question is whether the message is for someone else Stanley might have been involved with or just a broadcast.

  4. I think it’s a WSM-style broadcast — going out on all channels and a variety of frequencies. For bosses, it sounds like “interns are fair game for fun sex — heck, they want it.” For interns, it sounds like “you’ll be dragged through the mud if this ever gets out, so be secretive if you’re going to shag your boss and he’ll thank you for it.” For more senior women in Tennessee politics, it’s a warning about what will happen to your career and your privacy if you out a harasser. And for dumbasses everywhere who widdywack on about whether it was legal or not…it sounds like “go ahead and practice sexually discriminatory and unprofessional behavior because there’s a lot of people out there who don’t understand that it’s fundamentally a stupid and easily avoided conflict of interest to get it on with people you supervise.”

  5. Pingback: Tennessee bloggers react to Sen. Paul Stanley’s affair with an intern « Nashville Is Talking

  6. Because, and I think it’s in the AP stylebook, any sex scandal requires going over every little intimate detail of someone’s personal life.

    SayUncle is right, but there is also the element of dig into her past more and dig more dirt up and make Stanley look like a victim. That’s what it boils down to – that this wiley seductive woman (hey, look at all the practice she’s had!) tricked him and he had no choice.

  7. I was going to say what Beth just said. Calling her a slut is the first step which leads to “She seduced him.”

  8. Stanley set himself up as the Paragon of Godly Virtue and failed to live up to it, plain and simple. Don’t talk that bullshit, and people won’t bust you so hard if you fail to live up to it.

  9. You could see this coming a mile away, though.

    Stanley is playing the bumpkin, “the lusty sy-reeeen dun sext me up and turn’t me into a TOAD!” card. And “Blame The Bitch” is right out of the Sex Scandal Stylebook – going at least as far back as the story of Genesis. He’s been proclaiming his victim status as if that somehow provides him with an out.

    Y’know, he doesn’t make a very sympathetic victim. And “she got me into this” conveniently displaces the emphasis on his role in this whole mess. Who’s the actual grown-up here? Who’s supposed to be vested with all of this moral authority, not to mention his official capacity of bearing the public trust?

    And like LWC said: He made his moral constitution a public issue. He basically said that it was his character and his family and his faith in God that made him more fit for office. He can’t just go run from it now that it’s convenient.

    (I just love reading Terry Frank’s bullshit about this whole thing – it cracks me up, if only for being so thorougly predictable, steeped in that “craven apologist” technique. I imagine that should the pictures ever surface, she’ll be the first to come forward and point out how Stanely is an awesome photographer, a regular Richard Avedon in capturing the beauty of the human form…)

  10. Pingback: Sampler of More Stuff on Stanley «

  11. I was going to say what Beth just said. Calling her a slut is the first step which leads to “She seduced him.”

    Aaaaaaaaaaaand, once again ol’ Auntie Grande stomps in and shouts, ‘UNLESS SHE HELD A GUN TO HIS HEAD, HE IS NO VICTIM.”

    Grown, sorry-ass people with free will trying to present themselves as victims of someone sorrier than they get on my very last teeniny nerve and make me bust into rooms (online and IRL) and shout at strangers.


  12. I’d really rather you didn’t shout at me in this case. I was pointing out the probable spin control strategy rather than actually doing it myself.

  13. Oh, my. I see why my comment appears to shout at the commenter, instead of at those responsible for continuing the practice. I should have made that more clear, instead of just shouting.

    My apologies, W.

  14. “Times like these make you with there were women reporters on the Hill?” What am I? Chopped liver? The Capitol Press Room is named for my mother, Drue Smith, who was on the Hill 30 years. Now I am there for a chain of five newspapers and my blog. Check your facts.

  15. Dru, I will admit that I did not know that you worked the Capital Hill beat, but I was thinking that I missed your Mom in this situation. She would have had the best time with the gossip on this.

  16. I dont think its right to call her a slut,what about Stanley??? that word can be used for men too.
    Joel is my son and he loves her.Please dont call her names.We all make mistakes.look at yourselves before you judge.

Comments are closed.