Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Hell No!

Why would a woman stand next to her husband and support him as he talks about his involvement in a prostitution scandal?

Why would a woman stand next to her husband as he announces that he is indeed gay and has had relations with another man?

Why would a woman stand next to her husband when he performed sexual acts with another woman in the oval office?

You want to say that these women must not be smart or have any power of their own, but Hilary Clinton is one of the most powerful women in the world, and yet she stood by her man. Why?

I would never do that. I would emphatically say, "Hell No!" (say it with me girls!) I would be throwing tomatoes at my husband as he gave his forced "apology" to a crowd that really doesn't believe him. They only apologize once caught, and why do we insist on these forced apologies? We know they aren't sincere or repentant, right?

So I ask you, why are women this way in general, and in politics in particular?

Are they being bribed?

Are they getting better divorce settlements?

Are they being threatened?

Honestly, I don't get it...Is it some form of love and altruism (which again goes out the door for me the minute I learn about the prostitute)? Is it some ideal of civic duty?

Can someone please explain to me why these women are acting the way they do?


Chelle said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
fromthestecherbush said...

You know, I can think of reasons but I think that it would really be a matter of being in somebody elses' shoes. I could only give you reasons that I would stand my by my particular husband in some situations out of my own imagination. Maybe you'd understand, maybe you wouldn't. BUT, I too looked at those wives and knit my brow. I certainly never want to be in their shoes. I think of Anna's parents though. I admire them SO much for the decisions they've made since their family crisis.

D'Arcy said...

I agree, I have been WAY TOO judgemental in this blog post. I don't get it, but I am not living it either.

Arianna said...

What if they're scared? They could be afraid of something more than just being threatened...
I wouldnt know this for a fact but there's got to be at least sometime in every womans life where they stood by and watched (or listened or etc..) something they completely didnt agree with or completely felt out of line for something in them stopped them from saying Hell No. That and every woman is different in their actions. Where one woman would stand by their husband after he slept with another woman in the oval office, another woman might divorce the guy for it. I believe that maybe it also how the woman was brought up. Some were brought up to think that they were ment to just be mindless slaves to their husbands', no matter how horrible the man is. Other woman are brought up believing they can be independent and successful that way. I guess what I'm trying to point out is that everybody learns, lives, and loves differently therefore will react differently even if they are put in the same situation. Although I do agree with you. I do not think that is right in any way, and I would never stand for something like that either.

Hoped this might have helped,

Marie said...

I agree that each woman's personal reaction could be different to such an awful revelation, but I do think there's a case to be made for saying with your *public* reaction (i.e., whether or not to appear during the press statement), "I don't want my daughters nor the daughters of anyone else to think that such behavior is okay and that a forced confession is sufficient to heal the real wounds caused by marital infidelity." I hope she wouldn't abandon her marriage without some real soul-searching and real examination of his sincerity, but neither would I, in an intensely public moment, want to send a message that "this is just the duty of the wife of a public figure and I must suck it up for the sake of his career." And that's what I think these wives silently say as they stand mute next to their husbands for these rehearsed confessions. If she had looked as neutral as Hillary Clinton and many of the other afflicted wives at that moment, it would have been less nauseating. But she looked anguished. It was clear that she was not okay. Why do these wives need to be there for the "I've got a wandering pee-pee" press statement, but none of the other press statements of their husbands' careers? If it's truly any of the public's business, then their husbands should treat it as part of their job duties, and keep their family out of the spotlight while they perform those unpleasant duties. It's as if they've placed their wife there as a way of saying, "Look -- it's not that big a deal to her -- why are all of YOU making such a fuss?"

I"m also really disturbed with some of the media commentary I heard on this story. More than one commentator said that these public figures put in SO much hard work and SO many hours in their jobs that they need exciting sex in order to have any hope of coping. Have we become so jaded that we really believe that? I hope his daughters won't buy it, nor anyone else's.

Wonder Woman said...

Ms. Bee! We are appalled at your choice in language! Disappointment! j/k
Ali and Hannah

Sara Potter said...

a little delayed in commenting, but YES, I so agree with your sentiment on this, D...and believe me, truth always prevails eventually, and we don't know the whole story on that woman yet. But we will someday...