Sunday, January 22, 2012

Is there a place for sex in politics?

As women and inherently political women at that we must be attentive to how our rights are questioned and sadly violated.

We all remember the recent Herman Cain scandal, but was he really unseated because of his poor-track record in his personal life, or because his personal life made him an untrustworthy candidate to be President (as well as his lack of political know-how).

At a recent debate Michelle Bachman was asked: “As president would you be submissive to your husband?” Again, are we trying to unearth some personal flaw or identify an inherent weakness that would have made her ineffective as a could-have-been potential President? It seems that when the question was posed, she had already made so many comments that negatively affected her campaign that Presidency was a far-fetched reality and the question was merely to hinder her personal gains.

At the recent South Carolina Presidential Debate, Newt Gingrich was the target for questioning personal relationships. The moderator posed the question about Gingrich’s marital relations and lack there of. The question originally steamed from the understanding that in the 90’s Gingrich himself was having an affair while he was admittedly staking grounds against President Clinton for his affair (Even then many questioned why the media cared so much about personal sexual relationships). During the debate, his response was that answering the question served no political gain. As stated by Rachel Maddow: “There is nothing inherently news worthy about someone’s sex life, marriage, former relationships, or private sexual behavior. It is not inherently news worthy…” Granted the point for asking the question in the first place is not to discover if Gingrich is a bad husband, for that – no one cares. However, if using his personal life and personal values to identify if he is a “hypocritical family political” would highlight intricacies that would be vital in the political realm. For example, in regards to his position on instating a same sex ban, Maddow posed the question: “How can you justify passing government judgment on other peoples marriages when your own marriage is the kind of ethical mess that was described by your second wife on ABC news today?”

The Political Debates have become their own form of reality television show with affairs, zingers, and tears. However, these are the Republican candidates that are vying for the opportunity to unseat President Obama and dictate our future. We, the tv watchers of America, need to begin to question the importance of these questions. Is putting a candidates’ sexual past on display at a public debate for the sake of our entertainment, or are we truly unearthing necessary values that will affect their political campaign?

**re-posted from CT-NOW blog 

No comments:

Post a Comment