Wow. It’s really astounding how many people feel that they need to say something awful about Monica still, sixteen years later, on BoingBoing. Sigh.
5 Likes
Totally OT question: is Newt as creepy and unlikable in person as he is on TV?
1 Like
I was at an Inn on a short trip outside the Beltway for a romantic weekend with my now-ex. Newt was there with his then-mistress now-wife (who was a total DC wonk and not particularly mistress-y. There is a sexless, neutered style of DC woman dress that she had totally mastered despite being a pretty lady; she seemed intelligent, capable, and more like an aide than a girlfriend. Their affair was much in the news at the time I remember thinking she was getting a real bum rush because she was no bimbo.)
The inn had an afternoon tea and I remember walking into the room and saying, “That guy looks familiar” and my ex saying, “That’s because it’s Newt Gingrinch,” and feeling very stupid - I never expected to see him in the flesh especially on our vacation. Yes, he looked exactly like he does on TV - short, bloated. I remembered his clothes were more expensive looking in person than they seemed on TV.
It’s a good thing that we were not too worried about time, because his table of 8 or 10 had the entire wait staff at their disposal, while we had just the spare time of the new girl. It was one of the longest dinners of my life despite us being the only other people having dinner. He was the center of attention at his table, of course.
The people he was with were extremely solicitous of him, as well as the wait staff. That’s mainly what I remember of him, how everyone’s eyes were turning to him; of course, he was very famous and if these people were not old buddies they probably were excited to have his attention. He seemed lower key in person than he does on TV, less aggressive.
1 Like
[quote=“regeya, post:79, topic:39446”]
Even if they have an open marriage, though…what does that say about Hillary?[/quote]
Maybe she has different expectations of her spouse than most people do.
Maybe they have a relationship based on mutual respect that transcends sexuality, like the Underwoods on House of Cards.
Maybe Hillary has outside partners of her own and she’s just been more successful keeping them under wraps, as was rumored to be the case with Jackie Kennedy.
Who gives a crap? It’s not for us to judge how another couple conducts their marriage.
7 Likes
I have really noticed several things like this recently. 20 years ago it was ok for every late night comedian to slut shame a young woman on national TV for years.
I saw the Bird cage recently and Was somewhat put off by a comedy all about how funny it would be for a community of homosexuals to try and force themselves into the closet while their son demands it so his future father in law doesn’t notice his father is gay. With Ferguson I am also reminded of all the times in the past when most people and media blindly sided with police and hopefully we are seeing that change too.
It’s sort of hard to believe this is a normal level of change for 20 years. I suspect it has something to do with the “greatest generation” dying off. Hopefully it means great things for the next 20 years.
4 Likes
Partly generational, partly the result of the Infernat. At some point in the last ten years people of all ages realized that they all grew up with ridiculous over-the-top homophobia and slut-shaming that was used to keep everyone in line, not just gays and women who like to use their vaginas. Thirty and forty years ago masturbation was still considered by “responsible” people in the mainstream to be taboo if not unnatural in itself. We’re in the middle of a social state change where things like eugenic racism and fundamentalist sexual “morality” goes from being a major social force to being something very strange. Like literal religious sacrifices or the burning of widows.
3 Likes
Definitly another good example. Masturbation was a major taboo in the 80’s and 90’s. They made the Surgeon General resign because she said it was healthy. How stupid was that.
3 Likes
Oh yes, for that day . . .
Oh, definitely. I’m not arguing that. I’m just making sure people realize he was impeached for the perjury, not for the act itself. People don’t remember it, or may not have been adult themselves when it happened. It was just a way to usher a popular Dem out of office. (He was doing too well. We had that whole surplus thing.)
2 Likes
Who lost his job?
Ack! my bad - back to edit. I knew was acquitted. I just got misspoke.Thanks for the quick catch!
[quote=“catgrin, post:64, topic:39446”]Jon - the first thing you did was ask me “Who?” and THEN say in bold that you wouldn’t be googling it yourself.
You definitely asked me to give you the information. … will you please realize that … you DID ask me who Fluke is!?![/quote]
I grant you that is how you read it. I do not grant you that is how I wrote it. There’s this thing, in language, called a rhetorical question. I didn’t remember who she was, and I didn’t want to remind myself. I also didn’t want to be reminded, but obviously overestimated my ability to communicate the seemingly obvious.
I don’t care what Fluke is/was famous for. I think breaking the link between her name and the story is a good thing.
I never said anything in response to that comment - at all.
No, I realise that. But maybe this thread displays differently on your computer? On mine it’s a linear feed but it is not a single linear conversation. There are several interweaving and inter-releated concurrent conversations. Sometimes those conversations merge, sometimes they diverge.
1 Like
Fair enough.
Let me re-phrase: the background stories intimately associated with both Lewinsky and Fluke are important, but I am going to assume that both of them would prefer to be famous for something other than “BJ Queen” and “lesbian slut”. Maybe that’s a reach, but I don’t think it is.
Kate Sheppard (similar role to SBA, and also has her portrait on currency) is justly and justifiably famous for what she did as a woman for women. There is no positive reason to break the link between her and her story.
Fluke is running for the State Senate of California, which has 10x the GDP of New Zealand. I think that more than qualifies her aspirations to continue to be an agent for equal rights.
4 Likes
Is anyone calling Fluke a lesbian slut except you and Rush Limbaugh?
Who is the broad on the coin, anyway, @funruly?
(I jest, I looked her up).
4 Likes
Well, catgrin’s the one that bought her up. She seems to think it’s important.
1 Like
I agree. Although I’d also agree if she were running for government in Nepal, which has 1/10th of the GDP of NZ … I’m not sure what GDP has to do with anything? 
Except, that’s not the reason that catgrin dragged her into this conversation. Fluke is a good person doing good things. That’s a good story, and if I could I’d probably vote for her. But do I - does anyone - really need to be constantly reminded that she ended up on Limbaugh’s shitlist, or the gruesome details of why?
Isn’t that, in fact, the whole point of the original post? Lewinsky can’t move on from her past because people won’t let her. It seems catgrin wants the same dealio to apply to Fluke. Which seems unhelpful.
And again, the reason it became public is because it was brought up in a sexual misconduct case against Bill Clinton, not just out of the blue because Republicans hate Democrats. The impeachment proceedings over committing perjury were, though.
Since you have decided to drag me kicking and screaming back into this:
I’m now forced to speak for myself, because you’re trying to speak for me.
Please, don’t do it again.
Actually, my original point was that the sex wasn’t important.
You just keep missing that point.
I was making the point that a woman enjoying sex is no more important than a man enjoying sex, and that it’s just certain sections of society that hold a false double standard. Fluke wears her battle against Limbaugh with pride. She’s happy to talk about it. She’s also quite proud of the amount of advertising revenue he lost thanks to his treatment of her. There’s absolutely no reason to not talk about what happened because she feels that she won the day.
I’ve already made it quite clear that you did specifically ask me who Fluke is - there’s no reason for you to have posted a “rhetorical question to yourself” in a post directed to me.
Please, give it up. I’m not coming back to this at all.
This is my last post to you in this thread, no matter what you say.
I’m only posting this for the benefit of others to try to end this (again).
6 Likes
