Wednesday, October 04, 2006

Foley

This whole Mark Foley thing is disgusting.

First, stop using the word “pedophile,” whether you personally think a 16 year-old is a child, or not. Forty-one percent of 15 and 16 year-olds are sexually active, and 16 is the age of consent for many European countries, as it so happens to be in Washington, D.C. Let’s reserve “pedophile” for people who actually prey on sexually immature children. In our own culture, historically girls were frequently married off at the age of 12. (Hurray for traditional marriage that hasn’t changed in thousands of years, right?)

The principal scandal is about sexual harassment, unsolicited romantic or sexual overtures from a person in a position of authority toward a more junior person. Partisan politics and sexual orientation ought to have been irrelevant. In the business world, when a supervisor is informed that an employee has been behaving inappropriately, disciplinary action must be taken. Supervisors who failed to interfere have been successfully sued by harassment victims.

Of course partisanship has reared its ugly head, with some Republicans accusing Democrats of releasing this information to the media just before an election. Perhaps that is the case, but let’s not get away from the facts here: a Congressman made inappropriate sexual comments to pages via the internet; Congressional leadership knew about it and did nothing. Claiming this is an election tactic is like a defense attorney blaming a witness for reporting a crime.

Democrats should refrain from exploiting this to partisan advantage, unless they are absolutely sure no one has any sixteen year-old skeletons in their closet, which is not a safe bet.

Still, the public recognizes that Republicans, who rode to power on a message of family values, circled their wagons and stuck their heads in the sand, preferring to attempt to avoid a scandal. What they didn’t realize was that disciplining a congressman for inappropriate behavior looks better in the public eye than covering it up. A lot better. The scandal should have been Foley’s; now it’s the GOP’s.

13 comments:

Elizabeth said...

We were talking about this issue this morning. We think that making sexual innuendo with a 15 or 16 year old is a whole lot different than with an 8 year old. There should be differentiation here between "children" and "adolescent minors." One has no sexual feelings yet, the other is raging with hormones. It still doesn't make it okay, but it is a whole 'nother ballgame.

Jarred said...

I think this has to be one of the most thoughtful posts on this topic I've seen. Kudos to you for trying to make a reasoned assessment of it.

Gino said...

if foley was a democrat who actually DID shag an underage page, was proud of it, and unrepentant, he would have a easy re-election, a long 26yr career, and serve as a cause celeb for gays.
foley should be hung and gibitted, but for the democrats, of all parties, to make political hay out this is an ultimate level of hypocrasy.

to GOP voters, foley's big crime was hitting on underage boys.

to democrats, foley's big crime was being a republican.

but, knowing how this is timed for the election cycle, we need to investigate the democrats: what did they know? when did they know it? how many boys were allowed to be victimized while they 'sat' on this information? doesnt that make them accomplices too?

hey democrats, your hypocrasy is showing again, as big and bright as ever.

LeshDogg said...

Gino, I feel a small twinge of your pain here, but I can't help but feel this is a little bit of karma coming and biting the Reps in the butt. The release of, shall we say, "time-sensitive material" has been a political ploy used by both parties since the advent of the political system. To call one party a hypocrite over another on something like this is a bit silly.

I do agree with Andy, here, in the fact that the Dems should keep their mouths shut about it, and let the Reps hang themselves, lest they really botch things for themselves.

"Ye among you without sin" and all...

Andy said...

Gino, it's becoming clear that Republican House leadership has known about Foley's problem since at least 2004.

how many boys were allowed to be victimized while they 'sat' on this information?

Why are you throwing partisan stones? You're right to ask the question, when did Democrats know? Regardless of the answer, Republicans knew first and CHOSE to do nothing. You're making it sound like the Democrats framed Foley. Nice try.

Your other accusations are simply not worthy of a response.

Andy said...

On second thought, I partially agree with you. Shame on the Democrats for not telling the press sooner THAT THE REPUBLICANS WERE PROTECTING A PERVERT IN THEIR RANKS.

Gino said...

and to that andy, i agree.

i dont shill for the GOP. i do not belong to them, and havent for years now.
i despise them.
but hypocrasy frosts me.
and the left is the biggest at it.

which is why i despise them more.

my other remarks stand on their own. they are fact, and i believe you know it.
do you need a name?

Matthew said...

As far as I am aware, it is not clear that the Republicans in charge were aware of the messages in question. They admit to knowing about some of the, but not the real kickers. As far as the ones they admit to go, they could be considered in bad judgement, not completely unacceptable (as the others were). Of course, assuming this to be the truth requires one to believe that they would actually admit it if (and thus end their careers). So, maybe they didn't know. If they did, it's not likely they would admit to it...

Matthew said...

BTW, Gino, we all know you are talking about Gerry Studds. Wrong is still wrong.

Anonymous said...

Well the thing that bothers me the most is how self-righteously everyone involved seems to be conducting themselves. From the Republicans, to the Democrats, to the media, to some of the blogging community all seem to have found themselves a "higher moral ground" than the other folks involved.

I though am also a bit bothered that the "alcohol made me do it" excuse came out; then the "I was sexually abused as a child" excuse came into play.

UGH! When will folks just accept responsibility for their actions and not play the blame game.

This should be the way we act. Party affliation should not come into play.

Anonymous said...

It does make one wonder if this is the only time they have ignored this kind of information. Is this the only instance that has come to light? Will we`be`hearing more? As far as political timing, Bush and the GOP are masters at "conincidental" timing. The act by Foley, the ongoing cover-up, the hypocrisy, and now the blaming of others is low even for the GOP.

DJRainDog said...

Here's the thing: It shouldn't even BE a scandal! Mr. Chapman has hit best upon the truth of the matter. Everyone's running around with their noses in the air going, "Well, I NEVER!" You know what? Yes, you have, bitch. Or if you haven't, it's because you're fucking lame! What a torture this man's life must have been, and what a relief it must be for him to have the truth of his sexual identity out, despite the politically ruinous consequences. HOW FUCKING DARE the political pundits and the media use someone's personal, PRIVATE life to gain political capital, particularly over such an issue which you, Andy, at least, should see as IRRELEVANT -- sexuality! Whom I wish to fuck, provided it's not some pre-pubescent child, is absolutely NOBODY's business, unless (s)he and I choose to make it public knowledge (which we frequently do)! You can't have it both ways! Those pages are victims of nothing more than their own teenaged (and consenting) hormones, and of a society which condemns nearly ANY sexual desire as "sinful". Oooooooooohhhhh!! Scawwy! And as to the page's pain and suffering ("Garmonbozia" in David Lynch's oeuvre), AIM windows are VERY easy to close. I do it on a nearly daily basis. No one's FORCING you to continue the conversation. /rant

Anonymous said...

DJRD, of all the people to be caught in the conservative spin that this is about (condemning) alternative sexuality!

This is about improper use of power, abuse of people: and specifically that most intimate and so completely involving of the entire human person version of abuse, "sexual." Abuse--the using of others--is esepcially evil when it uses a person who is still in the primary developmental stages of their personhood.

Foley was serial--compulsive. We do no favor to him or anyone else who serves themselves by trying to accept his crap. Once someone is compulsive, they are not only not considering the full humanity of others, they have given up on at least a portion of their own.

Outgoing pages warned incoming pages.

Foley is NOT so attractive that most (any?) teenage pages would have been hot to get into his pants, unless they were making a power play themselves.

This is NOT a miraculous series of healthy, fully consentual sexual reltionships. (Even one would be a miracle, given the power structures, including age difference, involved.)