Such sex discrimination.....

[KathyF]

Well said, Coops and Co. Not sure where the idea came from that the private lives of public figures is fair game, but I hate it. Criticise someone for not doing their job, but not for what their partner says or does.   

[Gluestick]

No wonder society is in such a mess if so many condone behaviour such as Bruni's.

Apart from which, one expects, hopefully, a modicum of moral rectitude to be demonstrated by persons seen as social leaders. 

 Carla Bruni:

Realistically, that is a Utopian aspiration, since as the famed words of Lord Acton would suggest.

"Power corrupts: absolute power corrupts, absolutely!"

However political leaders ought properly to regulate their personal life in accordance with the demands and obligations of the job which they seek: it is not thrust upon them.

As I said previously, Noblesse Oblige.

If the example of Sarkozy and his wife are to become behavioral exemplars, then heaven help France and French social stability and order!

You see, one of the problems I have with this and similar is such public figures can rapidly be perceived as tacitly endorsing the "Do as I say: not as I do!" dynamic.

[cooperlola]

The woman is a model - what sort of behaviour is normal for such a person, for goodness's sake?  She's not a teacher or a lawyer, or a politician - she earns money by looking pretty and out of something which she had to put no effort in to get - her looks.   It's a daft occupation in the first place so its ethical standards are hardly worthy of any interest.  If she represented a noble profession maybe it would matter but she doesn't, her husband does.  And in his case - what does everybody seem to be obsessed by about him? - the fact that he is short!  What tripe.

 

[woolybanana]

What about Napoléon and his missus then. She had been around a bit and was probably quite a lot taller than him? Did they get the same treatment as Sarky and his missus?

[Gluestick]

Let's see if I have this right, JE.

If you are super-wealthy and can afford bed-hopping and kids you then desert; then this is perfectly OK.

If you do this and expect the state to keep them; then you are feckless, a social and moral blot and should be put down as an excrescence.(remember the recent heated and wholly condemnatory thread?).

Thus the Moral Imperative is ruled only by wealth?

Ergo, the Magna Carta and more critically, the Bill of Rights was all a waste of time.

Let's get rid of all those useless socialists and liberals (Pleeeease!) and get on with good doses of Libertarianism.

 Not do as you would be done by: but do as you wish.

[Gluestick]

[quote user="woolybanana"]What about Napoléon and his missus then. She had been around a bit and was probably quite a lot taller than him? Did they get the same treatment as Sarky and his missus?[/quote]

Probably not, Woolly: since Boney would have had any dissenters shot.

Or less than sycophantic press proprietors.

In any case, surely the core point is that society has moved on? Or perhaps ought to have done.

Nap was also suspected to have died from Tertiary Syphilis: since Arsenic was a noted specific for treatment. Along with mercury.

[cooperlola]

No, you have not got it right.  It's a big jump from saying that what public figures do in private should not affect how one views their job performance, to saying that I approve of people abandoning their kids!

Anybody (rich or poor) had the right to sleep with whomever they wished, last time I looked.  But calling a woman a bike just demeans you and weakens your arguement whilst re-inforcing theirs.  I cannot believe, for instance, that I am defending a rich model, but  this name-calling is offensive.

Get rid of me if you like.  Great solution - just bump off everybody who believes that offensive language shouldn't be tolerated and that seeing another person's point of view is being wishy-washy.  Or better still, call me useless - putting labels on people will go such a long way to making the world a better place to live in, will it not?

[Gluestick]

Sorry, JE: to myself and many other guys, women who sleep around as a sort of hobby, wreck marriages for their own, short-term gratification are socially, beyond the pale.

To elevate such to the position of wife of a president of a nation state of 62 million people, brings that country and its diplomatic credibility into significant disrepute;.

It also acts as a very poor example to the young: who surely have a sufficiency of bad role models already right now?

The woman's constantly in the media focus: she panders to that media in order to promote her delusions of being a singer.

Satire has been a weapon of ridicule since as long ago as Swift; satirical cartoons, which exaggerate physical abnormality and mental and emotional eccentricity have been around for hundreds of years. As have what seem to some, cruel nicknames.

Media shows such as Spitting Image et al, did not and do not treat kindly those in the public eye: why ought Bruni and Sarkozy be treated differently?

Oh: I know, 'cos she's a woman and he's vertically challenged.

Roll out the PC Nazis, eh?

And BTW: Ms Bruni demeans herself very successfully, without any assistance from myself!

[Chancer]

As my dear mother used to say, if she is not good enough for all the other boys she is not good enough for you son [:D]

Why should a President should think any differently?

I wish them both luck with starting a family, the same goes for any other childless married or PACsed couples who have the means and the desire.

[cooperlola]

Don't imagine that by labelling something PC, it excuses anybody from being offensive.  Why is it that people feel they can get away with upsetting people and bandying offensive language and sexist slurs  about?  PC is a great innovation in my book if it prevents even one person, one time, in one situation, from hurting another human being by their thoughtless use of offensive and meaningless epithets.  I am going to bed now before I say something I regret.[:@][:@][:@]

[Catalpa]

[quote user="cooperlola"]Why is it that people feel they can get away with upsetting people and bandying offensive language and sexist slurs  about?  [/quote]

Because some people have a deep seated contempt for those considered inferior - whether that be because of perceived station in life, dress... or the opposite sex generally. When it surfaces and they are challenged they bluster and bark defensive accusations such as (currently) political correctness or a lack of humour in the challenger but it doesn't disguise the fact that their views are judgemental, often not based on fact and plain offensive.

[KathyF]

[quote user="Gluestick"]Sorry, JE: to myself and many other guys, women who sleep around as a sort of hobby, wreck marriages for their own, short-term gratification are socially, beyond the pale. [/quote]

Fine, provided that it's equally OK to say that to myself and many women, guys who sleep around as a sort of hobby and wreck marriages for their own short-term gratification are socially beyond the pale! Or are we back with the good old dual standard?

[woolybanana]

No, both the goose and the gander should be judged

[Hoddy]

The trouble is Wooly we're a bit short of words of contempt for men of the same kind. What is the male equivalent of 'bike'. Does it carry the same degree of condemnation ?

Hoddy

[just john]

''Brains in his trousers''?

[Weedon]

[quote user="cooperlola"]Don't imagine that by labelling something PC, it excuses anybody from being offensive.  Why is it that people feel they can get away with upsetting people and bandying offensive language and sexist slurs  about?  PC is a great innovation in my book if it prevents even one person, one time, in one situation, from hurting another human being by their thoughtless use of offensive and meaningless epithets.  I am going to bed now before I say something I regret.[:@][:@][:@][/quote]

I just cannot let that posting go without comment.

I have always looked upon young Lola as one you could count on for her ability to put into words what I wanted to say without my being able to. Furthermore she always seemed to be the rebellious one, the one who could fight her corner with tenacity and grit, demonstrated by her spunky (can I say that) recovery from her terrible car accident.

But going to bed at twenty past eight in the evening, I ask you!

 

[Thibault]

Like an earlier poster, I am amazed at the personal venom directed at the French Head of State and his wife.  Politicians should be judged on their record, not on things they cannot do anything about such as their height.  There was a similar incident of name-calling regarding Gordon Brown and the fact that he is blind in one eye. 

[Jon02]

[quote user="cooperlola"]PC is a great innovation in my book if it prevents even one person, one time, in one situation, from hurting another human being by their thoughtless use of offensive and meaningless epithets.[/quote]

Que? Are you really saying that all dumbing down of social interaction in the Western world is exonerated by avoiding just one case of verbal abuse?

[cooperlola]

[quote user="Jon02"]dumbing down of social interaction in the Western world [/quote]I don't believe for one moment that that is, or ever was, the purpose of the use of so-called politically correct language.  It is and always has been, imho, an attempt to encourage people to think before they open their mouths (or put fingers to keyboard, or pen to paper) and insult people by the injudicious use of language.  Thus yes, I have always believed that it is a good thing, and dumbs down nobody, quite the reverse.

It is very telling that whenever anybody begins a sentence or makes a comment preceded by the words: "I know it's not politically correct but...." (usually drawing imaginary parentheses in the air and sneering at the same time) that one knows almost instinctively that they are about to insult somebody or make some sweeping generalisation about a particular group of people or section of society.

[KathyF]

In fact it's the reverse of dumbing-down, since you can't just trot out all the old automatic insults without thinking, but actually have to choose your words. Insults are like swearing in my book - the sign of an inadequate vocabulary.

[cooperlola]

[quote user="Hoddy"]The trouble is Wooly we're a bit short of words of contempt for men of the same kind. What is the male equivalent of 'bike'. Does it carry the same degree of condemnation ? Hoddy[/quote]

"She's a bike.  He's a bit of a lad."  The second one almost sounds like a compliment now, doesn't it? 

Better still, Hoddy, do you know of any similarly complimentary terms for a woman who likes to sleep with different guys when she feels like it?

 

I ask again - with the proviso that you don't leave behind unwanted kids or deseases, and that you are not betraying a partner - what is wrong with it, please?

[Benjamin]

[quote user="cooperlola"]

what is wrong with it, please?

[/quote]

Women who do this should be aware of possible side effects such as an increased risk of cervical cancer.

[cooperlola]

[quote user="Benjamin"][quote user="cooperlola"]

what is wrong with it, please?

[/quote]


Women who do this should be aware of possible side effects such as an increased risk of cervical cancer.



[/quote]Sorry, I don't get you.  Assuming one uses protection (and let's face it - one must these days, probably even with one's spouse as one can never be 100% sure where they have been[:D]) then is there really more of a risk if one has sex 100 times with one bloke or once each with 100?

Anyway, I'm glad to know that all the vitriole about Carla (not you, Benjamin) is because people are worried about her health.

[mint]

[quote user="Thibault"]Like an earlier poster, I am amazed at the personal venom directed at the French Head of State and his wife.  Politicians should be judged on their record, not on things they cannot do anything about such as their height.  There was a similar incident of name-calling regarding Gordon Brown and the fact that he is blind in one eye. [/quote]

Now I do agree totally with that, Thibault.

There are many things that one can do nothing about:  one's gender/sex, physical characteristics (short/tall, black/white) etc.  As someone or other has said, sure, if I am ignorant, I can get educated, etc but if I am black, a woman, homosexual, there isn't a great deal I can do about it?

[just john]

[quote user="sweet 17"]

[quote user="Thibault"]  There was a similar incident of name-calling regarding Gordon Brown and the fact that he is blind in one eye. [/quote]

Now I do agree totally with that, Thibault. There are many things that one can do nothing about:  one's gender/sex, physical characteristics (short/tall, black/white) etc.  As someone or other has said, sure, if I am ignorant, I can get educated, etc but if I am black, a woman, homosexual, there isn't a great deal I can do about it? [/quote]

Call me pedantic, but the origin of calling Gordon Brown ''one-eyed'' was made regarding his lack of perspicacity as PM, in ignorance of his physical ailment, so not a slant on his physical characteristics.