Bedroom, Boardroom, Cabinet Room

by Michele

What if somebody you worked with was doing stuff you disapproved of in her personal life?  What if she was a serial adulterer, or abused her kids, or engaged in risky sexual practices?  Is what she does on her own time her own business?  Or would you let it affect your view of her work?  We'd all like to think we're tolerant, that we live and let live.  But do we?  Have you ever been put to the test?  Have you ever worked with a senior partner who preyed on attractive young women (but not the ones in your firm)?  Hired a babysitter who boozed it up and slept around (but not when she was watching your kids)?  Did you think the same way about these people after you found out?  Did you call that babysitter the next time you needed your kids picked up from school?

Do we care about the personal conduct of the people running for President?  And if we do, is that fair?

Have you seen the video of Giuliani taking a phone call from his wife in the middle of an important speech to the NRA?  It's deeply weird.

                                                    

Maybe it creeps me out so much because the whole Rudy-Judi thing creeped me out from the get-go.  I lived through that drama in New York.  The gossip column blind items about Rudy wining and dining a mystery woman while still married to Donna Hanover.  The press conference where he announced to the entire city that he was dumping its first lady before he told the woman herself, the mother of his two children (who no longer speak to him).  The spectacle when Donna Hanover refused on advice of her matrimonial lawyer to leave Gracie Mansion, and Rudy went to live on his friend's couch.  How she did The Vagina Monologues to piss him off.

I lived in the city before, during and after Giuliani, and I can attest that the man is effective.  The change in the city was mind-boggling, almost unthinkable.  Under Dinkins, I heard three separate shootings outside my bedroom window in a one-year period.  Under Giuliani, you could walk the streets at any hour.  On nine-eleven, he showed leadership like no American has since FDR.  Still, I won't vote for him, for a lot of reasons, but one of them is undoubtedly the fact that he's a jerk in his personal life.  Is that fair?  Is it smart?

I haven't seen a Woody Allen movie since Woody dumped Mia Farrow for her adopted teenaged daughter.  I just couldn't get past my disapproval of the director's personal life sufficiently to plunk down my money for a ticket.  I couldn't stand the thought of watching him cast himself opposite sweet young things.  (Though if you believe the reviews, the movies haven't been so good, so I wasn't that tempted to overcome my distaste.  Still, I'd been a loyal viewer before).    Is that fair?

     John McCain and Fred Thompson are married to Stepford blondes gazillions of years younger than they are.  That bugs me.  And just to show I'm not being partisan, I feel exactly the same way about Dennis Kucinich, especially after he crowed on national tv about having a hot young wife.  (She is hot.  What's up with that?)  Is that fair?  Do I care if it's fair?  It's how I feel.

I have to admit I'm a hypocrite.  I've forgiven Hillary for sticking with Bill.  Not everybody has.  A very smart, educated and successful woman of my acquaintaince, who spent twenty years at home raising her kids before coming back to the work force, can't forgive Hillary for the "baking cookies" insult, and she can't forgive her for her double standard in staying married to Bill.  "This is somebody who criticized other women for standing by their man like Tammy Wynette," she said, "and then went and did exactly that."

We're not the Europeans.  The personal is political, I guess.  At least, here in the tabloid nation.

Comments

[SisterZip aka Pam]

Can't believe I am still awake at this hour to be the first here!

I think I admire Hillary more for sticking with Bill. There is a big difference in working it out over infidelity than to stay in an abusive relationship "just for the kids". It was a matter of Clinton being effective and the Republicans were looking for anyway to divert our attention from the real issues.

If what 'they' say is true and we get the leadership we deserve, I guess Guliani was the right man for that time. He was effective in NYC, but his people skills need some work. I'm sure Donna Hanover was no saint in that marriage, but how he handled the situation was appalling. I don't like all of the people he chooses to be around him either.

Not one of the candidates is perfect. It always comes down to the lesser of two evils.

[William Simon]

Politics aside, which I won't discuss here, one thing I do know for certain is no one, and I mean NO ONE, could stand up to a detailed examination of their Private Life. We've all got skeletons, we've all got kinks, we've all got our "Things" that someone somewhere would say "Ewwwww....THAT is dis-gus-ting!" and then they would immediately form an opinion about the kind of person we are from that one fact.

Using Rudy Giulani as an example, I give two damns about his private life. What I do care about are the changes he made in NYC, how he stepped up on 9-11 and was the Rock we so desperately needed, and what he plans to do for the country. Aside from that, I couldn't care less about his private life.

A lot of this started back when Jimmy Carter admitted in a PLAYBOY interview that he had "lusted in his heart" for women other than his wife. The yelling and shrieking went on for months. Bill Clinton? He was a bad boy, but I never heard one word about how he forced Ms. Lewinsky, or threatened her in any way shape or form; she was a consenting adult and indeed did consent to any and all capers in the Oval Office.

Someone's private life is just that: Private. And it should be left that way.

[Kerry, the Martial Tart]

I guess my response is "It depends." If what someone does in his/her private life involves abuse or exploitation of other people (adults or otherwise), then, yeah, I want to know so I can be sure not to support him or her. And I suppose there could be some behaviors that, while they don't rise to that level, speak to a person's ability to make decisions and/or provide leadership -- and I'd want to know about those, too. At the other end of the spectrum are those behaviors that, while I might not like them much, really don't matter.

As I thought about this, I realized that I'm much more likely to let my opinion of personal behavior affect my consumer decisions than my political ones. I'm sure that's because of some sort of internal cost/benefit analysis that takes into account all kinds of consequences, but I'm too foggy to figure that out right now.

Oh -- and about the work thing? That's really hard. I've lost a job because I spoke out against policies I didn't like, which makes me very reluctant to stick my neck out. So I've stayed silent in the face of some egregious behaviors. But I've also taken small stands where I could, even though it scared me. I reserve a special place on my s*%t list for people in authority who put people like me in those kinds of positions.

[michele martinez]

Pam, wow, you *were* up early. Or late. Thanks for thinking of us in the dead hours.

William, I hear you, and on the philosopical level I totally agree with your sentiment. What's private should be provate. Nobody's perfect. (Although Barack Obama seems to be at least normal.) For me, the legitimate question is, when does somebody's personal drama start interfering with their ability to get the job done? When Rudy was embroiled in his Judi scandal, it interfered. The Monica Lewinsky scandal interfered. If somebody seems unstable on the personal front, shouldn't we take that into account?

But where's the line? What if we just can't abide the politician's spouse? Is that a fair thing to take into account?

[michele martinez]

Kerry, I agree, this issue *is* harder when it comes to our own work. One vote doesn't matter, but when it comes to our own lives, we both have more power and are more likely to be affected personally.

I've had this issue come up with babysitters. What if they do a great job one-on-one with the kids, but you don't approve of their personal conduct? Is that somebody you want watching your kids, or is it unfair to consider their conduct outside the workplace? Here's another example. A woman I knew learned that her cleaning lady had been arrested for selling heroin, and she was very conflicted about whether to fire her. What if you found out a colleague or an employee had been arrested for selling drugs? Is that soemthing you'd consider when it came to their work? What if it was a DUI?

[Mary]

A couple of random ccomments about Michele's thoughtful post.

1.When people get married they make vows. When they commit adultry, they break vows. That DOES say something about their character. It's not just their "private life" we are talking about.

2.When somebody swears something is so under oath, but the person lies, that too is about character. If we are willing to tolerate lying under oath, then there's not much hope in any of the processes we count on to be conducted in an honest manner.

3.Finally, the young (at least 2nd wife) married to the much older man--I too have the "yuck" factor, and I admit this is personal. Four years ago at age 46, I tried out for a co-ed volleyball team. When I got to tryouts, the judge was a man in his early 20s. I was great! I certainly earned a place on the team. However, nobody ever told me that I had to be 20 something to play. I believed I was passed over because I was 46, overweight, and well, no longer a babe. That was my first, but certainly not last non-babe discrimination experience.

Does anybody honestly think that Fred Thompson couldn't find a beautiful, capable woman in his own generation?

[ramona]

Here's my take on this, Michele.

We should all be French. The men openly have mistresses and the women don't get fat. Everybody wins.

[michele martinez]

Mary, I agree with everything you just said.

Ramona, while it very much interests me not to get fat, if my husband openly had a mistress, I would go get a gun and shoot him. (Wow, I guess that makes me a true American.) Your views are obviously being influenced by your open relationship with Blond Bond. Honey, the rest of us think that is just sick.

[ramona]

I think it's sick, too. That's what I like about it.

[Maryann]

Tough issue, michele. I'd have to say personal actions have an effect on how I see people. I always liked Bill.Although I did think he was rather stupid for his antics, which allowed the opposition to focus on impeachment rather than on the more pressing issues of poverty and eldercare in this nation, he ran the nation well. Hillary had the guts to stick it out. She was in it for the long haul, whatever her reasons. On the other hand, I'm not a fan of Meryl Streep and I can't tell you why...she just bothers me. Woody Allen? Not a fan anyway, but in my mind what he did was pathetic. And wrong.
I will say that no way would I allow an employee in my house (if I could afford anything) to stay after I discovered illegal activities OR any kind of abuse no matter how good a job they seemed to do. First, I could lose my own freedom if I knew about the illegal stuff and did nothing, and second, my child is infinitely more important than any babysitter.
I'm definitely not perfect, and there are times when I look at someone having problems, no matter what they are and think "There but for the grace of God go I". It doesn't necessarily make me think better of them, but it does remind me that life is often a crap shoot.

[Harley]

Jeez, Michele, this is so tough!

Here's what I try to think: unless a guy is running on a Family Values platform while exhibiting that he has none, it's probably not relevant. Woody Allen makes me nauseous but I still see his movies (or did, when I still went and saw movies). But when I don't like someone anyway, I LOVE to dwell upon their hypocricy!

Ramona, I want to hear more about your open relationship, and Michele, not all of us consider it sick.

[ramona]

I agree with everything Maryann said, with the exception of not liking Meryl Streep and Woody Allen. The Mia-Woody thing is so distant from my own personal reality that I don't even try to judge. Cop out? You bet.

As for Bill, the man was, is, and ever shall be, a horn dog. Everybody knew this, and we elected him anyway. I fail to see the big surprise. Stupid--yes. Out of character--no. For the writers among us, wasn't the Monica thing perfectly in character for him?

Back to Maryann's final thoughts, I have two to add. Do we ever really know what's going on with other people, even if we see events with our own two eyes? If you see a child having a temper tantrum in public and the parent is doing "nothing" about it--is that a correct assumption? Or, perhaps, is it a child acting out an emotional or behaviorial problem and doing "nothing" is exactly how the parent needs to handle it.

As for marriage, nobody ever really knows what goes on in another person's marriage.

[William Simon]

There's an old saying:

"THEY are perverts. YOU are kinky. *I* am "creative".

[ramona]

William, are you implying that my thing with Blond Bond makes me a kinky, creative pervert? If so, I'm cool with that.

[William Simon]

(laughing) No way, ramona..:)

That just always struck me as the perfect example of what we're talking about. If someone else does it, we make decisions and judge them for it. If WE do it, well....there ARE considerations to take into account....:)

[ramona]

I get it now. It's that pesky casting stones thing.

I used to be very judgmental about other people's children. Now I have two 17-year-old boys. Twins. Not exactly angels. Both a head and a half taller than me. It's like all of my past judgments have come back to bite me in the...you know. Now, every other parent in the world gets a pass from me, except for the ones who say, one day you'll laugh about all this. For those, I'd like to borrow Michele's mistress gun.

[Nancy Martin]

Sorry I'm late this morning. I was trying to get a plane ticket to sit at George Clooney's bedside.

I think the issues are character vs. judgment. If you cheat on your wife, you deserve whatever the public dishes out. You made a vow--a promise--and you broke it. That's a character flaw.

But if you're single and can convince a sweet young thing to marry you in your autumnal years---well, that's not breaking any vows or laws except the law of the ick factor. (We are still laughing here in Pittsburgh over the 84-year old rich man who married his 23-year-old manicurist--and divorced her less than 4 months later.)

But if your judgment is at fault--say you cheat on your wife but do a great job in public office--I think we're allowed to doubt how you might handle future decisions. I might appreciate the way Rudy fixed NYC (at what damage to the Constitution?) but I can doubt his judgment by observing his private life. Does that make sense?

And in just about any relationship, once trust is broken, it's nearly impossible to fix it. We may forgive, but we rarely forget.

[Kathy Reschini Sweeney]

Great topic!

Woody Allen - yuck. I was never a big fan, and after the 'heart wants what it wants' crap, I was totally done. Our hearts want lots of things - it's called making good judgments and exercising self-control, idiot. Ditto for Tom Cruise, who just makes me sick.

The thing about these people is that they don't keep their lives *private* - because of their career choices, or their personal desires, they have chosen public lives. So they can't then turn around and tell us not to judge because it's private. That's bullshit.

Same with the Clintons. If you want to keep your affair quiet, and let's all be honest, Bill has had enough affairs to know, you don't do an intern in the oval office. Geez. And Hillary - you don't go on national TV and make statements about not putting up with cheating (which is what the Tammy Wynette crack was all about) and then act surprised when people realize you're not candid.

As far as the younger wives, no stones on that one. My husband is 11 years older than me, and he was also my boss (great family joke on that one). At the time, I really was a babe, and heard a lot of the crap. So that one doesn't phase me - you can fall in love with all kinds of people.

One last thing - I love lots of things that Dennis Kucinich says and stands for. But am I the only one who can't help but think of Frodo and Galadrial? hee.

[Carol Baier]

Observations about Rudi:

He's pulled that "phone call from my loving wife" on stage stunt before (I forget where or when).

When, after the first World Trade Center bombing, Rudi was told by experts not to put the command center in the WTC. He did it anyway.

I'm a liberal, so Rudi's social ideology (most of it, anyway) is good, but Rudi's too paranoid, too goofy for me. Plus, he's still a Republican -- and getting more so. Unless it's just lip service, which brings us back to the honest issue. Either way, no way.

[Margie]

Hi, it's me, Margie.

Okay, thanks for everyone letting me know we were talking about sex. On a Monday? I'm so damn proud of this crew I could burst.

Here is the thing - as you know, I think having sex is a great idea. I believe that people who are having sex are much happier (and less likely to shoot at you with another kind of weapon - BWAH) than people who are not. So I don't care HOW you have sex, or WHO you have sex with. The more - what was that word, Willyum? Creative, the better. And Ramoana - the more the merrier. Because variety is the spice of life.

NTS, no sex with those who can't consent - like kids and animals. Otherwise, go.

It's all part of the Margie Manifesto that I'm working on right now. Stay tuned for Friday's blog for more, and start thinking about your platform issues. I mean other than the shoes, which are tough on the ankles, but make the legs look great. Such sacrifices we make for our art.

[ArkansasCyndi]

Carol is right about Rudi pulling out the cell phone before. Husband saw a piece on it. It's a PR stunt to show what a "family man" he is now. Rudi does not impress me. Sorry for any Rudi followers.

I don't like Thompson either - trophy wife or not. He spouts the same old tired conservative blah blah. However, the article in Newsweek on his trophy wife was less the flattering. Seems she has a police record. Seems she has run off a number of his staffers. Seems she is the one in charge.

Bill Clinton - hound dog? Yep. Always has been. Was a touchy-feely guy before Hillary and I guess after. When I first met him, I was in high school. (I knew his mother and was friends with Roger). He has always been like that. But he oozes charisma. If you've never met him face-to-face, then you can not image how strong it is. I've experienced nothing like it before.

I try not to let personal lives effect me, but I have to admit, I won't go to a Tom Cruise movie because of his attach on post-partum depression. I have turned against Brad Pitt, again for his personal actions. Funny, but it seems to effect me more with actors than politicians. I wonder why that is!

[beachfla]

Great topic. Have to agree with you on the Woody Allen situation. Borders on being incestuous. Somehow I still think Cinton was an effective president and is an intelligent man despite the whole Monica fiasco. I know - it isn't rational, is it? As for the younger woman thing, I went to a prep school during my jr. high years with John McCain's sons by his first marriage when he was a POW. It is intersting how little you hear about them and their endorsement (if any?) of their dad... Hey, it IS easy to be an armchair judge! Sorry!

[Harley]

AkansasCyndi, I am totally with you. I cannot watch Tom Cruise without thinking, "Scientology, scientology, scientology"

uh-oh. Is the blog now going to get sued?

[Mary Storyteller]

I just realized there's another Mary on the list (with this name, the most common female name in the world, there are always others -- a principal once asked a caller to be more specific, "we have a covy of Marys in this school") so I'll add storyteller to my sign-in. When I hear someone call "Mary" on the street, I turn around, but don't necessarily expect it to be for me.
I do think honesty issues are important in every field, but I don't feel someone's (adult, consensual) sexual preferences are any of my business, unless I personally plan to become involved with that person.
(In case you became curious about the most common male name --
Mohammed).

[Josh]

Only you, Harley. They know where you live, that Scientologist Mafia. Us, we are only out here in the ether; we may not even exist.

Make them serve Greg.