I feel Ayn Rand
113 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 Newer→ Last
-
Has there been any kind of verification as to this supposed harem of woman? I haven't been following it (not interested enough) but early on it struck me that he had been advised to clam up after admitting the initial indiscretion, and that anyone with desires for fame/wealth/a-reality-show could wave their arms about claiming they slept with him too.
-
I think that about anyone who conducts a sexual affair behind the back of a partner -- people having sex is all good fun, consistently deceiving someone to whom you're supposed to show love and loyalty is creepy and wrong. But any time I say that I get told to drop the sanctimony and mind my own business :-)
ORLY? I've long said that if David ever cheats on me I'd be totally Old Testament about it. Much lamentation, fire, brimstone and hiring of lawyers to unleash the Four Horsepersons of The Seriously Rancid Breakup.
But if the unimaginable every happened and Fiona kicked your cheating arse to the curb, I could go a very long time without the spectacle of a Garth George column exhorting you to give up your Godless ways and come to Jesus.
-
wheres the outcry and christian moralising over that ? instead he's held up as a role model for gays in elite sport..go figure
i guess he's not famous enough ? and this seems weird...
Given what society does to gay people, especially gay men who aspire to supposedly ultra-masculine sports or careers, I think people find Thomas' actions understandable. Which isn't to say it wouldn't have been braver and maybe truer for him to have not married, and been honest about his sexuality - but how many of us would have the guts to do that? I don't think I would.
-
I suspect Tiger always knew he was a cheating horndog. You see less "coming out" stories about those.
-
...well lucy, i think that sux ballz!
-
I'll let Craig play with that one
-
I'll let Craig play with that one
Can it wait until my lunch has settled? :)
-
In your own tinme, good man
-
i'm all for marriages of convenience as long as both parties are aware that that's what it is
maybe tiger and gareth thought marriage would cure their bacon and smoke their screens but as public figures it is inevitable that all eventually comes out in the wash
goes without saying that there had to be some media complicity in protecting both their reps
-
Heaven forbid anyone do what is socially expected of them and only later realise that they actually can't learn to like it.
-
Playing golf, you mean? :)
-
...well lucy, i think that sux ballz!
Societal pressure on gay people to be and/or act straight? Yes, it does.
-
OTM lucy:)
so maybe tiger should play the cultural/race card from his black heritage like 'monty' zuma the sth african polygamist.
-
As you say, I'm not of the view that "he deserved it", but I can think of many, many people for whom I feel greater sympathy. I'm slightly surprised at the rush to such great sympathy here. He's an extraordinarily wealthy man with excellent PR advice.
I'm sure that excellent PR advice was that a squeaky clean image was going to earn him the most money. Should he have turned down Nike's $40M on the basis that they were going to make him out to be a better man than he was? Seems like an unreasonable expectation to me.
But I agree about the sympathy. I have only slightly more sympathy for Tiger than I have for Bill Clinton, which is to say basically none. I just don't think it deserves the coverage it's getting. The image angle doesn't seem particularly newsworthy to me, and well "elite sports star turns out to be arsehole", it's hardly novel.
The possibility that his behaviour was literally pathological is actually something that gives me pause.
And that possibility is the about the only part of the story that I think is of more than momentary interest.
-
But any time I say that I get told to drop the sanctimony and mind my own business :-)
I'll see your MYOB and raise you a 'crotch sniffing', which is why I'm not in this discussion, well mostly not, cause I'm trying to learn from my mistakes. I do see some irony in this though. It's a bit like saying 'keep quiet about this stuff, which I'm going to elaborate on for a bit, that's none of your business', through a loud speaker.
-
I think that about anyone who conducts a sexual affair behind the back of a partner -- people having sex is all good fun, consistently deceiving someone to whom you're supposed to show love and loyalty is creepy and wrong. But any time I say that I get told to drop the sanctimony and mind my own business :-)
I'm not surprised. Sexual morality within legal boundaries is rather private. Panty sniffing, as Craig so often calls it. Of course if you've gone a long way to cultivating an image of the loyal husband as part of some branding thing, then you're making a rod for your own back if that's not your thing.
However, I can imagine that one may very well start out as loyal, never expecting to become the worlds most famous golfer, and thus the kind of person who is inundated with offers. Having discovered that one is a sex addict, it would be an extremely difficult job to reverse all that PR without massive financial damage to oneself and everyone backing one. There would be pressure from a lot of people to keep it under wraps. So he could either just deny what he wants, for the money, or get what he wants and risk exactly what has happened. I actually don't think either position is better than the other. I actually find the idea of "Tiger Woods, Sex Addict" far, far more interesting and believable than "Tiger Woods, Famous Billionaire and Loyal Family Man", which strikes me as the kind of hateful constructed life that royalty are expected to live. Fantasy lives are usually just that, a fantasy.
I don't think all right thinking people should ignore celebrity gossip. People are allowed to be interested in what they're interested in. I'm not really much interested in this one, though. I was quite surprised to hear in the first place that Woods even was a supposed family man. That a man of his fame and money cheats around didn't surprise me in the slightest. It's pretty hard to even imagine what his sex life must be like when pretty much any single woman he meets is going to be very interested. I don't know anyone like that personally.
Like Gio, I'm somewhat cheered by the massive losses from it all. Only because they represent the crashing down of media constructed personas. I felt much the same way about Jennifer Aniston losing Brad Pitt. "Why the fuck would he even bother with her in the first place?" was always on my mind until a mate pointed out that it's because women like Aniston, so the whole thing made sense from a PR POV. Which is all very well until you realize that part of the point of being rich and famous is so that you can live a life you choose, not something your PR team cooks up for you. If he fell from grace as the World's Sexiest Man (a title formerly held by the likes of Tom Cruise), but got to use his dick the way he wanted to (and smoke the drugs he wanted to, iirc), I think he made the right choice.
-
I'm not surprised. Sexual morality within legal boundaries is rather private. Panty sniffing, as Craig so often calls it.
Yes, yes, I know. But am I right in thinking we'd all be less hesitant to think ill of someone who's behaved like a lying creep to his friends, relatives, investors, colleagues, customers, or even random members of the public?
-
"Why the fuck would he even bother with her in the first place?"
Your ability to accurately determine if and why people you've never met might be attracted to each other is truly astounding.
-
Ben's standards must be higher than mine..
-
Like Gio, I'm somewhat cheered by the massive losses from it all.
The problem is, the money will just shift onto other people some of whom we will eventually learn are no better. It's rearranging the deck chairs on the (not at all sinking) titanic.
-
Russell wrote:
A quickie analysis claims his top nine sponsors have suffered a $12 billion loss of stock market value as a result of his fall from grace.
I don't really care about Tiger Woods, golf, or celebrities. This however fascinates me. Investors believe that these companies will suffer a huge customer backlash, so that their sales suffer to such an extent that they are worth $12billion less ? Weird.
Cheers,
Brent. -
they are worth $12billion less
It's how business journos report things, but it's a tendentious and misleading way of putting it, based on taking the last sales and multiplying out by the number of shares on issue.
A tiny minority of the shares on issue changed hands at a lower price. Also, for everyone who sold at that price, someone bought -- and those buyers presumably think they got a deal.
If you announce that you were mounting a takeover for a listed company, immediately the asking price rises, showing that "value" or "worth" are not necessarily reflected in the last sale price.
Stock pickers of the Buffet variety specialise in buying things that are "undervalued" -- that is, in identifying discrepancies between the current trading price and what they believe the company is in fact worth if everyone could see what they see.
Equating last sale price, and value, is problematic.
-
I don't really care about Tiger Woods, golf, or celebrities. This however fascinates me. Investors believe that these companies will suffer a huge customer backlash, so that their sales suffer to such an extent that they are worth $12billion less ? Weird.
Brent: I suggest you go have a look at the fisking I linked to up thread -- which identified some pretty serious methodological flaws in the not-particularly well-reported study.
In the period the study covered:
* Proctor & Gamble's chairman announced his resignation, six months after standing down as CEO. (And, not surprisingly for a company heavily based on "premium" brands, it's still struggling with static sales during a recession. Don't know about you, but I'm doing a lot more price comparisons and going for the generic house brand than I used to.)
* PepsiCo downgraded its sales and profit forecasts.
* Nike reported a substantial drop in sales and second quarter profits.
To be honest, putting all that on Tiger Woods' wandering meat putter is giving the man's penis a damn sight more power than it deserves.
-
Tiger Woods' wandering meat putter
Another triumph
-
To be honest, putting all that on Tiger Woods' wandering meat putter is giving the man's penis a damn sight more power than it deserves.
I'm still cheered by it because it shows how poorly we understand the economy and the staggering fictions we tell one another when it comes - for instance - to the role of endorsements and sponsorships.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.