I don't think asking for sex is a bad thing.
Oh, sure, there are extenuating circumstances to consider. For example, pressuring someone into performing a sexual act for you is a bad thing. Continually pursuing it with someone who has made it clear they don't want it is a bad thing. Using it to manipulate ... that's a borderline kind of issue for me. I think that convincing people to do things that you consider beneficial to yourself is fine so long as you're not harming the people you're convincing, and if part of that marketing campaign involves you doing sexual things for them, well, hello. That's rather what marriage is about in a way. If there's mutual benefit, and you don't mind it? Bring it on, baby.
So when Idaho Senator Whazziz Craig asked a cop to do some sex stuff with him while he was in an airport bathroom, well, on the surface that is not a bad thing. It's a guy wanting sex. If the other guy wanted to do it, well and good.
Laws that make that a bad thing should be there to protect people from unwanted sex, but sometimes they're a bit too broad. They are based more on the Puritanical view that sex is icky and for keeping private and only between sanctioned partners and just don't talk about it, 'k? Being asked to do something sexual is only bad if you're emotionally traumatized by it. Maybe if you were abused or raped, you'd legitimately fear any such sexual encounter. Flirtation between people at a bar might be just as bad as the seamy, rather icky notion of some lonely guy shoving his foot underneath a stall in a grimy bathroom.
'Course, reportedly, Craig didn't just stop with the solicitation. When the cop flashed his creds, the good Senator flashed his own and tried, limply, to muscle his way out of a sticky situation.
That's crass.
And, of course, there's the whole hoo-ha about him being "gay" and yet being an outspoken opponent against various gay privileges.
Sorry, but
a) having sex with a man does not make you gay. It means you're willing to have gay sex. There's a difference. I know people disagree, but tough.
b) being gay does not mean you have to support the political desires of a large number of gay people. There actually are gay people who do not think that gay "marriage" should be legitimized. They view "marriage" as something special, sacred, and meant to be between men and women who intend to reproduce, etc. I disagree with that, personally, but I recognize that people think that way.
So what's this rambling screed all about?
Simply: Craig isn't being railroaded because he committed a horrible sin/crime/whatever or because he's gay, or because he's a hypocrite. He is being pushed out because the perception of wrongdoing has stronger ju-ju than actual wrongdoing.
And that is, quite simply, the way the world works. It is neither good nor bad. It just is.
Don't believe me? Then consider that if you believe murder is wrong, why are some murders overlooked? If a bad guy gets gunned down in cold, murderous blood, does his murder get investigated and prosecuted with the same fervor as when a child is killed? Sometimes. But not always. Politicians in particular are doing shady, amoral things all the time and so long as they're not obvious about it, don't get caught, and are generally doing well, then leave it be. You shade what is "good" and what is "bad".
But get caught doing something normal -- like seeing if the guy next to you wants to give you a quickie hummer -- and people who are squeamish about it, people who dislike the privilege that comes with public office and who wans to whap congresscritters simply for breathing, along with people who just like to cause trouble will raise up the mob spectre and then that guy's ass is pwned.
Craig is right to step down. He isn't exactly throwing away thirty years as a politician -- he served those years and did his job so they weren't really wasted, were they? And he'll continue his life in some other aspect. I'm sure he'll take care of himself. But he committed the sin of being caught on the wrong side of public perception, and once you've gone there, you need to go.
Ask Caesar, fuck sake.





The bottom line is that fairness in a criminal courtroom, where black and white are fairly well defined, is a completely different matter than fairness in the public arena.
Fact is, based on a LOT less evidence than you'd need for a criminal conviction, the public is able to make generally (but not always) accurate assessments as to the "stink" factor. That's why to this day Americans will wrinkle their nose when the Clintons are mentioned -- nothing you can really put your finger on, never mind successfully prosecute, but the whole operation smells to high heaven.
As to your statement: "I don't think asking for sex is a bad thing." and "...normal -- like seeing if the guy next to you wants to give you a quickie hummer..." Kewl. Errr, any chance I can get you to appear in court for me next week? Nothing serious -- no guys involved (as far as I know), but I thought it was some kinda rule that only hookers and Hooters girls could wear that kind of outfit. Mistakes were made, and I feel that assigning blame would be counterproductive.
- AD -
(Sitting here making crude noises in my own stall of the unisex toilet of the internet -- oh, sorry, did I just -- uhmm -- "accidentally" nudge your foot? My bad.)
Hey wanna have sex?
Just thought I'd ask and see if I get arrested.
Pretty much agree with your whole synopsis.
Yo, Mark, seein' as how AD didn't arrest you, I guess that means he said "yes!"
Hahahahahahaha! I meant with YOU!
Fuck sakes. I guess you're not interested.
Oh well. Your loss...
:o)>