Katha Pollitt on Andrew Sullivan

christian11 at mindspring.com christian11 at mindspring.com
Thu May 31 11:35:24 PDT 2001



>Just this past sunday Andrew went on and on in London times about clinton's 'sexual recklessness' and supposed psychological problems--about the thousandth piece he's written along these lines. he certainly didn't think Pres C or monica had a right to privacy! One thing you can say for old Bill, he didn't give Monica any fatal diseases, and he didn't troll for sex partners by filling out questionnaires on the internet!

Distinctions, please. If you buy the line, Bill and Mon only didn't have the right to privacy b/c it's possible he broke the law. You don't have to buy that line, but then if you don't, you're no longer arguing about privacy, you're talking about the legitimacy of the charges against him.

By the way, from everything I could tell from Monica's testimony and the Starr report, Bill was a psychological adolescent with a little dick and a narcissistic streak a mile wide. He may have never claimed to be anything different, but, if you believe Andrew's story half as much as you evidently believe Clinton's, then he hasn't claimed to be anything he isn't either.

While you might not have to "troll" the internet or demean yourself by filling out a questionnaire (heavens!) to find partners, doing so isn't a crime. (And neither, btw, is having sex if you're HIV+ if you inform your partner.) This is precisely the kind of clean sex brigade crap that you accuse Andrew of being so good at. Takes one to know one, I guess.


>Finally, I think anyone who is a practicing Catholic, anti-choice AND pro-welfare reform deserves to have their sexual peccadilloes widely known. The hedonism he has belatedly decided is all right for himself is not an activity he would make possible for women. Where's women's right to privacy in his scheme of things? In the back alley or the obstetrics ward. The heck with him I say -- what goes around comes around.

The problem with this is that, even if the story is true, Sullivan's hypocrisy isn't a good argument in favor of the right to privacy--or the right to choice. It's a good argument not to lend him credibility, but there are a hundred Andrew Sullivan's waiting to pop up where that one falls.

Christian



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list