|
|
|
December 19, 2009
Sometimes, being "had" matters
Is the subject of whether I feel "had" by Tiger Woods even worth a post? I don't know. For the life of me, I just don't feel part of a growing chorus of angry "we's" who do feel -- very strongly -- they they have been "had." (Apparently, there is a sense that by betraying his wedding vows as promiscuously as he did, the man betrayed the people who believed that he would never do something like that.) While I never gave it much thought, I always liked Tiger Woods, simply because he appears to be a pleasant fellow. I don't watch golf, though, so I am in no position to comment on his abilities or skill, and all I know is that he's one of the greatest golfers in history. I never followed his personal life, which interests me about as much as would the personal lives of the nation's top bowlers. So I really can't claim that I was "had." If I idolized him as a fan, and if I had read and believed that Tiger Woods led an idyllic life as a devoted family man, maybe that I'd feel differently. But even so, how much would having been "had" in this manner really matter? There's a lot of clucking going on (mostly by MSM types) about how the media didn't do their job, despite longstanding evidence of Tiger's womanizing. And some conservatives are drawing analogies between being had by Tiger Woods and had by Barack Obama. Except there's a major difference. Tiger Woods is one of the nation's greatest golfers. His sex life may cause his fans to feel betrayed (and it obviously hurt his family), but nothing can change his accomplishments in his sport. Falsely posing as a happily married family man with media assistance did not get Woods elected as a top-ranked golfer, and cheating on a wife is not cheating at golf. So the question of whether his fans were "had" (whether by him or his media supporters) is at best inconsequential. I agree with Glenn that there's a more important question. How long before we hear "we were all had" about Barack Obama? MORE: I should add that I feel a lot more "had" by Andrew Sullivan than by Tiger Woods, and that is because like Ann Althouse, I always assumed that whether I agreed with him or not, at least he was who he was. So far as I know at least, Tiger Woods is still Tiger Woods. Seriously, what is the world coming to when Andrew Sullivan is not even Andrew Sullivan? It really hurts to be had by someone you thought you knew but never knew, because he wasn't even the guy you didn't know but thought you knew. posted by Eric on 12.19.09 at 11:49 AM
Comments
Tiger will lose a lot of advertising income, as a consequence of the general public now becoming aware that his image is far from reality. Those in the know have been aware of the gap between Tiger's image and his reality for quite a while -see the links. I will not cry over his loss of advertising income. He is not the first "larger than life" athlete to be sexually promiscuous. Consider Babe Ruth, Wilt Chamberlain, Magic Johnson. I admire Babe Ruth for being the greatest baseball player ever, even if he played most of his career for the Evil Empire. Wilt was a great player. I also admire Magic Johnson for his business acumen after he retired, even if he was a Laker. I realized that Magic was a rather bright, self aware person when I read an article on what NBA players would have done had they not played in the NBA. Most said they would have become an MD or a lawyer. Yeah, right. Magic said he would have worked the line at GM, like his father. No fool, that Magic Johnson. I don't feel betrayed by Tiger. I bought nothing as a consequence of his ad exposure. He remains the best golfer of the last 15 years. I admired the speech he gave during the Inauguration festivities, honoring the military. Regarding the intrusiveness of the press: this came with the territory of raking in all that advertising income,of keeping his name in front of the public.Tiger figured he could keep playing the double game indefinitely, keep wifey under control and keep raking in all those megabucks in ad income. Maybe now he will just play golf and earn the description of the best all time. Anonymous · December 19, 2009 06:03 PM Sports players, actors, entertainers of any sort. They don't disappoint me because I don't consider them to be of any consequence. Tiger is known for being really good at a game. Whacking a little ball into a hole a couple hundred yards away. Okay. Yes I know it's hard and no, I can't do it. It still has zero importance to the universe. Entertainers do whatever they do to amuse people and pass the time. Good for them. Beyond that........ I suppose I have something of a visceral aversion to celebrities because many seem to believe that their fame gives them or their opinions weight and importance. Mike · December 20, 2009 09:03 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
December 2009
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2009
November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
• Being me is so unfair!
• Sometimes, being "had" matters • Why I like Climategate • More self-indulgent psychedelic nostalgia (while I attempt to hide my decline) • Another Way To Hide The Decline • The smart way to avoid bankruptcy • It Would Damage What We Hold Dear • Being white isn't "enough" • Polywell Down Under • "Precautionary principle" throws caution to the wind
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Bravo. I don't feel betrayed by Tiger Woods because (1) I don't feel his home life has anything to do with his skills as the world's top golfer and (2) I wasn't planning on buying any products he was endorsing (Buick, some really over-priced line of watches whose Teutonic name I will not even try to spell), regardless of whether he was the celebrity endorser. What? Suddenly Buick's are lousy cars because Tiger likes all-blonde sex orgies? Hey, Buicks would be lousy even if Tiger were chaste.
Of course, I don't feel "betrayed" by Obama either. Obama has revealed himself to be precisely who I expected him to be. No betrayal there.