Be a sexual being, by all legal means, but if you are a public figure, then think twice about that. Public figures that are married should practice monogamy with their spouse. Others still ought to be responsible. (But what is responsible in an era where sex is readily accessible via the Internet and Sexting?) Public figures encompass everyone from politicians, to actors, to artists, to athletes, to other high-level officials. Seemingly, the greatest tool to find chinks in the amour of a public figure is by casting aspersions on their sexual exploits, not the substantive effects of their on the job decision making. Even in this evolving age of sexual acceptance, sexually deviant acts still damage the character of a person like no other. It’s just amazing how the private life of a person behind closed doors can affect how they are received publicly.
As awesome as social media and phones with camera functions are, they are dangerous to the character of a person given how the aforementioned items can lead to the downfall of a public figure for their “sexual indiscretions.” There is no quicker way to defame a person than suggesting they are less than wholesome in the sex department. Do you ever wonder what is going through the mind of the journalist, who is a sexual being, when reporting on the facts that knowingly could lead to the demise of that public figure? Is it clear public figures must have screwed over the wrong person when they get caught with their hands in the cookie jar? Certainly, some might get exposed collaterally under the misguided effort of another to make a fiscal gain.
What is a public figure to do? They should keep their noses clean. They have lots of power, prestige, and as a result people want to get next to them. They also have a great responsibility. But should they just stop doing what everyone else realizes is a perk of the job; or, are the masses going to come to the conclusion that what a person does in the privacy of their bedroom, so long as it is “legal” (thinking mainly of age requirement and consent issues), has no bearing on the quality of work that person is capable of professionally? Some may only do their job well because of the sexual acts they are able to engage in. Others could potentially be distracted by such engagements. It depends on the person. Thusly, it could be reasonable to question all of their choices.
The real issue is how this is affecting the moral fiber of a nation. The other issue is whether the nation even cares about the private sexual acts of public figures anymore. When kids hear about Bill Clinton, Tiger Woods, Anthony Weiner, Bret Favre, Larry Craig, or sex parties other such people host; do those kids grow up thinking that they still want to be the President, a great athlete, or successful politician so they can behave similarly? Maybe the youngsters want to restore the prestige of the positions. Maybe HBO’s airing of Real Sex and other late-night cable programs over expose the youngsters and their desire to engage in sex outweighs their desire to have a clean sexual reputation.
It could be that the perspective on acceptable behavior during marriage is tainted, while redefining the purpose of marriage. No matter how deplorable certain sexual acts may seem, less and less of the population is outraged by who and what they are doing. It’s more disappointing while being incredibly intriguing. It may be that the country has bigger problems to confront. Then, the media allows people to hear more details than ever. In fairness to the media, the media is only meeting the demands. Entertainment at it’s finest? Too bad it comes during the most shameful moment of another. Or is it a shameful moment?
Sexual exploits of a public figure should not bring down such a figure given it is a legal act. There are two reasons for that claim. First, the public figures should be smart enough not to get caught while abiding by the law. Second, if such a figure is caught, the amount of desensitization that has occurred given the history and exposure, the person should carry on as business as usual, unless of course that person was on the bubble.
Different parts of America view it differently, but having a vivid libido is not a regional phenomenon. Therefore shouldn’t enough people understand? Additionally, deplorable sexual acts of a public figure can only be classified as such because people have a level of expectation for those public figures. After the frequent disappointment by public figures, shouldn’t people get the picture that public figures aren’t what most think they are? Thusly, lowering expectations.
With this ever-changing culture, are people still keeping those old conventions of wisdom? At any rate, public figures ought to be smart about their decisions, if only to protect their career as opposed to a significant other. Those figures should also consider having more discipline because actions do have consequences. Obviously, sexual acts can be pleasurable, but they can be extremely harmful to those involved as well as uninvolved parties. Given that so many do not believe that public figures are not better than they are, why aren’t those same people more understanding of their blunders?
Being left with more questions than answers, harkening back to older principles is a consideration. 1) Do not sleep around because of fear of contracting an illness; 2) Do not sleep around for the possibility of creating a life with another person that will bind all parties as long as they live—even if that was not desired; 3) Understand that being with another person is about more than pleasure, but a romantic connection, which should be treated with respect.
Even though these prior statements may be parental guidelines for kids, they may be the best for everyone. But, it really seems that society is too far-gone and old ideals of morality are too.