Sharing is not always a good thing

By Legal Eagle

[Warning, if you are eating, do not continue reading this post.]

I just had occasion to shiver all over with horror. You know, when something is so awful that you feel like your skin is crawling off your back? What could be so awful…?

The cause of my horror was the article where Tony Abbott was moaning about the lack of sex on campaign (which I came across via this post at Larvatus Prodeo). I was so embarrassed for him that I couldn’t read the article to its conclusion. And I didn’t dare follow the second link to the story of “sex-starved Tony Abbott” in The Examiner. Oh dear, there go those shivers of horror again.

I know Abbott’s being painted by some as a Catholic wowzer, and I’m sure that this is an attempt to shrug that off. But really, this is just too much information. I don’t want to know about the sex lives of any politicians, of whatever political stripe, gender or inclination.

I’m not a prude. I don’t mind what people get up to in their private life as long as it’s consensual. But the key is that word private, and as far as I’m concerned, private life should stay private. It’s their business, not mine. To my mind, a politician’s sex life is only relevant if it highlights some hypocrisy in that politician’s policy – e.g. a politician running on an anti-gay platform is discovered to have had secret gay lovers.

I don’t know why people feel the need to “let it all hang out” in public. Perhaps I’m just odd, but I don’t have any interest in such details. In fact, I feel acutely embarrassed for people who expose themselves like that. I just do not want to know.

(*pulls metaphorical blanket over head*)


  1. Posted February 19, 2010 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

    If he wants more sex he should wear more clothes.

    Also those bicycle seats aren’t said to be very good for the old 2 veg…

  2. Miss Candy
    Posted February 19, 2010 at 6:18 pm | Permalink

    Haven’t we heard enough about sex and the mad monk? Didn’t he get someone else into trouble already from putting it where the sun don’t shine?

    And wasn’t he carrying on recently about exercising self-control? WHAT PART OF HYPOCRITE DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND TONY?

    (shaking head, nattering unintelligible
    comments to self and occasionally twitching…)

  3. Posted February 19, 2010 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

    Is he saying he’s wanting campaign tail on the campaign trail?

    Female groupies in the Young Libs will be all a-flutter.

  4. Posted February 20, 2010 at 8:44 am | Permalink

    It’s a weird irony that Cap’n Cath’lic would be probably the first Prime Ministerial contender in this nation’s history to publically complain of a lack of sex. Usually discussions of politicans’ sex lives is a bummer here (the Libs have found this out and often). Abbott has to paint himself as a regular guy and differentiate himself from Kevvie who is the Kalvinist Kommisar.
    Kevvie’s been trying to do two things politically since he got in – reacquire blue-collar loyalty and establish the ALP as the party of Family (a la David McKnight). So far he’s done that.

  5. Peter Patton
    Posted February 20, 2010 at 3:41 pm | Permalink

    God Australians have very short memories. Does anybody remember the er, antics of the best Prime Minister in our history, one Robert. J. Hawke? It was Hawkie who started the whole campaigning in your speedoes thang.

  6. Posted February 21, 2010 at 10:10 am | Permalink

    I read the story yesterday and thought it very peculiar, but maybe it was a joke that didn’t translate to the newspaper (where they take everything utterly seriously. Never joke with a journo).

  7. Posted February 21, 2010 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

    Peter, that’s different. Bob’s sexy. 🙂

  8. Alicia
    Posted February 21, 2010 at 3:57 pm | Permalink

    Sexiness is in the eye of the beholder. I love the way ostensibly hetero men constantly pronounce on the sexual attractiveness {presumably to women] or no of heterosexual men.

  9. Posted February 21, 2010 at 7:27 pm | Permalink

    At least both leaders in the Howard v Beazley era didn’t indulge in this sort of talk.

    Mind you there are a couple of famous cartoons from an earlier age:
    * Did The Earth Move For You Too Dear when Margaret and Gough were in China during an Earthquake. Back then, that cartoon had many people with eyes closed, fingers in ears, saying “la la la take me to my happy place la la la”.

    * Birds and Bees on how Gough and Mal ran away from a report about sex

  10. Posted February 21, 2010 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

    Just realized – the Mad Monk’s foray into the domain implies he thinks the private sex lives of politicians can be the legitimate subject of news reporting, and as Liberal leader that carries some weight…. Hmmm… I guess if any salacious gossip stories come out about a Liberal politician, he cannot complain about irresponsible journalists.

    He’s pulled one worm out of the can.

  11. HeathG
    Posted February 22, 2010 at 6:08 am | Permalink

    I think this is a pretty dumb move by Abbott. As Dave has hinted out, Abbot has taken another step towards making the sex lives of politicians fair game for the media.

    This is a “bad thing ™” all round. Bad for politicians (I’m with LE, I only want to know about pollies’ sex lives if it involves hypocrisy) and bad for the media and freedom of speech because it’s bound to lead to pollies taking more interest in introducing supposed “privacy” laws in order to be able to cover up and hide their activities.

  12. TheodoraBrown
    Posted February 22, 2010 at 8:30 am | Permalink

    [email protected] “At least both leaders in the Howard v Beazley era didn’t indulge in this sort of talk.”


  13. Posted February 25, 2010 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

    I think the “did the earth move” is just a total joke: it’s not really about G & M, though you have to remember that M had become a public figure as a result of her column in the Woman’s Day or whichever magazine and at the time that was a bit novel.

    There was a very big and tragic earthquake (look it up), and, it’s true, G and M are both rather large people. In fact, the bad taste aspect of the joke is not G and M and the possibility of sex between them (which is really just a kind of pun in the context) but really that so many people were killed that it probably wasn’t much of a joking matter. At the time, though, the Chinese govt wasn’t in a hurry to publicize the true casualty figures and China was very much a land of mystery to the outside world still.

  14. Peter Patton
    Posted February 25, 2010 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    Good god, give me MORE pollies talking about nookie, if the alternative is the orgy of nauseating androphobic ‘No Sex Please, We’re Readers of The Age‘ we have witnessed in response to Abbott’s perfectly reasonable responses to the same Age readers’ merciless campaigns against ‘Aboott the Wowser,’ ‘Abbott the Catholic’ and so on. The irony is that Abbott’s truthful media turns have held a mirror up to the REAL prudes.

    For those concerned the next step might be a UK-style Tory Caught Pants Down With Naughty Nanny media, once again I defer to the master Bob Hawke – whom I am pretty sure Abbott is modeling his media strategy on.

    Hawke’s example showed that in Australia you can drink as much as you want, root as many as you want (even if you are married), have as dysfunctional a family as you probably wished you did not, so long as you fess it all up front, right from the get-go. Once we Aussies have got all the relevant info. then we will gladly re-elect you until the gift-bearing cows come home! 🙂

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *