09 February 2011

Topless and clueless

On the one hand, shouldn’t a man be allowed to send a shirtless photo of himself to a woman? After all, that very photo is now on the front page of the on-line New York Times. Life doesn’t get more public than that, does it? Though I suspect this exposure appears not in the context for which it was intended and becomes available for a larger and unintended (even unsuspecting) audience. The currents have certainly turned awry.
I like to think that once I almost had a body that looked like that of Representative Chris Lee. I suppose I have a few fantasies yet that someoneanyonewould want to have in their possession a photo of me without my shirt. Not going to happen. And, given the contemporary dress codes (look at any tabloid advertising female appareland especially for the under twenty-set), what exactly is inappropriate of the image of a man sans chemise. Of course, Mr. Lee was married and though he was trying to be honest about his body he was dissembling about his social state. And what was she expecting?
On the other hand, how stupid do you have to be to send anything anywhere that has the remotest chance of being misconstrued in the slightest way? We have long given up our rights to most privacy, and so we should expect that whatever we send out anywhere could end up everywhere. What was he thinking? Of course, he wasn’t, was he. And he, and those like him, are the government!!
On the third hand, what is it these days with men in public life (and who isn’t in public life?) who have trouble keeping their zippers zipped? Have they no sense of propriety? Restraint? Dignity? Somehow I feel confident that Chris Lee and other unzipped officials have taken their shot at the teachers who must work in the schools with children with Chris Lee in the headlines without his shirt on seeking a woman who isn’t his wife!
If it weren’t so absurd, this would be funny!


Post a Comment

<< Home