The one where I take Christine O’Donnell’s side

Christine O’Donnell opposes comprehensive, evidence-based sex ed. She’s unclear about whether separation of church and state is a cornerstone of the first amendment. She believes in cross-bred mice with human brains. She believes that victims of rape or incest should be forced to carry their attacker’s child to term. She’s also, unfortunately, not a witch. There are SO many reasons to dislike Christine O’Donnell and many more reasons not to vote her into the United States Senate. I find all of Sarah Palin’s “Mama Grizzly” endorsements to be ridiculous but Christine O’Donnell is a shining star in that pack.

I almost never believe social conservatives when they start up on that holier-than-thou family values talk. Yes, there are some who really live a Christian lifestyle 24/7 but most are like the rest of us humans; we all make mistakes. Can’t you recall numerous conservative politicians, preachers and leaders who have been caught up in scandal after scandal? I never thought O’Donnell was an angel and to be honest, it would feel good to be able to say “I told you so” when she was finally outed as a liar.

That’s why I was very curious when I heard that Gawker had a story on an O’Donnell one night stand. When I read the piece, however, I did not feel good. I’m upset, really, because instead of focusing on O’Donnell’s socially conservative hypocrisy (lust in your mind is against God; she’s a born-again virgin; condoms are anti-human; etc) as a legitimate political critique, the piece just calls her out for not shaving her pubic hair and getting wasted on Halloween.

An anonymous guy from Philly writes about an encounter with O’Donnell three years ago. Under one of the top 5 misleading headlines of 2010 – I Had a One-Night Stand with Christine O’Donnell – this dude tells the worst story about how O’Donnell, his landlord’s niece, changed into a ladybug costume in his bathroom on Halloween. After drinking down on South Street, she allegedly asked to go home with him where things got hot and they started making out. The story only goes downhill as anonymous dude proceeds to talk about how much older than him she is (“cougar”), how she was just a “decent” kisser, and oh yeah, she doesn’t wax her pubic hair.

Let’s marinate on that last bit for a minute. The state of O’Donnell’s pubic hair is very important to this guy because he can tell a lot from it. He can tell that “she wasn’t very experienced sexually,” that she’s not very trendy, and that he did NOT want to have sex with this naked, tipsy, attractive (come on, she’s no beast) woman in his bed if she went natural down there.

In the end, mystery dude explains how O’Donnell was so hung over the next morning and didn’t want to leave so he had to put her out. He never had sex with her and he never talked to her again. He did, however, crop himself out of all the photos he sent to Gawker and hid his identity. There was no real point to the story as far as I can tell, besides slut-shaming Christine O’Donnell and getting mad hits for Gawker (here’s another one).

This is Gawker’s bread and butter so I can’t really be surprised or shocked. According to Forbes’ Jeff Bercovici, “Gawker editor Remy Stern told me the site, which makes no secret of its willingness to pay for juicy exclusives, ponied up ‘a pretty modest amount’ for the story.” Many commenters on Gawker and other sites question the veracity of anonymous dude’s story. Since we don’t get his name or picture, couldn’t he have made the whole thing up? Come on, there are tons of people who would love to ride the O’Donnell train for the rest of its 15 minutes. The Atlantic’s Nicole Allan wondered the same,

In choosing to publish this story, along with a series of photos of O’Donnell dressed in a racy ladybug costume for the Halloween she allegedly spent with the writer, Gawker walked a tricky editorial line. On the one hand, O’Donnell is a public figure who has opened herself up to media scrutiny and who has suggested that her strictly conservative social views would influence her governance. Delves into how she practices these values in her personal can be viewed as a service to voters.

Editorial questions arise, however, over whether the man who writes about her lying naked in his bed should be able to claim anonymity. Gawker gives readers no reason to believe that the writer didn’t make the entire thing up.

Gawker editor Remy Stern spoke up when asked about the truth behind anonymous dude’s story and said,

We verified any of the facts he provided us with to feel really comfortable that this was all legit. We confirmed the addresses he gave us and matched the photos to make sure the guy with O’Donnell was the same guy we were talking to. We also confirmed the photos were taken on Halloween 2007 as he told us they were. We also confirmed that he lived with his roommate [who, as the story relates, ended up dating O'Donnell after the incident in question]. (Forbes)

I admitted in the beginning that I was sort of hoping for O’Donnell to get called out but I take that back; at least not called out in this fashion. She’s a hypocrite, that’s for sure, and people can call her out on the carpet on that point ALL DAY. If your platform is based on being socially conservative and you consistently make statements judging people’s sexuality, limiting access to sex education and condemning condoms of all things, then yes, you should actually try to live your life in accordance with what you’ve said. But to have some dude you got drunk with and spooned on one Halloween talk about your pubic hair as though that somehow disqualifies you for office or basic respect is overkill.

I’m not a Delaware resident and even if I were I wouldn’t be voting for O’Donnell. In fact, I am actively working to get her opponent, Chris Coons, elected to the Senate. I am, however, a woman and someone who doesn’t want to participate in this mudfuckstorm that modern politics has become. Shout out to Krystal Ball, too. Even though she doesn’t have the political IQ of an infant like O’Donnell, she is also dealing with a sexually embarrassing blast from the past as midterms approach. I don’t’ like Christine O’Donnell but I dislike dirty politics more.

I’m not the only one who can see the fuckery within:

  • Matador1015

    I can see your point; however, the only reason this is news is because O’Donnell set herself up. If she had framed the debate going in as “I was out there, but I’m only human and I’m working on getting better” that would have defused any likely bomb throwers like Anonymous.

    Saying crazy stuff like banning masturbation puts her in a bad light, since that doesn’t give the public what her position is on the economy or Afghanistan. All we have to go on is that she’s some sort of prude, which opens her up to ridicule.

  • Tattoo Supply LA

    What a story, but I think it shows that we are all sexual beings and that alcohol can impair everyone’s judgment.

  • Hannah

    I consistently vote Democrat, and I’m all for comprehensive sex education, but I don’t understand why you call someone hypocritical, simply because they are Christian and yet not perfect. Why do people like you think that in order to be Christian you no longer make mistakes? Isn’t the entire premise of the Christian faith based on the idea that we’re ALL sinners?