Tiger Woods car/life crash

i am not tiger woods

Fine, he was a sports prodigy but he wasn't, like, an ASTOR.

but in terms of how he was raised to view his own inevitable place, earl's parentoring etc

i think that more than wealth, is more likely to be a factor in how he's been treating the disposables that inhabit his world

so is okay if I hate him or not?

I mean, I've got things to do, I need a decision here.

it is okay

it is laudable for short term popularity, but will not make you a happier person.

or richer

unless you've previously shagged him and kept some text messages

or your stained blue dress

See, maybe it's good for dudes to hold off getting married 'til their mid-30s.

I really don't think age enters into it and that this would've gone down any differently if he was older.

if he was older it might have been a "concerned pimp cuts off supply of girls to tiger woods" story.

He gets his ya-yas out, settles down, plays golf...whole different story.

he's obviously got a lifetime supply of ya-yas that he's never going to be rid of, no matter at what age he gets married and pretends to take marriage seriously for the public.

i mean he and his wife have had 2 kids in the past couple years -- if that's not enough to get you to settle down and not be a shitty husband then you're always going to be a shitty husband at any age

doesn't seem to mind being hit by a golf club and mobile phone thrown at face - sounds like a pretty good husband to me

Dan Savage this week:

I suppose I'm obligated to say a few words about Tiger Woods. First, let's pretend that Elin Nordegren cheated on Tiger and that Tiger went after Elin with a golf club. Would Elin be viewed as the sole transgressor in the marriage then? Probably not. And second, daily papers and cable news outfits reacted to Tiger's "transgressions" by changing the names in the same "Why do powerful men cheat?" stories they've been pimping since Bill Clinton blew a load on a White House intern. For the millionth time: Men cheat for the same reasons women cheat, i.e., because they're bored or horny or unfulfilled or desperate to see someone else naked for a change. People cheat because monogamy isn't natural and we are wired to cheat. That doesn't make cheating right, of course; people should honor their commitments, and blah-de-nine-iron-blah. But we shouldn't encourage people to make commitments we all know they're unlikely to keep. The end.

i think this is just more arguments for the introduction of video technology in marriage?

I think it's pretty much established that he crossed the line.

i always thought dan savage underestimated the ability of people who were in awesome relationships to *not* give in to the urge to cheat.

yeah i get what savage is saying except i don't really know what this means:

But we shouldn't encourage people to make commitments we all know they're unlikely to keep.

blah-de-nine-iron-blah

He means "People cheat because monogamy isn't natural and we are wired to cheat." i.e., serial monogomy's fine if you want to make that commitment, but committing to it for a lifetime doesn't make much sense.

He seems to have gradually become more anti-marriage in the last year or two, or at least since I started listening to his podcast.

"Young men want to be faithful, and are not; old men want to be faithless, and cannot." - Oscar Wilde

yeah wmc it's his use of "we" as if we all got together and publicly pressured tiger woods to get married.

Yeah, he's jamming a macro-view and a micro-view together here and it's not fitting together perfectly.

Oscar Wilde OTM. Dan Savage misses the point of at least 3/4 of everything he says about monogamy, and he actually kinda pisses me off pretty much weekly. I've been listening to him for years, and the progression has been VERY slow, but I kinda think he might be a sick old pervert.

Maybe, but as a sick old pervert myself, I like having somebody speaking up for my tribe.

that whole "we're not wired for monogamy" argument kinda depresses me, because we're probably also not wired for pacifism or not looking out for anyone other than ourselves, but somehow a lot--if not most--of us manage to do it because people have managed to evolve to get beyond giving in helplessly to our wiring.

omar otm.

and from my cursory reading of neurology, psychology, and evolutionary theory, we're about as wired for altruism and loyalty as we are for selfishness and cheating. what's more, there's plenty of evidence that we can 'rewire' ourselves in one direction or another.

wrt savage, whenever someone trots out the word "natural," my inner red light starts flashing danger

i like the blah de nine iron blah tho- heft

I agreed with Dan up to this point:

But we shouldn't encourage people to make commitments we all know they're unlikely to keep.

Noone forced Tiger Woods (with an iron) to marry and make a commitment. You (or rather Tiger) knew what he was getting himself into: a relationship where you commit to monogamy (or supposedly so, I realize there are lots of relationships/marriages where fucking around is allowed or the partner looks the other way).

I think his point is that, to a certain extent, anything other than married monogamy is frowned upon, especially by the kinds of people who form the core of the advertising markets from which Tiger has made much of his money.

so now tiger is being oppressed by the puritanical morality of accenture's marketing department?

No, but he was essentially trying to have it both ways; be an icon and also be an adulterous lothario in a culture which frowns on that and I think Savage is (rather naively) suggesting that we shouldn't insist on such standards. Accenture is just trying to exploit his celebrity but once that turns to notoriety, it doesn't serve them.

The more I think about it, the more I'm struck by how weird it is that he's such a relentless collector of blondes. It feels like revenge for high school or something.

Who gives a fuck. I wanted to hate on his wife but on close inspection she is cuter than those other chicks. Big yawn.

so much cuter

why are all the other ones so ugly?

it's like if ur gonna ruin ur life...

def. not a jennifer aniston for angelina jolie trade up amirite guys? anyone?

As bad as he is for playing out, I've gotta wonder about skanky women who a) get involved with a married man and b) expect him to 'take care of them' when by being with them he's already proved he's not worth trusting to take care of a damned thing.

beyond some very basic biological functions (eating, sexing, shitting, etc.) anyone who uses the "we're not wired for _____" argument is totally suspect to me. oldest rhetorical trick in the book, and a really annoying one.

The 'other' women are really....rough.

The more I think about it, the more I'm struck by how weird it is that he's such a relentless collector of blondes. It feels like revenge for high school or something.

― l'homme moderne: il forniquait et lisait des journaux (Michael White), Monday, December 14, 2009 5:38 PM (15 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

guys generally favor one hair color or another, seems weird to me to assume that kind of tendency has to stem from some trauma or formative social experience

i know i'm late but

see i don't really buy this line on this particular story. i mean, ok, yes, right, we all know that. but tiger's problem is not "just being human" or however the media critics would put it. what i think is under-discussed or appreciated is how much this whole thing reveals about the kind of privilege and entitlement conferred by wealth and status. the deadspin article started to get into that, talking about how this was a not-uncommon sort of thing for millionaire athletes. but it's not just athletes; millionaires of all kinds live in this realm of private clubs and resorts, personal services that can requisition whatever you want, and it all leads to a whole lot of what most people would consider pretty gross behavior. that's the aspect that i think is most interesting, and just making this a story of one man's sins sort of obscures that.

and ok, there's nothing new or shocking about rich people being pigs. but we don't really hear enough about it, i don't think. every individual case of excess is treated as an individual case of excess, not as a symptom of some fundamental rot in a society that has spent the last several decades transferring more and more of our wealth to a small number of people at the top. and that's why i think the "oh we build them up to tear them down" narrative is deeply suspect, because it makes us somehow responsible for their abuses of power and wealth. it's this whole icarus bullshit, "oh we expect them to fly too close to the sun," blah blah blah. i'm sure tiger woods has a lot of pressures and a lot of problems, but so do lots of people in america, and they don't have millions of dollars to go drown their sorrows in porn stars and ambien. (still really don't get the ambien thing.)

― hellzapoppa (tipsy mothra), Sunday, December 13, 2009 9:25 PM

this is really really OTM and i've actually been amazed that of all places Deadspin is the only venue i've seen approaching this seriously.

I mean, it's not like he took a swing at any of these women with a golf club...