As if it isn’t bad enough for Eliot Spitzer’s wife that the whole country knows her husband cheated on her with high-paid prostitutes, the L.A. Times piles on with a front-page article about whether she was right to appear on stage with him when he made his speech.
First of all, I think it’s incredibly presumptuous for people to declare how they would act in that situation. Hardly anyone in the country, except Hillary Clinton, has been in such a public and awful situation. She has been married to the man for twenty-one years. What right does anyone have to judge her? How can anyone know they would behave? They have three teenaged daughters. Maybe she doesn’t want them to have to deal with the whole country talking about why she wasn’t at the podium with their dad, or why she didn’t hold their dad’s hand.
The kicker comes at the end of the article, which quotes a feminist claiming that Spitzer’s wife is really upset because she gave up her career:
Feminist writer Linda R. Hirshman has written harshly about “opt-out women,” her term for well-educated, successful professionals who quit jobs to advance their husbands’ careers. To her, that’s a risky and degrading choice.
“These women always look like deer caught in the headlights,” Hirshman said. “They were dependent on men to be their booster rockets, and now you see them starting on a downward trajectory.”
Just look, she said, at the pain on Silda Wall Spitzer’s face.
Yeah, just look at the pain on her face. The whole country knows her husband of 21 years cheated on her. Maybe the pain on her face has something to do with that, feminist writer Linda R. Hirshman, and not about your pet theories.
Boy, the L.A. Times must really be desperate to sell papers. They should be ashamed of themselves for publishing this story, on the front page no less.
Screengrab under the fold.
[UPDATE: Just so there's no confusion: the woman pictured in this screenshot is not Ms. Spitzer.]