Carmen Kontur-Gronquist, mayor of a small town in Oregon is taking some heat for some photos posted on her private My-Space page. I wonder is she is a Democrat since they were posted online before she was elected more than three years ago. Only after her election did it become an issue. Obviously, a very slow news day in Arlington, Oregon.
To her credit, she makes no apologies. "I'm not going to change who I am," she said. "There's a lot of officials that have a personal life, and you have people in this community who have nothing better to do than scrape up stuff like this." She certainly is not guilty of being a chameleon like many other politicians who pander to the crowd du jour.
Personally, I don't think that her photos were that racy. She could have just as easily been photographed on vacation at the beach or on the job as a lifeguard in a swimsuit that was more revealing. The photos that grace the covers of the supermarket tabloids and the billboards along the highway often portray much more suggestive themes than her photos. I can only imagine if I were a politician and some of the photos from my youth came to light. Fortunately, I went to Spring Break long before digital photography and the Internet.
I think that more feminists should come to her defense and support her freedom to express control over her body. However, I doubt that the more vocal feminists want to support someone who actually can pull off being photographed in their underwear.
Final thought: Given identical political ideology, who would you rather see in office? Ms. Kontur-Gronquist or Ms. Rodham-Clinton?
1 comment:
Well…on the one hand…yes, kudos for sticking to her guns. And I think you are also right about modern feminists. No way are they going to support a woman that looks like that.
But while I applaud her gumption, at the same time I do think she is/was in the wrong. Says the mayor, "There's a lot of officials that have a personal life, and you have people in this community who have nothing better to do than scrape up stuff like this." The key word in that statement is "personal". She was on "public" property. Yes, you could see far racier things elsewhere (who knows were the photo shot went from there though?). But regardless of that this is still underwear. I, like most other adults, am not "offended" by this in the sense that I'm upset. However, I sure wouldn't want to try and explain this to my 3 year old who adores fire trucks and is excited by every fire station we pass.
You mention you're glad pictures from your youth haven't surfaced or do not exist at all. Fair enough. Me too. However, that indicates you know that behavior is not something to be flaunted publicly or perhaps something you wished you hadn't done in public or private.
Consenting adults in private is one thing. Prancing around the local public fire hall is another. I can understand she's proud of her body. She obviously has worked at it. But she should not have used a public facility for her fashion show. Then she compounds the error in judgment by posting the pictures publicly. Although, I do think I read that her Myspace page is now closed off to people other than her online "friends".
So I'll give her credit for saying what she thinks rather than what some people want to hear. But I disagree with her nonetheless. This isn't "Slouching Toward Gomorrah" but I do think WHERE she did what she did was wrong and I think the fact that SHE published it was and error in judgment and wrong as well.
Post a Comment