Hey, what’s a little sex work among Democrat friends? And “mean old Republicans pounce!”
A few days ago I wrote a post saying that I didn’t care much about certain allegations concerning Obama’s sex life – allegations I didn’t believe anyway, but which involved consenting adults. One reason was because there were plenty of other reasons I was never voting for him. But I didn’t realize I needed to add a few caveats to that “consenting adults” rule, such as: unless the sex acts are what is now euphemistically known as “sex work” and/or broadcasting your sex acts online.
But now I realize that the political arena doesn’t seem to preclude such acts, so it’s necessary to mention them as being of concern. To wit:
Democratic Virginia House of Delegates candidate Susanna Gibson blasted her opponents for engaging in “the worst gutter politics” after videos surfaced of her and her husband performing sex acts online for cash.
Gibson, a 40-year-old mother of two who is running in a hotly contested race to represent the state’s District 57, hosted several live webcam shows on the adult streaming website Chaturbate, the Washington Post revealed in a bombshell report Monday.
The nurse practitioner has since railed against her political opponents, accusing them of engaging in dirty politics.
You almost have to admire Gibson for her bold rhetorical jiu-jitsu. You see, if a person “performs sex acts online for cash” (and by the way, these videos were recent, not something she did in her wild youth), that’s not the “dirty” thing. Opponents pointing out that this occurred is the dirty thing. Got it.
More Orwellian garbage from Gibson:
“My political opponents and their Republican allies have proven they’re willing to commit a sex crime to attack me and my family because there’s no line they won’t cross to silence women when they speak up,” Gibson told CNN in a statement on Tuesday.
And from her attorney:
Gibson’s attorney, Daniel P. Watkins, said the circulating videos are a violation of Virginia’s revenge porn law, which makes it a crime to “maliciously” disseminate or sell nude or sexual images of another person with the intent to “coerce, harass, or intimidate.”
That law was meant to involve private photos or videos, not sex work online for pay and open to the public, that has already been “disseminated” (the puns write themselves) by the participants themselves.
More details here – perhaps more details than you’d like, although perhaps not.
Speaking of Obama, I will also note that one of his early acts as a politician was to get henchmen to out Blair Hull and Jack Ryan in terms of allegations during divorce proceedings; here’s a memory refresher.
It seems as if the gibberish coming out of her mouth is meant to confuse low information voters as to what actually happened.
So, it’s “committing a sex crime” to point out she engaged in “sex work”?
As for her accusations of Republicans “silencing women when they speak up”, I suppose her running for office is the “speaking up” and the “silencing” is exposing her shady hobbies.
Are you sure that Chaturbate isn’t Jeffrey Toobin’s new talk show?
they’re willing to commit a sex crime
If an actual crime was committed she should bring it to the attention of the authorities. But obviously there’s been no crime. It’s just silly, misleading rhetoric.
This defense is similar to all the crazy teachers that freak out when Libs Of TikTok posts the content that they themselves posted online.
Basically they are saying at the same time that everything they posted is just fine but don’t publicize my totally fine posts.
If she was consistent she would be thrilled about this because it will raise lots of money for her ‘performances’.
When watching old reruns of “Star Trek Voyager”, I have often thought how ironic that ” Seven of Nine ” had an indirect connection to Obama’s election to the Senate.
jon baker,
Yep an argument can be made that Jeri Ryan has led us where we are today. No Senator Obama no President Obama in 2008 no Trump in 2016 no Biden in 2020.
Her attorney sucks more than she does, but not as good. His entire statement is so easy to dismiss. As noted, Chatterbate disseminated the nude or sexual images, and his client sold those images to them to distribute. The only coercing is his client asking for tokens to dissemenate her husband online (oh yes the puns come as easy as he does).
As for Gibson, if she thought she was doing nothing shameful, then her response suggests otherwise. She should have embraced her lifestyle and moonlighting career and rode it to a happier ending.
She seems to be raising more money since this story broke, so prostitution pays in several venues.
I knew people, religious conservatives, who couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Trump because of his private behavior, including the “locker room talk” on the Access Hollywood tape. This woman is a porn star for pay, and that is okay with Virginia Democrats.
She makes Katie Hill (remember her?) look positively old fashioned.
I am reminded of a discussion on Althouse about the Dylan, the Bud Light “transvestite.” (doing it for rhyming, not for precise wording.) “I would talk to you differently knowing no right-wing conservatives could run with what I say. “. There was a surprising degree of consensus among the commenters about Dylan.
From commenter Inga:
Don’t expect universal approval of what you post online, especially if it is, shall we say, somewhat controversial. Politicians, in order to be elected, tend to avoid saying things that would upset a lot of people. Apparently she hasn’t learned that.
Recall what another Dylan, Bob Dylan, said about politicians (from memory, so it could be more accurate)
A politician needs to be likeable to a lot of people. Many people do not like the act of earning money by sex. Posting that online is, shall we say, not politic. So that cuts out a lot of potential votes for our randy politician.
Merriam-Webster; “Whore: a person who engages in sexual intercourse for pay”
Physical intimacy reduced to soulless barter.
‘Progressives’ now celebrating objectification?
Gringo:
My goodness, Inga said that?
The Althouse Inga I recall was a whack-a-mole troll, whose comments were non-stop idiotic Dem talking points.
But I didn’t realize I needed to add a few caveats to that “consenting adults” rule, such as: unless the sex acts are what is now euphemistically known as “sex work” and/or broadcasting your sex acts online.
neo:
We admire your efforts to keep up in the face of constantly escalating madness. 🙂
huxley
Gringo: My goodness, Inga said that?
While Inga is as you describe her, she did say that. One is accustomed to a lot of disagreeing opinions in Althouse threads, but in this thread, there was a surprisingly large amount of consensus. Surprisingly.
I am sure that people here can come up with suggestions for some snappy campaign slogans which would fit right in with her “activities.”
what was that churchill line, about lady astor, she was usually the target of his barbs,
She was just producing content for your middle school civics classes.
It’s easy to make fun, but as a thought experiment, why not try on a Woke brain? See how it feels. In the Woke mind there is no opposition, there is no you. Their present is our future, at least it looks that way.
Dylan Mulvaney, the Bud Light transvestite, may have lost the battle, but he surely won the war, and Susanna Gibson will probably be elected. Will she stream porn from her office in the Virginia House of Delegates? Transvestites and whores are not just people we should accept without question, they’re celebrities to emulate. Get your mind right.
Glenn Reynolds has grown fond of talking about American Weimar. We’re there, why not bend over and enjoy the ride? Is this defeatist? What are we called if we deny defeat? Denialist? Crank? Cranky? The culture is broken. Don’t tell me it’s not. Now lets be happy. It won’t be long before we have to admit that all the hillbilly-heroin addicts had it right.
There, I feel better.
As for her accusations of Republicans “silencing women when they speak up”, I suppose her running for office is the “speaking up” and the “silencing” is exposing her shady hobbies.
==
Feminist discourse is a series of rhetorical games.
Leaked it herself, to generate more Chaturbate fans.
Wonder if she paid taxes on that additional income?
Her kids may get a verbal beating over it in school someone pointed out.
And my day doubt a kid would see it, today wouldn’t put it past many have at least part or a still picture.
I’m wondering if the media is just trying to fool old people at this point. There is no one under 40 who doesn’t know what Chaturbate is or how your “videos”* get on there, who doesn’t know what “revenge porn” is and how this is not that.
And as for low information voters, not old: believe me when I say that they are NOT low information when it comes to Internet porn!
I mean “sex tape”? That phrase only means anything to someone who had a VHS player. It’s been nearly 20 years since the last movie was released to VHS.
*It’s a streaming site, so they don’t have “videos” there. Someone, possibly a paying customer, captured streams in progress and posted them online, almost certainly without permission, but probably for his own perverted reasons and not because she was thinking of running for office. The “crime” in this case is not paying her.
if there is audio, maybe they could record some of her choice expressions, while she speaks, shes a degenerate, maybe she’s not as successful as sandra flouffe,
remember that one hit wonder,
To quote this fantastic Democrat candidate’s pitch in her sex videos from the article linked below,
“Y’all can watch me pee if you tip me and some tokens.”*
All this, she says, is to raise money for a “good cause,” which I presume is her election campaign.
What a sterling character, so thoughtful too.
*See https://www.dailywire.com/news/virginia-democrat-who-raised-money-by-selling-sex-acts-could-be-charged-with-prostitution-lawyers-say
What I find amusing is the same people discounting Gibson’s public acts are excoriating Boebert over an infrared video. Our public commentators are pathetic and extremely biased.
. . . . There I was, last night, sitting in the gates of the city, and these two angels appeared. . . .
neo – What is your rationale for ignoring a politician’s sexual indiscretions, but drawing the line at public exhibitionism?
Gibson’s situation is clearly worse than Trump’s daliances or (more recent example) the allegations against Corey Lewandowski and Kristy Noem (or at least feels that way given the current Overton window). But I’m not conviced that we’re talking about a difference in kind rather than simply degree. Gibson brought shame and embarassment ot her family, absolutely, but so did Trump and so (potentially) did Lewandowski and Noem. Lewandowski has four children with his wife, who was a 9/11 widow. Noem is married and has three children. I think you can argue that sexual exhibitionism degrades society, but so do the broken families and single parent households that result from other types of consensual behavior between adults, and those are arguably a much bigger problem for society (at least right now).
I’m not challenging your position in the sense of arguing that you are wrong. I really don’t want to have to care about the personal lives of politicians. I also think there is a strong anti-democratic odor when a public servant elected by the people is driven from office over a private sex scandal.
What I do see is that in culture war issues, attempts to split the baby always fail. If we can’t articulate a clear and convincing reason that starring in your own porno is wrong and different than cheating on your spouse, then inevitably, Gibson’s behavior will be normalized. (And, of course, anyone who dares to object will be tarred as a bigot.) Gibson and her supporters are playing the “victim” card now, but I have no doubt that is just a tactic to bide time as they shift the Overton window. I would be very surprised if Gibson believes that she has done anything wrong.
I don’t know the answer. It’s a hard problem.
FWIW – I also expect Gibson to be in the US House, by 2027 at the latest.
According to the articles I saw, Gibson’s sex video partner, her husband, is a lawyer. (Insert your lawyer jokes here.)
I’m sure that these videos will be seen as a great testimony to hubby’s judgement and discretion.
And, as others have commented, what is the impact going to be on this couple’s two young children?
Gibson’s attorney is certainly representing his client zealously, but does he not owe the public at least a wisp of a duty not to mislead them and pervert the ideas of privacy and publicity in order to cloud what his client has freely, cheerfully, done for money to anyone who cares to click to her site?
She and her lawyer give “sleazy” a whole new quality.
She gives Gibson Girls a bad name.
She gives Gibson Girls a bad name.
Sanford White, Harry Thaw, and Evelyn Nesbit did that long before any of us were born.
I’m old. All this pouncing is hell on the knees, I tell ya!