Below the Belt

The hoo-ha about Trump and Stormy Daniels puts me in mind of something that happened in my life just as Clinton’s presidential campaign, and the accompanying sex scandal, was going national.  At the time, I was training Tae Kwon Do in Connecticut, under Master Yu.  Although Master Yu had been in this country for at least a decade, he professed complete and utter bafflement about US culture.  When he realized that I was educated, he started asking me to “explain” things to him.

     In particular, Master Yu did not understand all the furor about Clinton’s sex life.  “In Korea,” he would say, “we say it is below the belt.  It does not matter.”  I tried, without much success, to explain puritanism and its role in US history; we want our leaders to be good, as well as good leaders (although we seldom get what we want).  And in any case, as the Clinton era unfolded, it became clear that the matter was rather more complicated.

     But now I find myself in the same predicament that troubled Master Yu.  I am baffled by all the furor over Trump’s fling with Stormy Daniels.  Indeed, I am thrice baffled.  To begin with, no one should be the least surprised that Trump behaved like a pig; his piggery regarding women has been public and well-documented by the press for at least 50 years.  Groping the “bunnies” at the Playboy Mansion, invading the dressing room at beauty pageants, abusing women on his reality TV show—Trump has never pretended to be anything but a pig.  Why should he be any different with this woman.

    Yet, there is endless discussion of the meaning of this scandal, dire or gleeful predictions that this may bring Trump down.  Even leaving aside Trump’s reputation, there is nothing new here.  Rich, powerful men often abuse women and seldom suffer any serious consequences.  #MeToo is trying to change that, and it might seem that Daniels is a natural match for that movement.  But she is adamant that the sex was consensual and that she is not a victim.  This makes it difficult for Trump’s critics to incorporate her story into their narrative.

     There isn’t even anything particularly sordid about Daniels’ story.  Trump used a crass display of wealth to “seduce” her; nothing unusual there.  And I’m sure Trump wasn’t the first guy ever to want spankies from an attractive woman.  I will be surprised if we aren’t forced to hear about things considerably more perverse than that before this is all over.

     There is one thing I am not baffled about, though, and that is why Trump’s supporters are seemingly untroubled by all this.  Many will believe anything the Great Man says, whatever the evidence may be; blanket denial and character assassination are always effective with people who want to believe anyway.  And I think that for a good many of Trump’s (male) supporters, this “scandal” is simply further evidence of the Great Man’s greatness.  Don is the man—he gets to pooch porn stars.  What could be better than that?