ah give him a break...he was only following in the very well-oiled tracks of many other Tory MP's ..he probably thought he had to do this to get on in the Party..and who's to say, given his political career and peership, that he was wrong!
Boys will be Boys is one of the Tory Party's proudest maxims..almost an election slogan
We can (or should be able to) separate Seb Coe the athlete from Seb Coe the husband--and continue to admire the first while looking down on the second. It would be wonderful if all great athletes (or those who are great in ANY field: art, philosophy, science, music, etc.) were saints in their everyday life, but it rarely turns out that way. In fact, we seem to get bored by sainthood in today's society--or at least we give virtue a lot less attention than we might. Being a "saint" isn't newsworthy or colorful; being a "sinner" is.
>>We can (or should be able to) separate Seb Coe the athlete from Seb Coe the husband--and continue to admire the first while looking down on the second. It would be wonderful if all great athletes (or those who are great in ANY field: art, philosophy, science, music, etc.) were saints in their everyday life, but it rarely turns out that way. In fact, we seem to get bored by sainthood in today's society--or at least we give virtue a lot less attention than we might. Being a "saint" isn't newsworthy or colorful; being a "sinner" is. <<
I agree with the former point, but I disagree with the latter. I should note that I became a Coe fan not simply because of his running, but because of what I perceived to be his character/integrity/idealism, what have you. He made the pursuit of excellence seem a noble ambition, as it was for Bannister and others, such as Eric Liddel & Harold Abrahms of Chariots of Fire fame...
I'm never bored with athletes who seem, and who actually _are_ (to the best of my imperfect knowledge), good people---Martina Navratilova, Pete Sampras, Joan Benoit, Zatopek...
Right. If we insist on looking for reasons to brand someone a weasel, a scoundrel, or an all-around low life, we almost always can find them. In the words of FN, "Human, All Too Human." It's actually harder to accept human nature as inherently flawed than to throw our former "heroes" off the cliff.
I'm not really sticking my neck out to defend Seb, but we should probably keep in mind that the Mirror is a "tabloid," equivalent to our National Enquirer in the U.S. In fact, I consider the Brit tabloids even trashier than anything here.
On the other hand, of course, the Enquirer has printed quite a few stories that turned out to be completely true.
(I would also add that I just scanned the websites of more legitimate Brit news sources -- BBC, The Times, The Guardian, The Independent -- and can't find a word about it. Of course, Brit libel laws are very strict, so they may be scared to mention it yet.)
Last edited by trackstar on Tue Jun 01, 2004 12:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
What Seb has done off the track is between Seb and his wife - I don't give a shit.
This is the T&F News bulletin board not the Moral Majority board. Seb can bring up his troubles, if he feels the need to do so (and if they're true), with his minister or marital counselor. They aren't my business, and I am not passing any judgement on this topic. I will, however, pass judgement on his 1:41 - that is damn fast!
I'm just going to pretend that he was pure as the driven snow when he was competing and conveniently forget anything after that. I can't make a distinction between this kind of cheating and drug cheating. [but that's just me]
I showed my wife the Mirror article. When she got to the quote from his mistress about how "Seb certainly lived up to his Olympic reputation in the bedroom," my wife asked me "Does that mean he made love for just three and a half minutes?"
Honestly, I do not care what he did in his private life as long as he competed fairly on the track. Did he break any laws? OK then his wife has reason to despise him, I don't. I am not one of those who admire an athlete for his lifestyle, I admire him for his athletic prowess. It would be nice if he were a saint but seeing as I don't see the two as being connected... Now if I had him coaching my kid I would warn them not to take lifestyle tips from him.
The ongoing belief seemed to be that someone who runs fast should be granted grace for any screw-up. Fine, whatever. But then a person who mentioned having problems with Scott coaching his or her kid got shouted down big time, in great part by Cyril, who has already commented on this thread.
One year and a neat little BALCO case example of "the end justifies the means" philosophy later, has our collective attitude changed toward this philosophy, however it manifests itself in human behavior/action? Or does the concept of running fast continue to excuse everything the runner does and perpetually wipe the slate clean (leading, in my opinion, to MORE such behavior, a la the Colorado rape scandal, etc)?
>>Honestly, I do not care what he did in his private life as long as he
>fairly on the track.Now if I had him
>coaching my kid I would warn
>them not to take lifestyle tips from him.
>Or does the concept of running fast continue to excuse everything the runner
>does and perpetually wipe the slate clean (leading, in my opinion, to MORE such
>behavior, a la the Colorado rape scandal, etc)?
Again, missing the point. We aren't condoning what Coe or Scott did. We are only suggesting it is their business - not ours. If they took perf. enhancing drugs - it would harm our sport and be our business. If they commited a crime, they would be held accountable.
The price they pay in their personal life for what they did (or didn't do) is between them and their families. Why does the public seem to want to get involved in the personal lives of celebrities?
I'm concerned with taking care of personal business in my own house without the outside influence of others, and letting others do the same.
As far as I know neither athlete is promoting adultery.
>As far as I know neither athlete is
And as far as I know no adulterer ever has, just like OJ never "promoted" murder, CJ Hunter and Kelli White and Arnold S. never "promoted" drug use and neither did FloJo or Marion or Tim, most tax cheats do not "promote" cheating on taxes, dangerous drivers do not "promote" reckless driving, and so on. You do not have to promote any particular distasteful action to be considered a lesser human for having engaged in it. There is a cost to society for actions like these and no matter how we come to know about them, those who knowingly act in such a deceitful fashion absolutely should be held to task if personal integrity and respect for the law are things we desire as social norms. If a person cannot be expected to behave with honesty and accuntability and with unwavering ethics when nobody is looking then how can we expect him to do so when he is in the spotlight and there is personal gain (fame, glory, stature, riches) at stake? How he carries himself in his personal affairs absolutely does have carryover into his public conduct. What Coe did might have been an error in judgment (though maybe it was not) but it sure wasn't an accident.
Cyril is exactly right. I don't understand why so many people here are getting on their high moral horse about this. So Seb is a human being with some flaws? Golly, gee, my whole view of the universe has been turned on it's head! Everything's rotten! The world is coming to an end!
Come on... Seb was a great athlete and his athletic reputation hasn't changed at all. His private life is just that--private. He's got to answer for his behaviour, but NOT to us! We are sure to be disappointed if we depend on ANY athletes for our moral and ethical view of life. There are other, even BETTER, sources for such things.
>My point the Seb isn't promoting adultery means that it is
>personal - not out business. He is not telling us to do it. He is not saying it
The slipperly slope slides very fast when you take your stand. Is
>fibbing on par with murder? To stay consistent you would have to say yes. A sin
>is a sin. So who will throw that first stone?
How slippery is it to say that Coe's clearly not the man of integrity that he has long portrayed himself to be? I am uninterested in attempts to soft-pedal a wrongdoing by saying "oh, but it is not as bad as this set of horrible things". I can think that lying is wrong without saying that society should punish it in the same way that murder is punished. It is on a par with murder or stealing or cheating in the sense that it unravels the fabric of society and the values it supports. Did your mother never tell you to beware the company you keep? It is clearly not a nonissue to people who are not blind Coe worshippers. It is not our business if we never find out, but now it is whether any of us like it or not and nullifies whatever point you were hoping to make. His actions coupled with his status as a public figure tacitly endorse it, he does not have to say it is right or to do it. If he would blatantly lie to his own wife and family and cheat on them then what is to reasonably stop him from lying to the public, which he has less of a personal obligation to, and cheating in his professional life?
Last edited by gr@sshopper on Wed Jun 02, 2004 5:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.