Do you think Tiger is sick or just a cad?

[ilovejack02]

I think I don't care .

 

[eliza61]

He's a man, a man who has the ability and the power to do with this libido whatever he can. Imagine a kid in a candy store with an unlimited income.

He's not new, special or unique. He just got caught.

Personally, I think that's the "addiction" of the week.

And because of the nature of much of our society, his transgressions, such as they may be, will be subjected to often-times vicious public exploitation. I often find the manner in which the media and its audience deals with private situations like this as despicable as the transgressions themselves. It seems to me that it should be 100% up to the victims of such transgressions, if there are any, to determine how much public attention is paid, and what type of public attention is paid, and if the transgression is victimless, then no broad public attention of any type should be paid.

It's called celebrity. This country likes it's celebrities. If you want your life to be private, don't become one or marry one. Sure, it stinks but that's the nature of the game.

 

[Skywalker]

I vote he is an arrogant jerk.

If he really wanted privacy he shouldn't have invited a dozen women into his marriage...that choice made it all public. Dork.

 

[RadioNate]

Am I the only person who is sick to death of the term "sex addict"? When life gets embarrassing people try to garner pity by calling it a disease. Give me a break. Let's try to distance our poor character by playing on people's sympathy. Poor addict! Let's call a spade a spade: He WAS SELFISH.

Oh and people are analysing whether Tiger can make a comeback? Is his wife going to make a comeback from all of this? If she has an STD, is SHE GOING TO MAKE A COMEBACK???

I want to make something very clear, I'm just having 'fun' thinking of what he should do. I don't care one bit whether or not Tiger recovers. I don't think there is anything to be gained for his wife to stay one more minute. In fact, I believe he has more to gain if he lets her go. He is 100% a selfish jerk and looks like an even bigger selfish jerk if he begs her to stay.

 

[agame2323]

We've had a First Lady who stood by her husband / President during somewhat simular times. This too shall pass.

 

[NY Disney fan]

We've had a First Lady who stood by her husband / President during somewhat simular times. This too shall pass.

Well I don't know President Clinton's adulterous history at the time he met Hilary, but it has now been established that Tiger was stepping out on Elin from the time he met her. This shall not pass.

 

[happygirl]

I wonder if he wanted to get caught? I mean 9 different women he knew he was playing Russian roulette sp? Then leaving that message on that girls voicemail. It seems like there are just some celebrites that love the limelight. Then there are some that you never hear anything about.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Both.

Having a sexual addiction is not an excuse.

Just like drug addiction is not an excuse.

If you have an addiction, seek treatment.

If you opt not to, then you suffer the consequences.

Addiction or not and accident mystery aside--it made his wife a victim of his actions and that is wrong on so many levels.

It is a true problem, but cheating in and of itself does not a diagnosis make and even if he were a sex addict--it is irrelevant and unfair to his wife. Get treatment, do something--but quit sleeping around, Tiger!!

 

[DancingBear]

Sigh no more, ladies, sigh no more,
Men were deceivers ever,
One foot in sea, and one on shore,
To one thing constant never;
Then sigh not so,
But let them go,
And be you blithe and bonny.

William Shakespeare, Much Ado About Nothing

 

[ogreenlee]

He's a man, a man who has the ability and the power to do with this libido whatever he can. Imagine a kid in a candy store with an unlimited income.

He's not new, special or unique. He just got caught.

i'm pretty tired of the "sexual addiction" label, myself.

i agree with your post. he's a man who got caught.

 

[NotUrsula]

Well I don't know President Clinton's adulterous history at the time he met Hilary, but it has now been established that Tiger was stepping out on Elin from the time he met her. This shall not pass.

Not to make this about Clinton, but when he met Hilary he had never been married, so his adulterous history was a moot point at the time.

There is every possibility that Woods' wife knew that he was prone to outside flings, and accepted it. It may be that she had other reasons for being angry at him at this juncture. We're not inside that marriage, and unless she decides to talk publicly about it at length (which I'm betting no settlement will allow) then we will never know exactly what the issue was.

There is a reason for the adage about power begetting corruption. It happens at all levels and in all professions -- even the clergy. I've heard it said that power is the most potent aphrodisiac known to mankind, and I believe it.

Someone wrote to Carolyn Hax (the Washington Post's advice columnist)last week asking if there was a new normal when it comes to sexual infidelity, since so many respected people seem to be indulging in it. She replied with a pithy truth: infidelity is a crime of opportunity, and the powerful get a heck of a lot more opportunities than regular folks.

 

[agame2323]

Well I don't know President Clinton's adulterous history at the time he met Hilary, but it has now been established that Tiger was stepping out on Elin from the time he met her. This shall not pass.

Do you really think Clinton's adulterous history meant anything when he got caught? Hilary should have said "Bill you never stepped out on me before so I forgive you." ????

I guess because it was only one woman Bill cheated on Hilary with its okay. rrrriiiggghhtttt.

 

[charlie,nj]

Tiger is a loser and lowlife!

A beautiful family at home and he screws around.


Did you hear the news about Tiger Woods having his name changed?




Yeah he had it changed to Cheeter Woods!!!





.

 

[bicker]

OK, I'll give you a reasonable summary of what he should do now:

#1, and #3 are things that you would have no idea whether or not he's actually doing, so you cannot say he's not doing them. #2 he actually did do. #4 is something he's always done.

Sorry bicker, but someone who makes millions of $$$ off his public persona does not get to say "I'm sorry and I want privacy".

The privacy isn't for him... it is for his family -- victims. Don't they deserve any consideration in your summary?

 

[sbell111]

I think he has issues.
His life was planned out for him from birth. He was on a golf course at age two and spent his entire childhood on one.
I believe when his Father died, it brought up a whole mess of childhood trauma and he went a little crazy.
So I'll say, sick. Maybe.
Possibly Michael Jackson syndrome.

 

[bicker]

Sorry Dr. Spock, but humans criticize other humans all day long without needing to legitimize it. That's just the way we are.

Then you shouldn't have any problem with what I wrote.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

#1, and #3 are things that you would have no idea whether or not he's actually doing, so you cannot say he's not doing them. #2 he actually did do. #4 is something he's always done.

The privacy isn't for him... it is for his family -- victims. Don't they deserve any consideration in your summary?

To me--when someone uses the "but they are a public figure excuse", it is simply a cop out excuse to their need to be a voyeur.

Privacy doesn't get eliminated with celebrity. But for some reason, there are folks who believe the right is lost if they make lots of money and are a public figure.

I do believe he is entitled to some degree of privacy even if he is shown to be a lying cheating snake.

 

[bicker]

To me--when someone uses the "but they are a public figure excuse", it is simply a cop out excuse to their need to be a voyeur.

Privacy doesn't get eliminated with celebrity. But for some reason, there are folks who believe the right is lost if they make lots of money and are a public figure.

I do believe he is entitled to some degree of privacy even if he is shown to be a lying cheating snake.

Yes, I agree with that all, as well as what I said earlier, about the need to show total deference to the victims. Picking up on your point, here, though, I think we all are best served by thinking about how abridging a celebrity's privacy in this manner serves or damages the greater good. What such vitriolic invasiveness on the part of the press does is essentially prompt smart people to reserve themselves away from the public arena. That's why our politicians are generally considered by most to be a lower-class of human. It's a serious issue though. I've met some incredibly excellent people in my life. One is the COO of the most successful software development company in the world. He's a private man, and I suspect would eschew the public arena, not because he worried about doing something wrong and getting caught, but just because even if he does everything right in his life it is likely that the more center-stage he is the more his life and the life of his family will be degraded by public scrutiny. The best people -- the smartest people -- avoid the public spotlight, thereby depriving society of some of what they would offer us if our society was not so invasive. And the more tabloid journalism invades every aspect of our society, the more gossipy we all become, the more good people will withhold their best gifts from society.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Yes, I agree with that all, as well as what I said earlier, about the need to show total deference to the victims. Picking up on your point, here, though, I think we all are best served by thinking about how abridging a celebrity's privacy in this manner serves or damages the greater good. What such vitriolic invasiveness on the part of the press does is essentially prompt smart people to reserve themselves away from the public arena. That's why our politicians are generally considered by most to be a lower-class of human. It's a serious issue though. I've met some incredibly excellent people in my life. One is the COO of the most successful software development company in the world. He's a private man, and I suspect would eschew the public arena, not because he worried about doing something wrong and getting caught, but just because even if he does everything right in his life it is likely that the more center-stage he is the more his life and the life of his family will be degraded by public scrutiny. The best people -- the smartest people -- avoid the public spotlight, thereby depriving society of some of what they would offer us if our society was not so invasive. And the more tabloid journalism invades every aspect of our society, the more gossipy we all become, the more good people will withhold their best gifts from society.

I think that goes back to the days of old and etiquette. Some things are better left private. B/c the last thing you want is scandal. I don't object to scandal being exposed b/c public figures are acting as role models whether they like it or not.

The continued exposure and diving into personal matters is not something that I care for.

Gossiping has been around for centuries.

 

[3prettyprincesses]

Yes, I agree with that all, as well as what I said earlier, about the need to show total deference to the victims. Picking up on your point, here, though, I think we all are best served by thinking about how abridging a celebrity's privacy in this manner serves or damages the greater good. What such vitriolic invasiveness on the part of the press does is essentially prompt smart people to reserve themselves away from the public arena. That's why our politicians are generally considered by most to be a lower-class of human. It's a serious issue though. I've met some incredibly excellent people in my life. One is the COO of the most successful software development company in the world. He's a private man, and I suspect would eschew the public arena, not because he worried about doing something wrong and getting caught, but just because even if he does everything right in his life it is likely that the more center-stage he is the more his life and the life of his family will be degraded by public scrutiny. The best people -- the smartest people -- avoid the public spotlight, thereby depriving society of some of what they would offer us if our society was not so invasive. And the more tabloid journalism invades every aspect of our society, the more gossipy we all become, the more good people will withhold their best gifts from society.

What an interesting post. I've always marveled at the celebrities who are able to retain some form of privacy in their lives...you hardly hear, see or know much about them apart from the movies they are in. But I agree, if you're in a public spotlight, you're kind of darned if you do and darned if you don't. People will criticize the good and the bad, questioning motives and such. I do think tabloid journalism has taken on a life of its own. It is insane the great lengths some of them will go to get a picture or story. I used to think that just because one is in the public eye (movie, tv, etc) then they are totally subjected to having their lives under a microscope(which I do not agree with). I've since re-thought that idea. I think it has to do with what you're putting out there and how often. If you have someone like Paris Hilton constantly in the press clamoring for the limelight, then she's going to be scrutinized like crazy. The more private celebrities are, the less they are out in the public eye and so on.