Christoper Gallant, 37, is an openly gay military pilot, former air traffic controller and volunteer firefighter who is running against Rep. Nick LaLota, who represents New York’s First District, covering eastern Suffolk County. Photos “surfaced,” as they like to say, showing Gallant in an explicit ad campaign modeling leather bondage gear. In some of the photos he appears to be doing…stuff…with another man.
The photos originally appeared on the site of a bondage apparel company called Mr. S Leather about 15 or 16 years ago. In response to the photos entering the campaign conversation, Gallant’s lawyer said that the photographs “were taken during a private, consensual photo session involving Chris and his then-partner, with whom he was in a committed four-year relationship. Chris was also friends with the owner of Mr. S Leather, and the shoot was intended to be fun and personal, with the understanding that Mr. S could use select images in connection with certain products” and that Gallant “remains fully committed to his campaign and to earning the trust of the people he seeks to represent.”
Right. About that trust thingy—oh! I forgot to mention that Gallant is the Democratic Congressional candidate in the race! Did I have to?
“This is the Democratic congressional candidate for CD1,” the local GOP wrote on Facebook above the smaller photo above. “Is this who you want to represent us in Washington DC?” That’s certainly a fair question. I hold that there is an equivalent of EA’s recently revisited Naked Teacher Principle in play here, though I’m not sure what I would call it. A candidate who has allowed himself to be photographed like that gets no sympathy from me if that choice eventually costs him a job teaching in a public school, and the standards of character and role model fitness for a member of Congress should be a higher bar than the one required of teachers. Sadly, considering the current Congress, that is obviously not the case.
Well, he’s certainly tied up the gay vote.
This seems to be typical Democrat electoral strategy: secure all the votes of a significant minority. It’s how Somalis and Islamists win elections in Minneapolis and Michigan. A single bloc of voters can deliver a win.
That pun made me want to gag….
Reminds me of the one line in “9 to 5” that made me laugh out loud. When the ex-husband of very square Judy (Jane Fonda) discovers that she has her pig boss wired to the ceiling in her bedroom (because she and Lily Tomlin and Dolly are keeping him prisoner for reasons too complicated to explain, then or here), he is shocked that she is now into sexual kinks and bondage. “Yes!” Judy says. “I’m into M & Ms!”
Dolly Parton’s very catchy song was all I knew about the movie. Yikes! And of course, the movie and song were out during my big firm era and the concept of just working from nine to five was incredibly alluring.
Where has all the normalcy gone! Moral choices, nowadays, always tends one to follow his/her passions. Self satisfaction is the center, societal norms are an intrusion.
Note, on the western end of the island they elected AOC, the bartender. The middle of the island continually re-elects Chuck Shumer, the self hating pro-palestinian Jew.
The third district elected George Santos!
“They’re his private life,” she said, “and what matters are the policies he will advocate for and how he’ll fight to make life more affordable and fair for Suffolk County residents.”
There’s that Democratic Talking point again…affordable (bold was my adjustment).
So, not only are they pulling out the old “personal life doesn’t matter” narrative, but they’re also airing out the “It’s the economy, stupid”, too?
“Affordability” has replaced, among others, “democracy is on the ballot” in the DNC talking points memo. And let us not forget the ridiculously titled, “Inflation Reduction Act.” Personally, I think anyone who willingly and dutifully spouts talking points is a lemming and not a serious candidate or office holder. Leaders don’t spend all their time following instructions.
There’s a couple of things going on here.
First is that some of ya’ll really need to get past your discomfort with kink. This is kind of a continuation of the fella we talked about earlier this year that liked to dress up like a woman with stonking big tits and have people call him names. The number of guys, both gay and straight, who do things like this, is incredible. For the most part, you have no idea what they’re doing, and that works for everyone. It’s a hobby, it’s stress relief, it’s safe, it’s fun. It’s cheaper than buying Lego sets and less likely to cause you to lose digits than woodworking. The more function your job demands, and the higher stress it causes is directly correlated with outlets like this. Jack, you’re a lawyer. I would bet amazing amounts of wealth that there are colleagues that you think very highly of with a fully-stocked toy closet, and you have no idea about it.
Second is that even though everything I just said is true, allowing yourself to be photographed for a leather site is mindbogglingly stupid for anyone, because you never know who might get too icked out by it to get over it. Running for congress knowing that your ass is actively on a leather site is so far past that that it isn’t even funny. It’s like… approaching the level of a legal competency issue… This guy is too fuckin stupid to be trusted with running an Arby’s.
Exactly, HT.
HT, if bondage is like woodworking only safer and we all need to just get over it, why should these photos be evidence of stupidity? Shouldn’t his bondage fetish be admired and celebrated?
Why is it stupid to have pictures taken of someone partaking in this particular hobby? Because it’s sexual, and people have weird hang-ups about sex. It isn’t about the thing itself being bad, it’s about the common reaction of people. It’s kind of like how it’s dumb for a woman to walk home alone from the club at 3AM… Technically, there’s nothing wrong with that, but it’s reckless to do it.
Can you articulate why it shouldn’t be admired or celebrated?
“They’re his private life,” she said, “and what matters are the policies he will advocate for and how he’ll fight to make life more affordable and fair for Suffolk County residents.”
That is all fine of course, however I think that people should keep their private live private. I do not care about a politician’s sex life as long as he is not breaking the law. I do not have the expectation that my senator or representative is a devout family man. Privacy is a double-edged sword: it gives a person leeway in living life as he wants to, but it also entails the duty to keep the details hidden from others. There are plenty of things I would rather not know or be witness off; that is certain doors within the house have locks. Once the secrets of a political candidate are out, he is fair game for the electorate and for the candidate who is challenging him in the election; that is how the game is played.
The invocation of Bill Clinton in this context is a bit off the mark. Bill Clinton committed perjury and obstruction of justice as he was being sued by Paula Jones, and with independent council Ken Starr on his tail.
But the “private life” mantra was the official defense! “Move ON” used it to launch their organization. “It’s just sex!” was another. “That’s how the game is played” glosses over the question for “Everybody does it.” SHOULD the game be played that way? My answer is not just yes, but “of course.” John Edwards having a mistress and fathering a child while running for President (with his wife dying of cancer) may be personal choices, but they are the personal choices of a sociopath, and attention must be paid.
The “private life” defense should only work for acts that are indeed private. Bill Clinton broke the law. Another example is Elliot Spitzer, former governor and attorney general of New York, who in both offices was sworn to uphold the law, and broke the law by visiting a prostitute. His prostitution habit was therefore not a private matter, and so he had to resign. Elon Musk has a non-traditional sex life with thirteen children with five or six women. Barney Frank had a flamboyantly gay sex life. I am entitled to my moral opinions about that, but I consider the sex life of Elon Musk and Barney Frank as private matters, and therefore non of my business. The same is true of somebody’s interest in BDSM and kink; everybody is entitled to his private hobbies as long as they do not break the law. The only think I require is that politicians practice discretion about some of those interest that have a tendency to ick people out.
Maybe Biden was right that they’re going put y’all back in chains.