Rethinking David Letterman: Exactly How Are We Supposed to Feel About All This?

I want to believe Maureen Dowd when she says the whole David Letterman affair is simply about "the erotic pull of proximity." But I'm not sure I'm there yet.

After a week of breathless reportage about the comic's admitted flings with female staffers -- and it's a sign of the media times that it feels like this story has been around so much longer -- one thing is obvious.

We have not yet, as a pop culture-breathing, tabloid-fueled nation, decided how we feel about powerful older guys seducing the young women who work for them.

I agree with MoDo on one thing; this is not a Polanski-level offense. Given what we know and how those involved are reacting, it doesn't seem likely anyone was forced to do anything they didn't want to happen.

But this is an example of a powerful entertainer having sexual relationships with young women who depend on him for their income and their careers. Much as I hate the idea of delving deeper into the details of these relationships, we don't know enough to say whether Letterman broke any laws or crossed any lines.

Brilliant as Dowd's column was -- dotted with dazzling pop culture references to Hannibal Lecter and Mad Men -- it seems to me she gives Letterman an awfully wide benefit of the doubt. This may be the first time I've seen a column gently defending an entertainer by noting two TV executives married subordinates. And Dowd, who has appeared on Letterman's show several times, doesn't spare a line to let us know how she feels about the guy personally, and whether those feelings have affected her conclusions.

And though Dowd downplays any connection to Bill Clinton, this reminds me exactly of the moment the Monica Lewinsky allegations were confirmed. Once again, an admired public figure admits a relationship with a woman many, many years his junior, who worked for him, after circumstances compelled the admission.

Most men, lacking the armor of celebrity, wealth, comedic genius and fan affection, would be less esteemed in the public sphere. Does Letterman get a pass, as Clinton did from many feminists, because we like him so?

I've written a brief analysis for a friend at TV Week collecting opinions from columnists around the country, and I don't think Letterman's show is in danger, unless there are substantially skeevy new revelations coming about his conduct. Any ratings bump probably won't be sustained enough to translate into advertising dollars and surely doesn't compensate for the public humiliation factor.

If anything, the constant media attention may help the accused suspect -- this morning, the Today show was still leading with the story -- whose strategy seems to consist of trying to scare everyone involved into avoiding a trial.

And to those whose knees are already jerking to pile on the "who cares?" comments, I would only say this: Such incidents help us all decide how we feel about this stuff if and when it happens in our own lives -- a teachable moment for some, a cautionary tale for others.

Right now, I'm feeling a little disappointed in a performer who always seemed to have a strong moral compass. And maybe a little disappointed in the people making excuses for him, too.

Follow Eric Deggans on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Deggans

Comments

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

"We have not yet, as a pop culture-breathing, tabloid-fueled nation, decided how we feel about powerful older guys seducing the young women who work for them."

Who said he "seduced" anyone? Maybe she seduced him. Or MAYBE, it was a mutually-decided upon action. Not all sex is the result of male seduction, and I've generally found that men who assume it is are men who can ONLY get a bed-mate via seduction.

"I agree with MoDo on one thing; this is not a Polanski-level offense."

It's not an "offense" at all! And until a participant alleges otherwise, it remains not an offense.

"it seems to me she gives Letterman an awfully wide benefit of the doubt."

You mean like in "Innocent until proven guilty"? You know, that basic foundation of American law? And in this case, innocent until an offense is at the very least alleged or charged. So far, Letterman stands accused of NOTHING AT ALL!!!!!

Your system of "Verdict first, Be charged with a crime afterwards" isn't how we do things in America. That is something our "pop culture-breathing, tabloid-fueled nation" HAS decided upon, back in 1781. Try and catch up.

[Jeff Norman - Huffpost Blogger]

Maureen Dowd wrote, as if it were an undisputed fact, that Roman Polanski drugged a girl. You wrote that you agree with Dowd. Why? Do you believe all accusers, or only some?

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

It IS an undisputed fact that Polanski gave a 13 year old girl Quaaludes. How is that not "drugging a girl"?

[rbndc]

Are we supposed to be shocked, saddened, or angered about Jimmy Kimmel and his new girlfriend, too? Or just about Dave?

[THISTLE]

Enough already. David Letterman was not married at the time of his liaisons. He is not an
elected official. He did not commit a crime. He went out with and had relationships with women
who worked for him. No woman ever complained about David, on the contrary, women have said,
it was the best place in the world to work. Done - over.
And as far as Dave not being able to tell jokes about straying LIAR politicans, why shouldn't
he make jokes about them? He did not do what they did. He also did NOT LIE about what
he did do. David Letterman is a great comic, we need him, we love him - he makes us laugh,
and now more than ever - every one of us could use some laughter.

[llisa]

Exactly. David Letterman had unmarried sex. Where's the scandal?

[S1m0n]

Why are you thinking about it at all?

[texanna]

How are we supposed to feel about all of this? How about not caring? Letterman didn't have a sexual relationship with someone underage, the person or persons he had relationships with didn't file any harassment lawsuits against him, and none of them has come forward at any time to allege that they suffered because of the relationship. When is this country going to grow up when it comes to sex? I swear, we are like a bunch of grade schoolers who can't resist giggling at what we imagine to be naughty words! As to Dave's new wife, I would have to presume that she couldn't have been completely unaware of his flings -- she was with him for 7 years before she married him!

[fredamae]

How Are We To Feel About This?

Move ON, It is NONE of "our" business and is a COMMON occurrence in America...for BOTH Men and Women.

The real Question Should Be; Why are WE so Obsessed with Celebrity Sex?

He Screwed Up! Thats how we should react...and Move the heck on; Let he and His Family cope!

[Yellowstonedemocrat]

Don't be naive, Eric. This can and often does work both ways. Sometimes the women GO AFTER the powerful guy. And some of those women can be hard to resist, no matter how powerful he is.

[mommadona]

Want the raw truth?

It is a man's world.
In his little enable "bubble" "it is good to be king"
A benevalent dictator, for sure, but a one-man domain none the less.

"Groupies/­Assistants­/Associate­s"=ENABLER­S.

A narcissistic hermit who created his nice safe 'place' - pops up to perform, then slinks back into that place with enablers in tow = that's where the money is honey....

Never understood how Letterman was considered a comedian. Still don't 'get it' -

It is a male thing.

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

"Groupies/­­Assistant­s­/Associa­te­s=ENABL­ER­S."

No, they are EMPLOYEES (well, not "Groupies"), not "enablers."

"Never understood how Letterman was considered a comedian. Still don't 'get it'"

Well you see, he's a person who tells jokes to audiences, which makes them laugh. He's been making me laugh for over 30 years. This is what is called a "comedian." That he has been TREMENDOUSLY successful is evidence that he makes MILLIONS of people laugh.

It's a comedy thing, nothing to do with being male. Sorry you're too dumb to work that out for yourself.

[pizzmoe]

Is it possible that these women were actually attracted to Dave?

[maluna]

I'm not sure, when I was a young woman I was NEVER attracted to old men (still am not), neither were any of my young friends. I think it's mostly the money & power they're going after. We all know they wouldn't have dated if he worked as a cashier.

[LLisaLL]

lol, so because you and your friends were never attracted to older men when you were young, those who are must only be attracted to them because of their money and power. Excellent sociological deduction based on sound research.

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

So YOUR personal sex drive is the measure of ALL women's sex drives? Well aren't you just the template for humanity then.

[Vixter]

It has been amazing for me to listen to every talk show, news show, late night comedian, etc. talk ad nauseoum about sexual harassment. The man was being BLACKMAILED, for gosh sakes. That shoulda, coulda , woulda, race has been run - yrs ago.

I applaud David Letterman for standing up to a slimy A-hole - who thought nothing about his 'girlfriends' privacy & tried to profit from her diary. I am amazed w/ all the noise about Letterman, & none about the jerk who tried to blackmail him. An ignorant jerk as well,,,I guess he didn't watch any of the myriad of cop shows when he took a check for 2 million.

Thank you. David, for doing the right thing by going to the feds. In case any of the nit-wits who are vilifying you don't know, Extortion is illegal. Dave is being punished for doing the right thing - going to law enforcement. I wonder if he is now thinking,,, "I should have just canceled the check".

[jotunloki]

ATTEMPTED blackmail. The only payment was the personal check the guy was arrested while trying to cash.

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

What are you? Halderman's lawyer? Split some more hairs while you're at it.

[abbienormal]

Good gracious. Has it ever occurred to you men that the seduction was going the other direction? Geesh, even I remember seducing older men when I was young.

Stop with the paternalistic blather. It's insulting.

[pizzmoe]

Well said, Abbie.

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

It's even possible that no one "seduced" anyone. Just because two people have had sex, it doesn't mean one was "seduced."

[joebiz]

Your reasoning assumes that the "young" intern staffers were some "babes in the woods" ingenues. One intern was a lawyer . . . yeah she knew where her meal ticket was stamped. One was the girlfriend of the alleged extortionist.

[ailbhe]

He's a gazillionaire, most likely he could not resist the temptation of them chasing him down.

Rich men are viewed as walking cash dispensers by a certain type and will always be targeted, having a face on the tv helps too.

[stillable2think]

Supposed to feel? Who cares! We have employment contracts and laws, if they were broken, some body gets sued or sent to jail. If no laws were broken, you got two consenting adults ---- so WHO CARES!!!

[Vixter]

The reason that we even know about this whole deal is the fact the Dave was being BLACKMAILED.

Let your anger out at the extortionist, not the person being blackmailed.

[ProfessorDuh]

We're not supposed to feel about it. We don't need to obsess about celebrities' lives. It's not our problem.

[Tallulah Morehead - Huffpost Blogger]

And of course, some of us just feel however we feel, without considering how we're "supposed" to feel. Who needs to wait for society's verdict on something to "decide" how to feel about it?