I never thought I would defend Rielle Hunter and call her “classy,” but I guess today is the day. In other news, I saw some pigs flying around earlier today.
Anyway, let me start by saying that there is nothing amusing to me about adultery. One little affair has the potential to cause so much pain to so many people. I don’t even generally enjoy movies that have an affair as a plot device, although I suspect I am in the minority from such hits as Closer. This affair is no exception. I will not be buying Ms. Hunter’s book to find out “What Really Happened.” I already know the answer to that – what really happened is that some guy with political aspirations cheated on his wife and fathered a beautiful little girl. No other details are needed to understand that he caused his family a lot of very public pain; as such, nothing else is terribly relevant.Ok, now that that’s out of the way, check this out:
And now, the commentary:
“Her lack of self-awareness would make her a great Bravo star.”
Is that so? Let’s think about this. That story itself has been very public for a while. She is not revealing anything new by her “tell-all” book. She may think she is, and she apparently really wants to tell us all her perspective. As much as I have no interest myself, I know I don’t speak for everyone. I can’t blame her for wanting to put her side out there. In fact, she raises a valid point – her baby girl is completely innocent and yet she will suffer because of her parents’ abominable behavior. I certainly understand Ms. Hunter’s motivations in defending her daughter:
“People make judgments based upon misinformation, and my daughter goes to school with those people. Those parents have judgments about her mother … and my daughter interacts with those people, so I think that she has a right to have it in the public domain.”
Now, I am not a mind-reader, so I am not in a position to know to what extent (if any) Ms. Rielle’s motivations have a self-interested component. But since I’m not a mind-reader, I’m going to proceed with the presumption of good faith, and not go down this road any further.
So, the question from this video is – is everything about everyone’s lives is somehow public because of one very public incident? That’s ridiculous, but that’s what the interviewers are trying to pull out of Ms. Hunter. Ms. Hunter, for her part, is very clear: the story itself is public, but as far as anything outside that story, “you are not entitled to that.”
But the interviewer is not be deterred! “I’m trying to get a straight answer on things that I see as completely in conflict.” She gave you the straight answer several times – “that time period is very public.” The fact that you are struggling with her straight answer being anything other than what you want to hear is not her problem.And she holds firm. Good for her.