11/05/24
March 31, 2010
Vanity Fair takes on Tiger Woods's Inconvenient Women: The May issue of Vanity Fair hits shelves today with Mark Seal's story on Tiger Woods. It includes interviews with a number of the mistresses, discussion of Woods's gambling and spending habits, Earl Woods's influence and, most disturbingly, a used tampon.
Prince Charles is now involved?
Lyndon LaRouche was right.
posted by owlhouse at 10:16 PM on March 31, 2010
It's not hearsay for these women to describe their own experiences. Though one or two could certainly be lying, if a bunch of them all say the same thing it's likely true.
The saddest detail of the story is that Tiger only bought the Perkin's waitress one thing their entire relationship: A chicken wrap from Subway.
posted by rcade at 10:18 PM on March 31, 2010
The saddest detail of the story is that Tiger only bought the Perkin's waitress one thing their entire relationship: A chicken wrap from Subway.
What's wrong with a Subway chicken wrap? Maybe Tiger was trying to help her count her calories.
posted by BornIcon at 10:34 PM on March 31, 2010
It's not hearsay
Steinberg said, "We'll take care of it."
"That's when their brush-under-the-rug, the cover-up, happened,"
It quacks a lot like a duck. Anyhow, I wasn't disputing the validity or truth of the stories; I was simply making the assertion that the piece, both tabloid fodder and amateurishly written, were not up to the standards of journalistic integrity that Vanity Fair has normally lived up to. I, for one believe that these women are telling the truth. Further, I wonder if he sprung for the extra $1 to get avocado on that wrap and if she's withholding the cookie he bought her for dessert.
posted by tahoemoj at 11:40 PM on March 31, 2010
tahoemoj...did you actually read the article in Vanity Fair? This link is to a cover story on the article, not the article itself. As such, it appears to be bits and pieces of the article randomly put together. That might account for why the piece seems amateurishly written, were not up to the standards of journalistic integrity that Vanity Fair has normally lived up to.
Of course, I'd have no idea as Vanity Fair doesn't seem to make it's way to the magazine rack at my barber's shop.
posted by dviking at 12:14 AM on April 01, 2010
Yeah, I get that it's just a teaser to what is actually in the magazine, but I stand by the criticism. We get the mag at home, but it hasn't arrived yet. I'll see what the real thing is all about when it's delivered. I understand what you're saying though; I shouldn't judge the article by the content of the advertisement.
On a side note, I think you might have a misconception regarding the content of Vanity Fair (I did before the wife subscribed). It ain't Vogue or Cosmo, as many guys think. It's a really in-depth (albeit fairly left-leaning) magazine, regarded with a lot of gravitas inside the beltway, with some of the better writers I've ever read in a magazine. Most scandal pieces in it involve old money and the Hamptons, not celebrity gossip like this. If you've never read it, you might be surprised at the content. I sure as hell was; that's why I was disappointed at the content of this link.
posted by tahoemoj at 01:03 AM on April 01, 2010
hear you on that, and I really didn't have any idea on VF.
Seems as though every newspaper/magazine is milking this story for all it's worth. The media hype is going to be huge next week...that will drive the Master's people crazy!
posted by dviking at 02:08 AM on April 01, 2010
I think it's a bit of a misnomer to call all these women "mistresses." A mistress is someone you keep and supposedly love and want to be with often. I don't think that's the case with Tiger and his stable.
posted by wildbill1 at 07:45 AM on April 01, 2010
Tiger would have to develop an intimate attachment to have and keep a mistress. All he has proven is that he can have sex with multiple women within the same general period of time.
posted by yzelda4045 at 10:27 AM on April 01, 2010
I'm often amazed at the depth and content of Vanity Fair; normally it is an amazing magazine that provides insight unseen elsewhere. This bit of drivel is far, far beneath their normally high standards. It bums me out that they would publish second hand hearsay bullshit like that. It might be true, but it should be left to the Us Weekly and TMZ's of the world. Their readers deserve much better.