I wrote here and here about Susanna Gibson, a Democratic candidate for the Virginia House who, it turns out, live-streamed sex with her husband on the porn site Chaturbate, for money. One might think that this revelation would doom a legislative campaign, but no: Gibson has gone on offense, and the Associated Press reports that she is gaining support, especially among feminists:
A Democratic Virginia legislative candidate whose race was rattled by the revelation that she and her husband livestreamed themselves having sex moved forward with her campaign Tuesday and drew some early support in the high-stakes contest.
Gibson has been gaining support as an abortion rights candidate….
[S]tate Sen. L. Louise Lucas, a leading Democratic lawmaker in Virginia, quickly came to her defense, calling on voters to “make this the biggest fundraising day of (Gibson’s) campaign.” Many women voters retweeted Lucas with a link to donate to Gibson’s campaign.
“Anybody who looks at this knows it’s a hit job,” said Amanda Linton, a 45-year-old defense contractor who donated $25 to Gibson’s campaign after reading about the videos.
Emily’s List, an advocacy group for Democratic female candidates, also defended Gibson.
To get to the bottom of the controversy, I obtained and partially viewed the videos of Gibson’s performances on Chaturbate. I didn’t watch all of them, which would require several hours and would be soul-killing, but it doesn’t take long to figure out that Susanna Gibson is no heroine, feminist or otherwise.
Chaturbate is a site where people perform live sex acts in front of an audience. The site is interactive: the “Chat” refers to the fact that viewers, who pay for the privilege, can send messages to the performers in real time, and the performers can respond on screen. (The “urbate” speaks for itself, I suppose.)
Susanna and her husband had a channel on Chaturbate with several thousand followers. They titled their channel “hotwifeexperience.” According to the Urban Dictionary, a “hotwife” is “a married woman who is allowed and/or encouraged by her husband to pursue sexual relationships with other individuals. Often, these relationships are in pursuit of fulfilling the husband’s/couple’s fantasies.”
Consistent with the channel’s name, Susanna was the star of the show. Her husband was a necessary accessory, but definitely second fiddle. It was Susanna who would read chat messages from viewers and respond to them in various ways, often by requesting payment. The videos consist in considerable part of these interactions.
The sex itself, while XXX-rated, is predictable and unerotic, due to the fact that it is being performed for an audience. What is shocking is what Susanna says to her fans. The folks at Free Beacon took one for the team, not only viewing the videos but extracting Susanna’s interactions with her viewers, which I think a normal person will find appalling, coming from a candidate for public office.
Feminism is not really Susanna’s thing. She describes herself as a “submissive,” and says:
I like being choked. I like being hit. I do.
She portrays herself as voracious and indiscriminate. In particular, she is turned on by performing in public:
You know what I think about when he f***s me is all of you watching me and that is what makes me f***ing come. I’m serious.
You have no idea how turned on I am that you’re watching me. Honestly I would f*** each and every one of you if you would let me. I would. I would f*** every single one of you.
I’ve had three in a day actually. Don’t tell my husband that he was the third.
There is much more in the same vein. No doubt exhibitionism was part of Gibson’s motivation, but she was also trying to make money. Gibson offers to urinate on camera in exchange for cash. At one point, she says she and her husband will perform a particular act if her fans come up with 500 tokens. Chaturbate says that 500 tokens cost $44.99.
Gibson tells her viewers that she is raising money “for a good cause,” and she filed for her House race during the time when she and her husband were active with hotwifeexperience, so it seems likely that the “good cause” was her political campaign. It is not clear, however, how much money she could have raised via online sex.
What I have reproduced above barely scratches the surface of the depravity we are dealing with here. It is, frankly, depressing. And yet, the Democrats don’t think Gibson’s cause is lost. They are trying to spin the story as involving the “leak” of a “sex tape” featuring Susanna and her husband, and casting blame on Republicans for the “leak.” As usual, they are betting on voter ignorance.
This story also tells us something about the decay of representative democracy. No one would seriously claim that Susanna Gibson is a person of talent or character who should be chosen to represent her constituents because of her sound judgment. No: she is a vote, plain and simple, and all Democrats vote alike. So who cares about her character?
Then there is the one issue that the AP mentions: abortion. You wouldn’t think that a woman who says she likes to be choked and hit and who offers to urinate in public for money would he held up as an icon by feminists. But there is only one issue that modern feminists care about. As long as Susanna Gibson will vote for unrestricted and government-funded abortion, up to and including the moment of birth, she will have their support.
STEVE adds: Um. . . this is one instance where I am quite content to have been scooped by John on the details of a major story.