No Tiger Texts Here

Wednesdays are deadline day so I only just now found out the breaking news that Tiger Woods issued a statement. And I know that because the Associated Effin Press has a TRANSCRIPT of it.

As for what happened since then, I am in no way caught up. One site reported "the Duffer says he's not perfect," which I thought was unnecessarily pornographic, obscene, and uncalled for -- because I thought a Duffer was something drrrrty (I guess it is now).

I don't know what he did, or didn't do, and I don't much care. I didn't VOTE for him, so as far as I know he isn't spending our tax dollars on hookers and blow.  I don't follow sports (except for "That Cal"), and I wouldn't pick a role model based on anybody's ability to whack a ball, or throw a ball, or catch a ball.

That said, I'm fully aware that corporate sponsors pay a handsome ransom to athletes to project a certain image while they shill their stuff. So try not to get too coy and misty-eyed about the whole Privacy thing when you're a bought-and-paid-for-product. As long as you cash their checks, they will expect some say in how that image is crafted -- how much say, well, that'll usually be left to the lawyers.

What is true for him is true for all of us: don't put anything in print you don't want to read on the cover of the New York Times (maybe that's been updated to say "on the front page of PerezHilton or TMZ" but I don't read those sites). I do know "in print" has definitely been updated to mean: in text, email, facebook, skype, twitter, etc (Direct Message will bite you on the ass every time.)

What I also know is, I don't live by that. The stuff I wouldn't want exposed is mostly the garden-variety mean stuff I say about friends and relatives if you catch me on a bad day -- not cause it isn't true (because it most definitely is true) -- but because it would hurt their feelings if I said it to their face. Which is why I say it behind their back, where I figure they will never find out...That's as God intended it, obviously, because the New York Times really just doesn't care.

I don't worry about the mean stuff I say about people I do not like because: I do not like them.

The other stuff I don't worry about is all the nekkid pictures -- and by "all" I mean.... eh...? a few dozen, maybe? This shocked one of my old college pals. And I do mean, shocked -- that's the word she used. I don't know why. It's one of the few areas where I'm actually an Early Adopter.

For as long as I've had a cellphone with a camera, I've been more than happy to exchange nekkid txts with ... gentleman Callers. And I do mean: exchange. I wouldn't just send out a random, unsolicited mailer or anything -- just a polite tit for tat, as it were, between consenting, committed Adults. They have my pics; I have theirs. I think theirs would be more identifiable in a lineup. (My face isn't in any of these pics of course... it's not my best feature.)

Before the BlackBerry, I just exchanged sxts (this was long, long before it became a teen craze). I also don't worry too much about those landing on the New York Times, because I never said anything as remotely printable as "I will wear you out." That's "naughty?" Please.

The stuff I sent would blister the paint right off the walls.