04 May 2007

Fall of the BP chief, parts 1 and 2

The Straits Times headline said "BP chief quits over gay affair". Ooh scandalous. Upright corporate titans shouldn't be gay, if caught out they must quit, right? But that headline notwithstanding, was that really why he quit? Plus further thoughts on freedom of speech, prostitution, etc. Full essay.

6 comments:

JohnM said...

Just for some Schadenfreude: the Mail on Sunday had paid Chevalier's expenses for 4 months (while he was travelling around the world) only to lose his exclusive with him because, unknown to the editors, he had a page on the Facebook website so all the other papers could get a picture of him, know all about his likes, dislikes, personal details. Hehe. Serves them right.

Anonymous said...

maybe all the factors were minor and poeple were willing to turn a blind eye, as long as company is prosperous; but if things are not OK, these make one vulnerable

sgsociety.com

boon said...

Your arguments in this article are not convincing. If, as you argued, Browne is brought down because he lied to the court, then we should look at why he lied.

He lied because he knew they met under sleazy circumstances. However you try to spin it, Browne's lover is a male prostitute. Even if Browne were heterosexual and he hooked up with a female prostitute, it would still be scandalous.

Yet you argue that because he is a "very busy CEO", it is entirely fine for him to do so. Is that the norm for homosexuals? After all, escort agencies are not dating agencies.

Regarding your comment on the "pink plateau", I find it contradictory. On one hand you say that Browne and Chevalier attend parties as a couple. Yet somehow he avoids being openly gay to his business associates. I find it hard to believe that his business partners have no inkling of his homosexuality. Since they already know, then what sort of plateau are we talking about here? He is the CEO of BP, after all.

Last point I want to make is that even if he is guilty of lying in court, he could conceivably have carried on as CEO especially since he was performing well in his job. I feel that there was pressure for him to quit because of his gay affair with a male prostitute.

We tend to forget that there are huge numbers of conservative thinkers, even in Western countries. It's not necessarily a sign of backward thinking, just different values.

By trying to force your arguments through, you have weakened your case.

Anonymous said...

Dear Alex, I have a related cmment and a question, this is also from todays ST and I find it scandalous:

http://www.straitstimes.com/portal/site/STI/menuitem.c2aef3d65baca16abb31f610a06310a0/?vgnextoid=6fadbe120b93a010VgnVCM1000000a35010aRCRD&vgnextfmt=vgnartid:8ef0cfa08a252110VgnVCM100000430a0a0aRCRD

"Decriminalising homosexual acts would be an error" By Yvonne C. L. Lee, For The Straits Times

(the article is FREE!)

Besides many logical flaws and the terrible language of this piece (written by a LAW PROFESSOR), gays are mentioned in one sweep with sodomy, bestiality and pedophile. Unbelievable!

My favorite sentence harbouring 2 well-know logical errors is this one: "It is a known medical fact that homosexual intercourse or sodomy is an inherently unhealthy act that carries higher risks of a number of sexually transmitted infections. The law should not facilitate acts which threaten public health."

Wow. My question is: does this kind of article qualify for hate speech? If yes, re-reading your earliere article:

http://www.yawningbread.org/arch_2006/yax-684.htm

..would make me think that one could go after the ST or the author for hate speech?

Please tell us your opinion on this...

Anonymous said...

Agree that the ST's headline was totally misleading, but the opening sentence is correct and along the same lines as the BBC's article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6612703.stm
I was quite confused after reading that sentence in the BBC's article, but the situation was explained in the body of the article. I did not read the ST's article -- was this not done?

Yawning Bread Sampler said...

To Anonymous 5 May 2007, 00:53 -

I have edited the page to include a photo of the Straits Times' story. (You can click the photo to obtain a larger, more legible version). This is to enable readers to judge for themselves whether the ST story is sufficiently accurate. To be fair, you should note, it came originally from Associated Press.