The sex lives of our elected officials have little to do with their efficacy in office. (jmayrault, Creative Commons)

His political opponents have not called for his blood. (In fact, Marine Le Pen of the far-right National Front party, has made a statement supporting Hollande’s right to privacy). 

His constituents have not demanded his resignation. 

The public did not immediately jump to criticize him for his “amoral” ways, nor did they denounce him as a “public embarrassment.” (Hollande himself, however, has expressed concern over the possible impact of this news on his political agenda and the image of his country on the global stage, particularly in regards to his upcoming state visit to the US.)

The French reaction couldn’t be more different than than how Americans reacted to the Clinton-Lewinsky, Edwards or Petraeus scandals. Shock was immediately followed by outcries for resignation on the grounds that those who hold public office should be held to “higher moral standards” in their personal lives as well as ethical standards in their professional ones.  

Clinton was a sitting president, Edwards a senator and Petraeus the director of the CIA. What relationship do their bedroom activities have to their jobs, to the extent that we can claim they are unfit to do them because they cheated on their spouses? Shareholders certainly don’t demand that their CEO be fired because of an affair, even though the functions of a CEO and an elected official aren’t that different: they are the face of the body they represent, and they network with other executives in order to make decisions that benefit that body. 

Politicians are not celebrities. Their social position does not, and has never been contingent on their lifestyle. Their job is to represent the needs of their constituents and to make decisions on their behalf that advance their best interests. Their political position is obviously relevant to the media, but their personal life isn’t fair game. 

Whenever celebrities complain that their “privacy is being violated” after the tabloids expose something unsavory about their personal lives, we respond that they aren’t entitled to any, because their lifestyle is exactly what they invite their audience to view in order to maintain their celebrity. But politicians don’t seek to be famous through stories of their romantic intrigues or personal struggles. They want to be known for the legislative milestones they made in Congress and the positions they take on controversial issues. Their personalities may be important to the public because they may offer an explanation for the values and thought processes that guide their decision-making, but intimate details, like those found on a tabloid, are not necessary for such an understanding. The American public needs to remember that elected offices are essentially just jobs, and all we need to know about the personal life of the individuals performing them is whether elements of that life will impair their ability to execute the duties of their office.

Their position as public figures does cause their decisions, public or private, to be subject to heightened scrutiny, but that scrutiny should only be limited to their function in the public eye. If my House representative took a bribe from a lobbyist, that would probably anger me, even if I didn’t vote for him. If he cheated on his wife, I’d probably be surprised. I wouldn’t go so far as to condemn his entire political legacy, as long as he wasn’t trading sex for favors or information. 

As Hollande said in his pre-speech interview with TIME magazine, “Private life is always, at certain times, a challenge. And it has to be respected… everybody now understands that President or not President, one is entitled to have a private life.”  

We should remind ourselves that sometimes, it’s just not our business to judge.

Ashley Yang's column "Unpopular Opinions" tackles the perspectives you usually won't take. Reach Ashley here, follow her here.