I watch this American story with a sense of wonder. There’s the pack in full cry after Donald Trump over a rumour that he had a child out of wedlock. There are two sources of this perplexity of mine. The first being that we know very well that Trump has had a child out of wedlock, it’s there in every biography of the man. The second is quite who it is doing the pursuing – exactly those who would scream blue discrimination if you ever used the word “bastard” to describe someone’s status at birth.
But on it goes:
Why the new National Enquirer story matters — whether or not Trump had a child outside of marriage
To take the second reason first. We’ve had something of a change in society these past few decades. True, it’s a little more notable over here in Europe than it is in the US but it’s still most certainly there. That a child is born outside marriage just isn’t quite what it was. It’s hardly even notable these days. Being “illegitimate” or a “bastard” just isn’t what it was. This is a useful and good change to society of course. What perplexes though is that exactly those who support this change – those generally of the left – are the ones hoping to use this rumour to their benefit.
Look, if it doesn’t matter then it doesn’t matter, right?
The other point is that of course we know, entirely so, that Trump has had a child out of wedlock. Two in fact. According to the Catholic Church at least – still by far the largest religious organisation upon the planet* – the marriage to Ivana and only the marriage to Ivana is in fact a marriage. Given that she’s still walking and talking any children born to any others by Trump are illegitimate therefore. And it’s really not all that long ago that they would have been treated as such too.
I’ll agree that I’m not up with all the details of Trump’s personal life but by my estimates that makes the last two born out of wedlock.
*Yes, it is, Islam isn’t centrally organised in the same manner