Eliot Spitzer should be immensely relieved. Because the lovely and talented "reporters" that have decided to take his sex scandal and milk it for all its worth are not focusing one bit on shaming him. Unless you've been living under a rock, I'm sure all of you have noticed that information about and pictures of the woman Spitzer slept with are being littered all over the news. And frankly, I'm really fucking sick of it. No one has interviewed her, and no one has credible information regarding her... except what they have lifted off of her Myspace page and what they have heard from "sources." Numerous "journalists" have been picking her life apart, dissecting it and analyzing it until there's nothing left. The New York Post managed to get ahold of topless pictures of her and, demonstrating their taste and decency, have published them. Is this seriously what journalists are focusing on? Also in the New York Post was a column by Andrea Peyser entitled "BOO-HO! DON'T SHED ANY TEARS FOR THIS BUSTY BRAT."

Classy.

This issue is really bringing to light how many people lack journalistic integrity. Peyser writes:

Now, we are getting a clearer picture of this young lady of the evening, the last in a line of babes and C-cups for whom the governor of the state of New York threw away his career, risked his health and maimed his marriage in search of what his madam ominously called "basic" sex. In the version she's putting out, young Ms. Dupre is the victim.

First of all: NO, we are not getting a "clearer picture" of her. We are getting bits and pieces of information from every possible source except from the woman herself. Second: "in the version she is putting out"? In order for her to "put out" anything, she needs to actually be involved in this investigation of her life. If anyone is "putting out" information, it's the media - reporters like you, Ms. Peyser.

Two alternate pictures are emerging of Ashley. In one, she's a survivor - of abuse, homelessness and drug abuse. This, of course, was before Ashley was nearly forced against her will to command $1,000 an hour to escort rich men from their clothes.

In another version, she's a spoiled brat whose stepdad bought her a Porsche that she wrecked. So she ran away from home at 17. For this, Eliot Spitzer lost everything. Ashley and Eliot deserve each other. One is mentally challenged by accident of birth. The other is that way by choice.

I would like to know where Peyser found the grounds to call this woman "mentally challenged." I would also like to know what kind of evidence she has to back up her claims - having never even met Ashley before. The media is filled with pettiness, but this is by far the worst I've seen. Can't there be some decent journalists out there that are above all this bullshit?

If you agree with me, you can see the whole story here, along with Peyser's e-mail address. Let her know how you feel. The best part of the New York Post is that they have a discussion board to provide a platform for hundreds of people to call Ashley a "slut" and a "whore."

Some people might argue that in sleeping with the governor of New York, she had to have known that there was a risk she would be exposed. But it was discovered that Spitzer went by a fake name, and she didn't recognize his face. It wasn't until their last encounter that she knew he was the governor. So many people (see: Andrea Peyser) are unnecessarily disgusted with her, when in reality, we should be disgusted with Spitzer, who was not only risking his own reputation, but the reputation and privacy of another person.

But no magazine or newspaper wants to focus on that. Because topless pictures sell more magazines.