Friday, July 08, 2011

The Spitzer Dilemma: Does sexual stupidity equal lack of leadership ability?


Follow me for a minute: Infidelity is immoral (not inevitable - that's a different post). Immorality reeks of poor judgment. Poor judgment hints at flawed character. Flawed character is not a desired trait in a great leader... right?

I watched Client 9: The Rise and Fall of Eliot Spitzer on Bio Channel the other night and it was... illuminating. There were so many machinations and subplots going on in the back drop of that scandal. There's no getting around the grimy 'married but paying for cocoa' element but the determination of pissy entitled old guard billionaires to bring him down seriously got my dander up. 



Now I'm not in any way saying that Spitzer wasn't a damn fool for all the hooker shenanigans. But it made me wonder, does swimming knee deep in heaux shiggity really impact his ability to lead the state of New York? Was Clinton not an effective President because of the Lewinsky (et al) of it all? Do we think less of Kennedy's public service knowing he was a complete and total hound dog? Would Gary Hart have made a good president?

These questions confound me because I believe that Eliot Spitzer was doing some good things. Admittedly some bad things as well. Does his bad outweigh the good that he could have done? I'm just not sure. What do high profile trailblazers do after they piss on their own trail? Can we trust men who trip over their own d**ks to lead us? Is sexual impropriety as tragic a flaw as embezzling? Or is dishonesty and weakness in any form unacceptable for men in leadership positions?

I don't know... it sort of becomes a slippery slope when you start thinking: well, there are worst things they could have done. Hmm, would their wives agree? Sure, these men owe their wives apologies but do they owe us the same thing?

The other fascinating aspect? The varying levels of disdain for the Cheaty McCheatersons. Some of these guys are reviled, some are still revered. Most everyone agrees it's especially heinous to cheat on your dying wife. Sneaking out for quickies while your wife is getting her chemo treatment just speaks to a callousness that makes John Edwards the least sympathetic of the group. I believe azzhole behavior was expected of Arnie but to impregnate the wife and the side chick (who works in your home) at the same time adds an 'eww ick' element that is hard to get around. 

Spitzer came across as such a Dudley Do Right that his fall from grace was shocking on a visceral level. Mark Sanford was just so whacktastic with his cheating. I mean his affair was a bad Lifetime Movie of the Week written by meth addicts. My goodness with the Latina lover, the long cheesy emails, the Appalachian trail? Dude, stop.

Clinton, well, his Oval Office slap-n-tickle was tragic because he lied about it (convincingly). One wonders what would have happened if he just said yeah, I did it, so what? What if Andrew Weiner had come forward and said that in a tequila-induced fugue state he twit-pic'd his privates to a random broad? Might he still be in office. 

The downfall of these guys is no longer shocking. In fact, it's almost expected. One of the best shows on TV right now, The Good Wife, is centered around these very scenarios. These events are so commonplace, I wonder if we'll get to the point where we don't even care anymore. And what will that say about us?

I guess my question is - Should cheating on your wife automatically disqualify you for running for (or staying in) public office? [squinting hard at Newt] Or is it the lying that really does it? What makes one situation worse than the others? Do these public figures owe the public an apology? Should they step down? And what in the world do they do next? I'm curious to know your thoughts. The floor is yours...

75 comments:

nylse said...

i dont think we should ever grow comfortable with bad behaviour and come to expect it; rather we should try to aim for the good.  with that said, i think it comes down to honesty and what that implies in other areas of your life.  i think its the lying that does it, after all no one is perfect...its how you handle it after it happens that really matters.  so, its on a case by case basis for me - what happens after you've been found out.

Brandon St.Randy said...

Good post. A friend of mine just sent me this NYtimes article about monogamy in marriage, and how it just doesn't necessarily fit for all people, which sparked a good discussion about cheating in marriage. We talked about how this very strict, puritanical idea of sexual fidelity is kind of a uniquely American thing. In Europe, Sarkozy, Berlusconi, etc. are all known cheaters. Before the rape accusation, DSK was favored to win the French presidency and his affairs are widely known. The friend sent it because they were really concerned that they wouldn't be sexually satisfied in a monogamous relationship forever.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/03/magazine/infidelity-will-keep-us-together.html?_r=1&emc=eta1

Here's a quote: "Rather, he says that a more realistic sexual ethic would prize
honesty, a little flexibility and, when necessary, forgiveness over
absolute monogamy. And he believes nostalgically, like any good
conservative, that we might look to the past for some clues.
“The mistake that straight people made,” Savage told me, “was imposing
the monogamous expectation on men. Men were never expected to be
monogamous. Men had concubines, mistresses and access to prostitutes,
until everybody decided marriage had to be egalitar­ian and fairsey.” In
the feminist revolution, rather than extending to women “the same
latitude and license and pressure-release valve that men had always
enjoyed,” we extended to men the confines women had always endured. “And
it’s been a disaster for marriage.”

BTW, my friend that sent that is a woman

maureen palmer said...

First and foremost  let me say this,  great U.S.A gives you gazzilion chances, so yes at on the onset, people are pissed, but these guys will/are getting second chances to reedem themselves.
THe saddest part  for most of these  guys, they are GREAT at what they do. Case in point, DSK, before his scandal with maid, he had done a  superb job at the IMF, laterly structuring Greece package to avoid austerity there. Spitizer is  an intellect, his grasp of  policies is  brilliant. I wish Arena was successfull.  Same  to President Clinton,  I just saw CNBC coveraging of his global  initiatives and this guy is brilliant. But how does one reconcile that flaw in character with great at what  they do. Maybe the old adage applies, "take the good and the bad". Personally, I think it should  be a  case by case situation. I did not think Weiner should  lose his job.
Do they  owe public anything? Yes,  you are an elected official and we expect some integrity  and I beleive the office comes with  horizontal morals.

maureen palmer said...

I read this article too,  the fact that they used Savage as  back drop of this article goes to explain human beings are on continuum, some are to the extreme right, some to the extreme left and some are right there at the middle. I think this flexibility will require an evolved individual (s)

maureen palmer said...

I read this article too,  the fact that they used Savage as  back drop of this article goes to explain human beings are on continuum, some are to the extreme right, some to the extreme left and some are right there at the middle. I think this flexibility will require an evolved individual (s)

maureen palmer said...

sorry chele,  Disqus is not letting  me great, this was  a reply to @ Brandon. St Randy

Brandon St.Randy said...

Agreed. I don't think most people are even ready to get ready to have some of the conversations he talks about in the article. That said, a surprising number of my male friends were actually of the opinion that as long as there's honesty and an upfront understanding, they'd be open to the idea of their wife getting a little extra on the side.

tiffanyinhouston said...

Agree with Maureen that generally speaking about this subset of men, that they are extremely smart and good at what they do. But the thing that we will never totally understand from the feminine standpoint is that men are extremely good about having sex without emotion or at the very least compartmentalizing it to some degree and women, generally speaking are not. I don't condone the behavior at all. But it seems like that seems to be the crux of the matter in all of these infidelities. Men with power who wanted to get their rocks off, with women who were willing to go along for the ride (literally). And I bet these men had no intention of leaving their families.

I'm rambly a bit right now..hopefully I'm making some sense..it's early..

miz jj said...

I think there is a difference between paying for sex and having an affair. Paying for sex (whether you agree with it or not) is illegal. Spitzer was the law and he was breaking the law. That doesn't work. You lose your credibility.

In terms of cheating it depends whether you think actions define character. If you have bad judgement in one aspect of your life does that bleed into other aspects of your life? I don't know if it automatically disqualifies you, but I think it demonstrates that you are someone who 1) doesn't keep their promises 2) doesn't care about hurting other people as long as your needs are met. Personally, I don't like lies or liars. If you want to stir the cocoa with lots of different people then don't get married and promise to love one person. Stay single and stir as much cocoa as you like.

Reads4Pleasure said...

I'd like to say that I can separate someone's private life from their public life, but thinking about it from a moral standpoint, I can't.  As my mother always says, "If you'll lie, you'll steal."  If you can lie to, cheat on, re-direct funds from your family to an outside person with no remorse, how do I, as a constituent, know that you won't do the same thing to your district/country?  You've taken a vow to forsake all others with your spouse and you've taken a vow as a public servant.  Both should be taken seriously and if, for any reason, you can't be accountable to either, you should remove yourself from the positions.

Penny said...

Peoples' public lives are often different from their public lives. (See Newt, Mr. on his third wife Morality.) This is especially true when discussing famous or political figures-after all we really only know what they (and their public relations staff) have told us.  We have no way of knowing how much, if any, of what "spin" we have been given is true.  I am currently reading about Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemmings, need I say more about that contradiction?

All of us have human failings, and in spite of those, may be capable of doing things that don't match that public persona.  We now know Martin Luther King, Jr. cheated on his wife, but does that negate the work he did on behalf of the people in this country?  That said, none of this stuff that these folks have recently been caught doing is new; these things appear worse today than they did 30+ years ago because of the 24 hour news cycle and electronic communications.  Did Anthony Weiner really think he was going to get away with his antics?  Twitter account hacked=stuck on stupid.  Did he think this couldn't be verified?  Arnie having his baby mama (who was the housekeeper) continue to work in his household?  (See Strom Thurmond)  Completely ratchet and low down. 

David Chase said...

I don't like cheating on your wife should be condoned but nor should it automatically disqualify you from public service. That being said, generally is these but figures are cheating - they are doing other things like lying, being shady with some funds, a litany of piss poor behavior. And once you start moving the line back of what you will or won't do, it's a slippery slope. It's more a matter of public trust. Once that is destroyed, there's no turning back.

Pure Choco said...

I was just saying the other day how completely devastated I would be if it ever came out that Barack cheated on MIchelle. Part of what makes him great is that we completely believe he's just not that guy.

michaeldavis said...

I don't think I could win with any comments on here so I'll tread lightly, but do you notice that no beloved AND effective politician has been locked down on his wife. Marion Barry, Bill Clinton, Spitzer (who broke the law and it he most def had to resign), etc etc.

The Rise & Fall of Marion Barry is a though-provoking flick too.

BlackButterfly said...

Disqus is having problems today!I was having this same discussion with a friend and we disagreed about whether or not these people are able to do their jobs effectively after an indiscretion in their personal life.  My friend and I both agreed that they were probably still able to do their jobs but disagreed on the "effectively" part of the equation.  I think that it is a rather difficult life to live and work in a public forum but all of these individuals knew going in that their lives would become public and I would venture far enough to say that they wanted this public life.  So to expect the public not to weigh in on your ability/inability to manage your personal life in a manner that is above board and trustworthy is a lot to ask when the public has to make a decision of whether or not you are going to have our best interests at the forefront.  I think it is perfectly valid to ask the question, "If your wife can't trust you then why should I?".  Character matters!Now, having said all of that I am not saying that these people are incapable or undeserving of a chance at rebuilding their lives because no one lives a mistake free life.  But a life in public service is not something that is owed to someone because they have done it before even if they seemingly did it well.  Trust is a hard won confidence that once lost, is a beast to reclaim, no matter who it is.

Andrea M said...

I don't think it's our job to judge or forgive this idiots. Wait - was that judgmental? *bougie shrug*
But I think we have the right to hold our publicly elected officials to a higher standard. They are representing us and working for us. I would hire a liar or a thief.

Bryan Anthony said...

That is interesting. I took a similar straw poll amongst my circle and none of us are having it. Definitely a case of whatever works for you and yours.

Jesse said...

Marion Barry skews the discussion because of the crack. Once drugs enter the picture, there's an entire section of folks who just don't want to hear it.

Jesse said...

Barack is the gold standard at this point. For a black man to be where he is, he had to do every single thing right every step of the way. It's an almost impossible ideal.

TheOneandOnlyMe said...

These men had positions based on the public's trust that they would have integrity while holding a public office.  Each of these men violated their fiduciary duty as public officials. Moreover, they lied. Therefore it's not the sex, it is the lie about the sex that rightfully made them lose their jobs.

thinklikeRiley said...

Unless they rapin' and robbin' - I ont gibbadam. If he need to get some side cocoa to keep the gubment workin' right, get it in and get back ta work. Now if ya all flagrant and ain't gettin' shiggity done? You gotsta go.

Sasha in Stilettos said...

Do you think if they had just told the truth about the sex and apologized, they could have stayed in public office?

Sasha in Stilettos said...

Yes. Cory Booker too. If he ever marries and cheats or gets caught with hookers, New Jersey would lose their minds.

AppleBerryMIA said...

I wonder - What would happen if Hillary was caught cheating?

Beautifully Complex said...

I think another problem is the lack of respect for the sanctity of marriage. So many people don't respect it or seriously give it the weight it deserves. What other situation requires you to make vows, sign a contract,etc. You know? Not friendships, not other familial relationships, not jobs. Marriage should outrank all of that. You know the terms & expectations when you make the commitment. So if you are not up for it then why do it ? Or when you realize it doesn't fit you, then get out of it. There has to be a standard, because we continue to see what happens when people don't have them. There should be consequences &  we should not just expect/excuse bad behavior. That is a slippery slope. There are people who based on their habitual cheating, pretty much have open marriages but won't admit to it openly. Sometimes it's due to privacy,  but it might be because they want to have the illusion/perception or whatever else they believe comes with people thinking you are happily married vs. the perception that comes from people knowing you are operating in a sham marriage.

BB Waite said...

There's a case for and against everything I suppose but in my personal opinion, once you take the monogamy out of marriage - it's not the covenant as set forth in the Christian doctrine. For someone like me there is only one realistic sexual ethic - that is staying true to the commitment of a two person partnership. Even with the understanding not everyone feels this way, I still think that if a person truly believes that they can not be monogamous long-term they need to make sure their spouse is aware and accepting of this fact or not marry at all.

BB Waite said...

I did feel like Kennedy's legacy was tarnished by all the infidelity. Quite truthfully, I wondered how much more he could have accomplished if he hadn't spent chunks of the day cavorting in the West Wing pool. But that's just how I think.

Digital Eve said...

I agree with your opening statement. 

Those in positions of leaderships, (just like those in law enforcement), have an implied obligation to uphold our moral code a lot more strictly than the general public does. Their job is to maintain order in our society, so if they cannot adhere to protocol then we cannot trust them to do right by us. 

 If they are careless enough to hurt those closest to them (i.e.  their wives) then how can we trust that they won't hurt us for their own gain (i.e. make backroom deals)?

GuessImJay said...

Know what pisses me off? Why do they always think they won't get caught? They always do.
And double fist bump for the line his affair was a bad Lifetime Movie of the Week written by meth addicts
That's golden.

William Martin said...

At this point? Nothing.

daisy said...

I agree it's interesting the varying degrees of anger towards these men. I know people that would shot John Edwards on sight if they could. Weiner just seemed kinda pathetic in the end.
Love The Good Wife BTW

rozb said...

Of course, when caught cheating on a spouse, if your public service has still been exemplary or at least the job was getting done, your actions are still dirty dog, and your integrity will come into question. But at the end of the day, public servants are human, and must at least take responsibility for their actions. Sometimes very publicly and painfully for everybody involved. However, when politicians act with hypocrisy, it takes another turn.

We all know when Clinton got caught, the politicians rallying for impeachment (yeah you, Gingrich) were knee deep in their own extra-marital shenanigans. I just can't with the fake outrage while you probably just got finished pulling your pants up.

Or the politicians that fight against homosexuality and LGBT rights while they are in the closet themselves. If you hold a position of public trust, you must act with integrity and be honest to those ideals. Don't wait until the National Enquirer or Globe gets some grainy video of your dirty deeds before you admit who you are and claim it.

NY2VA said...

If a public servant is doing his job impeccably and sexual scandal arises, I have zero grams of damn to give.  If everyone thought the person was the bees knees, an outstanding public servant , before they found out he was pumpin and sweating with (insert name here), how does that suddenly change?  Yes the person's legacy may be tarnished, but hell the legacy wasn't elected to do the job, and neither was his genitalia.  Folks might not want to kick it and have drinks with the cheating son of a beeyotch, but chances are, he wasn't gonna be sending any evites their way anyway, so oh well...  

Bottom line is, folks in this country have taken this moral high ground and are grading immoral deeds on a rubric, with sexual infidelity being a seemingly capitol offense.  In my opinion, as long as said immorality isn't illegal and it isn't affecting their job performance, it really shouldn't matter.  

SBChitownChick said...

This goes back to the age old conversation about levels of forgivable sin. If the politician who grafts a million as heinous as the one who has mistresses stashed around the city? It's all indicative of character flaws that I wants no part of

Trey Charles said...

Is it really so hard to get all your heaux shiggity out of your system and then get married and run for office?

rozb said...

Seems simple enough to me!

C Nelson said...

I think we have our priorities bass-ackwards on this issue, for the record. Paying for sex should be legal and regulated, for the sake of the men who'll do it anyway, the women who make their living from it (a book I read once had a line about life being really difficult when the best thing a girl has going for her is a great pair of tits, and I agree -- went to school with a couple like that...) and the women those men eventually hook up with non-professionally. Breaking the marriage contract, on the other hand? That should be what comes with criminal consequences, because it's never just between you and the hooker/hookup that way.

DCbywayofCali said...

I don't care about most of them, but Spitzer used tax payer money for his ladies of the evening. No bueno, sir.

DCbywayofCali said...

Delurking. . .

I only have issue with two of the recent cheaters: Mark Sanford and Spitzer.  Sanford left the state w/o letting anyone know, and thus put the state in jeopardy by not specifically putting the Lt. Gov in place.

Spitzer used taxpayer money to pay his ladies of the evening. Double no.

Nicoleghenry said...

It has me wondering.........Marriage at its very barest is a legal contract.........if you as a politician can't hold up that contract then what will you do when you have contracts with my  taxpayer dollars to sign? And yes, I love me some Bill Clinton and some Kennedy but evertyime I think of their legacies, I also think of Marilyn and Monica.

http://twitter.com/#!/belovedbless

Nicole said...

Yeah but some men don't get over their heaux stage till their 50's and politicians are on the younger side these days.........so if you wanna go that route you gotta wiegh.......heauxdom vs officialdom......red pill or green pill.

http://twitter.com/#!/belovedbless

Reads4Pleasure said...

I totally disagree. If Hillary was caught cheating, her name would be dragged through the mud by people that would conveniently forget or excuse her husband for doing the same.  She'd be called a Jezebel and people, especially those that believe women don't belong in politics anyway, would use it as an excuse to keep other women from entering the political ring.  The standards women are held to are very different from those of men.

SingLikeSassy said...

I can't speak to these cases specifically, as that could be considered a breach of ethics, per my employer.

BUT in the movies, you always see women being used to get powerful men in vulnerable positions and then they are blackmailed etc. Seems like it could cause problems.

Rob said...

Or blue pill even?

Rob said...

Or blue pill even?

Rob said...

I was thinking she might get "she deserves to have a few laughs" pass because of all the years she put in with BIll.

Reads4Pleasure said...

Maybe from other women, but the Rush Limbaughs of the world, who crucified her husband for the same thing, would vilify her for not standing by her man.

Penny said...

Did he really?  Spitzer is rich.

MariSol said...

This is it right here. Amen, Miz BB

Paul on Ice said...

On the one hand, I don't necessarily care what they do behind closed doors. On the other hand if you're stupid enough to get caught, are you smart enough to serve?

Mina B. said...

Whether or not a person will be an effective leader after infidelity comes down to how much of it we can chalk up to being a person who made a mistake vs. a person whose moral character has taken a back seat. The temptation and access to partake in immoral activities and get away with it is stronger than what most regular folks will have to contend with. That's not an excuse but it is a reality. So, sending twit pics of your junk to random broads might be something we can laugh at deal with, but repeat offenses, having a platform of moral righteousness, and/or elaborate heaux shenanigans are signs that the person lacks self restraint and good judgement which is a recipe for leadership disaster.

Wanyanak said...

I don't believe Spitzer used tax payer money for his extra-curricular activities.

angelasherell said...

But to get elected you have to have that perfect little family image!!!

LikeLena said...

Only Republicans get to cheat, apologize and keep it moving (David Vitter?!)

LikeLena said...

Bite your tongue

DCbywayofCali said...

It was found that some of flights to and from the rendezvous' with the hookers were indeed on his state credit card.

kjnetic aka Peter Parker said...

as i understand it, this is actually the stereotype to achieve any sort of 'power' in Western Society/US Society. the reason why one doesn't see single men, er, folks in many positions of power is due to the thought that they aren't mature enough...or something along those lines. (Not in all cases, Ed Koch, Lindsey Graham come to mind, i'm sure there are others)

kjnetic aka Peter Parker said...

hmm...i kinda look at it like this:

if there is anything i've learned from politics...or sports..it's this:

it's usually never the sex...or the act itself...it's the lie/cover-up about the sex or the act (except in Ahh-nald's case...that's just despicable, lol)

that being said, if a politician puts himself up to be a holier-than-thou crusader, then he kinda has a..an electoral contractual obligation to maintain that persona, and not put himself into a corner where he could be boxed in by adversaries.

if a politician talks all day every-day, about how he's a Tender-Hearted man, loves his wife and the Lil' Bouncin' Baby Jeesus, if he gets caught with (insert name of  a porn-star) in shady hotel on the West Side...his credibility will take a shot.

that being said, indiscretions of that nature should be more important to the constituents that voted him in, than people outside the bubble. So he would need to apologize to his constituents, and show personal reform in his life.

literatebrit said...

Delurking to comment. Great post! I think that cheating is especially reprehensible when the person is hypocritical about it. Like if John Q. Politics has never said anything one way or the other about gay rights/prostitution/what have you, then if they get caught with a prostutitue I don't care as much. But on the other hand, if he is the most vehement person against gay rights/prostitution/drugs/what have you, then if they get caught with a prostitute/drugs/whatever I feel like they don't really practice what they preach. Then there's the fact that prostitution and drugs are illegal, so regardless of what they've said they still broke the law. Basically it's a case by case basis for me.

MichelleG said...

He used the state credit card which he reimbursed (anyone that works for that kind of company knows how that flows). There's a difference in semantics and intention when you say he used tax payer money.

Page Bartlett said...

Brilliant post. There are certain positions where we expect a stronger stitch of moral fiber - teachers, preachers and politicians. If they can't live up to it, they should walk away.

Page Bartlett said...

Plus he was flying to those locations for legitimate reasons, not just to sleep with hookers. Not that that excuses it, IJS.

MichelleG said...

I know this isn't popular but I feel like the sole woman in America that doesn't condemn Edwards. If you've been the caretaker for an ill person then you know it gets hard, isolating and stressful. Are you all really expecting a man in his prime to not have sex for years as she lay dying? His mistake was not vetting the correct partner. The other woman should have known her role and damn sure not gotten pregnant. Yes marriage is til death do you part but there is a l-o-n-g time between diagnosis and death. I personally won't condemn him because he sought relief/comfort & managed to keep it away from his wife (until the press brought it up). And yes any other time I'd whoop (hypothetical)husband behind but if I'm dying - do you but make sure that chick doesn't come in my face period.

I think people need to get over their puritanical and ridiculous expectation of perfection in leaders. There is a separation of church and state for a reason. The job description does not include "must be like Christ" so you can earn your place in every black home,church and mortuary. We should judge politicians on whether they are getting the job done - if our weekend activities are not reflective of our work persona why should politicians be expected to live to a higher standard?

Nicole said...

DEAD at *blue pill*!!!

Cassie said...

To each his own but when you read all of lowdown dirty stuff he did (including trying to get his aide to pass the kid off as his own), it's pretty hard not to cast a frown in Johnny's direction.

Cassie said...

To each his own but when you read all of lowdown dirty stuff he did
(including trying to get his aide to pass the kid off as his own), it's
pretty hard not to cast a frown in Johnny's direction.

datdudeincali said...

"Sexual Stupidity" is not an indicator of anything else except stupidity when it comes to sex. It happens. But mayhaps, one of those esteemed gents might wanna think about repercussions, 24/7 news cycles, greedy skanks who want their fifteen minutes of fame, things like that prior to dipping off into random cocoa for all the world to see. Ugh. Bad visual. Just pictured that Edwards sex tape. I need a drink.

FreeBlackMan said...

I wonder if Gary Hart ever drives past the White House like - Damn!

Mina B. said...

I agree that "people need to get over their puritanical and ridiculous expectation of perfection in leaders" but if a person in leadership got there under the platform of family values and moral uprightness they can't have hookers on speed dial. Voters have every right to be upset. Most of these scandals are not just some dude hooking up w/his coworker when his marriage was on the rocks. They include elaborate lies and cover up schemes, baby mamas, numerous flings, pay-offs,  and all kinds of extra. ANY married person doing allladat deserves all the side eye they get.

I disagree about Edwards. Marriage is supposed to be until death- not until you feel it's getting too hard. The vows usually include the words- in sickness for a reason. If you don't think you can deal w/ what life may dish out then you don't need to make the commitment. I was a caregiver for years before my husband passed. Yes it's extremely difficult, but I was serious about my vows. "Are you all really expecting a man in his prime to not have sex for years as she lay dying?" we don't know how often they did/didn't do the deed but people don't say the same thing when the situation is reversed. Most people would expect a woman to be able to do this.

Brandon St.Randy said...

ah! I'd reckon that despite what seems like an avalanche of scandals every year, that's just the tip of the iceberg. I imagine there's plenty more dirt going on that we'll never see/hear about

Leo the Yardie Chick said...

I know if John was on his death bed, and Elizabeth was caught getting her itch scratched, 'harlot' would be the least of the curses hurled in her direction.

The affair was bad enough, but trying to pass off the child on another man in order to save his career was downright tasteless.

JojoRaze said...

This....all.of.this.
As my mother always says, "If you'll lie, you'll steal."  If you can lie
to, cheat on, re-direct funds from your family to an outside person
with no remorse, how do I, as a constituent, know that you won't do the
same thing to your district/country?  You've taken a vow to forsake all
others with your spouse and you've taken a vow as a public servant.


This is exactly how I feel.  If you can lie so blatantly to the woman or man you sleep with every night, who you promised to love, honor and cherish, what won't you do to me as a constituent or your constituency in general? 

JojoRaze said...

I totally agree with you on this and the poster below who said we shouldn't grow comfortable with bad behavior.  Marriage is monogamy in the Biblical paradigm is monogamy; even when you see examples of polygamy in the Bible, it never works out.  There is always drama between the wives and the husband, ie, Rebekah/Lea over Isaac; Abraham with Sarah/Hagar.  Solomon with all his wives who lead him into idolatry.  In every polygamous Bible example, the example over all is that polygamy is messy and ruins lives. 

Even from a non-biblical perspective, I don't quite understand how not having marriage as "fairsey" as Savage says, is silly if we live in a democracy.   If women are expected and socialized to be faithful, men should be too.  Coming from Savage, who is pro-gay marriage, he's basically arguing that marriage and sex isn't fair and we should live with it.  How would he feel if that's the argument anti-gay marriage people make: "Marriage is only between a man and a woman; it isn't fair, but that's how it should be since that's the union that produces children and propagates the future." There is something extremely disingenuous about his argument that heterosexual marriage should be more accepting of outside partnerships, when he and many same-sex marriage advocates are arguing that same-sex marriage is just like heterosexual marriage.

Furthermore, marriage is like being a supermodel.  You can't be fat and be a supermodel (Emme, notwithstanding); and no one is going around saying fat people should be supermodels.  You either lose weight or go do something else.  And I say this as a fat woman.  If you can't do monogamy, don't get married and don't ruin someone else's marriage.

Meth adiction said...

This kind of type of dependancy is also known as meth addiction and people who are dependant upon this specific drug are known as meth addict. For people who are not familiar, this specific drug is a potent as well as highly

One Chele said...

First of all... great topic and well done post. Really smartly written. You should write for a living or something.

Onto the questions at hand - I'm thoroughly sick of the myriad of excuses and dodges people come up with for immoral activity. If you want to spread cocoa, get out of your relationship. If you want to steal money, become a professional thief. Know your weakness and put yourself in a position where it won't bite you and people around you in the ass. Don't become governor of a major US State when you are paying high-dollar escorts hookers to service you.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails