Kay Hymowitz, via The Daily Beast, headlines her article about male (most currently: Anthony Weiner's) infidelity with a screaming generalization: MEN WILL ALWAYS CHEAT.
No, they won't. I've known cheaters, and I've known men -- and women -- who choose fidelity. We humans have a hard time accepting that we're not an inherently monogamous species. To cherish one person as your mate, to intend sexual and relational fidelity to that one person for a lifetime -- is a tall order, and one that's not to be lightly avowed. The road to hell, as they say, is paved with good intentions, sometimes with marriage vows ... and with constant change and the intrusion of circumstance (like twitter-pics and getting caught). Yes, some humans seem to be skeezy in character from the get-go ... Some are power-mad, and the power-pumpers who have a penis ... Well, it's just one more weapon in the arsenal. The power-mad are takers, pure and simple, and male takers tend to take with their handiest tool. No pun intended.
"Our long national nightmare is over," Hymowitz writes in the wake of The Weiner's resignation from Congress. All the more freedom now, in combination with the fact of his pregnant wife, for him to tweet his burgeoning boxers even more. Female takers will rise (ahem) to the bait.
(Some of the alleged Weiner-women.)
A man who can't keep his peter in his pants, and gets caught flashing his privates in public, is not a "national nightmare." He's a cheater exposed. It's certainly a nightmare for whomever he's cheated on. No -- it's a daymare ... a lifemare. The penis isn't the problem -- the man's character is. He's lied, cheated, deceived, betrayed. He's taken a torch to his own home. He's ruined his family, fouled his own nest.
It's said that when an animal fouls its own nest, it's either mortally ill or injured, or it's gone insane. Who among us hasn't gone bonkers with lust for another -- for the wrong person at the wrong time? I have ... and the "going bonkers" is, when you're not slavering over someone who's either married or hot for you regardless of your own relational status, a process that overrides doubt, fear, reasoning, and whatever else conspires to keep us away from another human we're hankering for. We can be supremely stupid when we're first "in love." It's not love -- it's lust. Usually, we want into another's pants before we want into their heart. Mating isn't marriage ... at least, not at first.
"... the fact is, men have never been reliably monogamous." Neither have women, though we're more likely to curtail our wandering eye when we're bonding ourselves to a beloved. Hymowitz briefly compares American and French culture as factors in how permissible and punishable infidelity is, and while culture and other historically devised mores can strongly influence how an adult human can and will act within marital relations, biology does trump all.
Being caught in the act is a bummer for the cheater, and a huge drag for a cheater whose working life is highly public. Too bad that so many public servants end up being pubic self-servers.
On the other hand, there are the rare gems who maintain their home-fires with genuine integrity. Barack Obama is one, I think. During the 2008 election, what struck me with constant force was how affectionate and playful he was with his wife and daughters, and they with him. Affection -- that's the ticket. You can't fake mammalian play. To my eye, it's one of the most reliable indicators of relational sanctuary, safety, and fidelity. We only play -- with no thought of gain, prestige, fame or fortune -- with those we know in our bones we're relationally safe with, and no man who has earned, and honours, the trust of his family will wag his 'tail' in a destructive direction.
(Barack Obama with his eldest daughter, Malia.)
It's the willingness to betray those we supposedly hold most dear that makes us unfit for mature relation ... or public office. Monogamy -- and faithfulness to bonded relation in general -- is a choice, and we make and break our vows based on whatever choice we make.






5 comments:
I agree. "Long national nightmare" is a gross overstatement re some tasteless sexting. Get a grip! The real national nightmare for the U.S. is its rapidly approaching debt ceiling. Nobody seems to give a damn about that, though.
the only reason why we know about these cheaters is because of the technology..men and women been cheating on each other since adam and eve..they just didn't have cell phone to show the world what they were doing..
Are human beings the ultimate gossips, or what!
;-D
I wonder if one of the reasons we get so snarled up about the tweet-pics (for example) is because it's *right there* ... in a way that a concept like "debt ceiling" isn't --> I for one truly can't comprehend "trillions of dollars" and abstractions like "debt ceiling" ... but I sure know it when I am approaching the limits of my own "capital" (This is hard to describe in a way ...)
Not only have I never cheated I can honestly say that I have never felt the slightest inclination to. Also I know from experience (albeit a long time ago) that I need to get to know someone extremely well before I am able to take the relationship to a physical level. So, unless I am unique among the male of the species, which is very unlikely, I don't think there is a universal propensity among men to cheat. In fact, it seems to me that among ordinary human beings, woman are almost as likely to cheat as men. However, you are right, when it comes to powerful men, cheating is far more likely. I have not known enough powerful women to work out if this is true of them as well.
I think it was the headline to that article, MEN WILL ALWAYS CHEAT, that got my goat more than anything. It's a blanket judgment that is simply not true.
Some men cheat; some women cheat.
I've come to see infidelity as akin to alcoholism and cancer in that I don't know anyone who hasn't been affected by all of them. -- Yikes, there's another blanket statement right there. But I do know one thing: NOT ALL MEN CHEAT.
Post a Comment