In a prior post I wrote about the betrayal of politicians to us, the constituancy. In that post I used “infidelity” in the context of their betrayal of their duties to us versus selfish and ideological goals.
Now, in light of the latest scandal involving a politician, a few words on their behavior in the context of adultery comes to mind. Of course we have numerous examples over the years of politicians on both sides of the aisle who have betrayed their spouses through adultery. What is interesting to me is the media reaction to their actions based on their party affiliation. I’ll leave it to you to figure out the difference. That is not my purpose here.
One thing that amuses me about the outcry and denounciations of these people is the hypocrisy of it all. No, not the adulterers hypocrisy but that of the denouncers. You can bet that at least 50% of the people denouncing these adulterous acts have themselves been adulterers or have somehow facilitated or aided and abetted an adulterer. That aid most often comes through what Peggy Vaughan, author of “The Monogamy Myth” (dearpeggy.com) has named the “code of secrecy.” The basic idea is that when most people know of a friend’s, co-worker’s or relative’s involvement in an illicit affair, there is a tendency to become a co-conspirator and keep it a secret. Often this is by omission, sometimes comission. Sometimes we even help them cover their tracks by backing up alibis.
Once the adultery becomes public knowledge though we change our tune. We cluck our tongue and decry their failure, dishonesty and all around lack of morality. Hypocrites?
Of course, we also know that half (more or less by expert estimates) of all men and women are involved in an affair sometime during the course of a marriage or committed relationship. So, by my estimation, half the population are active participants and some unknown number who are either willing or unwilling conspirators. That leaves a very paltry percentage of us who have the honest right to decry adultery; yet we do. Of course “reformed” adulterers who have sincerely accepted responsibility may also join the ranks of the honest critics. Interestingly enough, survey research indicates that though we have this high percentage of participants, almost everyone denounces adultery as wrong. There you have hypocrisy and duplicity of the highest order.
We tend to somehow be fascinated with the whole idea of adultery and the entertainment industry celebrates it and portrays it mostly in a very romantic light. And we watch it and revel in being the mouse on the wall who drools over the lust, secrecy and sexual excitement. Movies such as “The Bridges of Madison County” and TV shows such as “Desperate Housewives” romanticize and make adultery seem like the right thing to do if you need a little excitement in your life. And we watch. And then we call a politician who has a sexual tryst a hypocrite.
Just where lies the true hypocrisy?
Now let’s get to the issue of politicians’ adulterous or sexual detours compared to the rest of us. It seems that once someone is elected to a political office we begin to hold them to a higher standard. Of course there is good reason for that as we are dependent on them to look out for us and do the right thing for us. Yet, throughout history, we’ve seen time and again that far too many politicians can be dishonest, outright criminals and most of all, adulterers, just like everyone else. Why should anyone be surprised when one has a dalliance with some little staff chippie or seeks out sexual gratification in a men’s restroom? As one of my friends once said when Bill Clinton was under attack for his involvement with Monica Lewinski, “hey, what’s the big deal, he’s just a man.”
Indeed, he was and so too are senators Craig and Kennedy. Then there were Gary Condit, Bob Packwood, Henry Cisneros, Mark Foley, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy; need I go on? Some of these people suffered greatly in public opinion and others were given a free pass. Regardless, given the rich history of politicians’ adultery, we should perhaps realize that they were “just men” and as such no different than those who cast the stones. People who have affairs don’t think of their position, their family, their political obligations or the consequences. They get so involved in the excitement and so drunk with the love potion of hormones that all that is temporarily set aside in the heat of the moments. No matter how much we might like to believe otherwise, they are really just people like you and I who have the same hangups, fears, desires and humain failings as the rest of us. And for those of you who decry their hypocrisy, I hope you are in that small group of squeeky clean and pure folks who are not hypocrites in their own behaviors.
I’m not making excuses for them, there is no excuse that can justify adultery. The deception behind it is terrible and the consequences horrific. lives are destroyed, careers ruined, families broken and emotional distress beyond understanding (unless you’ve been on the receiving end, then you understand all too well.) I just want to point out that they are human and that much of the hypocrisy that is bandied about is as much from the accusers as it is from the accused
I also want you to consider something else. Does a person’s involvement in an affair affect their job performance. That is, if a senator, or your boss at work is having an affair, how much does that affect their capacity to perform their job? When someone has an affair and we discover it, there is a tendency to then apply that failure to all aspects of the person’s life. Does Craig’s alleged desire for homosexual sex negate his years of performance as a senator? Does it mean he will now stop doing a good job because he has been discovered? Is that fair? Is it a truism? I really think it is neither.
What it can affect in a small way is how they deal with the person at work if it is a subordinate. In those cases, there is clearly favoritism but that does not necessarily mean they are incapable of managing their job. I’ve seen numerous examples of people who are able to compartmentize and keep separate their private life from their business and still do a good job. Franklin Roosevelt carried on a decades long affair yet managed to guide our nation through one of the most catastrophic world wars in history. Newt Gingrich was arguably one of the best Speakers of the House in history yet his affair was never an issue as far as his performance went. John Kennedy was rumoured to be one of the greatest presidential womanizers in recent history but managed to do more good for our country in less than one term than most presidents do in two. His brother, Teddy Kennedy (though I detest his arrogant and abrasive lack of courtesy or manners) managed to perform as a senator for decades despite his Chappaquiddick escapades and even slick Willie, Bill Clinton managed to get by as a president.
So, why are we so willing to want to run these people out on a rail, or tar and feather them for doing what it seems we ourselves do daily? Why should you vilify them while patting your neighbor on the back and helping him or her cover up adultery. Why would you cry for a resignation when maybe you yourself had an affair? Is it that you think your case is so special and different or is it something else like hypocrisy?
I’ll tell you what I think. I think as with almost everything these days, when it comes to politicians it boils down to ideology and your own party affiliation. Democrats defended Clinton during his affair with Monica and told us time and again “he’s just a man” or “it wasn’t sex.” But, stepping back from ideology, you must know in your heart that what he did was very wrong and a leadership failure. He took advantage of an employee which would get most of us fired in the business world. Now most democrats scream for resignations of Craig and others who’ve done the same. Republicans have behaved the same. Hypocrisy.
Each party makes excuses and tries their best to make the other party member’s failures “different” they’ll justify their ire based on small differences in the story. The latest rationalization for attacking Craig’s behavior is that he is a hypocrite. That is just laughable. Every single one of these people who have had affairs is a hypocrite. Is it somehow worse if someone is a Republican or a member of that horrifying “religious right” (shudder)? Many on the left have already used that tactic. It’s not that he did it but that he is a Christain and that makes him a hypocrite. Doesn’t that imply that Democrats have no religious or moral compass therefore bad behavior by them is not hypocritical? Please, give me a break! It just makes me laugh.
The bottom line is that public servants, just like all of us are human. They are subject to the same forces that drive the rest of us into adultery. Because they are politicians does not make them immune, nor does it mean that somehow they are unable to do good works. If that were the case, 50% of the population would be incompetant and unable to keep a job. Think about it.
Â
Â