It’s a theory former White House Press Secretary Dana Perino floated last week, that men are prone to cheating and women aren’t, so we should elect more women to office.

I disagree with Dana.

While I can think of many reasons why more women should be elected to office, a reluctance to
cheat isn’t one of them. I’ve read plenty of studies that show women are as just as likely to fall prey to extramarital temptation as men, especially since we started making our own money.

But forget studies. Here are some real life examples: I learned from a friend yesterday that her good friend, a woman, recently left her marriage because monogamy just doesn’t agree with her. A male acquaintance filed for divorce after coming home to find his wife in bed with another man. A good male friend broke off a 15-year relationship after he found out his girlfriend had been chronically unfaithful (he was faithful and has since married a woman who shares his commitment to fidelity). Two other friends, a married couple, had their world rocked when they learned that close friends were divorcing because the wife had been cheating.

So, while the media continually depict woman as victims of infidelity, men get hurt, too. Which makes me wonder: Why are we depicted as victims?

I should probably clarify that I don’t think infidelity is okay, whether it’s committed by a man or a woman. If it’s beyond you to be faithful, stay single. Single is good.

And I’m thrilled that Jenny Sanford, the most recent “victim” of a philandering elected official, bucked tradition and refused the hold her husband’s hand during a press conference in which he apologized for his affair with an Argentinian woman.

4 Comments

• 

  By (no)sexandthecity, June 29, 2009 @ 4:14 pm

  Man or woman, I would prefer that politicians not be hypocrites professing family values, when they are only pretending to be something they are not. No matter which sex has betrayed their partner, it is still one of the most disgusting and cruel things you can do to a person who has been monogamous and faithful to you. The real “victims” are the people who honor their word and their commitments, who aren’t just lying and playing others for fools. It’s about ethics.

  If you don’t have integrity and leadership in your own home, why should anyone trust you to run their state or country? Had Hillary left Bill, I might have had more respect for her and the example she sets for other women. For better or worse, when you are in the public eye, people are looking to you for how to act. She’s just as much a liar as her husband; her marriage is a sham. She’s allowed his philandering to go on for years to ensure her own personal advancement. The message that sends is “A woman can’t make it in politics by her own merits, she has to ride on the coattails of some man.”

  That’s one of the biggest reasons I voted for Obama: his character. He seems to actually want to do the right thing, not just spout the words. He may one day prove to be a lying, cheating bastard…but for some reason I just don’t see that in him. He doesn’t just say he loves his wife and kids - you can see it in how he treats them. I like the fact that he sets an example for a strong family when other politicians like Sanford continue to let us down as a public. Be our leaders. Show us the way. If Obama has the integrity to do right by his own family, I trust him to do the same for the rest of us. People who stand before you and lie to your face without hesitation disgust me…which is perhaps why I have always despised the standard Politician.

  I’m all for bucking the “Stand By Your Man” tradition, too. What is this, the 1920’s? Kick his ass to the curb, don’t smile and support the bastard. Did he care what he was doing to you or your kids? No. So why care about his career. Have some self-respect: you cheat, you’re gone. Playing the docile female who lets people walk all over her…way outdated.
• 

  By Singletude: A Positive Blog for Singles, July 4, 2009 @ 2:18 am

  Why are we depicted as victims? Great question! As the traditional “weaker sex,” women have always been allowed to be more vulnerable than men. Male emotional expression is still stigmatized today, and when men are hurt, society still expects them to keep a stiff upper lip. So there’s less sympathy for men when their relationships dissolve.

  In addition, whether or not women cheat as often as men, the male sex is stereotyped as the one with the higher sex drive. So it’s presumed that if someone is going to stray into a different bed, it’s going to be the man. This primes us to condemn men when they’re caught and pour out our sympathy on their grieving wives.

  Another factor may be that women are often seen as the self-sacrificial relationship nurturers, and if you believe the studies, it’s true that women still do more of the communicative work as well as the household drudge work in their marriages. This seed of truth has grown into a media obsession with the beleaguered woman and her ungrateful husband. Again, it preps us to root for the woman when a relationship disintegrates.

  Finally, most of these high-profile scandals affect politicians and religious figures, and the majority in both professions are men. (For instance, in the Senate, there are currently just 16 women.) So, statistically, it’s just less likely that a woman in public office would be caught cheating. As more women are elected to positions of authority, it’s just a matter of time before one of them has a high-profile affair. It will be interesting to see how the media covers it when it happens.
• 

  By cdub, October 1, 2009 @ 3:38 am

  First off, well written Terry, and I agree with your points. I know I’m very late to this discussion but I think something else is being left out.

  Did Dana Perino forget all about the women who these men slept with? I mean they should be held accountable too (if they knew they were sleeping with a married man). It takes two to tango.

  But the bigger issue I see here has to do with how the Sexes attract to each other. If women weren’t as attracted to the Status of a man, then few women would be sleeping with these men that are high up on the male Dominance Hierchy Model.

  Also, there probably would be less cheating by women in office, because men don’t usually consider a woman’s status. It basically means next to nothing to most men. When men are considering a mate, they most often consider looks first and foremost. So if a Female Politican is considered attractive, there will be very few opportunities for her. Women on the other hand tend to look for other things besides looks in men, and to many women a man’s status does matter.

  Example, how many women would throw themselves at Obama, Bush, or Clinton because they are Presidents, further more, would they feel the same if the above mentioned men were Janitors (i.e., would they still want to sleep with them?)

  For a male example, how many men do you hear talking about how hot Hillary Clinton, Madaline Albright, or Nancy Pelosi are? And if these women were just teachers, it still wouldn’t make much of a difference to most men, as many men still would not pursue them.

  Thanks,

  Cdub
• 

  By cdub, October 1, 2009 @ 3:40 am

  correction meant to say

  “So if a Female Politican isn’t considered attractive, there will be very few opportunities for her.”

Other Links to this Post

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

*Name

*Email (not published)

Website