Vicki Larson argues that if men are going to cheat, they should at least do it discreetly — otherwise it makes all men look bad.
I wouldn’t want to be one of the 11 Secret Service agents who engaged in hanky-panky with hookers in Colombia right now. Not just because of the uncomfortable media exposure and forced resignations, but because when they get home to their wives or significant others, you just know there’s going to be some ‘splaining to do. And, “But this was the first time, honey, honest,” probably isn’t going to cut it.
“Why aren’t there more (or any?!) female Secret Service agents?” laments blogger Kiri Blakeley. By her reasoning there should be because, “Women don’t get into trouble the way men do.”
We don’t?
True, you rarely hear of sex scandals the likes of this when you get a bunch of women together for a gals’ night — although who knows what really goes on behind the locked hotel doors in Vegas after a Thunder From Down Under show?
Women do indeed get into trouble “the way men do” — we’re just as capable of cheating, lying and all sorts of manipulative behavior. For a brief time there was even a prostidude at a Nevada bordello, so it’s obvious that some of us are just as willing to pay for sex. It’s just that we don’t get in trouble en masse, frat-boy-style like so many men do. Women are just as lascivious, but we’re a lot more discreet.
In fact, men could take a few lessons from us.
♦◊♦
This isn’t the first time we’ve seen men behaving badly in public, and that’s part of the problem. When men act so scandalous in such a public way, whether hiring a bunch of hookers as the Secret Service agents did or just one — at thousands a pop as former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer did — it makes guys look bad. Not all guys, because we all know more men than not who would never act like that, as tempted as they may be. But those public sexual scandals confirm for many women that men are ruled by what’s between their legs and not what’s in their head.
Perhaps that’s why most of us seem to be much more forgiving when women stray.
I’m not saying it’s right or good; I’m just saying it’s pretty much true.
Last year, Tom Matlack of the Good Men Project took objection to that. “When was the last time a woman got dragged through the mud for cheating?” he asked.
“Why do we have a national obsession with men’s infidelity? Is it some kind of backlash, a hidden gender war buried in our collective subconscious? I just don’t get it, and it’s beginning to piss me off,” he says. Then he rattles off a list of celebrity women who cheated and were “forgiven,” including “Eat, Pray, Love” author Elizabeth Gilbert, who got a “free pass” because after her sexual shenanigans she went on a spiritual journey and found “real” love.
A few days later on that same site, Blixa Scott picked up where Matlack left off. In wondering why we forgive adulterous women, she notes that when women cheat we tend to (erroneously) think it isn’t all about lust and longing — it’s about love and romance and soul mates. “The lesson here is that our culture is intolerant of adultery when it seems to flow purely from libido. But when adultery is bound up in (a) story of love, well, we’re willing to look the other way. … And until our culture stops polarizing male and female sexuality by insisting that men only lust and women only love, the adultery double standard will prevail.”
♦◊♦
Perhaps that’s true when we’re talking about celebrity cheaters, but not the world most of us live in. Look at your own friendship circle; I’m willing to bet that most of us tend to support the person, male or female, who was cheated on and, yes, for many of us, that more often than not is the woman. Men still tend to do most of the cheating, but give women time; we’re catching up.
Of the women who are cheaters, sympathies tend to be divided; while friends aren’t necessarily willing to justify an adulterous wife’s actions (even if she herself is spinning a good story of why she needed to cheat), forgiveness often comes easier if her hubby was considered to be a jerk to begin with. But if he’s seen as a nice guy, a cheating wife can and often is cast aside just as easily and quickly as if she were a cheating husband.
And please don’t keep thinking that women cheat just for romance and love, or because we’re not getting fulfilled at home; we also cheat for the thrill of it, the passion and the novelty, and because we can — just like men. Sometimes, it really is just about the sex. Let’s face it – monogamy is hard!
But we don’t tend to engage in the kind of sexual drunkfests that some men do, especially if we’re high-powered women. It has nothing to do with boys-will-be-boys machismo in the name of our country either; the last time I looked, there were women putting their life on the line for all of us every day. You can’t blame testosterone for being stupid (although as I’ve pointed out before, testosterone-laden guys are more likely to cheat, divorce and have marital woes).
So, just imagine how the Secret Service scandal might have played out if after the big booze fest, each man slipped off solo, hit up a hooker and quietly took her to his room (and paid her the asking price, obviously; you mean we’re getting underpaid here, too?). No scandal, no disgrace, and his sweetheart at home would be none the wiser.
Now, that’s the way to cheat!
–
Vicki Larson blogs at OMG Chronicles. This post was previously published on Huffington Post.
About Vicki Larson
“But those public sexual scandals confirm for many women that men are ruled by what’s between their legs and not what’s in their head.”
“I’m not saying it’s right or good; I’m just saying it’s pretty much true.”
So these women are willing to believe misandrous ideas of men simply because some of them cheat? Men are ruled by what’s between their legs and not what’s in their head because a minority of men cheat on their partners (based on your linked stats). Care to explain the logic in that one? It seems in this case many women are prejudiced against men, willing to believe popular stereotypes and justifying it by high-profile cases.
I guess the various women marrying up, marrying for money confirm to many men that women are only interested in shallow material objects vs love, proving women think with their greed vs other attributes? People need to focus more on individuals vs groups, what some men and women do isn’t going to be the same as other men and women. Why don’t we teach this tidbit in schools more?
Why are the men getting caught with hookers? Supply and demand, obviously it’s harder for them to get what they want without paying for it and I’d guess women have an easier time finding casual sex than a male.
Have you seen how many “romantic” movies targeted to women have a plotline that is basically a female has a partner, usually a fiance who she is in love with and then she meets a new mysterious guy and falls madly in love with him, and somehow ends up with him after cheating on the first guy. I find it hard to believe that if the genders were reversed it’d be seen as “romantic” and “sweet”. But hey that genre is full of cliches…
It is confusing that a discussion of how to good people suggests that the appropriate alternative to cheating indiscreetly is cheating discreetly. How about not cheating? How about not making commitments we don’t intend to keep or know we are likely or certain to be unable to keep, or ending a committed relationship before moving on to someone else? Why is “be a better liar” on the table? Are we really this pathetic that this is how low the bar for being a good person- man or woman -has become?
My thoughts exactly. Thank you Kirsten in MT.
Wow, that CafeMom article was all kinds of sexist fail. Per the norm for The Stir as of late. My own response to Kiri is below:
No Kiri, I think you are a gigantic sexist with a tenous, at best, grasp on reality. I’ve been involved in HR for years. I gotta tell you, I’ve had just as many problem employees that were female as not. You made the following crazy statement to defend your above hallucinations, “When women are supposed to be doing a job, they do the damn job.” Let me correct that for you, “When women are supposed to be doing a job, SOME of them do the damn job.” Then again, like their male counterparts, some of them will skip out on work, do a half-assed job, and get involved in stupid controversies with their coworkers instead of doing their damned jobs.
Once again, cafemom and the stir prove that sexism is not just a man’s game.
Gross.
“The lesson here is that our culture is intolerant of adultery when it seems to flow purely from libido. But when adultery is bound up in (a) story of love, well, we’re willing to look the other way. … And until our culture stops polarizing male and female sexuality by insisting that men only lust and women only love, the adultery double standard will prevail.”
Got it in one.
This is the reason people are more tolerant of women cheating than of men. And I think this is also why, in my experience, when it comes to cheating the court of public opinion is kinder to women. When a man cheats on his wife the thought is that he simply couldn’t keep it in his pants and he went into the arms of another woman, thus hurting his wife in the process. When a woman cheats on her husband the thought is that he was not doing something for her and she found that something in the arms of another man.
Point being the thought is men do something to their wives to cause them to cheat while women are totally innocent and the men that cheat on their wives are jerks.
I think some of the differences in public perception come from our traditional understanding that in sex, men are actors while women are simply acted upon. If women have no sexual agency of there own, then they cannot be held responsible for sexual transgressions and so, we reserve judgment for her male lovers and hold her otherwise innocent.
All of which highlights yet another privilege provided women by the old gender binary that feminists have been happy to selectively preserve while otherwise raging against the machine.
Interestingly, I agree with the first part of your comment but disagree with your second paragraph. First, I wouldn’t say feminists have been happy to selectively preserve bits of the gender binary. That implies a conscious effort on their part…as if feminists are sitting around acknowledging aspects of female privilege in private, but publicly ignore it. It isn’t some great conspiracy. I will say that there are feminists out there who are unable to see female privilege, just like there are men out there unable to see male privilege.
Also, I think it’s interesting that you view the traditional “women as acted upon” role in sex as a privilege. Being viewed as having no agency isn’t actually a privilege. It may lead to a privilege (i.e. being more easily forgiven of cheating on a partner), but it in of itself is not a privilege.
First, I wouldn’t say feminists have been happy to selectively preserve bits of the gender binary. That implies a conscious effort on their part…as if feminists are sitting around acknowledging aspects of female privilege in private, but publicly ignore it. It isn’t some great conspiracy. I will say that there are feminists out there who are unable to see female privilege, just like there are men out there unable to see male privilege.
I’m sorry but I have to disagree with this to a point. Its not a big conspiracy (in the sense that its pretty public) that when it comes to talking about adultery a lot feminists tend to focus only on what adulterous men do as if they have been getting a total free pass on it.
And I’d be willing to say that there are men that recognize male privilege and try to maintain it just as there are women that recognize female privilege and try to maintain it.
Also, I think it’s interesting that you view the traditional “women as acted upon” role in sex as a privilege. Being viewed as having no agency isn’t actually a privilege. It may lead to a privilege (i.e. being more easily forgiven of cheating on a partner), but it in of itself is not a privilege.
And that’s probably Random called it a privilege. Because of the way women are often given more leeway when bad things happen (which according to some folks women are always on the harsher end of things). It may not activate when said woman wants to (just as male privilege) but I’d still call it that.
“And I’d be willing to say that there are men that recognize male privilege and try to maintain it just as there are women that recognize female privilege and try to maintain it.”
See now, I think that most people who want to maintain their privilege don’t see it as privilege. In all my conversations with people about privilege (of various kinds), I’ve never had someone tell me that they agree that they have privilege but they also think they should keep it. Instead they usually say that they either don’t think privilege exists, or that the example that I’m talking about isn’t privilege…it’s just “the way it is.”
So like, with adultery, I agree that there are feminists out there who are preserving the gender binary narrative, but again I don’t think it’s usually done consciously. I’ve come across feminists (and non-feminists) out there who will say things about how women are just better people in certain ways without realizing that they’re still stuck in the binary system they’re trying to escape.
“It may not activate when said woman wants to (just as male privilege) but I’d still call it that.”
But see, being viewed as someone without agency in itself also contributes to women being restricted by gender roles, particularly historically. That’s why I am suggesting it isn’t privilege on it’s own. It’s similar to men being viewed as having a high libido. It’s something that contributes to privilege, but also something that’s contributed to gender-based restrictions.
See now, I think that most people who want to maintain their privilege don’t see it as privilege. In all my conversations with people about privilege (of various kinds), I’ve never had someone tell me that they agree that they have privilege but they also think they should keep it. Instead they usually say that they either don’t think privilege exists, or that the example that I’m talking about isn’t privilege…it’s just “the way it is.”
I get you. Its just that to me I think that the “its just the way it is” folks know that there is some privielge working in their favor and don’t want to give it up and that’s just an attempt to justify the privilege.
But see, being viewed as someone without agency in itself also contributes to women being restricted by gender roles, particularly historically. That’s why I am suggesting it isn’t privilege on it’s own. It’s similar to men being viewed as having a high libido. It’s something that contributes to privilege, but also something that’s contributed to gender-based restrictions.
Fair enough. I suppose my view has been warped by having to hear double standards on privilege for so long. To a lot of folks the smallest crumb of evidence disproves female privilege but the largest mountain of evidence doesn’t disprove male privilege (and vice versa I bet).
So for the first bit…yeah I guess I’m just a bit more optimistic.
As for the second bit, yeah I can see what you’re saying. I guess just…well whenever I talk about male and female privilege, if I say I don’t think a particular behaviour/social norm/whatever is an example of it…it doesn’t mean I’m saying I don’t think it exists. I think both exist…so I don’t think you can disprove one or the other of them. I just also think it’s important to be highly contextual with the use of the terms in order to understand if they are at play in a given situation, and if they are, how they are affecting that situation.
I dig.
” In all my conversations with people about privilege (of various kinds), I’ve never had someone tell me that they agree that they have privilege but they also think they should keep it. Instead they usually say that they either don’t think privilege exists, or that the example that I’m talking about isn’t privilege…it’s just “the way it is.” ”
So, devil’s advocate here: is it even possible for someone to say he/she doesn’t have a privilege and be correct in saying that? I hope saying I don’t have a privilege is not evidence in itself that I have it. Saying “no” could be a denial of reality or a self-delusion, or it could actually be a correct statement. Presumably there is some sort of objective test for seeing if I privilege, and either you or I could be incorrect in predicting the outcome, not automatically me being incorrect as the person labeled as privileged.
If there is no way to challenge the “privilege” hypothesis, then that opens the door to all sorts of spurious conclusions. I have a lot of messages on the GMP. Perhaps it is because my pseudonym begins with “w” and our society maintains a distinct “w” privilege. I say society does not have a “w” privilege, but that means that society really does, and it’s obviously self-serving of me to deny it, so it must exist?
(On the other hand, I do think people whose last names end in vowels still face discrimination of sorts, so this may be a poor example.)
So, devil’s advocate here: is it even possible for someone to say he/she doesn’t have a privilege and be correct in saying that?
That’s a good question. It seems that when it comes to privilege it gets used in some sort of “This is true and any attempt to question it only proves that I’m correct, except when I deny it then it’s actually not true.”
@HeatherN
Yeah sorry, “privilege” was intended with some super subtle irony. I guess “rage against the machine” didn’t help draw it out.
I know the feminist perspective does not consider the denial of a woman’s sexual agency provides her anything but unabashed misogyny, but that’s kind of the point I’m making. If you believe the gender binary exists as means of maximizing the potential of the culture by enforcing behavioral norms exploiting gender (even while it violates the individual) then you tend to see a system of privileges reserved for compliance and inequities reserved for dissention. Conversely, if you believe that the gender binary exists to provide one group privileges at the expense of another group by exploiting gender differences, then you see gendered oligarchy or patriarchy. The feminist movement’s insistence on the latter and inability to see the former (privileges granted women for compliance with the gender binary) gets my goat every time.
It matters b/c a movement that professes liberation against the gender construct achieves anything but when it dedicates energy selectively to inequities burdening one gender. It’s not that I accuse feminists of plotting to preserve female privileges consciously; it’s just the net consequence of a movement allocating resources to address select grievances and remaining mute on others.
“I will say that there are feminists out there who are unable to see female privilege, just like there are men out there unable to see male privilege.”
That is an interesting perspective Heather but it also is important to point out that men have spent decades trying to acknowledge and reverse their prejudice about male privileges while (many) women seem totally incapable and resistant to even acknowledging it. When they do it is framed in side some argument that deflects blame back on to men or rationalizes the behavior in some other manner.
Right well first, I had to go back and read my comments to see what I’d actually written cuz they are a bit old.
Anyway, I know plenty of men who most certainly have not tried to acknowledge and reverse their privilege…and I know plenty of men who are completely unable to accept their privilege. As for deflecting…well yeah I know plenty of men who do the same thing you describe, only in reverse. (i.e. men deflecting the blame back onto women). There are plenty of men out there who completely refuse to admit that male privilege exists…just as there are plenty of ‘white’ people out there who refuse to admit that ‘white’ privilege exists, etc.
Anyway, women’s privilege is a fairly new thing, really. The only way that women were privileged in traditional western cultures were that they were considered fragile enough to be the rescued instead of the rescuers. But, as I pointed out, being considered a less-than-adult without any real agency is hardly a privilege.
Anyway, women’s privilege is a fairly new thing, really. The only way that women were privileged in traditional western cultures were that they were considered fragile enough to be the rescued instead of the rescuers. But, as I pointed out, being considered a less-than-adult without any real agency is hardly a privilege.
Oh but being considered less than adult shouldn’t be a mark against whether is counts as a privilege should it?
I mean with the way men are treated (beasts looking for the next women to rape, power hungry rage machines, emotionally dead, etc…) that doesn’t seem to mean that male privilege is “hardly a privilege”. (I’m sure you know what I mean and I think you might agree, it was just the “hardly a privilege” that stuck out to me.)
Danny…being considered aggressive and unemotional is not a privilege. And being considered a less-than-adult is not a privilege. I feel like we had this conversation already.
Oh I’m sure we have. (Sorry I’m just off my game today.)
No worries.
Some of the privileges I hear about have nullifiers, like being seen as weak to nullify the female privilege of more protection and being seen as strong has the nullifier of expectation and requirement in some cases (draft, etc) to sacrifice yourself for others. Are they both privileges, or do they get nullified?
I disagree with the idea that one privilege and another lack-of-privilege is a nullifier. That term implies that they cancel each other out…or that it all ends up equal in the end or something. They interact. And it’s not quite as simple as I think the direct correlations you’re making. Privilege is complicated, and different privileges (and disadvantages) interact and intersect in complex ways.
So in simple terms, the fact that being seen as weak but protected is shitty it doesn’t nullify female privilege, n same for men seen as strong but disposable doesn’t nullify any privileges relating to being seen as stronger?
“public perception come from our traditional understanding that in sex, men are actors while women are simply acted upon.”
This also holds true in federal law; if a drunk man and woman have sex, she is considered as not being capable of giving consent, while he can be convicted of rape since a) his consent is implied simply by being male b) he is responsible for her actions as well.
As Vicki mentioned above, sometimes women cheat for the sex. It is not always about how much her husband or boyfriend is a jerk. Sometimes, the thrill of some stranger in her ladybits is all there it to it. I’ve told this story before, but I’ll tell it again, twenty years ago, when I was still single, I was involved in a series of one-night stands with women I didn’t know. At least a half dozen were married women who initiated the sexual activities. I never sought them out, they just seemed to “happen”. In some cases, the women were fairly aggressive and made it clear that they wanted sex and nothing else.
At the time, I was in a phase of sexual grieving which took the form of subconsciously trying to take back power through promiscuity following a drug-induced rape I experienced at the hands of a female acquaintance. Fortunately, that phase did end before anything tragic occurred, but I took some really stupid chances back then with women I didn’t know. During that period, I seldom sought out sex partners but I never said no to those who approached me. It was as if it were just understood that I was not going to say no. I am not basing this on the ugly stereotype that all men want sex at all times from whoever is offering. Rather, I think I was transmitting “yes” nonverbally, if that makes sense. I wouldn’t say no. I didn’t really believe enough in my own self sovereignty to reject a woman’s advances
In the moment, I didn’t see it, but in retrospect it was very dangerous for a variety of reasons. Obviously, sexually transmitted diseases were a threat. Then, there was the possibility of angry husbands finding out and getting violent, among other things. Further, I didn’t know these women and had absolutely no reason to trust them. They could have easily lied and made all kinds of claims if discovered. Fortunately, I did not have to confront such a situation.
Interestingly enough, the response I’ve received since becoming a sexual violence speaker has been completely lacking in criticism for the married women who slept with me back then. I have been asked several times if I forgave myself, but strangely enough the same people have nothing negative to say about the women who cheated.
How about instead of discussing how to cheat “better,” we discussed how not to cheat at all. Now this might sound crazy at first, but what if we were honest with our partners about our sexual needs? If someone wants to sleep around while they’re in a relationship, they should have the courage and gumption to say so and negotiate that with their partner.
I get that people will still cheat; I just think its ridiculous to suggest that somehow if no one finds out that makes it okay.
This isn’t the first time we’ve seen men behaving badly in public, and that’s part of the problem. When men act so scandalous in such a public way, whether hiring a bunch of hookers as the Secret Service agents did or just one — at thousands a pop as former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer did — it makes guys look bad. Not all guys, because we all know more men than not who would never act like that, as tempted as they may be. But those public sexual scandals confirm for many women that men are ruled by what’s between their legs and not what’s in their head.
Okay, so the rest of men must worker harder to make up for women’s misandric perceptions based on a minority of cheating men?
Wow. Great point. Let me just utilize such logic in the rest of my life! For instance, despite having a bunch of other paragraphs I agree with, since this article has just one misandric paragraph I’m going to dismiss the entire thing. Oh wait, I forgot there’s more than one…
So, just imagine how the Secret Service scandal might have played out if after the big booze fest, each man slipped off solo, hit up a hooker and quietly took her to his room … No scandal, no disgrace, and his sweetheart at home would be none the wiser. Now, that’s the way to cheat!
Thanks Vicki, for telling men how we just need to cheat as good as women, who are apparently sneakier at it! Because being a liar AND cheater is way better than just being a cheater.
Seriously, am I the only one offended at the misandry and misogyny going on here?
Yeah, I’d say that’s a tone I’m not much fond of. Let’s cheat less, lie less, and be more honest. I know, I know that’s a virtual impossibility, but I’ll still hope for it.
If it’s a virtual impossibility, then there’s no point in pretending we’re talking about how to be good people.
?? And I said I’d keep hoping for it. And acting in a manner of goodness. I don’t know what you are getting at. My response to the piece is….why lie or cheat to begin with, which is part and parcel of all the work I do here.
It’s not a virtual impossibility, nor something to merely hope for. It’s a realistic expectation of good people that they not behave this way, and it’s a realistic option for good people to choose not to cheat and lie their way through their intimate relationships.
And I do not disagree. Nor do many many other people I know. Kirsten, perhaps it was a word choice that set you off, but if you read any of my writings here, you’ll see how deeply I promote the idea of people being good. Take that for what you will.
Sometimes, you know? I get tired. And I engage in sarcasm and dismayed language.
Because the fact that bad things do happen should not be an excuse to not try to be good.
I am being quite tongue-in-cheek about men learning to cheat like women do. I am not fond of cheating — having seen and experienced the damage it does — nor am I promoting it! That said, men who get involved in behavior like this are just plain stupid; there’s no other way to describe it. I expect such behave (to a certain extent) from my teen (and he hasn’t disappointed me!) — after that age, there’s no excuse anymore. If you must cheat, please don’t act like you don’t have a brain, which is what we’ve seen time and time again with powerful men. Why?
Same could be said of women who engage in this behaviour, though. That’s where I think you’re running into the most trouble…suggesting (even tongue in cheek) that the women who cheat are somehow smarter than the men who cheat.
And even more disturbing Heather is the thought that being smarter about cheating is somehow something to aspire to. As pointed out in other articles here sometimes men are never the wiser and end up raising children that are the outcome of that cheating. Is that something to be proud of?
I think Vickis articles should have been written for women; How to cheat like men; be dumb and get caught.
In some cases, the men doing the cheating who fail to use their brain while doing so, are totally irresponsible in their infidelity. Anthony Weiner comes to mind. But in many others, the infidelity is exposed because the women involved with these men expose their affairs. Is it safe to say that women can probably get away with cheating easier because men are less likely to spill the beans? Are men more likely to be comfortable having just a sexual fling without feeling used? Would it be a sexist thing to sugges that women are more likely to expose these affairs either out of guilt, jealousy or simply feeling used by their cheating partners?
I also want to touch on the issue of how our culture views women’s and men’s infidelity differently. I do think to a point that when one person cheats, attention is paid to why and often the conclusion is that the other person failed in some capacity to satisfy the partner who cheated. With men, it’s because the woman is maybe less sexual, not willing or exciting in ways he desires. With women it can be the same thing, but the stigma on the non-cheating party seems greater for men who fail to keep their women pleased than it is with women who fail to satisfy their men.
The tongue-in-cheek tone didn’t really come across for me, obviously. I also don’t really understand the prescription that if you *must* cheat, then you should at least be smart about it. Seems condescending. Not to mention apologetic to sneaky cheaters.
Tounge and cheek? The tone of your article sounds more like taunting than anything.(you men are stupid and can’t get away with cheating like us women do, so there!) You say you don’t promote ‘cheating’, but that’s preceisley what your article does. Basicly saying your not stupid for cheating, just getting caught!
I agree that men should take a tip from women when it comes to cheating: blame it all on your spouse, claim they weren’t “giving me what I needed,” and expect forgiveness and support from everyone around you.
I saw study from the UK, it found that women were more likely to judge the entire gender on bad experiences with a minority of men and another that found that cheating men were more likely to own up when asked if they are cheating, instead of lying and denying.
I think the article is wrong headed to suggest that men should [1] adjust their behavior to accommodate women’s sexism and [2] be more dishonest with their partners.
Before you throw your back out patting it so much on how good you are at cheating Ms. Larson, consider the chasm of the double standard.I’d imagine if I were a woman it would be comforting to know that if I was doing something like cheating on my spouse that #1) even if it was found out by my friends, they wouldn’t judge me harshly (oooh, a ‘secret lover’, how exciting, how romantic!) And #2) even if others found out, all I have to do is say what a ‘beast, jerk, monster’ etc. my husband is and not only do I get a free pass, it all comes down on his head!
I’ve always been a big fan of don’t ask; don’t tell, humans being who they are. But women do talk. I just think that their networks are a bit more closed off from men (and others in a more general sense.) I’m a college professor, and there are three reasons, however, I’ve never messed with a student.
1. It is bad ethically. It can almost never be good for the student.
2. They’re usually too young. They would attach unrealistic expectations, and they’re actually not that interesting most of the time untill they’re older.
3. But a real major consideration is: They are certain to tell their peers because doing a professor is “social currency.” When I was in grad school, I saw a professor garner smirks from students when he walked by. They thought he was a tool because he had had undergraduate girlfriends. No thanks.
I think the whole “discrete” part of the affairs that women dabble in actually has nothing to do with the women themselves. It’s because they are cheating with a man and a man has no reason to mess up the affair. When a man cheats with another woman she is usually the person who exposes the affair due to jealousy towards the wife, either via e-mail or phone calls. A man is often, but not always, happy to keep things purely physical without getting emotionally attached.
Exactly my point. I think women are “better” at cheating or at least not getting caught, because their partners in crime are guys who are perfectly happy with being just a sex partner and nothing more. I get the sense that women who are screwing with married guys think that there’s more to it than just the sex or the thrill alone. When a woman figures out she is only being used for sex, it is far more likely she will spill the beans to the wife or at least threaten to do so, causing the guys to get even deeper into the cover-up, making them look like fools in the process. If men were just as likely to rat out their cheating partners’ indiscretions to the husbands, women would find themselves looking quite foolish too. Imagine if a man threatened a woman to expose their affair, and lets say said woman has a family which she fears losing over this affair. Don’t you think she might do some stupid stuff trying to salvage her life, trying to dig out from the hole she’s in by getting in deeper?
If men were just as likely to rat out their cheating partners’ indiscretions to the husbands, women would find themselves looking quite foolish too.
Men would never do this. No guys wants to piss off a woman and get falsely accused of rape so she can save face.
Yeah, look at what almost happened to the ‘Good Day NY’ host Greg Kelly. He ‘Hooked up’ with some woman who came on to him, sexted back and forth, and got pregnent. Ended up she was ‘Cheating’ on her live in boyfriend. When she got caught (the guy knew the kid wasn’t his since she had ‘cut him off’ for a couple of months), she tried to claim she was drunk and therefore raped! The mountain of evidence proved otherwise and Kelly was cleared, the case was dropped(of course no charges were brought against her).
I remember this…was the anonymity afforded the accuser withdrawn?
What got me most about the press on this, is that the accused was named, pictured and his family named while granting the accuser totally anonymity -which is the norm for these charges.
I get the need to provide the accuser anonymity in rape cases, I just don’t understand why the accused is not afforded the same protection. Particularly when the current system provides cover to destroy a person with impunity. If we’re not granting both parties anonymity, or prosecuting false allegations, than the least we can do is drag the accuser through the press after the charges are deemed contrived.
I’ll let out the big secret here, whether I’ll be believed or not.
First, let’s get this out of the way. We men are all ruled by the same hive mind. I have been assigned the role as spokesdrone for the moment. Let the illusion of our individuality fade for the moment. It will be re-established shortly.
The big reveal: we have created the massive illusion that we are stupid about hiding our infidelities. It has been very useful for us for women to consistently underestimate how clever we are. This has been most convenient in creating both a false sense of security AND in stroking women’s feelings of superiority over men. (Notice the overwhelming success with the second goal so far. Keep up the good work, guys. Let’s see how high we can inflate it!) This discourages women from digging too deeply into our private lives. Because men are so stupid, there’s no need for any more than a superficial glance at our browser history or cell phone archives. The blatant failures pave the way for the stunning successes.
We’ve been carefully crafting the impression that we men are just fundamentally no good at cheating. So bad at it that it’s hard to imagine us ever getting away with it.
Now, you might think that if a woman was interested in having an affair with a man already in a monogamous relationship, she would be stupid to think that he could ever keep the relationship a secret. She would only ever do so under the assumption that he will be unable to keep the secret. She would therefore only do so with the expectation that he will give himself away, so therefore she must not have wanted it to remain secret in the first place.
So, unfortunately, the illusion of our ineptitude constantly falls apart, because we keep having trysts with women who know exactly how ingenious we can be at maintaining a deception for a long time. The partners think we are simple-minded, but the mistresses know how diabolically sophisticated we can really be. Of course, your wife may know exactly how good men are at lying because she’s sleeping with your co-worker, who’s lying to his own wife.
And that’s the problem with men – why can’t they ever think about men’s reputation when they cheat on their wives and girlfriends? So selfish in that way….
Ah that gave me a good chuckle.
Though I suppose I could have replied to any of the blokes and you’d have gotten the message, what with the hive mind and all.
@wellokaythen — Well, you sure fooled me! Thanks for your clever response. Of course, now we’re all dialed into the hive mind …
My second point got lost in the convoluted sarcasm of the first point.
The second point: when women have relationships with married men, those women are also choosing a very stupid option. Think about how many times the mistresses themselves are dragged through the mud along with the cheating husband. If women are so much smarter than men, then why do so many women enter into these affairs that they know that these men are so incapable of hiding? Knowing that you’re going to get caught and doing it anyway is even more stupid than thinking you won’t get caught and doing it. That’s willful ignorance.
Who’s more foolish? The fool, or the fool who follows the fool?
By the same token (assuming a heterosexual affair), whether or not these women get away with their affairs depends a lot on the discretion of the men they’re sleeping with. It doesn’t matter who clever you are if the man on the side can’t keep his mouth shut. It takes two to tango, and two to keep an affair a secret. Perhaps the great brilliance of women having affairs is the ability to find men who can be discrete….
So, what would you say the overarching point is to your article is Vicki?
Oops(rolls eyes). So, what would you say the overarching point is to your article Vicki?
The “overarching point” is that the frat-boy mentality of some men in power tends to cast a shadow over all men for many — I repeat, many, not all — women. How many articles do you see after such events, wondering why men who seemingly have it all ruin it (if that’s what you think they’re doing) for a screw? But, OK, if they have to fool around, it’s crazy to do it in such an arrogant way. Maybe JFK and others in days past could, when we weren’t so celeb-obsessed and people and the press often tuned away from such shenanigans, but today it’s just plain stupid.
I am in no way promoting or condoning cheating; I think it can be devastating to a couple and family. I did point out that women on the whole are a lot sneakier than men, and I’d have to guess especially high-powered women because we don’t hear too much about their affairs and I’m pretty sure they’re having them. Yes, there are many sneaky, successfully cheating men, too. Still, that arrogant frat-boy stuff is really, really bad (just like the Botoxed, boob-enhanced gold-diggers are for women, but any man who gets involved with someone like that knows exactly what he’s getting into).
Men should learn that, when you cheat, it is because your partner doesn’t fulfill you. They are inconsiderate of your feelings, your needs. They are self-absorbed and use sex as a reward-punishment system. Men should learn from women that when men cheat it is totally justified.
So women, who all know that they cheat and their friends cheat, consider men to be ‘ruled by that thing between their legs’ because they are not ‘smart’ (read manipulative) to lie well about it? So is the point that women are upset men don’t lie better? The cheating is ok?
Women don’t cheat because women ‘have affairs”: they aren’t betraying someone for something as base as sex, they are looking for emotional fulfillment. Because of course their partner is a man i.e emotionally stunted. Or of course because they hit their late 30s and are celebrating their sexual power.
In short men cheat because they are emotionally stunted base creatures rules ruled by their penis, and women cheat because they are deeply evolved emotional creatures betrayed by their less evolved partners.
“she notes that when women cheat we tend to (erroneously) think it isn’t all about lust and longing — it’s about love and romance and soul mates. ”
I don’t even buy this as an excuse that women buy; isn’t the first question women ask when a man cheats is ‘Do you love her??’ Certainly they understand that cheating for sex while painful is nowhere as near annhilating as being cheated on because your spouse/lover is in love with and mentally/emotionally intimate with someone else. I know this phase has been objected to before but I think the real difference in attitudes between men and women cheating is summarized again by ‘Women great. Men Suck”.
I just had a conversation with some female friends about how women tell everrrrrything to their friends about sex with men and are clear it is very graphic. I for one hate it; if I wanted to be intimate with my female friend’s friends I would have chosen them instead. I hate when I show up to meet a girlfriend and all her friends are giggling and saying ‘HIiiiiiii Michaeeeel” after we just had a great night together.
Anyway this one girl tells me how her friend had sex with a guy who was still sleeping when her friends came over and she was giving the blow by blow (no pun intended). I was horriified and she said to me “Michael it comes from the most scared space”. I asked her if the situation was reversed and she heard a guy she just spent the night with telling his buddies about every detail about her body, her noises, her sex, while she lay trapped in the bedroom would be as ‘sacred’. She told me without a trace of irony; ‘that would be disgusting, men are such pigs”.
I think this ‘tongue in cheek’ article comes from the same place.
Correction on above; she said ““Michael it comes from the most SACRED space”.
Sacred Space? Oh for fuck’s sake. Good lord. That’s called “gossip.” Nothin’ sacred about it.
BTW; the Secret Service agents weren’t fired for cheating since as far as I know not all of them were married or in monogamous relationships. They were fired for sullying the reputation of a US Presidential detail while overseas.