Skip to comments.Self-hating Spitzer--Why do men who seem to have everything throw it all away?
Posted on 03/16/2008 12:41:03 PM PDT by SJackson
Dr. Laura Schlesinger has a penchant for inane and knee-jerk moralizing. But last week even she outdid herself, as she blamed Elliot Spitzer's long-suffering wife, Silda, for her husband's unfaithfulness with a prostitute.
Speaking on the Today show, Dr. Laura opined: "When the wife does not focus in on the needs and the feelings sexually, personally, to make him feel like a man, to make him feel like a success, to make him feel like our hero, he's very susceptible to the charm of some other woman making him feel what he needs. These days, women don't spend a lot of time thinking about how they can give their men what they need."
According to Dr. Laura's approach, these poor, neglected husbands have been pushed by their rebellious wives into being porn and sex addicts. How sad that in the wake of the Elliot Spitzer tragedy we get Dr. Laura's blame-the-victim drivel rather than an honest discussion on the downfall of the American Male.
Men today are cheating not because their wives do not love them, but because they do not love themselves; not because their wives are not caring, but because their perforated sense of self is immune to affection. Were their wives to shower them with all the love in the world, it would simply seep through the shards of their shattered egos.
Propelled to succeed by an all-encompassing fear of failure and thrown into a rat race without limit, the broken American male never feels like he is ever good enough and chooses destructive escapes to compensate.
Powerful men like Spitzer are especially susceptible to the irrational self-loathing that is increasingly affecting the American male. Whatever level of achievement he attains, it is never enough to quiet the inner demons that tell him he is worthless. A culture built on soulless success has raised a generation of men to believe they are anonymous unless they accumulate money or fame, with women being yet another prized possession that accrues to the alpha male.
TRAINED TO feel like they are important only through professional achievement, these men are clueless about being in a relationship. They know how to master rather than relate, how to conquer rather than open up, how to manipulate rather than connect.
For the man to whom power is an aphrodisiac, paying a woman for sex becomes an erotic thrill. And men with low self-esteem are profoundly susceptible to women who are not their wives.
The man who sees himself as a loser sees the woman dumb enough to marry him as a loser squared. His wife's affection, therefore, cannot make him feel like a winner. It is only the woman to whom he is not married, the one that has not been devalued through a merger with a failure, that can make him feel consequential. And a woman who is so desirable that a night with her can set you back thousands of dollars can make a guy feel like a million bucks.
Bill Clinton may have been the most powerful man in the world. But all that power could not inflate an ego so punctured that it sought significance in a liaison with an all-too-ordinary intern who understood the depth of his need to feel good about himself.
LAST WEEK in Los Angeles I debated my dear friend Dennis Prager, the brilliant radio host and public intellectual, on whether men or women are more responsible for the breakdown of the American family. I argued that broken men are undermining their families; Dennis claimed that the blame was equally shared.
Now Dennis has always been a mentor to me. But, come on! You have to be blind not to see that men are in crisis. They are three times more likely to cheat on a spouse, eight times more likely to abandon their children (how often do you hear of a dead-beat Mom?), commit 98 percent of all violent crimes, and stand a decent chance of becoming porn addicts.
Even if they overcome the porn, they usually end up sports and TV addicts, who spend, on average, three hours per day in front of the tube. And that's three hours where they are not helping with the dishes, putting the kids to sleep, or being with their wives.
Sex for men has become a game of mastery rather than intimacy. A shocking statistic from the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention, published providentially on the same day of the outbreak of the Spitzer scandal, showed that one in four female American teens has an STD. Millions of teenage boys are pushing girls to have sex well before their bodies are ready, and without any kind of protection. Sexual scandals among powerful men should likewise spur us to action.
THE SOLUTION is to set a new definition of success among American men that is dependent not on becoming the competent governor of a state, but on becoming the responsible head of a household. The great man is not only he who can balance state budgets but he who helps his children with their algebra. Not he who hits home runs, but he who runs home to be with his family. Not he who wins primaries, but he who makes his wife and his children primary.
In this political season, it is in vogue to believe that pulling a lever for a particular candidate will bring us the change we desire. But it is we who have to change. America is not wanting in talented senators and industrious politicians. Rather, it is wanting in loving husbands and devoted fathers.
In the final analysis, what the people of New York think of Elliot Spitzer is not nearly as important as what his wife and children think of him. Because you are not a success in life if the people who mean the most to you think the least of you.
His opionion base on the false assumption that our's is the firstculture built on soulless success has raised a generation of men to believe they are anonymous unless they accumulate money or fame, with women being yet another prized possession that accrues to the alpha male. of that this is the first generation to deal with the age old temptations of enlarged, misdirected egos.
Because having sex with $4000/hr hookers is a perk for the rich and powerful. The Shah of Iran used to fly in hookers from Switzerland.
Needy, needy men? C’mon! Women are too busy taking care of themselves, the kids, the job, etc. these days to be worried about their “needy” man. I doubt Spitzer needed anything but to continue his obsessive power trip.
To an ordinary sod, it looked like the Governor of the State of New York was just doin' the horizontal bop with a fancy whore. To the more sensitive soul, like Shmuley Boteach, it was actually a cry for help.
“They are three times more likely to cheat on a spouse, eight times more likely to abandon their children (how often do you hear of a dead-beat Mom?), commit 98 percent of all violent crimes, and stand a decent chance of becoming porn addicts.”
What a bunch of BS particuarly the abandoning the kids part. Define “abandoning - does a Dad whose kids are taken away from him by a spiteful ex fall under that column? What about the fact that women initiate the VAST majority of divorces often times for no reason other than boredom?
Greg has my permission to cheat.
In the Middle Ages, judges convicted of taking bribes were sometimes condemned to be flayed alive. But, this is neither the middle ages nor was Spitzer a judge, so we should be merciful: There must be some Gambino-family soldier rotting away in some federal pokey who’d welcome a new prison “wife”.
Seems like a reasonable argument in this day and age. Maybe it's true in Spitzer's case. Who knows?
Dr. Laura never addressed any of her remarks specifically to the Spitzers. In fact, she went out of her way to say she would NOT talk about them because she did not know them. She spoke generally about marriages where men cheat. Unlike columnists who sit around on their high horses, Dr. Laura has treated a lot of couples in her time, and clearly she sees men straying in part because their wives stop trying.
The other thing is, no one knows the innards of the Spitzer marriage except them. For all we know, Mrs. Spitzer knew about her husband or turned a blind eye to it all in exchange for the power and status he brought her. She had her own office in the statehouse in Albany and apparently saw herself as a player of some sort. For all we know, that “grief-stricken” look on her face was her response to her loss of power.
Eliot Spitzer, the governor of NY, blows tens of thousands of dollars on whores but Dr. Laura is the “bad guy”—??
Gimme a break.
I think that Dr. Laura has a point in spite of the psychobabble above. However, what Dr. Laura is saying is probably a percentage of the time; how large that percentage is, we do not know. Relationships are complex and changing over the period of a lasting marriage. The relationships between couples is too complex and dynamic to generalize.
Most of what the writer of this article seems to me to apply to Democrats and others with disordered minds.
actually it was Sweden.
Nobody has a clue anymore. DrLaura was about to drop the show a couple years ago because correcting the society seemed a lost cause. Savage, the same. But they continue because what else is there to do. It’s over.
So a drug addicted airhead makes him feel like a man? This Spitzer is a fool, he could have found a better looking and more interesting woman at a local bar and it would have only cost him a couple of margaritas.
What may be true of the Gov is not true of most men.
Thats all fine and well, Shmuckly, but some men pay for sex because they aint getting it at home. Does it take a PHD to know that?
I feel pretty sure Shmuckface doesent get out enough to know what goes on in the real word, outside of his PC journals and other misandryst literature.
Couldn’t he just be a horney, self-centered cad? Why all the psychological BS.
I think because some men are immoral.
Why would any real man need a woman to stroke his ego? Good Lord. If a man is self-confident, strong, self-assured, his wife should not have to play the ‘praise and adoration’ act.
Well, according to this it was France.
He was one of the chief architects of Opec’s policies - he thought he could drag his people into the modern age - yet was surprised when the West refused to give him shelter when he needed it. (He who controls the oil, controls who our friends are.) He was also naive. The man was impressed by our Western ways, having gone to the Rosey, having partied with Gianni Agnelli in St Moritz, having used Madame Claude’s hookers and all that. But he forgot one thing. As it turned out, the most important: the power of religion and tradition.
O'Reilly is spouting the same psychobabble; that Spitzer has a "self-destructive" personality and "wanted" to crash and burn.
IMHO, which is as valid as Bill's and Shmuley's, I am convinced that Spitzer's ego got so big, he believed himself to be Omnipotent (as opposed to impotent lol) and was convinced he would not get caught and even if he did, would be immune from exposure and retribution.
Schmuly called a Catholic woman a PEASANT on TV during “The Passion” movie debate....he is below whale crap to me....plus being Michael Jacksons; good friend...YUK.
Yes to ALL that....plus Daddy Spitzer CHEATED to get his some the AG job and probably the Gov. job, so Eliot the John KNEW he didn’t really earn those positions.
Heck, he was just ministering to her ala Jesse Jackson. hehe
It’s because when money and power fall into the hands of the morally bankrupt, then they will use that money and power to do morally bankrupt things.
A person can seem to have “everything” but lack the most important, fundamental things: morality, humility, honesty, and trustworthiness. When you don’t have those things as a foundation, then it doesn’t matter how many other things you might have.
I am reminded of the lyrics to the song “Satisfied Mind.”
I agree. Blaming either gender for the other one's cheating is like blaming the robbery victim for carrying a wallet. It's still the cheater who makes the decision to cheat instead of working on the relationship.
Away with the psychobabble horsesh*t.
Dr. Laura and O'Reilly must have both missed the lectures on Greek Tragedians from their freshmen lit classes. Spitzer's inexorable march into self-destruction was something straight from the pages of Sophocles or Aeschylus: an arrogant man brought down by his own overweening hubris. Nothing more. Nothing less.
If it has a penis, then it is at fault....
“Greg, ask the box what we should do now.”
Greg has my permission to cheat.
I hate those commercials where the naggy wife makes
the point. I immediately don’t want whatever it is
that is being advertised. Seems like the advertising
agencies would know this.
I pay less than one dollar for my hookers and I don't have to return them after one hour.
Yeah, but sometimes you get a bite and you have to throw them back.
Oh, you’ve noticed that!
Nearly every commercial portrays the man as a slob or idiot, and his wife as the svelte genius.....
This has cost some advertisers my business for LIFE.
Melinda, we men are all needy guys.:) We marry women who support our egos and who make us chicken soup when we are sick. It never bothered me that Mrs.Spitzer stood with her husband. What bothered me was that her husband allowed her to do so. Lately, we have had to suffer though the onslaught of TV pundits, each telling his/her own version of the established rhetoric. TV stations must have a file of such pundits: adultery experts, relationship experts, prostitution experts, powerful men/women experts, stay-at-home mom experts, and, ultimately, the former failed FBI profiler experts. lol Spitzer’s case is really not very complicated, at all. He was in a different city, away from home, and he wanted sex, and he wanted it with Christen. Period, end of story. :)
Frankly, as I see it, there are a number of reasons that some men will look for attention and/or sex outside of their marriage.
First off, quite simply, some guys are simply scumbags. Plain and simple. They just don't give a damn about their marriage vows.
Secondly, as Dr. Laura states, they might be looking for something that they're not getting at home. It might be attention, or it might be something else, i.e. sexual. If it is sexual, maybe it's something that he's afraid to ask of his wife. So, he looks for it outside of marriage. Which brings up another question: Why a hooker, rather than an affair. Maybe because it is just something sexual. Or maybe there's some sort of feeling that he doesn't want to have an affair: That it won't be as complete a betrayal if there's no emotional bond, outside of the sexual acts.
Which brings up another interesting issue. If Spitzer had been seeing hookers for years, what are the odds that his wife not only knew, but approved of his dalliances with hookers. The idea being that since they were just hookers, there was no chance that he'd abandon her for them, and she could continue her life as the first lady of NY, and maybe eventually even the first lady of the USA, without having to "service" Spitzer.
I agree with you 100%. What was probably going through his mind was the entire Bill and Monica deal... "I can do no wrong. I've brought down some of the most powerful men in America. Nobody can touch me! And even if I get caught, so what? Look what that Arkansas yokel got away with!" Believe me, having gone to school in NY, many native New Yorkers look upon anyone else around the country, especially the midwest or south as "rubes."
Well, there is the old saying... "G-d designed man with two heads, but only enough blood to supply one at a time."
If the woman is 'acting' (faking it), there lies the problem.
A man naturally expects the woman he loves and is committed to by virtue of marriage to emotionally support him. If the person you love and who you assume loves you can't find it in themselves to encourage you and/or let you know they think you're special (to them, anyway), who will?
Enter the hooker, cute co-worker or next-door neighbor's frisky wife. Whatever the focus of his mistaken attention, a man who is deprived of emotional support and attention from his wife (not to mention, sex) will often seek and find solace somewhere else, even if has to pay for it and even if it risks destroying his life, as happened with Spitzer. None of this excuses adultery on the part of a husband but it does help explain why it happens. Unfortunately, many women don't like the explanation so they try to kill the messenger. In this case, Dr. Laura.
The male ego - a need for 'validation', if you will, won't be denied. Fame, power and wealth can't substitute for a loving wife that thinks her man is the greatest. If these other things could, powerful men would never get married...but they do.That many wives think they can do so with no consequence makes them part of the problem, which is Dr. Laura's point. A point dismissed and ridiculed by some but that also has a lot of male heads bobbing up and down in silent agreement and that should be recognized, not reflexively disputed based, mostly, on feminist orthodoxy.
That some folks seem to view a wife's sexual availability and emotional support for her husband superfluous to the man's emotional well-being demonstrates the validity of Laura Schlesinger's contention that society seems to have given married women the idea that she has little obligation to her husband and that he doesn't need or expect much from her because, if he's all that self-confident, he is his own best friend.
That kind of egotistical attitude in a husband will kill a marriage, fast. The 'praise and adoration' you sneer at should be mutual and should be expressed often, even if in sometime subtle ways. This kind of mutually appreciative attitude is what can keeps a marriage strong.
Um...he's the Governor of New York - he could do no such thing. He had to pay the huge premiums to keep his liaisons quiet.
Ann Archy, I think you’re onto a major point here.
Politics as a profession tends to attract those who are narcissistic—and favor those who are willing to cheat.
Thus a high percentage of political men enjoy flexing their power for fawning adulation—and are willing to cheat to get it.
Spitzer is a fool, he could have found a better looking and more interesting woman at a local bar and it would have only cost him a couple of margaritas.
He wasn’t paying for the sex. He was paying for her to go away after the sex.
I think they’re both wrong. Dr. Laura is wrong to blame the wife. We don’t know what kind of a marriage it was. Maybe she’s a difficult wife. But that doesn’t excuse what he did. Few marriages are perfect. More important, we are, each of us, responsible for our own behavior, regardless of how much we are provoked.
Similarly, Boteach says that the reason so many teenage girls have STDs is that: “Millions of teenage boys are pushing girls to have sex well before their bodies are ready, and without any kind of protection.”
No, sorry. The boys may be pushing, but so are the girls. No one is MAKING them do it. They may be poorly brought up, badly educated in school, deprived of religious and moral training, but they still have to CHOOSE FOR THEMSELVES. There can be difficult circumstances, but people somehow have to learn to stand up for themselves and do the right thing.
It should read "it is never enough to quiet the inner demons that tells him he is entitled."
Dr. Laura is usually spot on, but she dropped the ball on this one. Even she should have been able to peg Spitzer as an egomaniac.
I think that what Spitzer did was self destructive. He has body guards who know what he does and there are tabloid's that would pay a lot for embarrassing the Gov of a large state. He had to know that no matter how careful he was, it was only a matter of time, before the truth would come out.
So, yes Spitzer was probably self destructive or so self centered that he believed he would beat all odds.
Next, why would a man with a wife and young children at home want to cheat on his wife for over ten years? I think that he was searching for something that he didn't get with his wife.
Because they do not see it as throwing anything away. They have allowed themselves to become evil because they have no idea what good or evil is anymore.
Nothing is bad if it gives me a moments pleasure.
Nothing is good if it causes me the slightest inconvenience.
This is their motto. Eventually it brings them down.
i found only ONE set of things to call SURPRISING in the Eliot Spitzer fiasco
the ability of his inner circle to keep the sexual trysts secret or his ability to keep them from his inner circle
as a prosecutor and later as AG, Spitzer had the extreme ego, extreme hubris, extreme bullying nature, together with high-pitched moralizing (in a secular sense) that often are attributes of the mortally flawed high-and-mighty whose rise is often but an anticipation of their fall
the ‘people’ in NY remained the media’s sheeple as the media raised up spitzer’s ‘progressive-populist’ star, willingly, ignoring that the ends - going after ‘those greedy capitalists’ - must be justified by the means - the law - and NOT simply populist angst
spitzer readily illustrates the axiom that what goes around comes around
there really was no surprise - only a question of when