Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Spell Check Objects When I Don't Capitalize dick


I don’t know that much about Elliot Spitzer. He is putting poor Hilary in a bad situation because she can’t really denounce him without denouncing you know who. People often fuck people to whom they are not married. If every person who ever fucked someone to whom he or she was not married was prohibited from holding a position of responsibility there would be very few persons in positions of responsibility. There is a big stink because Spitzer spent the night with a hooker. Hookers hook due to market demand. Judah made a big stink when sister Dinah was treated like a prostitute but later succumbed to his own dick and patronized a whore himself. Perhaps it makes us feel like better citizens when we condemn Spitzer’s behavior but I bet there is an awful lot of hypocrisy that is part and parcel to this condemnation.

Because he is extremely thrifty, I presume that my husband has not patronized prostitutes, although I do allow him ample free time. But, men do these things. They just do. I was once stuck for (what seemed) a very long time in traffic with my recently widowed uber-Catholic father-in-law who had been attending grief counseling with Sister Mildred. She encouraged him, for the first time in his life, to get in touch with his feelings and it seemed like he was making up for more than eighty long years during this foray through downtown at rush hour. The old man mused that some men sin by committing murder and that others sinned with women. He concluded that if he were to commit a sin himself he would prefer that it be with women.


Elliot Spitzer sought sexual gratification and it cost him his career. While he won’t be sentenced to prison like a murderer, it seems awfully harsh that he will have to walk away from the position he fought long and hard for and I doubt that poking his dick in what I imagine he now considers the wrong place, makes him any less competent to serve. Nor am I saying he ever was competent to serve, but NY voters seemed to feel he was.

I am not a man and do not have a dick and not being driven by a dick perhaps I am not truly qualified to weigh in on whether indulging in non-monogamous dick inspired activities, even ones that are (stupidly, if you ask me) illegal, automatically renders a man unfit for public service. There are lots of smart guys (and gals) who engage in sex outside of marriage. It is sad and wrong and also very American in the worst sense of the word, to judge and censure and brand flesh and blood human beings worthless. These attitudes do nothing to foster a climate of sexual honesty or encourage loving sex. The American way it seems just sows more repression and inevitably we will sacrifice more Elliot Spitzers. Our Puritan throwback uptightness that makes us blush at frank discussion about sex not only creates dick martyrs but stimulates business for ladies of the night and increases the spread of sexual diseases and unplanned pregnancies.

Most people are driven by sex but I talk about the dick a lot because men seem to get in trouble way more frequently than women do. I’ve heard about gigolos and saw that stoopid movie with Richard Gere. Although Heidi Fleiss is starting a stud farm to serve ladies somewhere in Nevada, it says something to me about the dick and what’s attached to it, that the preponderance of clientele for the international sex industry is male.

I don’t know why our culture has such an investment in keeping sex dirty. Honesty about sex and our two fragile hearts is what makes me feel truly blessed to be a partner in my marriage and this is far more important to me than where my husband’s dick has been.

1 comment:

Fionnchú said...

Today, I had a student in class discussion about the advantages of growing up so wired into multiple media (these talks get free-ranging-- we were studying logical fallacies & Cause and Effect rhetoric, somehow) who informed us that there are mail-order grooms. "And they're not in prison?" I replied. (He was a former 'corrections officer' who was stabbed and otherwise beaten up for life in a riot in Cellblock H; they start now at $60k with only a GED. Three of his family served as such and never wound up with a scratch.)

What's my point? It's in the same class this morning that has a transgendering student. She had explained to me (in an aside) in response to a definition I'd made in the on-line component of our class that distinguished "sex"" from "gender" from "preference." She told me that the difference between "sexual orientation" is "it's who you sleep with" vs. "sexual identification," as a deeper drive. I thought about this as I did the dishes a few minutes ago, before reading the blog and after class.

Why go after-- as if Eliot Ness-- with such vehemence drugs for pleasure or prostitution as recreation? My distrust of venal capitalism discourages me from the Ayn Rand-Libertarian fringes, but I do favor the notion that government has no real business in protecting adults from themselves in matters of what the Pope might call "faith and morals." Trafficking in Ukrainian refugees or Thai nymphets violates human rights, of course. But, if people choose to frolic as grown-ups, is this any less reprehensible than eating Whoppers or chugging Big Gulps in public? These too have a cost in terms of personal welfare, but nobody's outlawing them. I wish we'd get away from treating drugs and sex as the Hays Code or Anthony Comstock or Carrie Nation all tried in earlier prohibitive times. They all failed. We inherit a philandering nature millions of years old. We find escape whether in meditation, rollercoasters, flagellation, chocolate, skydiving, or shopping. Part of us never wants to grow up. People will abuse this just as they sprain ankles jogging or overspend on plastic money or go into foreclosure, but how much can a nanny state look after us? I agree with what Auberon Waugh (see my blog yesterday) commented about both the National Front and the (British) Race Relations Board: "Both are a collection of bores and busybodies and both are harmful to the extent they are taken seriously."

Power attracts sex. Remember Pia Zadora? I cannot speak from experience, sadly, but so the evolutionary biologists argue. Same with all our titillating Puritan schizophrenic American media frenzy. I can see why the Diamond Girls escorts charge so much. She's better looking than Divine Brown. Even if he's no Hugh Grant.

"Kristen" will make moolah on "My Story" (real name[s] otherwise as NYT reports), as her rather fetching if suitably practiced come hither smile's finally up in the news today; so will Silda (name= German for "armed female warrior;" she can give Michelle O and Hilary RC a run for this week's angry bitch alumna from Harvard Law); Elliot gets his due for marrying the once and future kick-ass blonde and watching his career tank on the schadenfreude of those he prosecuted highhandedly.

We all sigh as if men and women dare have no desire for anyone but their mate. Even Jesus knew better. Although I never understood why he was so hard on lusting in one's heart for another man's wife. At least the rabbis allowed for our sorry bodies to find relief, as abused Dinah and her two-faced prophets knew well.

Reminds me of another such discussion today, talking about distortions of logic. A student exemplified "equivocation" from "The Ultimate Truth," when the spouse pretends to be shocked by the partner's failure to beat around the bush, to blurt out (for the promise of money) admissions of lust for a forbidden object of affection. Those fools on TV full well choose to surrender their dignity in the hopes of scoring big bucks. Hypocrites for cash. They are as much prostitutes as any $6,500 lady of the night.

What couple, in all honesty, would not admit to desire for one outside their bonds of wedlock? Not to confess this to each other, but inside, of course? Discretion preserves many a marriage. If this were not true, why would promises be required, or at least worth trying to keep? That's where the value of a wedding vow is based. Frail relationships are built on that keeping it to one's self, the decorum that gives a civilized veneer to our marriages and vows. Yes, we may sneak off and pour our treasures into foreign laps. But, secrecy and good sense can still control the wayward, so our children and spouses may not be ashamed. As the Talmud says somewhere (it says a lot in its 64 or tractates), if you sin with a woman, go to the other side of town where nobody knows you. And, pay her not with taxpayer's coffers or hedge funds.