I reflected somewhat on this post from last week. It occurred to me that the problem of these men is not so much sex-related, but power-related. Power is a far more potent addiction to have than sex. Power can make someone presume that they can do things they should not, such as have multiple sexual partners outside of their marriage without the consent of their spouse. As I see it the only real differences between powerful men and rapists are that
1) Powerful men can have consensual partners for their sexual acts rather than compel them by force or taking advantage of mind-altered drug-induced states.
2) There is a feedback effect in that there are always more women willing to associate themselves with such power (I assume at some point we might see the opposite as true with men trying to associate with more powerful women), and men willing to tell themselves through their inflated ego, that they attract such women not simply because of their money or influence but because they are handsomer or better lovers than others. Success, however it may be defined, is indeed a powerful social bonding force and signaling effect that people wish to send out. But overlooking its limitations to apply them to other things that are unrelated, areas where one is not as "successful" say, is rather foolish. And probably dangerous (and thus the reason why powerful men end up in these sex scandals). Rape is therefore a form of success in and of itself by taking something that you should not. Extramarital sex by powerful people is merely a reflection of that success, an ostentatious display of power rather than the exercise of the strong against the weak.
I suppose there are far more dangerous things (for the rest of us that is) that powerful people could be doing instead of screwing around behind their wife's back, for example they could attempt to kill people, start wars, or run organised crime rackets. So I don't sweat this very much as a major societal problem rather than a private problem. But it does deserve some explanation. And it still deserves to be understood as something other than "sex addiction"
11 May 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
That was my initial reaction. He's Tiger Woods. He's pretty sure he can do whatever the hell he feels like doing. End of story. Insert current name of the news cycle for maximum aptness.
Post a Comment