How The New York Times Explains Male Sex Scandals

Pages: 1 2

Anthony Weiner, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Arnold Schwarzenegger — these are just the most recent examples of powerful men who have ruined their lives because of some inappropriate (or, in the case of Strauss-Kahn, allegedly much worse than inappropriate) sexual conduct.

Can you name a single woman politician caught in a similar sex scandal?

If not, why not?

The answer is so simple and so obvious that there should be no need to write a column on the subject. But, thanks to feminism and academia, the obvious has been declared untrue.

Take the article on this subject by New York Times Washington correspondent Sheryl Gay Stolberg. Titled “When It Comes to Scandal, Girls Won’t Be Boys,” Stolberg begins her answer to the question as to why powerful men, but not powerful women, are involved in sex scandals with this disclaimer: “It would be easy to file this under the category of ‘men behaving badly,’ to dismiss it as a testosterone-induced, hard-wired connection between sex and power (powerful men attract women) … .”

Of course, what Stolberg dismisses as the reason is precisely the reason. Power (and money and fame) seduces women in the same way women’s bodies and faces seduce men. And, unless men exert major efforts to control their sexual nature, they will use their power (or money or fame) to obtain sex with a variety of women.

There are only two things that stop powerful and famous men from sleeping with available women. The first is a strong value system (that is, a sense of obligation to their wives and/or their religion’s power over them). The second is an overwhelming fear of getting caught. In either case, these things must be coupled with powerful self-control.

Yes, Stolberg, men — the least powerful as much as the most powerful — are “hard-wired” to sleep with as many women as they can. The only difference between the governor of California and a male sanitation worker is that the former has far more opportunities.

But Stolberg, our well-educated New York Times correspondent, denies this basic reality about men’s natures. Feminism 101 teaches the opposite of reality — that men and women have similar, if not identical, sexual drives. And therefore she dismisses the truth of the matter at the outset of her article.

But if it isn’t male sexual nature, what is the New York Times reporter’s feminist explanation for why sexual scandal is virtually a monopoly of powerful men?

“There may be something else at work: Research points to a substantial gender gap in the way women and men approach running for office.

Women have different reasons for running, are more reluctant to do so and, because there are so few of them in politics, are acutely aware of the scrutiny they draw — all of which seems to lead to differences in the way they handle their jobs once elected.”

Pages: 1 2

  • credulousDolt

    If you tried a little harder you might be merely silly.

  • Guest

    Easy. Men think with their penises; women think with their brains.

    • Shishir

      Another idiotic fembot line. Men’s penile ability somehow trumped women’s cerebral aptitude when men pretty much created civilization wholescale! Do you want me to compare male and female contributions to science,technology,art,literature,business,religion,politics,war etc etc? ……Is that tumbleweeds I hear in lieu of a response?


      Right. Idiot!

  • smartie

    really stupid

  • Jim

    The seem to be saying that some women view men as their own personal cash register.

    • mrbean

      If you deny that you are naive. Many mothers tell their daughters to marry for money. They can always get love by having affairs. And divorce is no big deal, with women favored with either a 50/50 split or alimony and child support or both.

  • Shishir

    Well yes, but it seems everyone is missing the giant ugly elephant in the room- the fact that men are not attracted to women in power unless they are hot!And there are very few attractive women politicians(Sarah Palin and Kristian Gillibrand come to mind).
    So for female politicians , they lack opportunity because they usually lack beauty!
    I can’t imagine any man thinking of say Nancy Pelosi,Hilary Clinton or Olympia Snowe in a sexual manner without vomiting.
    Men are not attracted to a woman’s “achievements” ,men would sooner marry an attractive cocktail waitress than a sullen,haggard Helen Gurley Brown clone type with 5 PhDs. If that sounds cruel well ladies,don’t blame men blame MOTHER nature.

  • Julia K

    No. The reason that fewer women are caught cheating is not simply that they have different motivations than men, although that might be a small part of it. It's also not simply that they're more noble, although that factors in indirectly as I will explain below. And it's not that they're better at evading detection. It's that they lack power.

    A recent study found that powerful women as likely to cheat on their spouses as powerful men were. Power bestows confidence and arrogance, which gives people a green light to sin however they feel like. The study found that "The popular notion that men are more likely than women to cheat is simply due to the fact that men occupy more positions of power than women, according to Lammers." Perhaps less powerful people, then, are actually more noble in some ways; but it's not an innate, gender-based nobility. The imbalance is one we created.

    Sorry, but "feminism and academia" are right on this one.

  • Tom

    Silly liberals. Just watch the Discovery Channel. Male mammals behave completely differently than female mammals. The males fight to gain control and dominance, then keep a harem of docile females to have sex with until they are ousted by a more powerful male. The males sleep with as many females as will let them. The females are careful to let only the more powerful and dominant men mate with them. A once liberal, feminist friend once began to raise chickens. She reported, shocked, that at first all the little baby chickens behaved the same, cute little fluff balls cheeping. Then….some of them became roosters and "started to fight each other over who would get to mate with the females. They also took on a protective role, keeping the flock together and pecking away chickens that were diseased and warning at the approach of predators." Silly chickens! They must have flunked their Harvard Women's Studies claesses about how sex differences are learned, not innate! Silly liberals. Look to reality, not your university propaganda.

  • Tom

    What used to control male sexuality was culture, religion, character, shame, nobility, chivalry, etc. Things liberals have trashed. Now they wonder why more and more men act like the animals on the Discovery Channel. Liberalism is Social Senility. End Stage Imperial Dementia. Wherever liberalism appears, squalor, degradation, chaos, violence and collapse soon follow. Just look at the US in 1950 and now. Amazing decline. America is doomed. Soon it will be taken over by races and cultures that will stomp the liberals and take what they want.

  • butpygmies

    reason #3 why some men don't "cheat:" some of us are actually in love with our mate.

    and, whenever there is a man having sex with a woman, there must also be a woman having sex with a man!

  • E. Fraser

    I guess, from the logic in this article, that men are unsuited to be allowed loose in society. This is a compelling argument for locking them up in the home for their reproductive abilities and handing the jobs and power over to women who are much less controlled by their hormones.

  • aleknovy

    The thing everyone forgot is "temptation".

    Powerful men are getting propositioned and hit on by young hotties left and right. Even the ugliest of ugly guys – if he gets in office – will have playboy quality women throwing themselves at him.

    Who the heck will hit on nancy pelosi because she's powerful? The Pelosi comparison was moot, because Pelosi isn't getting hit on or propositioned by male Chippendale dancers.

  • pinay scandal, iyottube, jorpetz, pinay tube site, filipina sex video

    You’re in point of fact a excellent webmaster. The website loading velocity is amazing. It kind of feels that you are doing any unique trick. Moreover, The contents are masterwork. you have done a great task in this subject!