The Marlowsphere (#37)
A recent discussion in my “Perspectives on the News” class at Baruch College (New York City) started with the subject of CIA Director General David Howell Petraeus’ resignation. From there it moved to anecdotes related to Hurricane Sandy. The session ended with an analysis of one of the common denominators between these two recent events: the impact of electronic media on our private and public lives.
David Gergen–an American political commentator and former presidential advisor who served during the administrations of Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Clinton—was one of the most frequent television pundits responding to the CIA Director’s apparent swift resignation following his admission of an affair with his biographer, Paula Broadwell. Gergen said, in effect, and I paraphrase liberally “This is not the end of his career. This is a highly talented man. He’ll be back.” Many agreed. Many conservative Republican-oriented pundits disagreed, of course.
The Petraeus resignation from one of the most important positions in the United States Executive branch should give us pause. Not because of the admitted affair, but because of the consequences of the admitted affair to our collective perception of behavior by governmental leaders. This is certainly not the first time that a person in high governmental position has had an extramarital affair. Such behavior is perennial. And there are many examples.
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt died in the arms of his mistress. During World War II General, later President Eisenhower had an affair with his driver while in the European theatre. President Kennedy was renowned for his many affairs. And President Lyndon Baines Johnson is alleged to have used the Oval Office for more than presidential duties. But more recently former President Clinton was caught having a sexual encounter with an intern for which Congress attempted to impeach him. He survived and has since gone on to become a leading world statesman alongside the likes of former President Jimmy Carter.
There is, of course, an apparent contradiction in all this. All the above-mentioned leaders—other than Clinton–were never asked to step down because of their extra-marital dalliances. The only president to actually step down was President Nixon and that was because of his blatant disregard for the Constitution of the United States!
There was never any question, at least publically, with respect to national security. These leaders’ skills and abilities were respected. Their extra-marital sexual activities were either accepted in their historical cultural context or the media looked the other way. The allegation that “pillow talk” impinged on national security or was an indication of “poor leadership judgment” was never an issue.
Today, that is not the case. In recent memory, New York State Governor Elliot Spitzer was forced to step down because of his many dalliances with high-priced prostitutes. The Anthony Weiner sexting scandal, also dubbed Weinergate, began when Democratic U.S. Congressman from New York State Anthony Weiner used the social media website Twitter to send a link to a sexually suggestive picture to a 21-year-old woman from Seattle, Washington. Weiner resigned from Congress.
We are living in a contradictory society, and by this I mean American society. Over a period of several decades our print and electronic media have increasingly presented sexual content—some of it academic and informative on the one side, and some of it blatantly pornographic, on the other. The evidence to support this observation is all over the place. Front covers of magazines display the human body in sometimes subtle, often aggressive sexual poses. Internet sites are rampant with sexual content—some of it illegal. Television programs and movies are increasingly obvious in their presentation of physical sexual content and language. Increasingly, “potty mouth” humor (if you can call it humor) has invaded the comedic realm. In more and more instances, young comedians, especially, descend to using so-called “foul” language in the first few minutes of their routine. There’s not much subtlety to the humor, or depth, for that matter.
Today, the Kama Sutra has lots of competition. The number of books, magazines, DVDs, television programs, and academic reports on sexual behavior, positions, and therapies is voluminous.
For example, findings from the largest nationally representative study of sexual and sexual-health behaviors ever fielded, recently conducted by Indiana University sexual health researchers, provides an updated and much needed snapshot of contemporary Americans’ sexual behaviors, including a description of more than 40 combinations of sexual acts that people perform during sexual events, patterns of condom use by adolescents and adults, and the percentage of Americans participating in same-sex encounters. The National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior (NSSHB), conducted by researchers from the Center for Sexual Health Promotion at Indiana University’s School of Health, Physical Education and Recreation, is one of the most comprehensive studies on these topics in almost two decades. It includes the sexual experiences and condom-use behaviors of 5,865 adolescents and adults ages 14 to 94.
Now put this academic study—a major follow-up to the work of Kinsey and his associates—in the context of the recently concluded presidential election. The election reflected a country virtually split down the middle: 51% voted for the incumbent President Obama, 48% voted for contender Governor Mitt Romney. The President came away with 332 electoral votes to Romney’s 206. When you look at the country’s electoral map you see both east and west coasts and parts of the northern mid-west voting for Obama, the rest of the mid-west, the west, and small parts of the east voting for Romney. The vote apparently reflected a split between highly conservative-minded Americans (for Romney) and more liberally, open-minded citizens (for Obama).
Are we now at a political and social watershed in the United States? On the one hand, our media display sexually implicit and explicit material at every turn, but if a leader, such as CIA Director General Petraeus, admits to having an affair—a coupling implicitly permitted in every form of media on a daily basis, it seems—the response is essentially “Off with his head!” In other words, while American media permit the communication of sexual behavior of all kinds and the public apparently eats it up, when a leader acts in a sexual way deemed “unacceptable” because of the leadership implication of “poor judgment,” his only recourse is to vacate his position. In a way, this is very parochial and reminiscent of the early Puritans (very strict) and the Brownists Pilgrims (even more strict). It is a morality strictness with not much room to accommodate real-life human behavior.
There is a marked difference between the reporting of sexual affairs in the first half of the 20th century and the second half and now: the electronic media factor. Content carried on electronic media travels at the speed of light. We know about affairs as soon as someone has admitted to it, particularly if it involves a leader. Athletes and entertainers, on the other hand, are apparently immune to this affect. In fact, just the opposite seems to happen. The same public that demands a government leader step down because of a sexual affair is glued to reality shows, the tabloid press, and social media following the athlete/entertainer’s every illicit move and deviant behavior. In essence, they give tacit approval and come back for more each week. These athletes and entertainers can have children out of wedlock. They can get married and divorced 24-hours later and still make a living without fear of public rejection. In fact, the sexual exploits of athletes and entertainers seems to underscore the adage that there is no such thing as bad publicity! This publicity only seems to add to the athletes and entertainers’ resume and viability at the box office.
Our public leaders, however, are held to a different standard, at least in the United States. Sexually explicit content is in view and earshot on a daily basis almost everywhere. And according to the national sex survey mentioned earlier, our sexual patterns of behavior are more varied than heretofore. Yet when a man of clear leadership capabilities, like General Petraeus, behaves “in private” in a way injurious to his personal life and family, this private matter becomes highly public and we lose a person of leadership value within moments—all because the private life becomes so public.
Electronic media have many positive characteristics. It can be argued that electronic media have had and continue to generate positive effects that underscore economic and political life on this planet. But electronic media have also blurred the separation of people’s private and public lives. While electronic media have given us economic and political gains, it has also undermined the perceived effectiveness of some of our leaders when the private becomes public.
Please write to me at meiienterprises@aol.com if you have any comments on this or any other of my blogs.
Eugene Marlow, Ph.D.
November 19, 2012
© Eugene Marlow 2012