Eliot Spitzer’s downfall has brought much discussion to the airwaves and blogosphere, with no small part of that discussion comprising speculations as to why his beloved wife, Silda, would stand at his much disgraced side. Very cynical commentators have suggested that her marital posture reveals a dark political strategy, or some nefarious desire to hold on to power. The same commentators liken Mrs. Spitzer’s resolute stance to Hillary Clinton’s allegedly politically calculated commitment to her unfaithful husband. Others see a heroic woman trying to hold her family together, while some see a woman too stupid to see she’s been shamed and abused by an aggressive and arrogant husband. (One conservative female blogger might not see Mrs. Spitzer as stupid, but surely she sees abuse in parading Mrs. Spitzer out onto the stage.)
There is much to say about all these observations, but I am not the person to say it. My default position is to see a woman who is in shock; I see a woman who looks like she has been forced to witness the execution of her children. If you ask me, Mrs. Spitzer looks in dire need of healing.
But I also see in Mrs. Spitzer's actions the possibility of Wife Guilt: The reason she is standing with her husband is because she feels guilty for sexually failing her husband. I can almost hear the tape in her head: It’s my fault, for what sort of wife fails to keep her husband happy? How could a wife of such an important man – a man attractive in so many ways – fail to keep her man satisfied? How could a wife who is clearly attractive, even beautiful, fail to keep that man content? I'm responsible for this: surely there must be something wrong with me!
And that is indeed what no one seems to be exploring: there might be something wrong. All kinds of married couples have ceased sexual relations with each other; we all know that things change in marriages. Many women in this country suffer from depression, and menopause is no small hindrance to sexual excitement, especially when depression or chronic fatigue is part of the equation. Many wives know that their husbands’ sexual urges do not decline with age, at least in the same way as a woman who has stopped ovulating loses her "urges." No doubt this puts such wives in a very precarious place. And so, too, their husbands, who are daily, even hourly, bombarded with sexual images and invitations for "mind-blowing" pleasures.
I have heard of several married couples who have made curious and risky sexual compromises with each other. Some wives give tacit approval to their husbands to solicit extra-marital sex so to keep their men happy, but only as long as such husbands recognize their offshore ventures are to be strictly about sex (no love allowed!). I know one menopausal woman who said recently that she would prefer it if her husband would just go out and find a little satisfaction, for she is too tired and too guilty to help him. I once dined (sort of) with a very progressive bi-sexual Episcopal priest and his wife who had struck an even more curious deal: she could have heterosexual extra-marital affairs, while he enjoyed sexual liaisons with men. The one caveat was that they could not commit “real adultery” by falling in love with their respective lovers. Sadly, couples strike deals, implicit and explicit, all the time.
Perhaps the Spitzers had a similar sort of deal, maybe even one that went unspoken. Maybe Mrs. Spitzer is ill. Or maybe Gov. Spitzer was cavorting with very high price prostitutes because there was some guarantee of anonymity; a "typical" affair would be too messy and too risky, even if his wife approved. Maybe some high-end escort services are set up strictly to serve clientele that cannot do the normal “public affairs” route. Husbands who believe they have the tacit approval for this sort of behavior nonetheless feel they must be discreet, so spending big money is seen as a sort of protection.
I realize, of course, that I am speculating about the unknown realities of the Spitzer marriage bed. But I am not speculating about the realities of many married couples, the impulses of men, and the fact that many wives feel guilty for losing their sexual passions (or for simply getting old). One of my childhood friends lost his wife to cancer in a slow and miserable death; her guilt for not being able to have sex with him as she slowly died was one of the burdens he could not carry for her no matter how hard he tried to reassure her that he was fine (and boy, the guilt he felt for thinking about sex beyond her death, while she was still alive, was nearly enough to kill him).
All this to say that we do not know the reasons Mrs. Spitzer is standing on the dais with her fallen husband. But guilt might be the reason she’s not running toward divorce court. Sadly, much of that guilt is often self-imposed, reinforced by a culture that tells us that we not only CAN have it all – success, luxury, power, money, sexual fulfillment, perpetual health and beauty – but that we MUST have it all.
In short, in all of this, I see nothing but grief and sorrow, and a great deal of ugliness.
But, in the end, even if there is no dysfunction in the Spitzer bedroom, even if Mrs. Spitzer feels no guilt at all, there is the distinct chance she still feels responsible. I, at least, have known more than a few women who have taken responsibility for ALL the problems in their marriages. And that, as we all know, is a terrible weight to carry.
(One note: I had a very cynical college buddy who believed that the best way to keep a woman attached to you was to pull away from her; cheating on her was seen as the best way to keep her close. His theory was based on vanity, that the woman would be drawn closer to her cheating man to find out how she had fallen out of favor. The woman would fret to no end: Have I lost my allure? my beauty? my sex appeal? Did I do something wrong? My friend felt this worked even if the guy was a loser. But it especially worked if he was a great success, at least in the eyes of the world. Surely a successful man who wandered was saying that his wife was not up to par, no? That there was something wrong with her?
Of course, PAYING for sex is not the best evidence that a guy is particularly skilled at romancing the ladies.)
Peace.
BG
©Bill Gnade 2008/Contratimes. All Rights Reserved.
2 comments:
One possibility that the pundits fail to acknowledge is that Mrs. Spitzer may have looked at her husband and chosen to forgive him. I have known women and men who, when confronted with sin on the part of their spouse, have taken them back. This is not to say the hurt disappears; indeed, the scars remain. But as a friend told me once, "there's more than one reason Hosea is in the Bible.
Cheers.
Dear Randall,
You are right. I did hear one pundit yesterday say that one of the most important and dynamic "family values" is forgiveness. Does forgiveness always lead to reconciliation? Perhaps. But I notice that Mrs. Spitzer was raised a Baptist in the south. Perhaps she is, then, in a sense, turning the other cheek: she loves her husband, the father of three daughters she adores. Surely he merits forgiveness -- especially if he asked for it, no?
As we know, however, forgiveness comes at a price. That price, it is evident, is revealed in Mrs. Spitzer's face.
Regardless, I would not trade places with either of them.
May God bless them richly with His grace and mercy.
Peace.
Gnade
Post a Comment