Salon | Newsreal: The horny dilemma

T A B L E+T A L K
President Clinton has a 79 percent approval rating! Have Americans no shame, no shame at all? Join the Clinton approval ratings discussion in Social Issues

D A I L Y+Q U O T E
Curling frenzy

R E C E N T L Y
Germ war games
By Jeff Stein
If the U.S, finds itself back in the desert against Iraq, get out your gas masks
(02/09/98)
The lady is not a tramp
By Jenn Shreve
The lurid coverage of Monica Lewinsky's sex life tells us more about aging geezers in the press corps than it does about a young white house intern
(02/06/98)
The roots of the Clinton smear
By Gene Lyons
How Gennifer Flowers and other fast buck artists spawned the Clinton smear
(02/05/98)
Men in black (robes)
By Bruce Shapiro
Looking for an anti-Clinton arch-conspirator? Try the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court
(02/04/98)
Subpoena me? Subpoena you!
By Jonathan Broder
Trying to turn the tables, the president's attorney gets legal on Kenneth Starr
(02/03/98)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Browse the
Newsreal Archives
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

spacer

THE HORNY DILEMMA | PAGE 2 OF 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If only the president did not love his wife! What makes it so excruciating is that he does love her, but also experiences an intense desire for sex outside the marriage, in a society that has not figured out how to offer him a solution.
This is not to excuse our pitiful, helpless president, who if the stories are true, bears some personal responsibility for the firestorm raging around him -- especially if he lied. But the real problem lies not with his psyche but with a tyrannical institution that creates similarly irresponsible behavior in millions of men and women.
Would we rather have had George Bush, or Bob Dole (both of whom are rumored to have had a fling in their time), in his place? Or Gerald Ford for more than half a term?
Perhaps the man from Hope could have followed the advice of one of his surgeons general and embraced the joys of masturbation. Somehow, that wouldn't have cut it. The truth is he had no available sexual alternatives that would have served the national interest. And now that he's apparently been caught, it is not clear that the nation really wants him to tell the truth -- as witness his record high approval ratings. Perhaps ordinary Americans have a better understanding of the irrationality of marriage than the shocked pundits of the New York Times.
One could argue that Clinton should not have run for president in the first place, a choice made by many others who had trouble keeping their fly buttoned. Whatever happens, there has been, and will be, a price that Clinton will pay for his alleged deceits. But what of the nation? Is a fondness for carnality now to be a disqualification for higher office? Is the presidential gene pool to be restricted to the tepid and eternally frustrated?
It is not easy to separate public and private morality, although that is the direction in which American society appears to be moving. It is not impossible to imagine a situation a generation or two hence where people will form genuine long-term attachments while allowing each other a far higher degree of sexual liberty than they do today.
If it does not, then political leadership will be continually sacrificed on the altar of scandal, or it will be limited to those who, like Richard Nixon, find outlets for their frustrations in other, more dangerous ways. There are those blessed few -- perhaps Al Gore is one of them -- who have attained a satisfying balance. But they are the exception, not the norm.
While the issue of sexual freedom is debated endlessly in private -- on the therapist's couch, among friends over a beer or on "Oprah" -- it is still taboo politically. But unless we want to go through this wrenching, endless cycle of scandal, we need to ask whether linking marriage and sexual fidelity, for our leaders as well as ourselves, really makes sense anymore.
SALON | Feb. 10, 1998

Fred Branfman is a regular contributor to Salon
Table Talk: Are we pushing the puritanical envelope? Join the discussion in Table Talk.

T A B L E+T A L K President Clinton has a 79 percent approval rating! Have Americans no shame, no shame at all? Join the Clinton approval ratings discussion in Social Issues D A I L Y+Q U O T E Curling frenzy R E C E N T L Y Germ war games By Jeff Stein If the U.S, finds itself back in the desert against Iraq, get out your gas masks (02/09/98) The lady is not a tramp By Jenn Shreve The lurid coverage of Monica Lewinsky's sex life tells us more about aging geezers in the press corps than it does about a young white house intern (02/06/98) The roots of the Clinton smear By Gene Lyons How Gennifer Flowers and other fast buck artists spawned the Clinton smear (02/05/98) Men in black (robes) By Bruce Shapiro Looking for an anti-Clinton arch-conspirator? Try the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court (02/04/98) Subpoena me? Subpoena you! By Jonathan Broder Trying to turn the tables, the president's attorney gets legal on Kenneth Starr (02/03/98) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Browse the Newsreal Archives - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
		THE HORNY DILEMMA \| PAGE 2 OF 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - If only the president did not love his wife! What makes it so excruciating is that he does love her, but also experiences an intense desire for sex outside the marriage, in a society that has not figured out how to offer him a solution. This is not to excuse our pitiful, helpless president, who if the stories are true, bears some personal responsibility for the firestorm raging around him -- especially if he lied. But the real problem lies not with his psyche but with a tyrannical institution that creates similarly irresponsible behavior in millions of men and women. Would we rather have had George Bush, or Bob Dole (both of whom are rumored to have had a fling in their time), in his place? Or Gerald Ford for more than half a term? Perhaps the man from Hope could have followed the advice of one of his surgeons general and embraced the joys of masturbation. Somehow, that wouldn't have cut it. The truth is he had no available sexual alternatives that would have served the national interest. And now that he's apparently been caught, it is not clear that the nation really wants him to tell the truth -- as witness his record high approval ratings. Perhaps ordinary Americans have a better understanding of the irrationality of marriage than the shocked pundits of the New York Times. One could argue that Clinton should not have run for president in the first place, a choice made by many others who had trouble keeping their fly buttoned. Whatever happens, there has been, and will be, a price that Clinton will pay for his alleged deceits. But what of the nation? Is a fondness for carnality now to be a disqualification for higher office? Is the presidential gene pool to be restricted to the tepid and eternally frustrated? It is not easy to separate public and private morality, although that is the direction in which American society appears to be moving. It is not impossible to imagine a situation a generation or two hence where people will form genuine long-term attachments while allowing each other a far higher degree of sexual liberty than they do today. If it does not, then political leadership will be continually sacrificed on the altar of scandal, or it will be limited to those who, like Richard Nixon, find outlets for their frustrations in other, more dangerous ways. There are those blessed few -- perhaps Al Gore is one of them -- who have attained a satisfying balance. But they are the exception, not the norm. While the issue of sexual freedom is debated endlessly in private -- on the therapist's couch, among friends over a beer or on "Oprah" -- it is still taboo politically. But unless we want to go through this wrenching, endless cycle of scandal, we need to ask whether linking marriage and sexual fidelity, for our leaders as well as ourselves, really makes sense anymore. SALON \| Feb. 10, 1998 Fred Branfman is a regular contributor to Salon Table Talk: Are we pushing the puritanical envelope? Join the discussion in Table Talk.