Thursday, May 19, 2011

Love Is A Many Splendored Thing Department: This Week's Sexual News In Review

Happier Days?  Photo credit.
I want to start out by saying that there are more men than Arnold Schwarzenegger who have children that they know about but did not acknowledge to their wives and the children they live with until much, much later in the game.  I have met four in my lifetime, quite ordinary men who were not governor of anything, so it's not really that rare.  But I have the same question about all of them, large and small:  how do you hide a second family?  And more important, how many people have to be paid off not to reveal that you have a second family when you are governor of California?

Personal responsibility is definitely taking a hit this week, since it turns out that pedophile priests are not responsible for their actions, and the church was not responsible for supervising them.  No,  it's what you suspected all along: the collective power of queers and fornicators to ruin innocent lives is too powerful, even for God!  According to a five year study commissioned by the Catholic Church, the sexual abuse of children and teens by priests rose dramatically in the 1960's "because priests who were poorly prepared and monitored, and were under stress, landed amid the social and sexual turmoil of the 1960s and ’70s."  The report, commissioned by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and executed by a "research team" from John Jay College to the tune of $1.3 million, must be a great relief to the Universal Church.  "The bishops," so reporteth the New York Times, "have said they hope the report will advance the understanding and prevention of child sexual abuse in society at large." Probably not.  It probably won't advance the understanding of sexual abuse in the church either.

If it is true that it never occurred to priests to abuse children until they were put under such intense psychological pressure by other people having sex, that would mean it could never happen again.  How do I know this?  I'm a historian, of course.  My analysis of the data (done for free, just this morning, and I offer it to the Pope out of shame for how queer people hurt these poor priests) has revealed the 1960s are not only over, but will probably never happen again.  Only the law of circular time, which governed Aztec history prior to their conquest (and conversion to the One True Faith) by Spain in the early 16th century, would suggest otherwise, and everyone knows that in the United States we live in linear time. 

And the Church wants to know why people don't take it seriously anymore?  Mary, please.

In other news, Dominique Strauss-Kahn has resigned as head of the IMF following charges that he tried to rape a chambermaid.  Strauss-Kahn, whose nickname is "Hot Rabbit," according to the New York Daily News, is in Riker's Island, asserting his innocence.  57% of French citizens also think he has been set up by his political enemies.

I would take this even possibility even semi-seriously except for two things:  one is that French people think Americans are too hysterical for words about sex, which is true, but I doubt that the NYPD would have walked into this $hit $torm unless they believed the woman (and why would an immigrant woman and a single mother call attention to herself in this way unnecessarily? I ask you.)  More important in my calculus is the number of powerful American men who have firmly asserted their innocence and/or threatened to bury people for spreading rumors about them that turned out not only to be true, but part of a pattern of out of control and/or criminal sexual behavior.  For example, Ah-nohld and his campaign staff responded viciously to charges of sexual harassment:  in 2003, one woman sued then-governor Schwarzenegger, charging that he and his staff had spread false rumors that she was a convicted felon.  And do you recall that president who did not have sexual relations with that woman -- except that, actually, it turned out that he did?  And John Edwards, who first lied about, and then finally admitted, having had an affair with videographer Rielle Hunter, but denied being the father of her child -- except that it turns out he is?

There seems to be a certain kind of man -- and not surprisingly, he is usually a rich and powerful one (The Council of Bishops, The Leader of the Free World or Aspiring LOTFW, The Governor, The Banker Of The Planet) -- who thinks that if he just asserts something is so the rest of us are bound, by some strange compact, to believe him.  Surely this is a much more interesting topic for historical analysis than the strange theory that priests crumbled under the weight of birth control, gay liberation and abortion, and were forced to calm their nerves by diddling children.

19 comments:

Tim Lacy said...

Doesn't all of this fall, consciously or not, under the "Big Lie" theory? I think most Big Lies occur, naturally, in a fit of anger and denial. What interests me is both (a) how they persist and (b) how they effect the teller of the Big Lie. I think (a) is easier to explain. So it's (b) that troubles and fascinates us.

What struck me about the Schwarzenegger situation is the political crassness of his waiting to tell his wife and others until he was out of office. He literally sold his soul for the governator-ship. - TL

Ellie said...

Just for the record, French public opinion seems to be backing away from the conspiracy theory now that the initial shock has worn off. The media is also revising the first wave of "Americans are so prudish" commentary and digging into DSK's long history of questionable behavior towards women.

Fie upon this quiet life! said...

I don't believe for a second that priest sex abuse is a phenomenon of the 20th century and I'm sure most thinking people would agree. After all, Boccaccio's Decameron tells multiple stories of priest sex abuse and it was written in the mid-14th century. (Sure, its fictional -- I guess -- but the amount of sexual activity among the holy in that book is pretty high. Even if ten percent of it were representative of the truth, it would still be pretty despicable.) One of my favorite lines from it is the eye-roller "The sin that's hidden is half forgiven." Most sinners would certain hope this aphorism is true. Priests double so.

shaz said...

Yup. So how do we best talk comprehensively of the (sexual) power of privilege, without erasing the line between consensual affairs with (less powerful/dependent) women and rape of (less powerful/dependent) people? I'm with you all the way, but trying to figure the advantage/potential damage of pairing Ahnold with Supreme Banker. I heard one newscaster actually attribute both incidents to "men's sexual appetites." Uh, so not the issue, and particularly insulting for the raped woman/child (despite what the Church might say).

JoVE said...

Personally, all of this is making me want a reissue of Brownmiller's Against Their Will and other radical feminist texts asserting that this is NOT about sex, it's about power.

The way all of these are being reported by the media also seems to illustrate the extent to which Christian Right concerns with morality and marriage dominate the discourse. And how marginalized feminist and queer perspectives on power, respect, and so on are.

In one piece I heard on the Strauss-Kahn affair for example, the French woman being interviewed (whose name I didn't catch) included the information that many women found him difficult to work with in meetings. However, despite this tidbit, the interview remained strongly focused on his extra-marital affairs and criminal activity, especially in relationship to the threat it might pose to his leadership.

While I deplore the criminal activity, the fact is that the contempt shown for women, and the inability to work with women as equals ought to disqualify a man for political leadership in the 21st century. That this contempt extends to hiding 2nd relationships, harassment, and rape is only further evidence of that deeper problem.

Susan said...

So, with our Governator, what strikes me is that he didn't have a "second family" -- that is, I have heard nothing that suggests he treated Baena and her child as his family, though he provided for her economically. Gee, we don't even know that his son knew that he was his son...

Which makes this much easier: the only people who had to know were Baena herself, and the people who handled the money. And presumably they know to be discreet.

Miriam said...

I don't believe for a second that priest sex abuse is a phenomenon of the 20th century and I'm sure most thinking people would agree.

Several years ago, Stephen Haliczer published a monograph on the Church's previous big sex scandal, the solicitation crisis. (Solicitation = confessors seducing their penitents during the act of confession.) One of Haliczer's implicit conclusions is that the early modern Church did a much better job of cleaning up its act than the twentieth-century one, although by our standards the treatment of victims was still quite bad.

Historiann said...

I have heard through some news reports that Maria Shriver and Schwartzeneggger maintained separate bank accounts & handled their money themselves, which would make it pretty easy (at least if you're a wealthy Hollywood star) to hide the palimony/child support payments.

I have a question about this: Tenured Radical wrote, "I have met four in my lifetime, quite ordinary men who were not governor of anything, so it's not really that rare."

Really??? FOUR?!?! This blows my mind completely. You must have much richer (or more promiscuous/adulterous) acquaintances than I. (At least, big bucks would seem to be a huge part of this equation if they're keeping it a secret, even for a little while.) The only cases I've heard of are Christopher Buckley (whom I don't actually know personally, BTW) and a non-celebrity father of a non-celebrity friend.

And, in any case--what's with all of the un-safe sex? Put on a jimmy hat, boys! Saves everyone a world of hurt.

Comrade PhysioProf said...

What kind of fucken "study" could possibly reveal the social causality of priests fucking little boys? Asking a bunch of fucken priests?

BBat50 said...

Claire. You are always a great read.

I agree with Ellie that the French reaction, which I've been following, is moving along. First, they started with the conspiracy theory and coverage of the "perp walk" which only Americans allow the press cover (remember, these are presumed innocent people at the arrest state, guilt is not yet proven).

Now it's moved onto the fact the he seems to have a history of such behavior.

john e - '80

Fie upon this quiet life! said...

Miriam - Thanks for the heads up. I'll check out the book.

gklyric said...

at least as insidious and disgusting as wealthy powerful men who take their pleasure where they will, and pay for it as they must, are those who are neither wealthy nor powerful who do the same thing, often more violently, in order to pretend that they have a higher power status than they do. These are far less likely to do anything apologetic or compensatory, and the suffering of their victims is deepened both by this and the weakness of their ability to get help.

Anonymous said...

Bravo!!! You would never know it if I didn't tell you but I just gave you a standing ovation in my living room for tone and content. It made my day to read things expressed in this manner. I also think JoVE's comment is brilliant! Thanks to you both.

Interstingly, the word verification I am being asked for before posting is "subverso." Ha!

Vince said...

What is known is that the up tick in the 60's was as a result of REPORTING not that there was any great up tick in the actual commission of childhood destruction.

Anonymous said...

This is the legacy of what I like to call the "alpha male" syndrome.

Maria

Search Engine Optimization Solution said...

Greetings! I would just like to express my gratitude for the cool information contained in this post. I will be visiting your site for more awesome info soon.

Logo Design said...

Hi, I like your blog very much! It is found me so interesting and informative... Thanks very much for sharing this amazing information over here…

Ready-Made Logo said...

Nice post. Great blog. Thanks for the share. It was very interesting and informative. Keep posting. I follow you.

Ready-Made Logo said...

You are a Great while writing in the blogs it is awesome I liked it too much good and informative thanks for the sharing.