Welcome to the
Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum

This is a community where people come in search of marriage related support, answers, or encouragement. Also, information about the Marriage Builders principles can be found in the books available for sale in the Marriage Builders® Bookstore.
If you would like to join our guidance forum, please read the Announcement Forum for instructions, rules, & guidelines.
The members of this community are peers and not professionals. Professional coaching is available by clicking on the link titled Coaching Center at the top of this page.
We trust that you will find the Marriage Builders® Discussion Forum to be a helpful resource for you. We look forward to your participation.
Once you have reviewed all the FAQ, tech support and announcement information, if you still have problems that are not addressed, please e-mail the administrators at mbrestored@gmail.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
#2682655 11/13/12 02:30 PM
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,621
A
Member
OP Offline
Member
A
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,621
By FRANK BRUNI

Published: November 12, 2012

There were remarks galore about her unusually toned arms and the way she dressed to show them off. I even spotted a comment about how much of her armpits one of her outfits revealed, as if underarm exhibitionism were some sort of sexual sorcery, some aphrodisiac, the key to it all.

What else could explain his transgression? Why else would a man of such outward discipline and outsize achievement risk so much? The temptress must have been devious. The temptation must have been epic.

That was the tired tone of some of the initial coverage of, and reaction to, the affair between David Petraeus and Paula Broadwell, which had many people claiming surprise where there wasn�t cause for any, reverting to clich�s that should be retired and indulging in a sexism we like to think we�ve moved past.

Broadwell has just 13 percent body fat, according to a recent measurement. Did you know that? Did you need to? It came up nonetheless. And like so much else about her � her long-ago coronation as homecoming queen, her six-minute mile � it was presented not merely as a matter of accomplishment, but as something a bit titillating, perhaps a part of the trap she laid.

There are bigger issues here. There are questions of real consequence, such as why the F.B.I. got so thoroughly involved in what has been vaguely described as a case of e-mail harassment, whether the bureau waited too long to tell lawmakers and White House officials about the investigation, and how much classified information Broadwell, by dint of her relationship with Petraeus, was privy to. The answers matter.

Her �expressive green eyes� (The Daily Beast) and �tight shirts� and �form-fitting clothes� (The Washington Post) don�t. And the anecdotes and chatter that implicitly or explicitly wonder at the spidery wiles she must have used to throw the mighty man off his path are laughably ignorant of history, which suggests that mighty men are all too ready to tumble, loins first. Wiles factor less into the equation than proximity.

Sure, the spotlight these men have attracted and the altitude they�ve reached should, theoretically, give them greater pause. But they�ve either become accustomed to or outright sought a kind of adulation in the public arena that probably isn�t mirrored in their marriages. A spouse is unlikely to provide it. A spouse knows you too well for that, and gives you something deeper, truer and so much less electric.

It has to be more than mere coincidence that Bill Clinton had an affair with a White House intern; Newt Gingrich with a Congressional aide (now his wife); John Edwards with a woman who followed him around with a camera, creating hagiographic mini-documentaries about his presidential campaign; and Petraeus with a woman who made him the subject of a biography so worshipful that its main riddle, joked Jon Stewart, was whether Petraeus was �awesome or incredibly awesome.�

These mighty men didn�t just choose mistresses, by all appearances. They chose fonts of gushing reverence. That�s at least as deliberate and damnable as any signals the alleged temptresses put out.

Petraeus�s choice suggests an additional measure of vanity. Broadwell exercises compulsively, as he does. She�s fascinated by all matters military, as he is. �Petraeus once joked I was his avatar,� she told The Charlotte Observer a while back. So by his own assessment, he was having an affair with a version of himself.

And yet it�s the women in these situations who are often subjected to a more vigorous public shaming � and assigned greater responsibility.

The Web site Business Insider posted an interview with an unnamed former colleague of Petraeus�s who knew Broadwell and characterized her as �a shameless self-promoting prom queen.� The colleague all but exonerated Petraeus by saying: �You�re a 60-year-old man and an attractive woman almost half your age makes herself available to you � that would be a test for anyone.�

The headline of The Washington Post story that weighed in on Broadwell�s wardrobe asserted that he �let his guard down,� a phrase that portrays him as passive, possibly even a victim. The story notes that his former aides considered him �the consummate gentleman and family man.�

It goes on to say that Broadwell was �willing to take full advantage of her special access� to him.

An article in Slate asked �how could he � this acclaimed leader and figure of rectitude � allow such a thing to a happen?� The italics are mine, because the verb is a telling one. �She went a bit ga-ga for the general,� the article later observes, adding: �She may have made herself irresistible.�
Such adamant women, such pregnable men. We�ve been stuck on this since Eve, Adam and the Garden of Eden. And it�s true: Eve shouldn�t have been so pushy with the apple.

But Adam could have had a V8.


A version of this op-ed appeared in print on November 13, 2012, on page A27 of the New York edition with the headline: The Siren and the Spook.


They are called Honey Pots by security professionals. Tends to let the man off the hook a bit, IMO.

If you can get to the NYT page, try the reader�s comments. They are revealing. The vast majority thinks adultery is just an �unfortunate error�. (Now where have I read that before?)

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/13/o...todaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20121113

Regarding his resigning. Well, I agree. In fact he is getting off easy. I would not work with him any more. I refuse to work with anyone who has ever committed adultery if I know it and can at all help it. So far, I always can. If they do not resign I transfer them to corporate purgatory.


"Never forget that your pain means nothing to a WS." ~Mulan

"An ethical man knows it is wrong to cheat on his wife. A moral man will not actually do it." ~ Ducky

WS: They are who they are.

When an eel lunges out
And it bites off your snout
Thats a moray ~DS
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,108
Originally Posted by Aphelion
underarm exhibitionism

But Adam could have had a V8.

rotflmao



BW - me
exWH - serial cheater
2 awesome kids
Divorced 12/2011




Many a good man has failed because he had a wishbone where his backbone should have been.

We gain strength, and courage, and confidence by each experience in which we really stop to look fear in the face... we must do that which we think we cannot.
--------Eleanor Roosevelt
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,239
J
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,239
Very convenient timing for this affair to be exposed as Congress holds hearings on the Embassy attack

Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,239
J
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,239
Hillary Clinton just called him a liar.
This affair was exposed by the White House to cover up what happened at the Embassy.

Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 20,433
Likes: 4
B
Member
Offline
Member
B
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 20,433
Likes: 4
Originally Posted by Jedi_Knight
Hillary Clinton just called him a liar.
This affair was exposed by the White House to cover up what happened at the Embassy.
It's also sad how the media jokes about how it's justified, because they say "Have you seen his wife?" "Compare her to his hot/beautiful OW". puke



FWW/BW (me)
WH
2nd M for both
Blended Family with 7 kids between us
Too much hurt and pain on both sides that my brain hurts just thinking about it all.



Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,239
J
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,239
Well adultery is never justified.
But we have an assassination of a Ambassador and the CIA chief was scheduled to testify about what happened to the Congress and days before his testimony, but after the election this is leaked to the press.


Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,621
A
Member
OP Offline
Member
A
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,621
I find it interesting so many NYT letter writers complain about him having to face public scrutiny and resign. Typical liberal NYT readers, I suppose. They excuse all forms of adultery in general. Especially in Democrats.

What they don�t mention in their letters is he broke a contract. Well, two contracts. The marriage contract with his wife, of course. But also a written contract he signed with his employer, the United States Government. At his level of security clearance he long ago agreed to report personal contacts beyond random encounters. Including and especially sexual relationships.

He risked national security. They don�t call them Honey Pots for nothing. Anyone else would be fired if they broke that contract. So he should be fired. He should also lose his retirement benefits and maybe go to jail. Does not matter what he thought he was doing or if he thought it was all safe. He should be treated the same as any lower level person who has those levels of clearances would be treated. And that is harshly. Very harshly.


"Never forget that your pain means nothing to a WS." ~Mulan

"An ethical man knows it is wrong to cheat on his wife. A moral man will not actually do it." ~ Ducky

WS: They are who they are.

When an eel lunges out
And it bites off your snout
Thats a moray ~DS
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 274
O
Member
Offline
Member
O
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 274
The thing that disturbs and saddens me the most is the apparent culture.

Time after time, we see the military spouses coming here to the MB boards asking for help in dealing with an adulterous military member.

It's apparent to me that the "work hard, party hard" culture which includes institutional cover-up of adulterous activity -- which is a crime punishable under the UCMJ -- infiltrates to highest-possible levels. Just look at the news over the past month: 4-star Petraeus; 4-star Allen; BG Sinclair of the 82nd Airborne. These guys represent the military's top command structure; the guys who carry the banner of honor, integrity, and sacrifice!

It's a national disgrace.

Of course, what's happened to these guys is a great example of "nuclear exposure." Hopefully, some of the BS's here are taking notes . . .


Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,239
J
Member
Offline
Member
J
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 11,239
The WSJ just tweeted an article.
She and Patreus spent a lot of time running together.
Apparently she's a great runner. She finished 12th out of all women in the Charlotte Half Marathon last year.
Patreus runs 6 minute miles which is amazing.

So that is a lot of recreational time they spent together.
Obviously one major lesson is to not run with a married member of the opposite sex.

Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,621
A
Member
OP Offline
Member
A
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,621
Interesting follow-on article - I didn't know this. Perhaps these laws ought to be used by more BS.
---------
Adultery, an Ancient Crime That Remains on Many Books
By Ethan Bronner
November 14, 2012

When David H. Petraeus resigned as director of the C.I.A. because of adultery he was widely understood to be acknowledging a misdeed, not a crime. Yet in his state of residence, Virginia, as in 22 others, adultery remains a criminal act, a vestige of the way American law has anchored legitimate sexual activity within marriage.

In most of those states, including New York, adultery is a misdemeanor. But in others � Idaho, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oklahoma and Wisconsin � it is a felony, though rarely prosecuted. In the armed forces, it can be punished severely although usually in combination with a greater wrongdoing.

This is yet another example of American exceptionalism: in nearly the entire rest of the industrialized world, adultery is not covered by the criminal code.

Like other state laws related to sex � sodomy, fornication, rape � adultery laws extend back to the Old Testament, onetime capital offenses stemming at least partly from a concern about male property. Peter Nicolas of the University of Washington Law School says the term stemmed from the notion of �adulterating� or polluting the bloodline of a family when a married woman had sex with someone other than her husband and ran the risk of having another man�s child.

Linda C. McClain, who teaches family law at Boston University, likes to give her students two decisions from New Jersey courts, the first from 1838 and the second from 1992, to demonstrate how things have changed.

In the 1838 decision, the court said that the harm of adultery lay not in �the alienation of the wife�s affections, and loss of comfort in her company,� but in �its tendency to adulterate the issue of an innocent husband, and to turn the inheritance away from his own blood, to that of a stranger.�

In the 1992 ruling, in a civil case, the court said, �Adultery exists when one spouse rejects the other by entering into a personal intimate sexual relationship with any other person.� It said it was �the rejection of the spouse coupled with out-of-marriage intimacy that constitutes adultery.�

Most states have purged their codes of laws regulating cohabitation, homosexual sodomy and fornication � sex between unmarried adults � especially after a 2003 Supreme Court decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which made sexual activity by consenting adults in private legal across the country. But the question of how that ruling affects adultery remains unanswered because others may be harmed by adultery � a spouse and children. Several courts have alluded to the constitutionality of adultery laws since the Lawrence decision.

But Melissa Murray, a professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley, said she thought �most courts in light of Lawrence are going to give adultery a wide berth.�

Professor Murray added: �It is an open question whether adultery continues to be viable as criminal law even though it remains on the books in 24 states and territories. Nobody is going to be going to jail for it. But it is used in divorce and custody cases and even in some employment cases.�

A number of law professors, including Joanna L. Grossman of Hofstra University, said one reason that adultery laws remain on the books is that getting rid of them would require politicians to declare their opposition to them, something few would do. In addition, many like the idea of the criminal code serving as a kind of moral guide even if certain laws are almost never applied.

Mr. Petraeus is a retired four-star general who collects a military pension and remains subject to military codes of conduct that prohibit adultery. But Diane H. Mazur, a professor of law at the University of Florida and a former Air Force officer, said that the chances of the Army�s calling Mr. Petraeus back to active service in order to court-martial him over adultery are zero, as are any chances of state criminal charges� being brought.

�That would be reserved for the most unimaginably serious circumstances,� Professor Mazur said. Even within the military code, she added, adultery is charged as a criminal offense only when �the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces,� she read from the manual for courts-martial. That meant something larger than seemed at stake here.

Professor Murray said her research had led her to conclude that laws regulating sex emanated from a notion that sex should occur only within marriage. Criminal law, she said, was there to reinforce marriage as the legal locus for sex. So any other circumstance � sex in public or with a member of the same sex, or adultery � was a violation of marriage. �Now we live in an age when sex is not limited to marriage and laws are slowly responding to that,� she said. �But we still love marriage. Nobody is going to say adultery is O.K.�

A version of this article appeared in print on November 15, 2012, on page A12 of the New York edition with the headline: Adultery, an Ancient Crime That Remains on Many Books.


"Never forget that your pain means nothing to a WS." ~Mulan

"An ethical man knows it is wrong to cheat on his wife. A moral man will not actually do it." ~ Ducky

WS: They are who they are.

When an eel lunges out
And it bites off your snout
Thats a moray ~DS

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Search
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 1,079 guests, and 45 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Mike69, petercgeelan, Zorya, Reyna98, Nofoguy
71,829 Registered Users
Building Marriages That Last A Lifetime
Copyright © 1995-2019, Marriage Builders®. All Rights Reserved.
Site Navigation
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5