In Defense of Elizabeth Edwards and Other Enablers [Updated]
This past Sunday, Sally Quinn wrote a thought provoking Washington Post column about Elizabeth Edwards that got many of my friends talking. She took a slightly different tack than much of the other media coverage has taken. In the outcry about John Edward's revelations, she pointed one of her fingers at Elizabeth Edwards, as an enabling wife. In my humble opinion, there are arguably many ways to examine this kind of a news story. There are so many angles in the prism from which to view it; who is at fault, who did what to whom, who is lying and when did they lie. In short -- the world has always been and is full of human frailty. But when someone is running for public office, it does require a stronger microscope.
Frankly, I was heartened that the Saturday morning after Edward's admission, the Today Show ratings handily beat their competition with their exclusive Olympics coverage. I thought this augured well for America. A splash of international sports competition in China was far more captivating to the average American viewer than the same tawdry political story of the lying, cheating, son of a bitch with the blonde permed floozy. "Oh, another page out of the Gary Hart Monkey Business book," yawned my sister. Perhaps, as citizens, we have become more like the French when it comes to expectations for our political leaders; a dalliance here, a blow job there, a call girl in the hotel room or the swelling belly housing a love child tucked away in a penthouse suite. Oh, that. Yawn.
Before I begin my defense of enablers, let me make one thing clear. It's entirely possible that I may be the biggest patsy alive. I'd like to believe my husband has been honest with me all of these years. And perhaps, at this very moment, he's speed dialing some stripper from the Badda Bing Club, or getting ready for a nooner in between bites of his sandwich at a no-tell motel. If so, I suppose that would make me an enabler too.
When most of us enter marriage we base our union on one big important thing -- trust. When we take those vows, be they the antiquated ones "honor and obey" or some groovy updated version "we will always listen to one another's point of view," we spouses mostly jumped in believing we would trust the other person to hold up their end of the bargain. Unless, of course, one is marrying someone with a checkered past; a tattooed Tommy Lee of the rock world, or Elizabeth Taylor, for example, someone for whom commitment and vows seem.... perhaps a bit more elastic.
So if Elizabeth Edwards had niggling doubts somewhere in the past, if she and her husband talked it over and he assured her he was telling the truth, well, somewhere in there the trust factor had to come into play. Sometimes because we do love, we fill in trust in places our spouse may not deserve. Even when our heads are telling us not to, our hearts create the trust bridge. I want to believe my husband does love me when he tells me so. And I don't need to go looking for trouble until I begin to smell something that might stink like fish.
Is it truly possible to recognize all of the dangers, the warning signs lying out there in wait for us during one lifetime? That inability to always navigate correctly, to hope, perhaps, for the best in our marriages, is what makes us human. Presumably it's what keeps people like Elizabeth Taylor going back to the well each time, in hopes that she will truly find her Prince Charming. For those of us weaned on Cinderella and Snow White, somewhere in our marrow, people like me still want to believe in true love. We still hope that it can conquer all, no matter what dings and dents life throws at us.
I cannot imagine anyone being willing to endure a marriage grounded in continual suspicion or assumption of wrongdoing. Yes, there is a fine line between gullibility and believing in someone, between stupidity and strapping on a set of blinders. But if I've asked my hubby the same question four different ways and he's answered it the same way every time -- I want to believe he is right. Who among us is licking their chops to call the private investigator when life appears to be moving in the right direction? Who sits, daily vigilant for a sign of transgression, for a hair or two on the forearm to stand on end, to feel that "sixth sense." Who aches to sit outside a honky tonk bar in a trench coat with binoculars? Who invests in a home lie detector set just to keep "handy" by the bed? Only the miserable I suppose.
It's often said that the only people who really know what goes on in a marriage are the two who are in it. I know that I pray never to be the wife who has resorted to checking her husband's Internet history for child porn sites or titillating emails, the 1950's equivalent of lipstick on the collar. How can we possibly know -- and why should we be entitled to -- the delicate dance between what a wife knows, what she wants to believe, what she does believe and what a husband tells or obfuscates when infidelity is involved.
And so I argue that we leave Elizabeth alone. Whether John Edwards was carrying on the affair in 2006 may very well be our business. Whether or not his wife knew in 2006 is firmly HER business. That belongs in the category marked "inner workings of a marriage." She was not the one running for public office, she was doing what strong women like Silda Wall Spitzer, Cynthia McCain and countless other accomplished, well educated, dedicated mothers have done throughout history -- trusted their man, believed in him and supported his ambitions in numerous ways.
Like scores of public wives before her, she was no different than you or me. She wanted to believe that her marriage had what it took to go the long haul: that it could survive the unthinkable death of a child, a duel with cancer and then the heart-stopping news that the disease had returned in a more virulent form. And through all of that, I have to believe that what didn't kill them, made the good parts of their marriage stronger. And it set an admirable lesson for their children about life and perseverance, about strength and looking for silver linings while you stare down violent, black storm clouds. This is tough stuff. In the face of all of that "life-testing" can you imagine running an investigative behind-the-scenes check on your husband too -- just in case he was a philanderer?
And here is my other reason for defending enablers. The children. When backed into a corner, a mother lion will fight to the death to spare her cubs. It's programmed into human nature too. So whatever Elizabeth was doing, whenever she knew, whether or not she went on, with cancer, to campaign for her husband with this betrayal clasped in her breast -- whatever she did, you have to believe she was putting her kids first. And when you are the one left holding the bag of feces, after something unexpected blows up in the family's face, you will do whatever you can to make it alright for the kids, two of whom must be trotting off to school shortly, ready to face the judgment and scrutiny of classmates and parents. There is a fine line between sympathy and pity. And a good mother tries to mitigate that as well.
Yes, as much of a rubbernecking car wreck as this is -- and now that the wolf pack has been sicked on John Edwards to determine the lineage of this love child and who is paying whom -- now, I suppose some of it is our right as taxpayers to know. The hounds are already yelping in the distant brush. But it makes me long for the decades of discretion. I think nostalgically of the days when the secret service smuggled a breathy Marilyn Monroe into the White House. I yearn for the private and broad brush-stroked affairs of past presidents, well documented posthumously, but squarely off limits to the press corps of the time. When it comes to protecting the children, I think folks like Jackie O or Lady Bird got it right. Kick him in the scrotum behind the privacy of closed doors, but protect the children at all costs. Even if it means masquerading as an enabler.
UPDATE, 8-15-08, 10:20am:
To all the readers of my blog posts:
Firstly, I love your comments, so keep them coming -- you all have interesting, and diverse thoughts and opinions. This kind of discourse is fun. It's what keeps us alive as a society.
As a mother of four, one who is currently on vacation with all of her kids on what has been an endlessly rainy month where I am -- there is never any extended period of time during which to visit the bathroom by yourself, let alone think.
In reading all of your comments I wanted to add two thoughts that I'd originally had when I sat down (14 different times) to write my Edwards blog in between "Mooo..ooom, she's in my chair" and "When is dinner..."
Firstly, all of you who struggled with the word "enabler" and wrote about that -- thank you. One of the first thoughts I'd originally had when I read Quinn's column was how much I absolutely hate this new-agey, over-used, psycho-babbling word. Enabler-- what does that really mean anyway? It seems like a great word to deflect and dissipate blame from the sinner. Has the wife whose husband has been secretly binge drinking airline bottles of booze in the garage aided his addiction?
Is the mother who didn't find the pot in her kid's school locker an enabler? Some of us simply can't know everything about everyone. Surely we all have doubts about everything at some time, we all second guess ourselves, but I'd like to believe we are all guilty of trying to look for the best parts of our spouses, our children, our neighbors until we see the red herring.
Did the Edwards risk the Democratic nomination by hiding this knowledge? If, in fact, she DID know all in 2006, then I agree that was harmful to the American public.
My point is that we don't really know exactly what she knew then. And it isn't our place to pick over the bones of that one fact at this juncture. That is between them at this point and the damage is done. He didn't get the nomination so in this Greek play, the Gods of fate dealt their hand. America was saved!
What he did with Ms Hunter? Wrong, wrong, wrong. Shame, shame, shame. His actions are worthy of our microscope. He has been publicly castrated already and one can only guess what is going on behind closed doors. (And for those objecting to scrotum-kicking - relax -- don't be so literal, think figurative!)
My point is that we don't really know exactly what she knew. And there is no point in continuing to kick her now. What people do in the dynamics of a marriage is really their business. After the camera takes the confession, after the public figure is humiliated, after we all shake our heads and say "how is it possible these guys think it will never be discovered?" (Do politicians no longer study history, despite their hubris colored glasses?) it's time for us to back away from the bleeding body of the wife.
In fact, how about this theory? Has anyone considered that she didn't know anything in 2006, but in the face of all of this media attention, in all the hideous accusations that are raining down on a family with three innocent kids, perhaps she decided to present a united front and look like an "enabler" to protect them, not him. To make it go away faster. Because really it's all a mess.
A mother lioness will act before she thinks sometimes. She will throw her own body before the tusks of the wild boar to keep her cubs safe. And hasn't Elizabeth Edward's body taken enough blows by now?
Keep up the discourse -- you are a fun bunch. And thanks for reading.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Well I have Breast Cancer also and it's a full-time job going through chemo. I'm sure she just felt that she couldn't do it alone. You don't feel like you're in remission when you finish treatment-you fear the cancer coming back. I'm sure it's something she didn't or doesn't want to face alone. And if he prostrated himself with shame and apologies, then she probably felt they could go forward. And there's her legacy as well. When you are faced with imminent death, you want to leave a mark.
Why all these comments about Elizabeth. Hey gang. She wasn't and isn't the guilty party.
And, if it were me, as a mother, I would have bigger concerns. At this point she knows she is dying of cancer. And when she does, could "the other woman" step in and serve as the mother of her children. That would be MY major concern. After years of excellent mothering, could her husband bring "the hussy" into the house to rule the family. How awful.
I look forward to the day when anyone in the public eye tells the media, that what goes on between their spouse and he/she is none of anyone’s business, and the story ends there.
Learning of an affair can be shocking and painful, no matter what you knew. Once you hear it from the mouth of your spouse, or see it in action, it’s devastating. In addition, after learning of this, one must deal with the every day experiences of life, like getting out of bed in the morning, or putting on a smile as you say good morning to your children. When the media stalks this kind of story, the children are the ones that get hurt the most. Why would anyone in the media imagine someone like E.E. or anyone in the public eye, want them to speculate on their relationship, or hear what the entire country is saying about their intimate relationship, i.e. Did Elizabeth enable her husbands behavior? So what if she did, that is her business! People in the media have to stop this!
I love what Lee Woodruff said, “Frankly, I was heartened that the Saturday morning after Edward's admission, the Today Show ratings handily beat their competition with their exclusive Olympics coverage.” Bravo to the American public for focusing on one of the most important events for this world. And shame on those who want to drag this story out for every penny they can make off of it.
Elizabeth and John Edwards have been married for 30 years. That is a lifetime of trust, commitment and partnership, not thrown away lightly. She has young children whose interests and needs she will protect and defend with all the love in her heart. And, she's struggling with cancer, a life-sapping, mean thing that may deprive her beloved children of their mother.
I've watched people make hard choices, and as a child, I was the beneficiary of those choices. When my own mother was fighting to survive cancer, she too discovered her husband--my father--was in love with another woman. She had 4 children; she was sick; she chose to keep the family together. My father stayed in the family, took care of her until her death, then married his longtime lover. It was all emotionally traumatic for an adolescent, the oldest of 4, who lost her faith in her father, and then her mother at age 40, from cancer.
Whatever has happened between Elizabeth and John Edwards in their marriage, and whatever choices they make, will--I hope--be in the best interests of their children, and themselves, and certainly not a horrid, judgmental and cruelly sanctimonious Sally Quinn.
You have my sympathies for what you endured and my appreciation for your appreciation of your mother's difficult choice.
I think that while the biology shows we mothers will fight to the death to protect our children, there simply isn't anything in the biology to motivate us to do the same for spouses. I say... feed the bum to the (other) lions. And yes, stop that "enabling" in the process.
Great post, Lee. I'd write more but I've got to go scrape now-hardened, once-frozen yogurt off the once-lovely floors. Once I remove all the ants that have been partying all night on top of it.
LOL.....I just had a flashback to when my then 4 year old son put a nearly-full half-gallon of sherbet in the refrigerator part of the refrig-freezer, and it melted and had the juice sucked out of it by the "frost free" feature...
That said, Elizabeth Edwards's situation is different from that of most mothers of young children in that she is older and sick, besides. She doesn't have the range of choices that most wives have when their husbands are caught philandering. I don't think she can be faulted for trying to make the best of a terrible situation for her and her children, and to minimize the effects what must be a truly demoralizing and terrifying predicament. . If I were in her shoes, I would be very worried about the kinds of choices John makes when it comes to women, and I would probably stick with him and try to re-educate him about parental responsibility.
It must be a heartbreaking situation for her, one in which no alternative seems like a very good one.
Thank you! We really do lose our options when we are sick or older, and children are in the mix.
The plight of the poor Edwards'. How big is there 5 or 15 million dollar house again?
At least he cheated with a woman. Republicans are likely to be caught with a boy.
thanks, lee, for your update and i wholeheartedly agree with your suggestion that perhaps elizabeth didn't know about the affair in 2006 and i have stated so in other places on this site.
i am just amazed at the lack of empathy towards elizabeth exhibited here. from everything the public has come to know of john edwards, edwards as aa habitual philanderer was never mentioned or even hinted at by the most voracious of his critics. why in the world would she not believe her husbandof 30 + years, if he denied the affair? how far would any of us really have pushed it if we were in her shoes?
i really think it is time to back of elizabeth and have compassion for her.
john gets what's coming to him. although i think beyond the extreme damage done to his family personally, the other dad thing is how many on the right are trying to paint the whole john edwards as a fraud, inclinding his platform. "see there really is no poverty in america. it was all slick pr from a trial lawyer. he lied once; he lies abut everything
I can never understand the blame the wife mentality when the actions of the husband are where the focus should be. She did not cheat. He did. I supported his campaign and over time became a supporter of hers because she represents a strong woman. Strong women do not run out of the house crying at the first or even second sign of their husbands' infidelities. Strong women need to be strong to keep the family members most vulnerable to the actions of the parents from getting hurt. I am not Hillary's greatest fan, but I empathized with her too. People of a certain generation were raised to keep the family together for as long as possible and compared to other kinds of issues in marriages the philandering husband is a relatively small matter. Of course, it should not be condoned, but there are so many issues and people involved in marriages and even the pain of the infidelity can not match the pain of a total break up of the family. Most often, I have noted, women need time to process what they will do because the consequences of their actions affect their children as well as themselves.
Some of us actually contemplate what will come after we kick the SOB out for cheating. We have trouble with child support, visitation rights, custody fights, and step-monsters. The grass isn't always greener on the other side of divorce.
I wanted to say more, so here is the rest of my comment: While Ms. Quinn continues to feed at the trough, turning a blind eye to real public wrongs, she seeks to use her claws to rake at the life of a woman who has asked that their family's privacy be respected. Elizabeth Edwards is combatting cancer, and her prognosis is not great. At the same time, she is taking care of her children, is standing beside her husband, as is her right to do so. And she is waging a fight to draw attention to the plight of poor and struggling middle class Americans who do not have access to the health care that they desperately need.
Unlike Ms. Quinn, Elizabeth Edwards is NOT an enabler of any kind. At a time when many others would crawl into a corner and pity themselves, this courageous woman is taking a strong, principled stand. Ms. Quinn should be ashamed of herself. I happen to believe that so much hay is being made, because John Edwards is the only candidate who spoke about the injustice being perpetuated against our own citizens, and that does not suit Ms. Quinn's and her ilk's paymasters.
I have to wade in here and state my opinion. Firstly, if Sally Quinn wants to write about enablers, perhaps she should step up to the plate and castigate herself and her fellows in the media establishment. In this country, we have witnessed the lifeblood being drained from communities all across the United States. Starting in the '80s, under Reagan/Bush through the Clinton '90s, and into the beginning of the 21st century through the unchecked outsourcing and offshoring of jobs, and the displacement of American citizen workers through the exploitation of our visa programs, and also illegal immigration. The likes of Ms. Quinn, and her peers have sat silently while good and decent American citizens have been treated little more than chattel. Fired, laid off, lied to by the Clintons. Promised retraining and "new jobs", training for jobs that would also be outsourced, entire industies offshored, and jobs that never materialized. A free press is supposed to report in the public interest, but to the likes of the rapacious Ms. Quinn, the only "public" she recognizes are those that keep her bottom line well plumped and cozy. She has enabled the corporate and foreign interests, corrupt politicians and lobbyists to not only get away with destroying untold millions of lives, ripping any chance of a future away from poor young American children, but to feel they are entitled to do so.
Excellent, well said.
Its become high level gossip 24/7 in the place of News we were used to. What we grew out of at 14, snotty gossiping, is what these high-paid mouths indulge in...right in our faces to boot.
That it is Elizabeth's only, and none of our business whatsoever is ignored...
In all truth, the problem is John's, not Elizabeth's, not ours, not the country's. Al Anoners learn that the alcoholic's problem is HIS and once released, need never be her burden...u
It is working its way through, as all things do.
Elizabeth has enough on her plate without our intrusions, how cruel are we to burden her with our "Shoulds and Coulds and Oughtas".
TV has conditioned the public to think that their opinion on everything is nigh onto required, it is not.
Acceptance of things as they are in reality is required. Ego not essential.
Elizabeth is the only reason I would have voted for John. She s smarter, more down to earth and more compassionate and KNOWS THE ISSUES. She would have made a better President then HE would.
What! Are you serious?! You would vote for a president of these United States because of his wife? This is the most ridiculous, naive reason ever, that I have heard of a why a person voted for someone. The wife is not sworn in. The wife is not the commander in chief. The wife does not run the nation. The wife doe not discuss problem of the world with world leaders. The wife is not leader of the free world.
I am of the opinion that this has been picked over and over again. Let it go, we none of us were there, we all know men tend to be less than faithful and certainly less than honest when it comes to sex. What he saw in her is beyond me, perhaps she threw herself at him nonstop for weeks or even months on end and men do not have the stuff to ignore that sort of behavior. Elizabeth had little to nothing to do with it, and she undoubtedly believes John's good characteristics outweigh the bad. The human is an incredibly complex mechanism, and understanding what goes on in someone else's mind is beyond most of us. Let it die a death and let's get on with the real issues in the nation.
Agreed, leave it alone.
John Edwards is not ever going to forget what he has done to his "best friend"
If Elizabeth wants to forgive that is her right. Neither of them will ever forget.
OBAMA 2008
50% of couples stay together after the man was caught cheating. There are as many reasons for staying together as there are for divorcing.
I have a friend who refuses to believe that Pres Kennedy ever cheated on his wife. She hated Clinton for cheating but Kennedy was her hero, so she solves it by staying in total denial. I didn't care at the time that Clinton cheated. I thought it was as irrelevant to what kind of President he was. Clinton probably counted on the same kind of discretion Kennedy had.
As far as Edwards is concerned - knowing that he wanted to be President and seeing what happened to Clinton, what he did was beyond stupid.
But I agree, leave his wife out of it. She obviously loves her husband. They have been through a lifetime together, not just a political life. She forgave him - the foundation of Christianity. And stayed with him because all the good things about their relationship were greater than the bad things. No One has the right to judge her and the judgements people say about Elizabeth Edwards shows more about themselves then it does about her.
Well said! I remember somebody (perhaps Couric) describing Clinton's behavior as "reckless, " if that is what you meant by "beyond stupid." Same holds true for Edwards. I am having a hard time getting past the way his personal indiscretions put his policies in jeopardy. His not winning the nomination was already not a good sign, but he was supposed to give a speech at the convention that might have caused the voting public to take a good hard second look at poverty in the USA and the associated problems. Now he won't be giving that speech....
. He must have known that would happen if he got caught. But I can't blame Elizabeth for continuing to work to get him elected...
When ordinary people mess around, it isn't my business. When I support a politician with my time and money, and his personal bad behavior jeopardizes the very policies he advocated that caused me to support him, then it IS my business. But what his wife does...tha
I don't see where having sex with another woman"'jeopardizes the very policies he advocated " he was bringing forth the cause for the poor, nothing changed.
And for that matter, why would having sex with another woman, like all presidents did, all men did, disqualify him from being President since it hasn't disqualified any yet?
We don't have to react like this was some crime, its his business not ours, no matter how hard the MSM pushes it at us.
Adultery is pretty much a personal matter and monogamy isn't normal... don't we have absolutely more serious matters at hand. Reality IS.
People are losing jobs, homes, cars, no benefits..
Of all the gall, to drag Elizabeth around and through the media, cruel insensitive busybodies
After reading your biography it is clear that everything you have been thru after your husband's injury and recovery have given you a great deal of compassion. Thank you...that is exactly what more in this country need.
Since when does the cheated-upon automatically get labeled as the co-cheater? John Edwards did the cheating, not Elizabeth. If she's "guilty" of anything, it's of trusting her husband, and isn't that supposed to be a good thing?
Great piece. Thank you for sharing that many of us simply DO NOT CARE about Mr. Edwards' dalliance and feel strongly that it belongs in the tabloids. First the MSM wouldn't touch the story. Now they won't leave it alone. Lazy and unimaginative journalism at its finest. Sheesh.
As for Elizabeth Edwards as enabler, marriage is long, human nature is flawed and life is shorter for her than most. Why on earth would she kick this man to the curb over an affair, no matter how privately hurtful or publicly embarrassing? Be mad as a hornet with him. Exact more than a pound of flesh in penance. Eyes like daggers, words like knives for a year or two. But divorce?
Americans who are so parochial, GROW UP.
Oh come on. Be mad as a hornet, eyes like daggers, words like knives for a YEAR OR TWO??? Angry much? Step back.
Good grief, nothing like making a situation WORSE!
How about, be a nice person to everyone, all the time? It helps HEAL.
Elizabeth doesn't need to become evil to cope with the publics intrusion into John's private life. Good gawd Gertie.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
