Why Women Keep Their Pants On

New York Governor Eliot Spitzer is the last data point I need on my mental graph of 1)men, 2)women, 3)keeping it in their pants, and 4)keeping our pants on. I'm ready to claim moral superiority, or at least the high ground on smarts. Women are either less willing to cheat on their spouse, abuse young interns and cross the double-yellow line of sexual indiscretion, or we're much better at hiding it.

Look at the modern-history laundry list: former D.C. Mayor Marion Barry, Bill Clinton, Congressmen Henry Hyde, Bob Livingston, David Vitter, Mark Foley, Bill Thomas, Bob Barr, Senators Gary Hart and Larry Craig. Must I go on? Shall we go further back in history? If we made this into a parlor game for coming up with politicians' sexual sleaziness, crimes and misdemeanors it could go on all night, and which women would be on the list? If you said, Congresswomen Helen Chenoweth (deceased) and Sue Myrick had adulterous affairs, you'd win the prize.

Granted, the Congress and state houses are predominantly male. Even so, the percentage of women who have ruined their political reputation for the sake of bodily delights is pretty small compared to men. So what's going on?

Well, Gloria Steinem has said, "Women are not more moral than men. We are only uncorrupted by power." Perhaps, or at least we don't equate power with sexual liaisons. The psychology professor Alice Eagly found that women were more likely than men to support morally traditional policies. A 1999 study of men and women in the U.S. Coast Guard found a statistically significant difference showing women's greater moral judgment. Then again, as Carol Gilligan would point out, "women impose a distinctive construction on moral problems." Well, for sure, and the bottom line is we don't have a good answer on whether women are more moral than men -- especially when it comes to indiscriminate sex acts.

Without hard evidence, I'm going to wade out of the morality question, and weigh in on the side of women being not only smarter, but clearer about our priorities. It's taken us a long time to get the small amount of political power that we have. We're not going to be so frivolous, careless of the public trust or stupid enough to blow our opportunity for a chance encounter of the sexual kind. We'll leave that to Spitzer and his ilk.

Comments

[STRONG]

BY THE WAY. I URGE GOVERNOR SPITZER TO GET SOME VIDEO-TAPES OF THAT WHITE HOUSE, "AGING LOTHARIO", SLICK WILLIE, WAGGING HIS FINGER AT THE CAMERA--AND US--AND PRACTICE REPEATING, IN A SINCERE "TEARY" MANNER "..I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN." THEN HE SHOULD CALL A PRESS CONFERENCE FOR HIS WIFE AND HAVE HER MUSE ABOUT "..THAT VAST RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY."

AND NOW YOU KNOW WHY SENATOR OBAMA "MUST" WIN. TO SAVE WHAT'S LEFT OF "SANITY" IN THE USA.

[STRONG]

IS THAT WHY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON "ALWAYS" WEARS PANTS? BECAUSE SHE'S ALWAYS AROUND SLICK WILLIE AND KNOWS THE FULL TRUTH BEHIND HIS REPUTATION AND ALSO ITS BREADTH??

[ObGyn]

There is a reason why men evolved with the potential of producing one billion babies every day (if every sperm finds an egg) and can continue to produce them till the day he dies at age 110 even. But a woman is born with only 500,000 eggs total, and cannot produce any more new eggs after she is born, and most of these eggs die before she reaches puberty. Then the eggs die even faster and only one is ready each month. By the time she reaches around 40 she has none left. Men and women really are different.

[ObGyn]

Do I have to explain biology to you? Women are not superior to men, just different. In our species, women get pregnant and have evolved to be selective in who fathers their baby. Men, on the other hand have evolved to "conquer" as many women as possible and increase their chance of passing their gene to the next generation. A woman can be pregnant only once in every 9 months, so she must be more discriminating. A man must keep sowing his seed to increase the chance of getting a good offspring. Get it? Simple evolution. Unless you are a creationist repugican. In which case I have nothing to say to you.

[fun2bfree]

yeah, that astronaut woman in the diapers was sure morally superior....

here is a hint--using gender as your discriminatory filter for selecting people for anything beyond sexual coupling is not a good idea...

[robinhood1]

"And here's to you Mrs. Robinson, Jesus loves you more than you will know." - Simon and Garfunkle, singing forty -one years ago. Some women can't keep it in their pants either.

[ailbhe]

It is better to have politicians ego's propped up with sexy interns than planning war games to make themselves feel like big boys.

Women don't have to pay for sex, they are also careful not to get caught as they have more to lose.

[marguerita]

.......and the Kennedy boys?????

[commonsenselives]

Cheating is not a female/male problem.

It is a HUMAN problem.

One gender does not have the moral authority over the other on this topic. Both men and women cheat on their spouses and at the same rates. Just because its hidden, does not mean its not there.

[wndrwrthg]

Women are far more than likely to put out for a man who has power or money, even though he is fat, ugly, short membered or all three than a man for a women who exhibits the same traits.

[MsLiz]

Put another way, the older, established, married, self-assured male cheats with a young attractive female who did not know the guy when he was poor and had zits, unlike his wife.

It doesn't work in reverse for females. Unless we are rich, we are undesirable after menopause. Women don't have the same opportunities to cheat.

Broad generalizations: Men are more concerned with a mate's physical attractiveness than women are. Women may like to fool around with attractive men, but we marry for other reasons, many having to do with fatherhood potential.

Supposedly, men think about sex every sixty seconds or so, while women think about it a few times a day. I think for men, it is all about sex. They seek power and money as a means of getting sex.

[ipitombi]

Whereas, women think of sex as a means of getting power and money. Reason why women stick by their men when their men are caught.

[Cathexis]

I disagree, Ms Gerber. While you may well be right, in the end, I suggest it is wrong for you to dismiss the effect of numbers on the statistics. At least one viable theory is that "More powerful men than women are caught 'compromised' because there have historically been greater numbers of men in power."

I don't believe you can dismiss the possibility, out of hand.

[Zanti]

"It's taken us a long time to get the small amount of political power that we have. We're not going to be so frivolous, careless of the public trust or stupid enough to blow our opportunity for a chance encounter of the sexual kind."

Exactly--that's the only explanation possible. Otherwise, female politicians would be teaching the men a thing or two about wild behavior. After all, outside of politics, women are much more aggressive sexually than men. Ordinarily, women stalk, harass, rape, and engage in gang fights at ten times the rate of men.

Glad to hear women are able to curb their naturally aggressive and horny impulses once they've gained some power. I suppose that's the answer to our nation's problems in these areas--give women power, and we'll see a huge dip in sexually aggressive behavior.

I'm so glad you addressed this issue, since it's always cause for astonishment when women don't behave in sexually aggressive ways. Unprecedented, really. It's so very contrary to what we normally observe as to cry out for an explanation. Thanks for bringing us several steps closer to understanding this bizarre, history-making situation, one that so boldly challenges everything we thought we knew about men vs. women.

[MsLiz]

you are funny.

[vinny]

'We'll leave that to Spitzer and his ilk.' By ilk, you mean all males don't you?

Wow, what an incredibly unintellectual insight. To bad you didnt have any "hard evidence" to back your sexist perogative. This post definitely deserves to be nominated for the "MOST SEXIST POST" award for 2008. It could win.

[prolbowl]

Amen. This post is ridiculous. I had an affair once. I was single and she was married. I have more empirical evidence that only women cheat than she has for her man hating diatribe. Sorry you were hurt little gal, but keep it to yourself.This is garbage!

[LeftVetPatriot]

Hear, Hear! What sexist horseshit!!

With whom are all these fidelity-challenged men fornicating?
Single women? Other men? Kids and critters?
Jeeze, Robin. Do some homework.

[260Parkway]

My mother told me a long time ago that men were stupid whether married or single. Her point of reference: my dad and her experirences with the dumb things he's done during their 46 years of marriage. So to witness this episode is just another nail for me in the "Men are Stupid Coffin".

[hartkid]

I would argue that women are more likely to cheat on their husbands. They are, however, better liars. I can count on both hands married women that I "know" her are/were not monogamous. I saw each of them lie perfectly and convincingly to their spouses. Women have many more opportunities for "free" sex with men who have no interest in a long-term relationship. Morality doesn't enter into the equation. Human nature trumps self-deceiving notions about morality every time given the right circumstances.