Sex Scandals

Two major news stories in the last week or so have involved the sexual activities of prominent politicians. Taking the more recent story first (though the actual sex took place a long time ago), film star/former Mr. Universe/former governor of California Arnold Schwarzenegger admitted to having fathered a child with a member of his household staff over a decade ago and having kept it a secret even from his wife Maria Shriver, who is now separated from him, having moved out their mansion after learning of the affair. Judging from the number of headlines it generated, this became a huge news story for at least a few days, and Schwarzenegger has even been forced to put his various post-gubernatorial entertainment projects on hold.

Obviously Schwarzenegger's wife has a right to be angry at him for his failure to be honest with her, and given that by some accounts he can be self-centered and conceited, among other faults, it is no surprise that she regarded this as the final straw (that they stayed together for 25 years is actually fairly impressive, especially for a Hollywood marriage). But in other ways, since the actual affair took place long ago, it is really water under the bridge. Certainly no one who is not actually part of the family (or perhaps a close friend who might have reason to resent being lied to) should get worked up about it. I almost get the impression that some people think it's a bigger deal because he actually had a child out of wedlock. I'm sure people would still be criticizing him if he had admitted to having an affair more than a decade ago, but I suspect not as much. But this is completely illogical; having an affair is not any more immoral because you have a child as a result, unless you then fail to provide for the child (it is my understanding that Schwarzenegger has financially supported since his birth, so that is not really the case here -- it could be argued that he also was responsible for acting as a father to the boy, but as his former staffer married not long afterward, the boy had a father).

Of course many people will condemn Schwarzenegger simply for having an extramarital affair, as many other public figures have been condemned in the past. But really that is mainly the business of the married couple. Some couples even have an understanding that allows occasional flings (Schwarzenegger himself was supposedly in an open relationship with another woman at the time he started seeing Shriver). Where Schwarzenegger does probably deserve moral condemnation is for alleged actions that were reported in the media a long time ago, namely that the accusation that he groped a number of different women who didn't in any way welcome his attentions. Having an affair with a willing partner (I am assuming here that the woman he had a child with was not in any way pressured into the relationship -- if she was, that's an entirely different matter) is far less immoral than forcing yourself on someone who is unwilling, even if you don't actually have sex with them.

This brings us to the other recent political sex scandal, the arrest of IMF head and prospective candidate for French president, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, for sexual assault. If the facts of the case are at similar to what has been reported, then this was not even a remotely consensual encounter. A few news reports have seemed to generalize about the accepting French attitude toward the sexual behavior of their leading politicians. I would have assumed for the most part, though, that this mostly extends to having consensual extramarital affairs (including one night stands), including having children outside of marriage like Arnold Schwarzenegger (80s era president Mitterrand being the most prominent case). I'm not sure how much they are prepared to overlook sexual assault, which is a completely different thing.

I have read that a few French papers have made comments about American prudishness when talking about this case. While I would certainly agree that Americans tend to be prudish, if those making these comments accept that Strauss-Kahn actually acted in the way he is accused of acting, then there is something seriously wrong with them. If he had been arrested for, say, solicitation of prostitution, they would have a right to complain about American prudishness. Sexual assault, however, is something completely different. It is true that some of Strauss-Kahn's supporters in France and elsewhere have claimed it was a set-up. This possibility has to be acknowledged, and there should be a presumption of innocence until the case goes to court, but it certainly seems that Strauss-Kahn has a history that makes the accusation somewhat more credible. True, he hasn't been accused of behavior quite this violent, but at least one female journalist only reluctantly refrained from pressing charges over an encounter with him. If French politicians go around seducing willing women, I wouldn't say the French are that wrong in overlooking it. But if they overlook assault, they need a serious readjustment of their moral standards.

While we will have to hope that the truth of this particular case will come out in court, the main point is that people have to distinguish between consensual and non-consensual acts. While a certain degree of condemnation may be deserved in a case like Schwarzenegger's, mostly for the dishonesty involved, it isn't really a big deal, and he certainly shouldn't have his career destroyed because of it (I'm referring here to the recently revealed affair and child, not the groping, which is worse). For that matter, Eliot Spitzer deserved to be pilloried more for his hypocrisy in aggressively pursuing call girl rings then for the mere fact of paying a call girl for sex. But Strauss-Kahn, if guilty, not only deserves to have his career ruined, but deserves to go to prison, as do, say, prominent athletes who force themselves on women (I seem to recall a number of stories of this sort in recent years as well). Unfortunately, many people are either prone to condemn others out of hand for any sort of sexual activity that doesn't fit their personal standards of acceptable behavior, whereas others will excuse even assault if committed by those they highly admire (or have an interest in defending). Neither response is reasonable, though they both conform to the usual contradictory attitudes people have about sex.

[Update: Here's an article about the understandable reaction of many women in France to the absurd remarks made by some French political and media figures in their initial responses to the Strauss-Kahn arrest. Also, I read that at least one hotel worker says he asked her to come to his room when she got off work, though she declined. This, however, proves little one way or another about his guilt, since there is nothing really wrong with hitting on somebody if you don't use force or coercion, and you don't persist after you've been turned down. Again, what really matters is whether he crossed the line into forcing or try to force an unwilling participant into engaging in sexual acts with him. Incidents like the alleged one with the journalist a few years ago are more indicative of a pattern of behavior than simply flirting with members of the hotel staff.]