Psychosexual neurotic Politics:
I really don't know anything about Gov. Spitzer. He might be a good Governor, he might be a bad Governor; he might be a good person, he might be a bad person; he may have done a lot of good things in his life, he might have done a lot of bad things in his life. I haven't the slightest idea on any of that.
Suddenly a government investigation reveals he has been hiring prostitutes for sex. This immediately is front page news, not just front page but tops everything else going on in the world for attention and anger. There are so many bonafide things to be angry about: death, disease, genocide, violence at every level of society, the national debt, spending 12 billion dollars a month in Iraq, the economy, etc.----but Spitzer's personal sex life becomes the real source of rage.
It has never been clear to me why consensual sex acts between adults is everybody else's business. I can certainly see why Mrs. Spitzer might be awfully upset. Or his kids, etc. It seems silly, to me, to get too worked up about anyone's sexual life as long as it is consensual sex between adults. I don't see a lot of rationality to sexual behaviors, let alone involve the legal system to label any of it right or wrong. The best, and only thing, I can personally do is sense what is appealing and unappealing to my own sexual feelings. In this case, my own sense is that I am amazed anyone would pay over $5000/hr to have sex with anyone. Perhaps maybe even I could have a pretty good sex life at $5000/hr. Then there are the gals involved. Let me see, at $5000/hr that means sex 20 times a year nets them a $100,000 salary. Okay, I guess some of the money goes to management so let's say 25 times per year. I don't think I would take a CEO job at a corporation for several hundreds of thousands of dollars, but having sex once or twice a week for the same salary---that seems a bit easier to handle. Tis really true: everything about sex is irrational outside the intent to procreate. One gal goes to court and claims a date rape has left her emotionally scarred for life. It may well be true. Another gal makes a living sexing strangers. She may be as content with her profession as a bug in a rug.
I don't know how many prostitutes or their patrons are arrested every day in this country but I assume it must be a large number. Even so, that large number must represent like a miniscule number of actual sexual adventures involving prostitutes. It seems hard, from any logical aspect, to get any real handle on the morality of sex. Religions have historically weaved a tangled web of morality into sex based on---well it is never clear what it is based on except some believed dictate from God. The trouble is, on what religious beliefs do you build laws around? Majority rule is hardly a logical basis for laws on such genuinely personal behavior. Maybe we should defer to the grandaddy of all religious tenets: "do unto others as you would have them do unto you". I guess most of us want to be free to pursue any kind of sexual activity in bed which is voluntary and pleases both partners. Of course what pleases you may be really distasteful or repugnant to me. Thus there is no logical reason to ban any kind of consensual sex between adults. Okay, you may say, but there can be no money behind the sexual activity. Since in about every other type of pleasurable activity there is often money involved, it seems illogical to insert that prohibition. And what about those who marry for money and wealth? Should people like Jacqueline Kennedy have been arrested and prosecuted? By some sort of legitimate definition she was a high class prostitute. Purportedly she is said not to have been all that much interested in sex and told Jack, "Go do your thing, but do it discreetly". Should all of the Kennedy's have been arrested? Or is it their right to structure their sex lives their own way?
I suppose one might argue that without laws against it, everyone would be running around either seeking or being a prostitute. That seems a stretch. I doubt I refrain from engaging prostitutes because it is against the law. Maybe I am too cheap; maybe I find it more convenient to use inflatable dolls; maybe I am afraid of venereal diseases; maybe I find sex with a stranger unappealing or unfullfilling; maybe I just don't care that much about sex; maybe, if I were married, I would consider the affect on other members of my family. Whatever the reasons one doesn't use prostitutes has little to do with the laws against it. This seems clear enough based on those countries in which prostitution is not illegal. Such countries are hardly one big orgy.
Aside from all this, why would anyone in a prominent position in society or in a good marriage risk it all with sexual activities that endanger both? It is more sad than something to go into a rage about. With all the progress on so many fronts in human lives, controlling sexual behaviors remains elusive. Sex remains a loose cannon for all of us. Who knows what lurks in the sexual thoughts of anyone else? Who can explain what turns on who? If sex is a wonderful experience then why arrest some ugly hapless guy who finds a pretty gal who will sex him for money? Or arrest her?-----in one sense she has made someone happy with no victim, not exactly the worst crime in the world. For most of us I suspect climbing into bed with an unattractive partner is not not something we would do in the absence of a gun to our head. Maybe more power to those that will. I always liked the historical quote, "I don't really care what they do as long as they don't do it in the streets and scare the horses". Really now, why should we care so much about the sex lives of others? Using again the basic religious tenet "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" kind of dictates that to the extent you would not like your sexual life and preferences in bed to be public fodder, then no one should be making the sexual lives and preferences of others public fodder as long as it is consensual and between adults. In a very practical sense, the ability of a high class prostitute to make a $100,000 dollar salary is about as much earned financial security as someone who inherits financial security. When younger I have been in porno shops and frankly, it just struck me that most everyone in there didn't look physically like they would have much luck attracting anyone sexy looking on their own. I see sadness and unfairness there, no real movitation on my part to see if we could arrest them if they bought pornography or paid someone for sex. The ethical crime of Gov Spitzer is that I assume his wife did not endorse his adventures. If she didn't, then he broke the golden rule: "do unto to others as you would have them do unto you." I doubt he wanted his wife sleeping around. That is the sin, and it is personal---not the function of government to uncover personal breaches of trust between spouses.
Just how much public tax money was spent to expose the sexual habits of Spitzer? I mean the paper said they even paid for surveillance of him for a month. There are people without health care or dental care etc. and we ignore them and track the sexual proclivities of Spitzer? Maybe a good portion of our population needs to reshuffle what is important in life. For most of us, any public discussion of sex is almost always in the form of raucous laughter, and rightly so---sex is absurd enough in it's variety to be truly funny. Every age has it's witches and harmless sexual deviates have always been in the forefront. Like what are those in a rage about Spitzer saying: that his political decisions were a product of his sex life? that the government should have a mandate to investigate and publicize the sex lives of citizens so that people can lose their jobs, their marriage, humiliate kids, etc? Just exactly whose life has been made better by this expensive investigation and subsequent revelation? Exactly why am I to think more or less of someone based on their personal sex life if it is consensual and only adults involved? But when all is said and done, most people do care---they care a lot---and always have throughout history. It is what it is I guess. Who says God has no sense of humor---human sexual activities are proof that He does. Is there anything a little odd, you know a little off center, about your own sex life? Maybe like you don't particularly care for sex, that too is worth a chuckle or two in Jay Leno's monologue if you care to write him about it. I say let's get serious and expose all the sexual deviates amongst us. Make it the law that everyone has to take a lie detector test and detail their own sex life, including the kind of sex engaged in, and put it on file, available under the freedom of information act, so that neighbors, employers, friends, co-workers, and people who dislike you can 'know' the 'real' you. And you the 'real' others. I wonder, if this were done----would being abnormal become the normal?
