Sex, lies, and jpg

Weiner-Gate, cyber sex, sexting, Facebook, Twitter....another Men Behaving Badly political scandal. Pelosi called for Congressional Ethics Committee investigation to see if he used gov't resources for his escapades. Some focusing about lying, character, poor judgement, sexual creepiness, underlying mental issues, on and on.

I feel so sorry for his wife, not even married a year yet, dragged into the limelight in this way, finding out the truth the day he held a press conference coming clean. :( I'm wondering what people think about the Infidelity angle in the Digital Age?

Quote:

---

Weiner's other Democratic colleagues have largely been silent on the issue, amid growing suggestions in the media that New York lawmaker should resign from Congress. But the congressman insisted Monday he's guilty only of poor judgment and that he never cheated on his wife and never met any of the women he communicated with online. "I'm not resigning," he declared.

---

http://beta.news.yahoo.com/blogs/tic...150450660.html

All this new social media is re-defining fidelity, intimacy, trust and betrayal. Is this kind of behavior you'd accept in your own relationship? What do you think?

Maybe politicians need some sort of friendly support group or something that can nip these problems in the bud before they ruin lives. Who the hell wants stressed out policymakers cracking under the pressure...

Pretty sure this kind of behavior was considered cheating before there ever was an internet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Maybe politicians need some sort of friendly support group or something that can nip these problems in the bud before they ruin lives. Who the hell wants stressed out policymakers cracking under the pressure...

---

New congressmen go through an orientation that deals with these topics. What I don't get is why Weiner thought he'd possibly get away with this. :bored:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Pretty sure this kind of behavior was considered cheating before there ever was an internet.

---

Not to everyone, apparently. Men might view this differently than women. Some men are saying "it's not sex", just an extension of fantasy, not much different from surfing web porn. Then there's Carter's stance "I have lusted in my heart"....

Even without jpgs or sexting, people still use texts, e-mails, Facebook skype or messengers, even forums for "interactions" that can be flirtatious. I suppose everyone draws the line in different places. :hmm:

Yes, generally not the men engaging in this kind of behavior. I think there's a vast difference with someone flirting on a night one and making repeated phone calls of a sexual nature.

It's kind of an interesting issue. Nowadays it's so easy to get yourself into a place you shouldn't be, with the instant access we all have. And, since many people are tech savvy, they are going to save that evidence.

We've had this discussion on a mom forum I'm on-some women furious and ready to divorce their husbands because they looked at internet porn. Others are a little more lenient about it, or join in the fun. Then there might be some that get into closer to cheating arenas, where you can have instant live camera access to another person. Or the men are spending grocery money on a pay-for-porn site. Or, they find out their husbands have logged into one of those "how to cheat" type sites, complete with a profile that says "Likes to bang strange broads". :bulb:

Each person's sense of infidelity is different. That's why it's important to talk to your mate about what you find acceptable and unacceptable.

Anyway, that's between him and his wife, but he is a dumbass for posting his junk on the internet. Nothing you post is ever truly private; and as a politician he should be well aware of that. It's not like he did it in college when he was 19 or something (though he'd still be a dumbass for it).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catgrrl

Each person's sense of infidelity is different. That's why it's important to talk to your mate about what you find acceptable and unacceptable.

---

That's what it comes down to. I do occasionally wonder if some of the politicians who are caught cheating were allowed to do what they did by their wives until it got in the news (I would imagine at least a portion of the women who marry politicians don't do it for the love); then there are reputations to protect.

That's so true, Cat. The live interactive instant access stuff can change things. It's not clear what "privacy" means in their minds, but it looks like plenty of adults get drawn into things they regret, and never think it has a trail. Or they'll never get caught. Do you suppose some want to get caught, or push the limits for some kind of thrill? :confused:

I heard today that something like 1/5 divorces today cite Facebook as the beginning of the end of marriages....spouses re-connecting with old classmates or previous lovers....leading to internet infidelity and sometimes more. :bulb:

His Facebook page was like a dragnet for young librul gurls.

Quote:

---

Meagan Broussard, who said that Rep. Anthony D. Weiner sent her explicit messages through Facebook.Meagan Broussard, a 26-year-old Texan, came to Representative Anthony D. Weiner’s attention when she posted a single word on his Facebook page: “Hottttt.

[...]“He sent me a friend request the same day,” Ms. Broussard said. “I just thought, that’s weird.”

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/20...-the-me-photo/

---

But if the Internet is just a pathway for infidelity, maybe long-term marriage itself just doesn't work fore everyone?

Long-term? The guy was married for a year and has been doing this for far longer.

I know, I'm just speaking in general to GGT's point about connecting with people on the Internet or Facebook being the undoing of relationships.

Long-term, I'm just happy his prospects to be NYC mayor are gone.

Yeah, the guy was little more than a pitbull of the left. I have a feeling we're going to go back to the Dinkins mold of mayor after Bloomberg leaves.

I'm worried about the whole issue too. He may endorse Quinn, which I think says something about how she's evolved.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catgrrl

It's kind of an interesting issue. Nowadays it's so easy to get yourself into a place you shouldn't be, with the instant access we all have. And, since many people are tech savvy, they are going to save that evidence.

We've had this discussion on a mom forum I'm on-some women furious and ready to divorce their husbands because they looked at internet porn. Others are a little more lenient about it, or join in the fun. Then there might be some that get into closer to cheating arenas, where you can have instant live camera access to another person. Or the men are spending grocery money on a pay-for-porn site. Or, they find out their husbands have logged into one of those "how to cheat" type sites, complete with a profile that says "Likes to bang strange broads". :bulb:

Each person's sense of infidelity is different. That's why it's important to talk to your mate about what you find acceptable and unacceptable.

Anyway, that's between him and his wife, but he is a dumbass for posting his junk on the internet. Nothing you post is ever truly private; and as a politician he should be well aware of that. It's not like he did it in college when he was 19 or something (though he'd still be a dumbass for it).

---

Divorcing because someone watches porn? Pfft, everybody does that. Actively finding out how to cheat is something else, of course. But like you say, it's important to talk about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flixy

Divorcing because someone watches porn? Pfft, everybody does that. Actively finding out how to cheat is something else, of course. But like you say, it's important to talk about it.

---

Well, the nature of porn, and access to porn has changed with the internet. It's no longer looking at magazine print photos or renting XXX rated videos. Now there are phone-sex numbers to call, live-views and interactive chat rooms, web cameras, and things connecting all devices in the cloud. Maybe Weiner saw his activities as interactive porn, or something. :think:

A lot of people find porn extremely objectionable. I can see how someone would want to get a divorce from a porn-junkie :o now, is this guy bipolar or something? Would he have had more success if he'd teamed up with his wife?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

New congressmen go through an orientation that deals with these topics. What I don't get is why Weiner thought he'd possibly get away with this. :bored:

---

Yeah I was thinking of something a little more long-term, you know, continuous, like.

Well, seeing others be forced out of office for similar indiscretions doesn't seem to have acted as a deterrent.

I said support group not terror group :bulb:

So...it's acceptable behavior for a single guy? Or for a private citizen but not a public employee? :bulb:

Yes, sex is indeed an acceptable behavior for a single guy. :bored:

Dumbfounded again after reading about this. You'd swear he was guilty of raping young girls.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Yes, sex is indeed an acceptable behavior for a single guy. :bored:

---

I didn't mean sex, but "internet interactive porn", aka photo sharing or phone sex. Are you bothered by Weiner doing what he did, or that he did it after getting married?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

I didn't mean sex, but "internet interactive porn", aka photo sharing or phone sex. Are you bothered by Weiner doing what he did, or that he did it after getting married?

---

Neither. To demand that somebody shares all his fantasies with you is just as sane as demanding that he shares al his farts with you.

between the lines of every marriage vow... :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

between the lines of every marriage vow... :o

---

Yeah, I don't believe in marriage for love either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Neither. To demand that somebody shares all his fantasies with you is just as sane as demanding that he shares al his farts with you.

---

My question was originally aimed at Loki, because he seemed the most adamant that "what he did is wrong". But it's also open for everyone to comment, obviously. ;)

I'm a bit confused about what people are bothered about. Is this a generational gap, where the older people in congress don't understand new (and common) uses for technology? That can't be right, because Weiner is 45 years old. Was he not savvy enough to know how to use technology to keep certain things "private"....like accidentally hitting Reply All....? Sounds like a fairly common and innocent mistake.

Are we supposed to believe the women he was chatting/texting/twittering with were victims of a pervert sending them things they didn't want, or is it more likely they participated by sending him provocative e-mails, sexts, and pictures of their bodies. Maybe their nekked bodies. People have sexual fetishes. Don't we all know that by now?

I just don't get it. Vitter didn't resign and wasn't kicked out, and he paid a prostitute to put him in a diaper during sex. JFK was a known adulterer, suspected of dealing with the mob. Bill Clinton was an adulterer while a governor, before even elected as POTUS (where he continued infidelity---though he "Did NOT have sexual relations with that woman).

:rolleyes: FFS, we have all sorts of so-called "perverts" that have been in public office, and probably currently hold high positions. Do we really care if it's a cross-dressing man wearing women's lingerie under their suit and tie, or if they go home and get off on their plushie stuffed animal suit? Does their job suffer if they're looking at internet porn, or getting a lap dance in a strip joint? Really?

:confused:



*The only time this "matters" if legislators are running on a platform of making laws in favor of "Family Values, Hetero Marriage, Religious Right Moral Morality" for other people....and are found out to be lying hypocrites. That doesn't seem to apply to Weiner. And he's only been a married man for under a year.*

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Yeah, I don't believe in marriage for love either.

---

Who designed you and to what end? :mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

:rolleyes: FFS, we have all sorts of so-called "perverts" that have been in public office, and probably currently hold high positions. Do we really care if it's a cross-dressing man wearing women's lingerie under their suit and tie, or if they go home and get off on their plushie stuffed animal suit? Does their job suffer if they're looking at internet porn, or getting a lap dance in a strip joint? Really?

:confused:

---

If nothing else this sort of thing may signal poor judgement, inability to handle stress, personal relations, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

If nothing else this sort of thing may signal poor judgement, inability to handle stress, personal relations, etc.

---

His constituents seem happy with his judgement in congress, that's why they elected him. Maybe he deals with stress by flirting in cyber space, and saw it safer than a hooker, or seducing someone he works with? His wife reportedly knew full well about his bachelor behavior before they were married. Sounds not atypical of high testosterone men who seek positions of power or leadership, high stress and adrenaline.

None of us know the details after that.....do we need to? Is it really our business?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

If nothing else this sort of thing may signal poor judgement, inability to handle stress, personal relations, etc.

---

And the people who would say that about something like the 'offense' need to learn to mind their own business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

If nothing else this sort of thing may signal poor judgement, inability to handle stress, personal relations, etc.

---

Reply B:

Would his judgement be "better" if he'd solicited a prostitute, or been an "anonymous" actor in X-rated movies, or posed his naked penis in porn pictures? Are we prepared to tell everyone how to handle their work stress AND sexual tension? And are we prepared to interject ourselves into every public official's personal relations and judge them by that?

There's a lot of American male holier-than-thou going on here. In case no one noticed.

I'm not saying it's a big deal, but I think it's silly to pretend it's not worthy of some level of judgement. If it weren't worthy of any judgement, all husbands and wives would often casually mention to each other the people they had flirted with online while at work that day.

People judge him because what he did was beyond the norms of what many people do. Especially the cock shots.

Look, moral outrage aside, he clearly wasn't being particularly smart.

Are you a married man sending pictures of your crotch to strangers while knowing perfectly well how American politics work? Then chances are your judgement is a little off. I'm not saying it makes you a bad person. Maybe you have a healing crotch, I don't know. But your brain is not quite right and that's [probably] a fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dreadnaught

I'm not saying it's a big deal, but I think it's silly to pretend it's not worthy of some level of judgement. If it weren't worthy of any judgement, all husbands and wives would often casually mention to each other the people they had flirted with online while at work that day.

People judge him because what he did was beyond the norms of what many people do. Especially the cock shots.

---

I don't believe that this has anything to do with what husbands and wives do in their private lives. As a "Luddite and technophobe," I know damn well "cock shots" are all over the internet. They're even optional emoticons in MSN messenger.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Look, moral outrage aside, he clearly wasn't being particularly smart.

Are you a married man sending pictures of your crotch to strangers while knowing perfectly well how American politics work? Then chances are your judgement is a little off. I'm not saying it makes you a bad person. Maybe you have a healing crotch, I don't know. But your brain is not quite right and that's [probably] a fact.

---

You mean he'd have been smarter to figure out how to cyber flirt and send X-rated pics that couldn't be traced back to him? Or that this is something non-married men can do, and no one else? What about the women who were sexting and jpg-ing right along with him? Is their brain not quite right? Would those women be vindicated if they were "professionals", but persecuted if they were elected?

:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Look, moral outrage aside, he clearly wasn't being particularly smart.

Are you a married man sending pictures of your crotch to strangers while knowing perfectly well how American politics work? Then chances are your judgement is a little off. I'm not saying it makes you a bad person. Maybe you have a healing crotch, I don't know. But your brain is not quite right and that's [probably] a fact.

---

Why is this a uniquely American thing? Do you really think your politician's cock shots wouldn't be frowned upon? Or that anyone's cock shots aren't frowned upon when everyone in the room knows whose cock it is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

None of us know the details after that.....do we need to? Is it really our business?

---

You tell us. You're the one who started the thread about something you claim to feel *correctly, IMO* is none of our business or interest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

You mean he'd have been smarter to figure out how to cyber flirt and send X-rated pics that couldn't be traced back to him? Or that this is something non-married men can do, and no one else? What about the women who were sexting and jpg-ing right along with him? Is their brain not quite right? Would those women be vindicated if they were "professionals", but persecuted if they were elected?
:confused:

---

Would they have eaten parsley if they'd been PNGing? I honestly have no idea what you're asking or getting at. Were those women putting anything important at significant risk?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

You tell us. You're the one who started the thread about something you claim to feel *correctly, IMO* is none of our business or interest.

---

Is this another one of your "define your terms before we can comment" replies? It's unfortunate a politician brought these very personal definitions and contructs into public discussion....but that's how the cookie crumbled. Now we all have an opportunity to define our own limits, what we think is strictly private and personal, and where public figures fit in those constructs.

Do we hold ourselves to lower standards than our elected officials? If we hold them to higher standards than ones we personally espouse....why?

IMO Weiner's lies in interviews on-camera were more condemning than his cyber sexting, jockey clad or naked penis pics. Even though I also know an abrupt shame will make most people want to lie or cover up. After the initial sensationalism, I sort of wanted him to stand at a podium and tell media---

"I did these things as a bachelor, a single man. The women were strangers in real life, but we developed an internet connection or "relationship". We were willing, consensual, adult parties. I never forced my cyber needs upon them or stalked these women. We enjoyed each other, and it was mutually enjoyable for what it was. It was far safer than any other option.. My fiance knew all this before we married. Our marriage is private, our private lives are private. I only regret being put in the spot light and decided to lie instead of telling the truth."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Is this another one of your "define your terms before we can comment" replies?

---

No, it's more along the lines of a "methinks she doth protest too much."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

No, it's more along the lines of a "methinks she doth protest too much."

---

Because I started a thread asking people to evaluate and discuss their own personal definitions and boundaries? Or because it includes the important tangent of how our public officials meet or miss that mark?

In that sense, what the hell is wrong with "protesting"? Should my retort be....why don't you appear to give a damn? :donkey: