Scorned: A User’s Manual

The gospel according to Hillary, Elizabeth, and Jenny.

By Kathleen Deveny | Newsweek Web Exclusive
Jun 25, 2009

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: boredwell @ 08/09/2009 3:53:08 AM

    I would have to say that your interpretation of Ms Sanford words and actions borders on hagiography. Without endorsing Mark's behavior, any person who rides the tumultuous rapids of marriage KNOWS it takes two to row that dingy. Without denigrating Ms Sanford, she has utilized the media adroitly promoting herself as an appealing protagonist with a bigger heart and mind than her antagonist husband. Obviously when Mark was out sight, he was not out Ms Sanford's mind. In fact, I would wager that her statements regarding his absence were setting the stage for Mark's departure and her arrival. She was determined to give Mark a taste of his own medicine. Had she truly valued the sanctity of her family, her marriage she might have chosen to recuse herself from making any comments at all. What I heard her say is "if Mark thinks it takes two to tango, I'll show him it takes three." Ms Sanford, like Elizabeth Edwards, is entitled to her scorn;whether she chooses to publicize it or not is her business. But like Ms Edwards' Ms Sanford's declarations germinate from less-than-saintly motives. While Mark muddles through his philandering mid-life critical mass, his wife has chosen to take the "I'm-better-than-Mark" moral high road. That holier-than-thou attitude doesn't make her more sympathetic in my book but it speaks volumes. It provides a bit of insight into why Mark might have set his sights on taking a hike that weekend.

  • Posted By: nureetco1 @ 07/13/2009 7:32:54 PM

    Finaly a girl who is not turning the other way. Bravo Jenny!

  • Posted By: nureetco1 @ 07/13/2009 7:32:33 PM

    Finally a girl who is not turning the other way. Bravo Jenny!

  • Posted By: Second_Opinion @ 06/26/2009 3:35:06 AM

    .



    The naked truth?

    Marriage is an institution by women, for women, meant to benefit women and fulfill their fantasies. Men are not designed to be either married or monogamous. If you don't believe me, ask your neighborhood biologist.

    Yet every time one of these episodes happens, everyone acts so surprised. Worse, everyone - and I mean EVERYONE - is eager to condemn the poor guy and heap scorn on him. In this case, Republicans AND Democrats jumped on the bandwagon. OK, so Sanford got caught.

    Look around, ladies. There are more shoes to fall. While we're all so busy castrating Sanford, believe me, there are other guys out there getting a chill down their spine - only to have it warmed right back up by their own Carlottas.

    Yes, these men do pay a hefty price - and will continue to do so till the day they die. Every axiom has a grain of truth at its nucleus and none is truer than that "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned!" Seriously, what pleasure do you women get out of reminding these men - at EVERY CONCEIVABLE TURN - that they screwed up?

    These guys would all have been better off walking. Life is too short to spend it listening to a shrew.



    .

    • Posted By: CaroJ @ 06/26/2009 11:15:11 AM

      You are a sexist pig.

      Women have no more to gain from monogamy than men do. Marriage does not benefit women anymore than it does men -- in fact, the statistics show that men get more happiness from marriage than women do. Marriage does not fulfill a woman's "fantasy." What lunacy!!

      Everyone gives up something to be "faithful.." We do it because there is more to gain from monogamy, ideally at least, than there is to lose.

      • Posted By: Second_Opinion @ 06/27/2009 5:31:44 PM

        .



        Carol, honey, you may be right. I just might be a sexist pig. In your view.

        I prefer to think of myself as a realist.

        There is ample documentation from research spanning decades that women ABSOLUTELY do have everything to gain from monogamy. Monogamy insures that sustenance, in all its forms, remains constant so she can concentrate on raising the brood.

        Men, on the other hand, have evolved over thousands of years to venture into unexplored territory and seek out new things. Without this characteristic and penchant for exploration, we would not be where we are today as a species. Now just because someone says some words that are supposed to have "meaning", you expect to undo something that is intrinsic to a man's character?

        And don't even BEGIN to claim that marriage does not fulfill a woman's fantasies. Be honest, how long have you been "dreaming" of that "big day"? Planning, scheming, and imagining how "perfect" it would be? This is the real world, ladies, NOTHING even remotely approaching "perfect" exists in it. Many of you are hopelessly lost in your personal Cinderalla fantasies. Please, be honest here at least.

        Finally, the notion of "marriage" is a man-made, i.e. human, construct. Marriage does not exist naturally in nature, it is something we made up. Now there may have been legitimate reasons for doing so, but it remains artificial, an intellectual imposition of an un-natural set of conditions. I'm not saying it doesn't have value, it does. Just recognize it for what it is - and stop dreaming about it.

        As for Mrs. Sanford, before you hail her for being so composed during this process, remember she had FIVE MONTHS to plan her response. If you think for a minute that she didn't know it would ultimately come out, that she didn't think about how she would handle it - what she would do and say - you are tragically mistaken.



        .

        • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/27/2009 10:50:42 PM

          Second Honey, First, monogamy, not marriage, does exist in nature. It is about the partnership that the marriage entails. Women no longer need a man to provide. It's about far more than cooking, cleaning and having children. Except for the child bearing part, the other household jobs are equal opportunity. Sometimes, the male even stays home to tend the nest and the woman brings home the bacon. Men also have something to gain from monogamy. A stable, trusting relationship and a family that cares for him. Are you saying that women don't like adventure? Baloney. Unless you want your woman, barefoot and pregnant, perhaps she too would like to go rock climbing, continue her education or travel. Yes, women are nurturers. So are some men.
          Honestly, not all women want the huge wedding. Sometimes a simple ceremony of commitment is enough. Even in the backyard! You see, it's really about the "commitment". Don't tell me that men don't have fantasies about the perfect woman. So, we agree that none of us is perfect. Adults go into a relationship knowing that. Then come the compromises. I call it fine tuning, or working out the bugs. The bottom line is, it's about the partnership and each couple tweaks it to work for them. You want 50/50? It doesn't exist! Some days or weeks it's 20/80, depending on who's up for it. The next day or week it flips and the other person can handle more or less. It's an on going process.
          Your implication that men have "evolved" and women haven't is insulting. I enjoy travel, a bit more than my husband. He's more of a nester. I have a friend who is a Dr., her husband a musician. They have twins. Who do you think carries the financial load? My point is that marriage is not a "one size fits all" kind of thing
          I have been married 30+ yrs. The kids are on their own and we each make about the same per year. Now. I am lucky enough to work 3 days per week. With all the bumps in the road, it ultimately comes down to the commitment we each have. It doesn't work if only one person takes the vows seriously. Evidently, I have more faith in my husband and men in general than you do. Sanford blew it! He said one thing and acted another way. Now he's sorry. Sorry he got caught!

          • Posted By: Second_Opinion @ 06/28/2009 4:59:48 AM

            .

            Chris, you are absolutely correct about monogamy. However, I was referring to the ritual of marriage. It is artificial, no getting around it. So, I think we're pretty much in sync on those two.

            Second, you are also correct that many women no longer need a man to provide. Bravo! I think a man is much better off with a woman that doesn't need him. In that case, there is a much better chance they can approach a marriage as equals. However, to be fair, let's also agree that there are many men that, likewise, don't need a woman to cook. We are perfectly capable in the kitchen. With a needle and thread, too.

            "A stable, trusting relationship and a family that cares" is just as applicable and important, perhaps more so, to a woman as a man.

            And I never said women don't like adventure nor that they haven't evolved. What I said is that men's evolution has inculcated in us behaviors that served us and the common purpose very well when we first came into existence. Those behaviors are still in our genes. Monogamy isn't one of them. Women evolved also, just as well and just as far, but differently. Not better, not worse, different. We ARE different from each other. Am I saying men can't be monogamous? No. We are perfectly capable of it. It just isn't a natural state.

            You sound like you have a sound marriage. Good for you! I would bet that, at it's core, is a strong sense of acceptance of one another just the way you are. Right?

            Now, I could be cute and admit that you are also correct that men have fantasies about the perfect woman, but that the word "commitment" NEVER enters into it (Hey, it's OUR fantasy, OK?). But I won't.

            At the end of the day, the Sanfords have a dynamic in their marriage that no one but they know about. What I am saying is that we should NOT be so quick to call Gov. Sanford names and villify him. We don't know the whole story. Listen, I detest finger-wagging, bible-thumping, do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do, pontificating Republicans as much as the next (sane) guy. However, as a man, I can give Sanford the benefit of the doubt because I do not believe his trip to Argentina last week was selfish. I think it was desperate and the result of extreme pressure and intolerable anxiety. He was, and continues to be, a man in crisis.

            You said it yourself, Chris: "...none of us is perfect."

            .

            • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/28/2009 2:42:27 PM

              I've always held to the belief that it it better to be wanted as opposed to needed. I agree about men being very capable, sometimes better, in the kitchen. I've been known to mow the lawn. It's about who has the time, capability or talent for certain tasks.

              Women have fantasies too. We, mostly, don't act on it. I haven't ,yet, become a Bon Jovi groupie.

              My feeling is that if Sanford leaves his wife and goes off with the Argentinian beauty, after awhile the glow will diminish. Once the real world intrudes and the honeymoon period is slowing down. My guess is that Sanford is a romantic. His beautiful girlfriend doesn't have four children and other encumbrances. She seems perfect now! Also, they see each other only in exciting, romantic, clandestine situations. He seems perfect to her too. This is still in the courtship period.

              If marriage were easy, everyone would do it "til death". As for our differences, that's the good part!

              I believe Sanford needs to decide just what it is he really wants.

              • Posted By: Second_Opinion @ 06/29/2009 1:16:51 AM

                .

                Again - and for the last time - Gov. Sanford is in crisis. His world is upside down. If he COULD decide what he wanted, he probably would do so.

                Secondly, I don't think anyone has yet seen the object of his affection. However, she is reported to be 42 and the mother of two children. I don't know their ages. Hardly the sublime, nubile, sweet young thang of popular imagination. In reality, this likely makes her more of a threat.

                I'm sure he didn't wake up one morning and decide he was going to go off and get himself some strange just for the thrill of it. If that were the case, then he would deserve everything that is being thrown at him.

                This probably developed slowly, subtley, over time. It most likely caught both of them by surprise. The sweet, potent, intoxicating nectar of those moments is something that will stay with them forever and that no one can take away. I, for one, am glad they had the opportunity to taste it, for it may be the only - or last - time either gets that chance.

                .

                • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/29/2009 1:13:34 PM

                  Have you seen pictures of her? She' s a beautiful, exotic, "babe".

    • Posted By: yahoo @ 06/28/2009 12:59:20 AM

      Maybe we women should just take sorry bastards like yourself and throw you out in the cold world to fend for (and feed) yourselves. Good riddance, worthless worm.

    • Posted By: pickwick8 @ 06/27/2009 3:39:03 PM

      Well....the neighborhood biologist might point out that some birds are monogamous their entire lives. Many male birds will continue with the same partners and help on the nest or feed the female while she sits.

      I've often thought that male birds are better parents than many men.

    • Posted By: GeorginaKlanica @ 06/26/2009 12:54:25 PM

      Get real, Second Opinion - Both sexes have undesirable inherent traits, but we have brains to control them. (And I'm not talking in our pants.) Marriage is to ensure you take care of your offspring.

  • Posted By: karliforson @ 06/26/2009 1:38:15 PM

    skycycle pilot- you are a pompous jerk. Maybe he should have remembered HIS VOWS. I am sure it has nothing to do with sexual satisfaction... more he needs to grow up and get off the power trips. When you find yourself falling in love with someone and you are committed you need to grow up and snap out of it! Cheating is never justified except by the ignorant and guilty.

    • Posted By: ultra low frequency @ 06/27/2009 10:16:30 AM

      ever consider it MIGHT be because he wasn't being loved??....gold digging power cows usually aren't capable of that...

      • Posted By: ageekymom @ 06/27/2009 10:36:08 AM

        I hate to break it to you, but Jenny is the one with the money. Kind of blow that theory away, doesn't it?

        • Posted By: ultra low frequency @ 06/28/2009 2:02:25 PM

          not really...she may have the money...but her plans for the power grab were somewhat thwarted...

      • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/27/2009 2:12:59 PM

        Um, she gave birth to four kids. Obviously, it was happening more than occasionally. What she wasn't, was a younger, unencumbered, husband stealling Argentinian. I've seen pictures and Jenny looks like an attractive woman. Just not all "tramped" up.

    • Posted By: skycyclepilot @ 06/26/2009 1:45:31 PM

      You make it sound so easy - obviously, you have never been there. After you find yourself feeling unneeded and unwanted for several years, then you'll understand. Get real...

      • Posted By: karliforson @ 06/26/2009 1:55:27 PM

        No one said marriage was easy. You have to work for marriage. And if working at it is below you then you need to get out before you go and drop your pants with another woman or man. I am sorry that you have been scorned that wya but I would hope you had the integrity to be the better party and not cheat.

        • Posted By: skycyclepilot @ 06/26/2009 2:09:51 PM

          I worked at it. She wouldn't.

          • Posted By: drsyko1 @ 06/27/2009 2:06:58 PM

            Then GO GET A DIVORCE MORON!!! I don't care WHAT your wife did or didn't do, it does NOT justify cheating. You don't feel loved anymore, well boo hoo for you. Do the honorable thing and get a divorce, and THEN look for another relationship. There is nothing wrong with leaving a relationship that is just bad. However, anyone who cheats, man or woman, and blames it on their spouse is nothing but a loser who is looking to justify their unjustifiable behavior. It's really immature and sickening.

      • Posted By: whiteknighthou @ 06/26/2009 2:06:52 PM

        again a nailed statement. You said it sky.

  • Posted By: Toni Kamau @ 06/28/2009 9:39:44 AM

    I think our political elite doesn't produce anymore real men. When will we get one, who will stand up and say: I regrett nothing. I love and need both of them....... Promise him my voice.

  • Posted By: lordmi @ 06/28/2009 1:30:26 AM

    Ha-ha-ha.
    Instinct is more simple - she still wants to be a First Lady ( not number 7 or none), so forgiving - is a chance to keep the title.
    This is the simplest and true reason for all those wives to live in mess of betrayal.
    Disgrace.
    But understandable.
    After all - EACH of those DO deserve to be betrayed. - just because of wave???s calculations is also betrayal .
    And do not look for Love there.
    I do not have any sorry and any respect for all these women trading Female pride for title.

  • Posted By: Starfish123 @ 06/28/2009 12:22:23 AM

    Great article, and I heartily agree with everything written. She DOES seem like a very well put-together woman, who absolutely doesn't need her husband. She continues to be protective of their children, and sites, and I'm paraphrasing, "One would think a man would care more about his sons." WHAM. Right in the gut. I truly like this lady already!

  • Posted By: myrider @ 06/26/2009 12:05:50 PM

    Look at it from his point of view. He was living in a fish bowl. Living under pressure like nothing most people have lived. He was not looking a mistress. He found someone he could talk to that would not run to the media. Everyone will say "he should have turned to his wife". She was part of the fish bowl. Read his interview with time magazine reporter done a few months ago. The reporter could sense a man beat down. This reporter could not get the gov to talk about any "news worthy" stuff. He was just getting "yes, no,short answers". Then the reporter brough up the gov's childhood and the gov lite up. Started talking about how he enjoyed fishing, spending time on the river and about the good times of his life. When the conversation turned back to politics the gov went back to the short nonresponsive answers. This guy was misserible. He had moved up in politics to a point where he had lost himself. This mistress allowed him an outlet to talk about about simpler times. He indicated they had just been friends for years. Probably providing an outlet for both. It was so out of his character to have an affair. He had tried to do what he felt was right as gov for the state of SC. Had fought a hard battle over the stimulus money Again doing what he thought was right. He could have taken the easy road and accepted it, but no, he knows this money is a short term solution to a long term problem. This money will start a lot of programs that will have to be funded for a long time. He had an outlet for his frustrations. It reminds me of a song that goes something like "once in a while you can get shown the light in the starngest of places if you look at it right" . He did not go looking for a mistress. It just happened. He was living in a fishbowl and was miserible. He was being pushed to run for President. A job he probably did not want but would have done because it was expected of him.

    • Posted By: GeorginaKlanica @ 06/26/2009 12:45:25 PM

      Myrider - don't makes excuses for this low life. If he needed someone to talk to, he could have visited a psychologist, whose career is on the line if they violate confidentiality. And don't spew this crap about talking. Talking and F***ing are not the same.

      • Posted By: pickwick8 @ 06/27/2009 3:29:11 PM

        Well, I agree with you. He does seem miserable. He does go on about all the times he remembers before politics. Politics is a horrible business. You have to see how things really get done every day. And it's not people being nice or decent.
        Jenny seems like a phenomenal person to me. But I think she deserves much better than to go back to a marriage that is this broken. It might seem like the right thing to do, but sitting around with a husband who is sighing and crying over another woman is not a happy picture.

        • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/28/2009 12:00:14 AM

          Now, it's no longer about him or her. It's about the children. They had no choice in this. Let's hope they both get back to parenting soon.

      • Posted By: Laurie0101 @ 06/26/2009 4:24:29 PM

        "It just happened." Yeah, there we were talking about politics, and suddenly we were passionately necking. Who can control what happens?

        "He was living in a fishbowl and was miserible. He was being pushed to run for President. A job he probably did not want but would have done because it was expected of him." Well, not a problem now!

  • Posted By: maxbyte @ 06/27/2009 11:20:38 PM

    Nicely written and on point. I assume, based on a few readings of Jenny's post-affair missive, that she had been working on that for a while - if only to feed the media in the hope the media would then leave her and the boys alone. Whether she wrote it alone or had help is irrelevant. She's certainly capable of doing it solo, and perhaps the five previous months had given her time to get over all of the emotions she might have otherwise had.

    It is impossible to put oneself in the shoes of the Governor or his wife. What surprises me most, perhaps, is that it played out over Father's Day while the Governor was "on the trail", so to speak. That just seems so senseless, even knowing that they were two weeks into a 'trial separation'. The boys would certainly have considered that a bit odd. I hope.

  • Posted By: Discernment @ 06/27/2009 6:56:17 PM

    Another infamous illustration of James Dobson's "Focus on the Family - Family Values" advocates. Hypocritical Christian Republican Conservative role models touted by James Dobson's and his phony Family Research Council.

    They are all a bunch of modern day American Pharisees.

  • Posted By: Discernment @ 06/27/2009 6:32:46 PM

    PLEASE READ AP QUOTE. THIS IS A TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF "REPUBLICAN-CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIAN-FAMILY-VALUES" HYPOCRISY

    AP: "About an hour after Jenny Sanford talked of her pain and feelings of betrayal, her husband brushed aside any suggestion he might immediately resign, citing the Bible and the story of King David - who continued to lead after sleeping with another man's wife, Bathsheba, having the husband slain, then marrying the widow."

    AP: "What I find interesting is the story of David, and the way in which he fell mightily - fell in very, very significant ways, but then picked up the pieces and built from there," Sanford told members of his cabinet in a session called so he could apologize to them in person and tell them the business of government must continue."
    - - - - - -

    IMPORTANT TO NOTE: When James Dobson's "Focus on the Family - Christian Conservative Republicans" like Gov. Mark Sanford, Senator David Vitter, Senator John Ensign, Senator Larry Craig, and Gov. Palin's abstinence practicing unmarried teenage mom Bristol Palin run a fowl of "Family Values", they can just hypocritically make excuses as to why the "family values" platform they campaigned on does not apply to them.

  • Posted By: rpelley @ 06/27/2009 5:46:42 PM

    These things don't "just happen". There are countless decisions to be made before one finds oneself in a room with someone not your spouse with your clothes off. Too bad the urge to merge obscures the images and faces of all those who will be devastated by the betrayal. Living well IS the best revenge...one who knows!

  • Posted By: citizenPZ @ 06/27/2009 4:10:25 PM

    her husband is a dick; the new national symbol of SC

  • Posted By: gigglinggirl @ 06/26/2009 12:58:24 PM

    Look..the simple fact is, that some scorned women remain with their betraying husbands because after a certain amount of time with a guy, the "devil" you know is better than the one you don't know. Thirty years ago, a friend of mine who had been married four times said "don't kid yourself, the next one is just another can of worms". I've remembered that throughout the ups and downs of being with the same man for 25 years, and frankly, some times, that thought has been what has allowed me to overlook/let slide/underplay the impact of various disagreements. I'm sure he would say the same about me. It's hard to leave relationships that sometimes have lasted longer than any other relationship in your life, except for your parents. Not all spouses stick around, but I think this is the reason that some do.

    • Posted By: chris s. @ 06/27/2009 2:52:55 PM

      As a awoman who has been married 30+ years to the same man, I say pick your battles. Also, the advice I've given to my married daughter, is that sometimes you may not like the other person. That is temporary. You do, however, still love them and that is what makes it stick. That and respect. When you have those ups and downs, it's good to remember why you chose that person, in the first place. Working through all this garbage is either going to make the Sanfords stronger or destroy them. I'm hoping for a good outcome.

    • Posted By: rdefazio8244 @ 06/26/2009 1:04:12 PM

      I am sure that you are right with respect to why some women choose continuation of a bad relationship, but as a man I would be more inclined to end it. Sometimes being alone and being at peace with oneself, as long as the children are not abandoned or neglected, is better. Caring for the physical and emotional needs of the children becomes a much more demanding part of one's life after leaving a spouse, but in many instances it would seem to be the better choice, all things considered.

  • Posted By: yenta4u @ 06/27/2009 8:37:31 AM

    It's been a while since I read Newsweek online. I was bored and looking for something new. And there it was. Kathleen Deveny's acerbic take on "disgraced" political wives. Her observances are dead on, humorous and compelling. I actually read beyond the first line of each graf.

    And this? "All of them managed to take lemons, make lemonade, and add a shot of vodka." Gonna steal that ditty.

    I guess I'll be reading Time again.

    • Posted By: pickwick8 @ 06/27/2009 3:47:35 PM

      I thought this was a good article, too. More thoughtful and observant than the others I've seen on the subject. good writing.

  • Posted By: xlntcat @ 06/27/2009 3:43:43 PM

    My guess is that Ms Sanford knows that the worst is yet to come. Yesterday it was revealed by a GOP state representative that Sanford had diverted a federal grant into his own PAC last year, got caught and was allowed to repay the state. He now says that he will repay the state for the misappropriated funds used to see his mistress. He has many enemies on both side of the aisle because he has been one of South Carolina's worst governors and has bankrupt the state. The week he left for Argentina the legislature has overturned 10 of his vetos and he got beat in court by a 12 year old. It was also reported in The Daily Beast that he had covered up an unexplained death of an African American child on rural property belonging to the governor. Mrs Sanford provides the money, the connections and apparently the political acumen. I have doubts that she has serious intentions regarding taking this creep back (He is one homely dude), but she made him and she may very well want to be sure he leaves with no more than he came with. If so, good for her! Both she and South Carolina deserve better than Mark Sanford.

  • Posted By: rdefazio8244 @ 06/26/2009 12:54:08 PM

    Well, if Mrs. Sanford is as you portray her to be, then I would also have to surmise that the same vitriolic talents that have made her into a media magician also were fully at work during the period when her husband was not involved with the other woman. Gee, I don't know, but perhaps that would make me want to find someone a bit less edgy, too.

    Why is it that for people in the media who have the obligation to produce witty articles according to a schedule that they seem to be able to see things about people in only one light? Is it also not possible that the same pre-adultery moral stiffness that characterized her husband was a shared trait between the two of them? Perhaps she still has the same values and opinions that her husband espoused before the affair. It would account for all that this article has attributed to shrewdness and a need for public vengeance.

    The simple fact is that people do not know how to let others, especially public figures, have a private life. Simply because a person seeks public office does not mean that every bit of the privacy that we all seem to think is a constitutional right for ourselves should be automatically forfeited once we take a paycheck funded by taxes. After all, if it is true that everything about a public figure is fair game, then why not dig into the subject matter and come up with the length of the governor's penis, or how about the diameter of his wife's nipples? Is that too private? Too personal? If so, then there are limits to the invasion of privacy of public officials. The fact that the media feeds on this stuff simply shows it to be the classless and amoral crowd that it is.

    • Posted By: pickwick8 @ 06/27/2009 3:41:39 PM

      This would have been between the governor and his wife, and the media would not be there is the governor hadn't disappeared on a trip to Argentina leaving his state without approved management.

      The local newspaper was obviously sitting on this information and refusing to release it. They already had the emails. And they knew when he was coming back.

      His disappearance made it a real news story and the confession made it a romance.

  • Posted By: delius1967 @ 06/26/2009 2:01:08 PM

    Wow. I really can't believe some of the posts here. I'm a guy, I've been married for 15+ years (to one woman). How many times have I cheated? None. How many times have I wanted to? Er... I lost count after it hit seven digits. Do I want to have sex with other women? Of course. But marriage to a fantastic woman is worth more than any number of impersonal orgasms. If you can't see that, I feel truly bad for you.

    You've got two heads, guys. Don't think with the smaller one. And accept responsibilty for your actions.

    • Posted By: CaroJ @ 06/26/2009 4:11:47 PM

      You sound like a mostly decent guy... but there is a difference between finding someone other than your spouse attractive and wanting to cheat with that person. If you have "wanted to cheat" a million times since you have been married, something is wrong....

      • Posted By: pickwick8 @ 06/27/2009 3:33:03 PM

        Some of the men who are writing in are saying that they lived years in marriages without sex or passion.

        It sounds as though you and your wife have a good relationship in all ways. That's fantastic. Sometimes that endures. But a man or woman who is left alone without any affection for years could be forgiven for finding love elsewhere.

        I don't know what the marriage was like in this instance, but it appears that it's been cool for awhile. I saw some footage of an interview some time ago and the body language was bad. They both physically turned away from one another when he came into the room.

    • Posted By: whiteknighthou @ 06/26/2009 2:05:33 PM

      how often do you and your wife have relations?

  • Posted By: Calypso722 @ 06/27/2009 3:20:11 PM

    I say leave him... if that is what he is going to do there is no reason to stay. I do commend her for taking the high road and not standing by him while he confesses to the media, but she chose to stay out of the media at home with her sons while the govener mad an A&s out of himself

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse