I realize that this will be unpopular but...

Email Print posted by comix 03/11/2008 01:35:55 PM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
 I am pretty nervous about posting this but if I don't say something I might have trouble controling my impulses. I have been following TYT since they were on Air America and I am no longer surprised by anything that Cenk says anymore. At first I was shocked nearly everyday but now I am inured to it all. I enjoy his fresh honesty and sometimes goofy opinions. Like a persons race or sex does not matter anymore etc. But I feel as though someone should point out a few flaws in the "men can't help it" argument.

The argument that men cannot help cheating is so lame that I just had to say something. So here goes. Are you telling me that a man (like JFK) that holds an office as important as president cannot control his dick? If he is unable to control his impulses then he should not be president or control large weapons. Why do we make this excuse for men? Powerful men "need" more sex? really? Power just makes them so horny that they are unable to control themselves? Now JFK managed not to start a world war but I am not sure how considering all the sex he was having everyday. Maybe he was just too busy getting a blow job to take any dangerous actions. He was so busy having sex that he left decisions to his staff? I don't know. Johnson was doing the samething while the war raged.
Men cannot control their sexual impulses? Really? That is an excuse that a child would use not a World Leader. "Gee Dad I just could not help myself, I had to screw that whore or get a blow job in the white house." A grown man should be able to control his dick, it is as simple as that. If it is "natural" for men to have sex with anything that tickles their fancy then perhaps we should reconsider allowing them to hold important office. Maybe that is why the world is always at war somewhere. Why does no-one talk about this? It would appear that it never occurs to anyone that someone who is unable to control their impulses might not make the best leader. This is same lame argument that some people make about rape - It was the womans fault for "tempting" the man with a look or her skirt. Are you a grown man? would you rob a bank because you saw the money stacked up? would you steal stuff because you saw it in the window of the shop? These are absurd arguments right? You might want to do those things but hopefully you will not at least in part because it is a societal standard that you do not and in part because you control your freakin impulses right?  Of course men are expected to control these impulses - why not sexual impulses?

As for the Gov of New York - I believe that prostitution should be legal, I really do. But at the same-time the violation of the trust of the people that elected him is important. It is our business because he ran as a strong prosecutor not as a free love guy. Of course he lied, he lied not only to his wife but to his constituents as well. They are paying him, he is not doing this job for free. What he spends his pay check on is not my business unless he told his constitutents that he would be a strong against crime - prostitution is a crime whether or we agree with the law or not. One more point that will not be popular either. I don't believe that Cenk would blame a woman anymore than a man but most of our culture would so...

If the governor of New York was a women and she had campaigned on how tough she would be on crime (including prostitution) then got caught paying that much money for a whore there would be such a cry for her resignation that it would be heard across the world. If a woman does it it is much worse than if a man does it maybe because a woman is expected to CONTROL her impulses. After all someday she will be a mother... I have actually been told this - someday she will be a mother - nuf said

< HP Asks: Who Is The Better General Election Candidate? | San Diego volunteers needed. >
 Display:
I realize that this will be unpopular but... | 18 comments (18 topical, 0 hidden)
you got it (none / 0)
SEX is destroying our nation!  I guess it's time to bring back the Moral Majority, pitchforks and all (Ak could lead the pack)!

by rev24 on 03/11/2008 02:23:27 PM EST

Not at all (none / 0)
    I am afraid that you have missed the point entirely. That is not what I would want or hope for in this time or any other time. Responsibility for ones actions is what I would like that is all.

by comix on 03/11/2008 02:27:45 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Politicians, Sex, and Golf (none / 0)
I'm pretty sure you talked a lot about politicians controlling/not controlling their sexual impulses. The framework that you put it, just doesn't jive with me.  I look at our elected leaders sexual proclivities as I would golf.  I personally don't care if they stray away from the country club and play some other courses.  Just as long as they tend to business and get the job done, it's all good in my book. 

by rev24 on 03/11/2008 02:58:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
the evils of (none / 0)
Sex turns straight people gay and gay people into Mexicans...Everybody goes down a notch.

by nfc on 03/11/2008 04:03:36 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Here Goes... (none / 0)
Comix: Are you telling me that a man (like JFK) that holds an office as important as president cannot control his dick? If he is unable to control his impulses then he should not be president or control large weapons. Why do we make this excuse for men? Powerful men "need" more sex? really? Power just makes them so horny that they are unable to control themselves?

I strongly disagree with the idea that because a man (or woman for that matter) shows poor judgement in the area of sex that he/she will clearly show poor judgement in other areas.  Sex truly is unique in that regard, and is often the ultimate trump card to logic and reason.

As for powerful men being more horny, I don't think Cenk makes that point. I believe he's making the reasonable point that men in power have more *opportunities*, and that many people who pride themselves on not cheating simply haven't had any basic opportunities. 

Or maybe they have, but maybe they weren't *good* opportunities. You know, like maybe they didn't find the potential woman to be more attractive than their wife or girlfriend, or maybe they had friends around that would tell on them, etc.

I made a similar argument WRT "would you keep the money" if the bank accidentally put it into your account.  People LOVE to act moral and righteous but SO MUCH of that is fake because they never really have a good opportunity to be seriously tempted.  For anyone who disagrees, I highly recommend you read a short story by Mark Twain called The Man That Corrupted Hadleyburg.  It deals with temptation.

Comix: Now JFK managed not to start a world war but I am not sure how considering all the sex he was having everyday. Maybe he was just too busy getting a blow job to take any dangerous actions. He was so busy having sex that he left decisions to his staff? I don't know. Johnson was doing the samething while the war raged.

Do you really think JKF was THAT busy with BJ's that he neglected his presidential duties? I mean, the example given was BJ's in the car on the way to events.  If anything, I could make an argument (mostly joking but half serious) that this showed he was a great multi-tasker who took his time seriously.

Men cannot control their sexual impulses? Really? That is an excuse that a child would use not a World Leader. "Gee Dad I just could not help myself, I had to screw that whore or get a blow job in the white house." A grown man should be able to control his dick, it is as simple as that. If it is "natural" for men to have sex with anything that tickles their fancy then perhaps we should reconsider allowing them to hold important office.

Well, yes, men (and to some degree women, but not the same degree) ARE programmed that way.  Society tries to override it, and we see the results (actually, often we don't because far more people have cheated, are cheating or will cheat than we'll ever know).  Hell, there's a good chance I'VE been cheated on and I just don't know it (in past relationships of course).

Who people legally have sex with has no bearing on how they act in an important office.  It just doesn't.  You can't read anything more into it.  Some of the greatest rulers (and worst tyrants) in history have done it.  It's simply the lowest common denominator that unites countless people.

Maybe that is why the world is always at war somewhere. Why does no-one talk about this? It would appear that it never occurs to anyone that someone who is unable to control their impulses might not make the best leader. This is same lame argument that some people make about rape - It was the womans fault for "tempting" the man with a look or her skirt.

Why does no one talk about this?  Maybe for the reasons I've already stated.  Consider that in many other European countries, they LAUGH at our puritanical ways, and wonder why we even waste the time that we do worrying about issues like this. 

In that context, arguing that we don't talk about it enough is not something I can get behind.

Finally, please don't throw rape into the equation.  Do you honestly think that even the most die-hard hornballs around here really think rape is justified (obviously not, it's horrible and disgusting)?  We're talking about consensual sex.  IMO, including rape is a red herring that derails a serious discussion of this issue.

by ihavenobias on 03/11/2008 02:27:17 PM EST

100% right, 0% yada yada yada (none / 0)

"As for powerful men being more horny, I don't think Cenk makes that point. I believe he's making the reasonable point that men in power have more *opportunities*, and that many people who pride themselves on not cheating simply haven't had any basic opportunities. "

Case in point:  David and Wendy Vitter. This smug couple delighted in condemning Bill Clinton's infidelity and Hillary's tolerance thereof, during their sanctimonous campaign for Congress, and then for Senate.

Then Sen. Vitter injected lies and the risk of disease into his marriage. And his judgmental cunt wife Wendy evaluated the pros and cons of being a Senatorial spouse, and decided that a life of privilege was worth keeping even if she became a national joke.

Men and women are corruptible; but each want different things.

by Dogger on 03/11/2008 02:57:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]
yes/no (none / 0)

"The argument that men cannot help cheating is so lame that I just had to say something."

I have to agree that this "argument" on it's face is lame.  Can't = won't.  I think any woman who accepts this argument from her man is kind of a fool. 

However, I'm one of those of the opinion that prostitution laws are a waste of time and resources, like the marijuana laws.  Be that as it may, a politician should be prepared to get hammered for pulling this kind of stupid stunt.  I think Clinton has demonstrated that regardless of what the law says, this kind of stupidity does damage that reaches far beyond just the two people and the families involved.  Americans are simply too sexually torqued up to let this kind of stuff go quietly by.  That the public will freak out because some man was nailing a women other than his wife and then yawn over a story about our borrowing $12 billion a month for the Iraq war seems to me a symptom of a much deeper illness in American society than sexual promiscuity. 

I just think we're not paying attention to the things we ought to be paying the most attention to. 

by bfaul on 03/11/2008 05:27:51 PM EST

Sptizer (none / 0)

Spitzer made a career out of prosecuting prostitution rings and bashing the "Johns" publically for his political stunts.

The feds are now saying he's been using the serivce for years. Not only that but it wasn't the sex that inititally interested them but the large transactions...leading me to wonder...funds for the prostitutes....or was he being blackmailed. 

by acroso on 03/11/2008 07:01:53 PM EST

yeah right (none / 0)

"Spitzer made a career out of prosecuting prostitution rings and bashing the "Johns" publically for his political stunts."

You know this how?  How did you become an expert on what Spitzer did or did not do in his career?  You live in New York?

by bfaul on 03/11/2008 08:53:01 PM EST

[ Parent ]
A pile of Acroso has 1000 eyes (none / 0)
Acroso lives everywhere and nowhere.

by OneHitKill on 03/11/2008 09:01:55 PM EST

[ Parent ]
lol (none / 0)
@ a pile of Acroso

by Chinese Democracy on 03/12/2008 12:18:59 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Sptizer (none / 0)
"

Spitzer is unlikely to continue in his post, according to Norman Adler, a well-known public affairs expert in New York.

"I don't know how he could possibly stay on," said Adler. "The funny thing is, if you live by the sword, you die by sword. He prosecuted prostitution rings, looked at e-mails and phone conversations, and used a terribly swift sword to his opponents, and now it turned against him.""

 

by acroso on 03/11/2008 09:28:44 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Spitzer (none / 0)

Spitzer outraged over video game with prostitution characters.


Statement on the video game

 

"

Like all parents, I know it is increasingly difficult to protect our children from negative influences… we have learned that when self-regulation fails, government must step in… we must do more to protect our children from excessive sex and violence in the media…

Media content has gotten more graphic, more violent and more sex-based… Currently, nothing under New York State law prohibits a fourteen-year old from walking into a video store and buying… a game like ‘Grand Theft Auto,’ which rewards a player for stealing cars and beating people up. Children can even simulate having sex with a prostitute…"

 

by acroso on 03/12/2008 01:09:02 AM EST

Don't they have parents in New York? (none / 0)
If that "live by the sword, die by the sword" thing is really true in regard to self-serving pricks who grandstand on the video game content issue, it should just be a matter of days before we see the attention-starved Jack Thomson under arrest for serial murder.

by OneHitKill on 03/12/2008 06:35:39 AM EST

[ Parent ]
In his defense (none / 0)
There's a difference between an adult boinking a prostitute and a kid doing (or simulating) it.

Devi's advocate.

by ihavenobias on 03/12/2008 11:50:11 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I enjoy the show, and Cenk ... (none / 0)

... but keep a shaker of salt by the desk at all times.  A single grain just won't do.

I get more annoyed by his subtle defense of Bush I, Reagan, free trade and globalization. (some of which is not-so-subtle)

by plooger on 03/12/2008 02:05:52 AM EST

You nailed on with that last part (none / 0)
Although defending Bush 1 doesn't bother me as much, maybe in part because I never really bothered to read up on what he actually did. He just flows below the radar for me...maybe if he was a 2 termer I'd care more.

by ihavenobias on 03/12/2008 11:51:52 AM EST

[ Parent ]
I agree (none / 1)
I don't think prostitution should be illegal, but that issue is wholly separate from the question of whether or not men are so morally weak -- and this has nothing to do with Christian "sexual" morality, but EVERYTHING to do with honesty and decency towards a person who should be your best friend -- that they can't keep it in their pants.

by jarett on 03/12/2008 02:52:22 AM EST

I realize that this will be unpopular but... | 18 comments (18 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: