As I write this, the pressing question in the news is, "Should Anthony Weiner (congressman from NYC) resign?" Since I started writing this, Anthony Weiner has resigned.
I dismiss the Republican arguments (all, naturally, recommending that this firebrand congressman resign) as partisan hypocrisy. That doesn't mean they are wrong, but to take their self-serving recommendations seriously is impossible. The main source for the accusation of hypocrisy is the continued service of David Vitter, currently a Senator from Louisiana, who was embroiled in a controversy regarding the “DC Madam”, a house of prostitution. He was never asked to resign, and was subsequently reelected.
The Democrats themselves have been gathering in larger and larger numbers to recommend that Weiner resign. They presented several arguments, some of which are also voiced by Republicans, including 1) He can not effectively represent his constituents after this embarrassing sexual impropriety, 2) The country is distracted from serious matters by this ongoing national joke, 3) He needs to take time for himself and his family, 4) He has engaged in at least one ethics violation: Don't engage in behavior that would reflect poorly on the House of representatives or the United States, and 5) he lied to the media, fellow congressmen and congresswomen, and even his wife.
There are, of course, other reasons given, some more artfully articulated than others, but they lack specificity. Some extrapolate from the other reasons given above: "If he lied about that then he is vulnerable, or a liar, or hiding something else, etc."
Some said he shouldn't resign. They argue that he never claimed moral superiority, others have done worse without resigning, he did not violate any laws, and there is no reason to think that this indiscretion will affect his effectiveness as a congressman. We don't know the extent of congressional bad behavior, but the reasons for his behavior are as understandable as they are reprehensible.
There remains something that was not been given much attention, but is probably the most important thing to consider. Has Weiner gone nuts (no pun intended)? He looks and acts sane publicly, his apology seemed sincere and appropriate, he seems to understand that what he did was wrong, and he has vowed not to continue to do it. So, he's sane, right?
Some say that, as a powerful man, he is predisposed to "risk taking" and may be more likely than most to engage is risky sexual behavior than most people. I'll grant that, but there are some aspects of this particular indiscretion that scare the pants off of me. Not literally.
First, when men take risks, they generally do so with an awareness of the consequences and a concerted effort to avoid detection. Part of the thrill is avoiding getting caught, but Weiner took no precautions. He did not disguise himself and, in fact, flaunted his identity to the women he had never meet personally. Another congressman, Chris Lee, resigned in disgrace in a matter hours after he had been outed by a woman with whom he had been corresponding via Craig's List. One photo of his bare chest was enough to shame him into resigning. Weiner was certainly aware of that episode, but he was sending photos which were virtually identical in pose, if on occasion more explicit, with no apparent awareness that he too could be exposed and suffer extreme embarrassment and pressure to resign. Watching a colleague fall next to you while you are engaging in the same behavior without any attempt to disguise yourself is beyond foolish; it's (politically) suicidal.
Second, he engaged in this behavior over a period of years with multiple women, even after marrying his current wife. Being married does change things. It is no longer just embarrassing, it is hurtful, and he should have known that. He lacked the awareness that his behavior would affect his family.
The complete self-absorption, narcissism, lack of awareness and relentless pursuit of this activity in the face of risks that he could not see, but should have, leads me to believe that this is beyond a peccadillo; it's an illness. He is right to seek "treatment" and, if he does, that would go a long way towards reassuring others that he is not likely to reengage in self-destructive behavior.
If this is an illness, it would fall into one of several categories. It might, for example, be a paraphilia.
Paraphilias are ... “characterized by recurrent, intense sexual urges, fantasies or behaviors that involve unusual objects, activities or situations and cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning. Tends to be chronic and lifelong, although frequency and intensity may vary. Often not associated with distress. Clients often claim the problem lies in others’ responses. This is about justifying and normalizing their behavior to alleviate guilt and embarrassment. Most deviant people choose to lower their inhibitions by justifying their behavior or engaging in distorted thinking that supports the behavior.”
The term "sexual addiction" is not included in the current version of the diagnostic and statistical manual (DSM-IV), but the topic is under consideration. Addictive behavior, in sexual terms, would involve “compulsivity (inability to stop), continuation (despite consequences), and obsession (their minds are so preoccupied by these thoughts, other areas of their lives that they could be thinking about are neglected).”
It is not possible now to know if Weiner will have the characteristics that would suggest addiction, but clearly if the behavior continues despite this public shaming he could be considered addicted. The question is whether he will continue the behavior despite consequences and neglect his work and marriage.
In any event, the behavior he has engaged in is deviant, incredibly risky, and harmful to his family and his occupation. How likely is it that treatment will be successful? How long will treatment take? How likely is it that he will be able to function in his job after treatment?
It is too soon to know the answers to these questions, but my suspicion, based on the nature of the behavior, is that this will not be an easy road for former Congressman Weiner. He has underestimated the problem from the beginning, and his unrealistic approach has thus far shown, if not a lack of sincerity, at least a failure to appreciate the inevitability of his current dilemma. I am sure that Congressman Weiner is confident he can put this behind him, live a normal life, stay married, and eventually resume a life of public service in some capacity, but as much as he has underestimated the problem, I think he is overestimating his ability to change his habits.
In order to accept Congressman Weiner as their representative, the constituents will have to extend an extraordinary amount of trust or accept that they have a sexual deviant representing them. Even assuming they would accept the latter, trust is still necessary, and his actions have already betrayed that trust.
If he should run for reelection, his constituents will decide if they are willing to be disappointed. I hope that Congressman Weiner can gain some insight into his problems that he has so far failed to demonstrate, but his constituents should be prepared for disappointment.
Regarding the push for resignation addressed towards Weiner and not David Vitter, there is a perceived difference. Most people understand infidelity, even with prostitutes, as being within the range of normal behavior (although that is not necessarily true). Even without studying abnormal psychology, the behavior of Weiner clearly falls outside of the normal range of behavior. Although usually unspoken, there is a fear of an undiagnosed psychiatric disorder; one that may have only now become uncovered, but that may affect every other aspect of his life in ways that cannot be predicted. When people say, “I’m glad he’s seeking the help he needs”, they are saying that until he has been evaluated and treated by professionals, he should not be allowed to function as a congressman or in any position of responsibility.
My personal assessment is that human interaction via the Internet and social media is so foreign to our psyche that our normal impulses can be warped, and our normal inhibitions can seem unnecessary. Perspective can be lost, and we have a strong tendency to fool ourselves. Although unjustified, we may feel safe revealing thoughts, feelings and even images of ourselves that we would not share under any other circumstances because it all seems less real, or anonymous, or private. It is therefore not at all clear that bizarre behavior via the Internet is reflective of deep psychological disorders. It may actually be a distortion of our normal, if “antisocial”, nature. There’s a paradox for you.
There are layers upon layers upon layers of psychological motivation that affect our behavior over the Internet. The psychology isn’t new perhaps, but the circumstances that affect behavior are new – as new as the Internet as a means of communication. Maybe it was necessary for Weiner to resign for his own health, but then maybe he is one of us that just went overboard and, given the embarrassment, he might be jarred back into reality. Or maybe he is so deeply disturbed that he won’t be able to stop. Even Weiner probably doesn’t know the future at this point.
I will say that, given our almost universal lack of understanding of his behavior, it was probably necessary for him to resign for the benefit of his fellow congressmen. They might fear that he will begin to act bizarrely in public and moon C-Span, or shout out inappropriately (“You lie!”).
With time, perspective and counseling, Weiner will understand his behavior and, I think, control it. He is not the first to find himself embarrassed by the Internet, and I suspect he won’t be the last. It’s human nature.
No comments:
Post a Comment