sex addiction

When the Weiner sexting story broke, I was on holiday in Amsterdam, where prostitution is legally regulated, and newsstands display Penthouse and Vogue magazines side-by-side. It was no surprise then that “Weinergate” seemed to be met by the Dutch with a “here the Americans go again” eye roll.

In contrast to the Dutch, Americans love sex scandals. We love them so much that in a good year we produce and consume not just one of these high-profile scandals, but several. For many of us interested in sexual justice, the juiciest stories are those of the hypocrites: the Elliot Spitzers who lead anti-prostitute campaigns while purchasing sex; the George Rekers who champion the anti-gay movement while hiring “rent boys,” and the Newt Gingrichs who lead impeachment hearings while engaging in their own extra-marital affairs.

And then there are people like Anthony Weiner: Charismatic heterosexual men in powerful positions who thrive on taking risks.
Guys who benefit from the security and social status of marriage but who also have ample time away from their partners. Men who are fierce defenders of reproductive rights, are friends with the likes of John Stewart and Ben Affleck, and who (understandably) have many dedicated women fans. In pre-Twitter and Facebook days (circa 2006), such public figures were sometimes called “rock stars”; their fans, “groupies.” Today, with the democratizing boost of social media, more of us than ever before can construct our own neo-rock star status, supported by “Facebook friends” and “twitter followers.”

The privileges taken by (mostly heterosexual male) rock stars are nothing new; what’s new is the neo-rock star’s ability to showcase their goods on such a massive scale. But with this newfound power of instantaneous social impact, private digital messages are increasingly impossible. It’s the equivalent of whispering sweet nothings into a megaphone; or asking the masses to kindly shut their eyes while they flash that one special love interest in the crowd.

When teen girls send sexy words and images (and those photos are intercepted and distributed by “frenemies” for the purpose of shaming them), American parents panic and talk about “ruined lives.” But what about when the “sexting” is between consenting adults? Is there any harm in Weiner’s actions, and if so, harm to whom?

From a legal perspective, it seems that there is no case against Weiner. He did initially lie to reporters, his “fans,” and possibly also to his wife, but not under oath (so no perjury). He has admitted to engaging in several digital affairs, but adult, consensual sexual liaisons outside of heterosexual marriage and reproductive sexuality are (gratefully) no longer criminalized in the United States. If Weiner had campaigned against “dangers” of sexting and the internet, we could bash him for being a hypocrite (but alas, he was too busy championing issues like insurance industry reform).

I do not yet know enough about the situations and interpretations of Weiner’s sexting partners to comment on whether or not these women ever felt harmed by his messages (at this point I have not seen any self-reports of negative impact). But I will venture to guess that all of them (as well as Weiner’s wife, Huma Abedin) are being wounded by the invasive scrutiny of this media storm.

And so, from my perspective Weiner’s biggest “crime” may be that he was reckless with his neo-rock star privileges. I thus will
offer two pieces of sincere advice to Representative Anthony Wiener and other rising neo-rock stars:

1. Invest in a good therapist who will help you reflect upon your desires, social/sexual identities, and social privileges. This is crucial information for then reassessing your own goals for yourself and your relationships including your marriage.
2. Never confuse your fans and followers for your friends. This is especially important when operating under “schoolyard” conditions, where the status of one person or political interest depends on the beating down of others, and where conservative or knee-jerk normative definitions of “good” vs. “bad” sexuality rule.

Meanwhile, for the most part, American media coverage continues to uncritically replicate the notion that Weiner’s messages are simply “inappropriate” and “shameful.” And that’s why some of us with “Dutch” and sexual justice sensibilities — including us at Sexuality & Society — are rolling our eyes.

—–

Related Sexuality & Society stories:

• Lerum, K. Dec. 23, 2009. The real problem with sexting: Adult complicity in labeling teens “sluts,” “perverts,” and “criminals.”
  
• Dworkin, S. Dec. 17, 2009. Critically examining media coverage of Tiger Woods: Sex addict, masculine privilege, or racialized sexuality in sport?
  
• Lerum, K. May 2, 2010. Sex addiction clinics as capitalist confession booths.

When Tiger Woods was caught having not just one but multiple and simultaneous extramarital affairs, many news sources labeled him a “sex addict.” What else could explain cheating on a gorgeous blonde Swedish swim suit model (so the reasoning went). In response to the massive negative press, Woods effectively went underground, canceling all public appearances. A few weeks later, the media storm was still raging and Woods checked himself into Pine Grove Behavioral Health & Addiction Services, a Mississippi clinic specializing in sexual addition treatment.

Months later, just as Woods was attempting to re-establish his chaste public image, Jesse James, the husband of Oscar winning Sandra Bullock, was exposed as having committed similar transgressions. After being slammed by the media James too checked himself into a sex addiction clinic, the Sierra Tuscan in Tuscon Arizona. While the use of medical/ “disease” models around sexual “deviance”  is not new, the recent high profile cases raise for me the following questions:

• What role are sex addiction clinics playing in regulating discourses of sexuality?
• How are discourses of sex addiction intersecting with and reinforcing individualized assumptions of sin and redemption, in other words, conservative religious discourses of sexuality?
• Do sex addiction clinics serve as public (and for profit) confessional booths for “secular” society?
• What role do public confession and redemption scripts play in larger belief structures about “good” and “bad” sexuality (now labeled “healthy” and “unhealthy” sexuality)?
• In what ways do sex addiction discourses ignore practical (e.g. partners living separate lives) and systemic (imbalances of power and privilege) issues related to infidelity?
• How do major institutions (e.g. those related to religion, medicine, criminal justice, and business) benefit from avoiding the practical and systemic, focusing instead on individualistic, moral understanding of sexuality?

The mission statements of both Woods’ and James’ clinics clearly state that sex addition/compulsion is in part a medical matter.  Pine Grove (where Woods was a resident) offers a special program called “Gentle Path” which refers to sexual addiction as a “disease:”

The Gentle Path Program offers gender specific treatment to aid men and women in regaining their freedom from the disease of sexual addiction.  Most patients are simultaneously treated for mood disturbance, anxiety or other addictions, such as chemical dependency.  The Gentle Path Program has a special focus on working through past trauma and family problems.  The program is designed to help men and women regain freedom from compulsive behaviors and develop a sense of healthy sexuality.

While not specifically sponsored by any religious organization, Pine Grove emphasizes religious/spiritual aspects of healing. The “Gentle Path” program (an ironic name given its austere living requirements) requires members to sign a celibacy contract, including a promise not to masturbate during the course of their treatment.  Clients are also forbidden to leave during their treatment the except for group chaperoned fieldtrips. Like many prison environments, the clinic appears to serve in part a punitive function. News reports appeared to take glee in the fact that Woods was retreating to a place that would cause him physical as as well as moral hardship:

“The world’s No. 1 golfer will not have an easy time of it as he tries to conquer the demons that led him to repeatedly cheat on his stunning wife with multiple women.” (NYDailynews.com)

In a recent article in Alternet.org, psychologist and psychoanalyst Michael Bader calls sex addiction a “B.S. excuse for not thinking.”  Bader asks,

“If a married man has a lot of extramarital sex, is he necessarily a sex addict? If a seemingly straight man frequents restrooms for casual sex, is he an addict? How much pornography does someone have to look at, how many hours spent in chat rooms, hookers hired, to go from “hound dog” to “sex addict”

Bader goes on to explain the difference between drug and alcohol addiction and “sex addiction”:

“Traditional addictions like those to alcohol or heroin always involve the presence of tolerance and withdrawal; that is, increasing amounts of the substance are required to achieve the same effect, and in its absence the addict suffers an increasingly painful psychophysiological state as the body and brain rebound. But when it comes to sex addiction, physiological tolerance and withdrawal are usually not present, and if they are, they don’t govern the addict’s life in the same way that, say, opiates do. Sex addicts get anxious when they can’t get their “fix” — they don’t go into DTs.”

In fact, Bader argues, the addiction model for sexual infidelity ironically perpetuates pathological sexuality:

“… by viewing someone’s sexual desires as addictions, 12-step approaches can subtly reinforce someone’s own pathological view of themselves. People struggling with sexual compulsions are already afraid of their sexuality, viewing it as an alien internal beast. To imply that the addict’s sexual fantasies and sources of satisfaction are, like alcohol to the alcoholic, a loaded gun, reinforces this belief, when in fact it’s simply another fantasy. The actual psychological reality is that the so-called addicts’ desires and fantasies are perfectly understandable attempts to deal with anxiety and depression given the context of their personal histories, their painful and irrational views about themselves and about men and women, and their inability to imagine a healthier way of living. Once they’re helped to become aware of these meanings, they actually increase their self-compassion and are freer to exercise self-control.”

Bader concludes with an analysis that extends to many public sexual stories:

“Everywhere that sex enters the public arena, whether it be in education, gay marriage, Internet sex, or the hypocrisy of self-righteous politicians getting busted for their indiscretions, we see a worrisome refusal or inability to think about psychological meaning, and to instead reduce the conversation to either a morality play or a voyeuristic parade of gossip and speculation. Replacing the psychologically complex and intensely human drama of sexual behavior with two-dimensional labels like addiction is but one example of this trend.”

Bader’s analysis is needed in a world saturated with simplistic psycho/moral/medical discourses. This is a small but important step toward serious systemic analysis. Even the quintessential playboy, Hugh Hefner, understands this. When asked if he thinks golfer Tiger Woods can overcome his playboy transgressions, Hefner replied curtly:

“He can if he wants to. But this whole idea that it’s a sex addiction is a copout. Some people become obsessed with sex, but it’s not like an alcohol or drug addiction. He did it because he could get away with it.”

While Elin Nordegren may indeed not want her estranged husband, Tiger Woods, to “get away with it,” Woods’ treatment for sex addiction and his public confessional performance has little to do with Elin, and more to do with replicating and selling individualistic morality tales around sexuality.

———

Referenced articles

Bader, M. Jan. 19, 2010. “Sex Addiction: A B.S. Excuse for not thinking.” Alternet.

Huffington Post, April 13, 2010. “Hugh Hefner slams Tiger Woods, Jesse James, and Sex Addiction.