What Was Silda Spitzer Thinking?

Posted on March 18, 2008 11:51

Anonymous:
Nice try George. The real pink elephant in the bedroom is that many men are lousy in bed--believing that it's all about their "release". Maybe your wife, when she's done cranking out your crotch fruit and washing your skid-marked undies out, would agree.

March 18, 2008 11:44 AM
~~~~~~~~~~~

You are right about George's comment. Often times sex for women is nothing but a waste of time and a one-sided event for the man.

Hell, majority of men don't even know the anatomony of the women's sexual body parts to appropriately satisfy her.

But if they are married and sex is a problem there is not an excuse for the man to severe the marriage bond by cheating. Let them go to counseling to try and fix the problem.

A woman should readily make herself availble for sex with her husband, but again sex will become boring very fast if the man only gets satisfied.

This snippet is from 2004.

"Some day a female politician will be caught with, well, her pants down. I wonder how America will react to the cuckolded husband, gazing calmly at his cheating politician wife.

Maybe when a man is put through this humiliating ritual, the polls will show that America doesn't like seeing a wronged spouse biting his cheeks at a very public press conference. And when the polls show it doesn't work, I suspect it will end."

I think the author is exactly right. When it comes to a man standing by his philandering wife, it'll be a cold day in hell before we see it happen. Colder still to EXPECT it as some sort of marital right.

Just for grins, can anyone think of a woman in a similarly powerful position (politics, business, what-have-you) where she cheated and her husband stood with her for the media glare?

I can't, perhaps others can?

Personally, I don't think any husband would. Too much self-respect.

That is a separate issue from whether or not the couple stayed married, by the by.

I agree with you whole-heartedly. I wouldn't have stood by him. That had to have been the most humiliating, embrassing experience of her entire life. I pity her, but she should have known better than to let him make her share in his shame. She did nothing wrong. She shouldn't have stood their and taken a public beating JUST by standing there. Family or no family, women need to start standing up for themselves. If she was the one who had cheated, do we think Eliot Spitzer would be standing at her side. No. Probably not.

I agree with you whole-heartedly. I wouldn't have stood by him. That had to have been the most humiliating, embrassing experience of her entire life. I pity her, but she should have known better than to let him make her share in his shame. She did nothing wrong. She shouldn't have stood their and taken a public beating JUST by standing there. Family or no family, women need to start standing up for themselves. If she was the one who had cheated, do we think Eliot Spitzer would be standing at her side. No. Probably not.

"What he did was wrong but..."

That's not an apology, or even a pretense of an apology. That's an excuse (note the use of the word "but", another one is "just")--is it one that you have used, or will be needing to use?

It's also called dissembling.

1. to give a false or misleading appearance to; conceal the truth or real nature of: to dissemble one's incompetence in business.
2. to put on the appearance of; feign: to dissemble innocence.
3. Obsolete. to let pass unnoticed; ignore.
–verb (used without object) 4. to conceal one's true motives, thoughts, etc., by some pretense; speak or act hypocritically.

Nice try George. The real pink elephant in the bedroom is that many men are lousy in bed--believing that it's all about their "release". Maybe your wife, when she's done cranking out your crotch fruit and washing your skid-marked undies out, would agree.

What makes ppl think they have right ( and may be moral/intelectual superiority) to advice??

Men are not perfect but to be with a prostitute is rather unforgivable. Did it ever dawn on him that he might bring home something that even Ajax or bleach wouldn't wash off. I wouldn't have been standing by his side. That is one he would have done on his own. He didn't need help to mess up the lives of his wife and precious daughters and he didn't need help to stand up there and admit to wrong. I think he was only sorry he got caught. He probably grew up with his Daddy's money getting him out of trouble and probably thought that he was way above fault in this also.

Men are not perfect but to be with a prostitute is rather unforgivable. Did it ever dawn on him that he might bring home something that even Ajax or bleach wouldn't wash off. I wouldn't have been standing by his side. That is one he would have done on his own. He didn't need help to mess up the lives of his wife and precious daughters and he didn't need help to stand up there and admit to wrong. I think he was only sorry he got caught. He probably grew up with his Daddy's money getting him out of trouble and probably thought that he was way above fault in this also.

Men are not perfect but to be with a prostitute is rather unforgivable. Did it ever dawn on him that he might bring home something that even Ajax or bleach wouldn't wash off. I wouldn't have been standing by his side. That is one he would have done on his own. He didn't need help to mess up the lives of his wife and precious daughters and he didn't need help to stand up there and admit to wrong. I think he was only sorry he got caught. He probably grew up with his Daddy's money getting him out of trouble and probably thought that he was way above fault in this also.

What he did was wrong but the reality is that she probably wasn't giving him sex at home, and she might be beautiful in your eyes, but she's not what she was when she married him. i mean the pink elephant in the room is that women are supposed to have sex with their husbands when their husbands want--if they don't, then their husbands are just balloons filling up with love juice--it's just a matter of time. I believe some women know this but still for whatever selfish reason refuse to screw their husbands--then they throw up their hands when the inevitable happens, and collect alimony. Women are so sanctimonious about how their husbands are supposed to be good and sex outside of marriage is unacceptable, but if wives would spend some more time on their backs, their husbands would spend less time on the prowl. So get off your high horse, sally. get out of the office and into bed, make babies, take care of your husband emotionally, then you'll see less straying. Or if you want to work, just keep it in moderation.

Is the male miscreant ever to be forgiven by his spouse, and if so how, and after how much time passes?

Is the male miscreant ever to be forgiven by his spouse, and if so how, and after how much time passes?

Is the male miscreant ever to be forgiven by his spouse, and if so how, and after how much time passes?

Rather than criticize Mrs. Spitzer for "standing up there" with her husband, we should let her make her own decision. Obviously, she loves her husband.

How does anyone know that for certain? George Sutton, do you have some inside knowledge that you wish to share? Or are you simply jumping to a conclusion?

I agree with Sally on one thing--Eliot should stand (finally) protect his family by standing up there ALL BY HIMSELF. I think it is the height of cowardice to hide behind his wife's skirts.

What was she thinging?

why am i up here
how emabarrassing
i'm gonna kick his a** when this is done
how do i explain this to the girls?
how do i explain this to my family?
why should i explain it?
dang 22!?
what does she have i don't?
wait he is bald!
i don't need him!
ok, i'll stay for a minute because i have invested a chunk of my life into him and his
LOOK OUT WORLD HERE I COME!!!

she'll be ok! :)

"Once, just once, wouldn’t you love to see the politician up there at the lectern sweating bullets, apologizing for letting down his wife and family …. alone?

Yes.

Put on your silk undies and face the consequences of your crappy behavior like an adult.

I'd feel the same way if it were her.

I think it is a lot of nerve for Sally Quinn to be questioning what any other woman would do in these cases of infidelity. It comes down to this - it's none of her business!

We all know how Sally Quinn got to where she is and it wasn't from talent or brains!

The daughters are the ones who concern me most. Men may start hitting on them because they are the offspring of an overweening, philandering father. Silda Spitzer should NOT stand by her man. She should leave him, and take her daughters with her

Watching Ms. Spitzer, all you could think about was the Taliban? Watching the Taliban, what do you think about? American Idol?

Sheesh...

Perhaps she is keeping him BECAUSE she has 3 children. Children need a father. Period.

As far as Hillary, she doesn't care about Bill's affairs. She was ticked off because it would mess up their career and quest for power. That is, she was mad he was dumb enough to get caught. Also, in all likelihood, she's a lesbian. Have you seen the Indian model that lives with her full time?

I think that leaving is easy to say, but less easy to do. As these things unfold they get more complex. Your mate has a weakness perhaps not known until he reaches a level of status where new opportunities and stresses arise. He/she yields to less than moral behavior. He/she is humiliated. You are kind of numb and in shock. The nightmare keeps unfolding. As time moves on you who were "done to", can now be expected to "do some doing". Everybody expects you to do what they like to think they would do. What you want to do, however, is not yet clear. Things like feelings of love, words like "in good times and bad", a sense of the needs of your mate, his/her family, your kids- empathy and pity for those you know like no other . . all conspire to generate conflict. The last thing that you are ready to do is something hasty that you will regret later, that will compound the problem. Each person, each marriage will have to find their own way through this.
Furthermore, sometimes sex with someone else is not world-ending. But in an over-sexed, Calvinistic, immature culture thirsty for tittilation and watching people squirm emotionally, like our own, we have a way of making it worse than need be. As a society we generate much more sex and drama than we can handle, and this perpetuates tragedies such as this one.

Why did all these women do it? "Stand by their man"? That is the reason so many dislike Hillary. She sends the message to young girls and women that women are inferior and must be syncophants to men for their existance. She is today running with his shadow! For as a former first lady she would not be qualified for the presidency of the United States were it not for her role as subserviant.

They wanted the power....at any cost!

I think she was a fool to stand up with him. The only reason he is "sorry" is that he is sorry that he was caught. Otherwise his little escapades would still be going on.

The rich and luxuriant American pornographical industry inundates the whole world with porno films which satisfy the most excentric instincts and fetishes of all kinds of sexmaniacs around the planet. But, more than ever, surges of puritanisms still remain in America.
they may be the descendents of the puritans pilgrims. The American puritans seem to accept that a president they elect send thousands of young soldiers do die in an ignominious war. Those puritans face as normal that tenths of thousands of innocent foreign cildren, women and old men die victimized by "intelligent" bombs the president they elected (and re-elected) ordered to be launched in their countries. By rationalizing that the war would bring economical benefits for their country. But it seems that those puritans do not forgive a president, a governor, a senator ou any other incombent commists adultery. Mrs. Silda Sptzer had demonstrated to be a woman of great valor by standing by the side of her husband in the most crucial hours of his life. Her husband had commited some grave errors, sexual miscondact behaviours, a "sexual indiscretions". Mrs. Sptzer is living through "rainy and cloudy days". But these cloudy days will bring many sunny days and many starry nights. It is just a matter of time. When Mrs. Silda, at night, in bed, she will be certain thatshe will not sleep with a man that had commited war crimes. Her hesband did send four thousand of young American soldiers to die in an ingloroius war. Her husband did not give orders to kill tens thousands of innocent children and innocent civilians of other countries. Mrs. Sptzer husband did not disable any men, neither women or children. He had had only many "indiscretion acts of love". Which the puritans do not accept...Neither forgive...

john bailo says-

John Bailo:

Bottom line: it's always the chicks who control these things. Clearly, Silda took a look at herself in the mirror, noticed her newly thin figure and said, "why am I stuck with this old bald guy". Meanwhile, her accomplish (you girls all gang up on us), Ashley Alexandra Dupré, is looking to advance her singing career. So, Silda rolls over, lets things happen, and the next thing you know it, she's got the upper hand. She can walk away from Elliot, take his dough and marry the pool boy. Meanwhile Ashley gets her own CD. All Elliot gets is a bunch of unpaid VISA charges for wanting a little nooky.

========

so, john, this has happened to you?

All you do is judge other people and you get paid for that? sheesh! thats a terrible way to earn a living!

Sally Quinn, you are so right!! These men get away with murder because we women let them. It's something you never get over, even if you try to forgive. Looking back, I'm no so sure that I would marry. It's not worth the agony.

Bottom line: it's always the chicks who control these things. Clearly, Silda took a look at herself in the mirror, noticed her newly thin figure and said, "why am I stuck with this old bald guy". Meanwhile, her accomplish (you girls all gang up on us), Ashley Alexandra Dupré, is looking to advance her singing career. So, Silda rolls over, lets things happen, and the next thing you know it, she's got the upper hand. She can walk away from Elliot, take his dough and marry the pool boy. Meanwhile Ashley gets her own CD. All Elliot gets is a bunch of unpaid VISA charges for wanting a little nooky.

I don't think he did it because he could, or out of arrogance. I think he did it because he's a male and men are not monogamous. He might also need extreme stimulus.

Boy do you have it backwards lady! Here you are talking about how we indeed have not "come a long way" because of women like this- I think the only thing hurting women in this situation is a woman like you, who presumes to know anything about what women in this situation are going through. Instead of standing beside your sister, trusting she is making the right decision for HER and HER family, you blast her. That's where women lose- when we attack each other. Shame on you.
Furthermore, as a woman who has had this happen to her, I can assure you that we are not the pathetic, weak creatures which you portray in your article. It takes a lot of strength to pick yourself up, and work EVERYDAY for YEARS to put your life and family back together. Pathetic is the person who judges the victim. Shame, shame on you.

ms. quinn:
i couldn't agree with you more...the agony on ms. spitzer's face is palpable...she's already been profoundly humiliated. why stand up there and humiliate herself more? no one is fooled by it.

if i were to marry a high-profile person and he betrayed me similarly, i wouldn't stand up there while he announces his sins--would YOU?

The reason is MONEY !. Wives hope that by standing by their husband, he will not loose that
money making job. Sure she could go back to that prestigious post she had, but that means long long hours of hard work and having all over again to put up with many arrogant co-workers and bosses.

I find the whole assumption that she (Silda, whoever) is humiliated fraught with assumptions that the woman defines herself in relation to a sexual relationship with her husband, and that she is necessarily diminished by his sexual conduct of which she had no knowledge. I find this a primitive way of thinking that equates all women who are married with the sort of people who get into bar brawls about sexual jealousy. Certainly, she is shocked and embarrassed, but not necessarily out of primtive feelings of sexual possessiveness. For Silda or other high powered wives, there is damage to a common enterprise, and there is the sudden knowledge that a person with whom you are allied has not been forthcoming with you about all the possible exposures to which he is subjecting the enterprise. Now, in the matter of why the person stands there, I guess I would admit the logic bears a relationship to the assumptions most people make about the shape and meaning of a marriage. Beyond that, it's very hard to read all the text and subtext of the ritual, but simple readings based on an idea of humiliation along the lines of primitive clashes over sexual ownership in confined quarters are forced at best. They impose meanings from the past that fit only poorly the far more complex partnerships in the present day of compartmentalization of so many features of personality. Her being there is not necessarily sexist, although it's related to sex. The readings of the sort suggested by Ms. Quinn are sexist.

What I find interesting is all the angry attention focused on what in essence was a VOLUNTARY act engaged in by two consenting adults. Whether Spitzer was married is a secondary issue.

The relationship we have as individuals to the state is NOT voluntary. All of the involuntary and violent acts of aggression committed or condoned by Mr. Spitzer while he was pretending to be Governor and/or a DA far outweigh his consorting with prostitutes.

No, instead of complaining about the fact that the state is STEALING their money, a VIOLENT and NON-CONSENTUAL act and the basis of Sptizer's TRUE criminality, instead people complain about the one VOLUNTARY act being publicized by the media that this criminal has engaged in.

And by the state's own rules, should he go to jail?

I can guarantee you, dear reader, that won't happen. Yet, if it were any one of us mere peasants, it certainly would.

It is the height of hypocrisy.

Hey Sally are you reading all these comments? I am wondering about this comment feature of washingtonpost.com. Do the reporters read the comments? I think they should, otherwise we readers are being asked to interact without getting heard. This is an interesting forum but a little one-sided if we don't get to hear your reactions.

The marriage vows most of us take call on us, in part, to stick together "for better or worse." While adultery is wrong, our vows should not be abandoned in favor of what is easy.

Silda standing with Elliot is love, confusion and and grief. Hilary staying with Bill was ambition and future planning. Support Bilary for co-president.

I never could stand by husband when I learned that he betrayed me...not only that, he was a thief and liar in a lawyer's suit. I left him and moved far away. He avoided child support and pretty much ruined my life. Now, the kids are grown and have their own children. They love their father and sometimes, seem to favor being with him over me. Would I do it over again? I'm not sure. I'm alone and have struggled for income for the past 40 years.

It seems you can take the woman out of the burqa, but it is proving far more difficult to take the burqa out of the woman.

How about Mrs. Kobe Bryant? Another sad victim.

While I can empathize with the agony of the violated wife, I am astounded that she would stand next to her powerful husband Elliot Spitzer, enabling him to further the public humiliation on herself and on her daughters as mere hangers-on and not as members of a self-respecting family. In typical Hillary-esque fashion, she too committed sati by throwing her Self into the funeral pyre, all the while insisting that he too not step down, possibly hoping that the last vestiges of political power, or the greed for it, would serve her as well.

Silda Switzer's actions were public ones. She will take other, more painful and decisive actions, in private. Her daughters know the difference between her public role as political wife and the private woman who is their mother. Silda Switzer's courageous choice to stand in public, while extremely difficult, protects her family's right to deal with this tragedy in private. We have not "come a long way baby" if we turn the figure of condemnation away from the true culprint.

Silda may be preserving her daughters financial
inheritance, astutely, letting her man not be
visibly available for future dalliance.

John said "Why does it not seem to occur to anyone that she may have encouraged her husband to utilize a prostitute?"

Are you kidding ? Just another liberal Democrat trying to cover for his party which is on deep trouble as we see it now eating it's own young .

Barry

Thank you ! The women should hold their own news conferences , alone and announce the divorce proceedings along with a lawyers request for STD testing on the cheating husband . Why can't these gals get a backbone ? It is embarrassing to know that so many wives are doing this . They did get a fine example from Hillary who went as far as saying
"It was all a vast right wing conspiracy".

Barry D from Texas

Why does it not seem to occur to anyone that she may have encouraged her husband to utilize a prostitute?

Dear Betty K: Thanks thanks thanks......

Norrie Hoyt, Spring Rain and Richard T. Lee good to see some decent humans.

Arun Gandhi to my knowledge is a humble and honest man. He might have made a mistake. The PARASITE went after him and got him fired. She will have her judgement. However, I pray for all her victims.

She belongs to 3rd rated gossip not Faith column.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

Betty K- You could NOT have mirrored my sentiments more accurately! When is the Post going to wise up, Ben Bradlee being alive or no, to his Hamptons society matron gossip-monger wife actually being pawned off on the Post's long suffering readers as an actual "journalist?" When is this nonsense going to stop? Oh yes, Sally Quinn can GOSSIP-SHE'S VERY GOOD AT THAT-THAT'S ALL SHE CAN DO THOUGH, AND TO GIVE HER ANY SORT OF PLATFORM THAT SUGGESTS OTHERWISE JUST SHOWS YOU HOW LOW THE POST HAS SUNK IN ITS JOURNALISM STANDARDS (NOT THAT IT WAS EVER VERY GREAT IN THAT AREA ANYWAY) AND THAT THE POST ENGAGES IN RANK DISGUSTING NEPOTISM TO MAKE SALLY QUINN FEEL GOOD, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY FROM HER PERSPECTIVE TO MAKE HER FEEL "CREDIBLE."

BOB WOODWARD, ARE YOU LISTENING?

Srini D Balan and PRIYA,
Thanks for your posts. However, do not expect much reason over here.
Peace.

In defense of Sally Quinn, you gotta admit this: even if she has no morals, at least she has no shame!

Amen to your article -- What Was Silda Thinking. You said exactly what I thought.
--Anne

You know there is one thing these women did do that Hillary Clinon did not. They did stand together with their husband when they ackowledged the truth. Hillary was there when her husband lied. And she lied for him as well when she claimed it was a "right-wing conspiracy". No Mrs. Spitzer did not need to and probably should not have stood next to the Governor but at least she was there when he did do the right thing. Stop comparing these women to Hillary. She knew he was lying because of his history and she stood next to him when he lied. She's a liar as well!

Can you please write about your own two marriages and your own exemplary conduct so that we can learn how to conduct ourselves and become good virtuous people. Pretty please!

Sally Quinn making any sort of judgements on Mrs. Spitzer or any other woman suffering similar emotional trauma is truly disgusting. The arrogance she reveals in her writings and television appearances knows no bounds. I have read and watched you make a career out of mercilessly judging the actions of others one way or another and take some perverse pleasure in kicking people especially when they are down. If you really want to understand faith and religion, you may want to start by seriously examining what you have done-beyong cultivating the "right" people, acquiring mansions, wealth, the right connections to keep you in your rarified world, tell everyone how loyal you are, and hosting A-list parties with the "beautiful" people. You have done a tremendous amount of damage to people with that sewer of a mouth and your poisoned pen. Please stop, it's enough. And to the management of the Washington Post-please find a graceful way to get rid of her now because you know it's only a matter of proper timing after her husband passes that you will finally show this shameless human being the door once and for all.

Quinn says, "For young girls, it says this is an acceptable role for women -- to be lied to, cheated on, disrespected and humiliated in public/ You take it and must still be supportive. because that is what is expected of women. For boys, it says it’s okay to lie and cheat and dishonor your family, and you might grow up to be a senator or a governor or a president. You can get away with it."

Those statements apply to any famous man or woman who publicly commits adultery. Fortunately, we know that no one in the DC media establishment has ever done that. If they had, mentioning it in these comments would doubtless be considered a prohibited "personal attack." I gather that it is not, however, a prohibited personal attack to impugn the motives of Silda Spitzer without knowing anything about her side of the story. Shame on the Post for publishing this (but, of course, no shame on the writer for writing it, lest that be considered a personal attack.)

Sally Quinn,

You write columns criticzing others, but you don't seem to understand that:

Blood and families are thicker than polemics and abstract doctrines.

Your feminist doctrines are irrelevant to a woman in distress.

You have no human sympathy or kindness.

You are not qualified by any of your personal attributes to write the columns that you do.

*********************

Get a life, but, before you do, try to understand people's real lives.

What's good for the goose is good for the gander, correct? In light of the question you pose to Silda Spitzer, I would like to know what you were thinking when you moved in on Ben Bradlee when he was still married? Isn't that a violation of the tenets of every faith?

The response of the media and public to Ms. Spitzer's appearance is perhaps more interesting than Ms. Spitzer's trangressions. I don't see a political woman standing by her man; I see a courageous and intelligent MOTHER, woman and spouse who is probably going through more emotional turmoil every minute than many of us have in a decade. We should respect her courage and have empathy for her difficult position, rather than project our expectations upon her.

Ms. Spitzer, you do what you think is best for you and your family, and you should know that most Americans hope you and your children will come through this with strength and dignity. Don't worry about what people think of you.

I repeat: the ugly, catty, self-righteous, incredibly judgmental and above all arrogant and inaccurate post by Sally Quinn merely underscores her utter unfitness to be called a "journalist" in any shape or form. Yes, indeed, she DID break up the former editor of the Wash. Post's first marriage, now didn't she? But that was OKAY, BECAUSE IT WAS SALLY QUINN DOING IT.

Sheesh! I have NO respect for this woman, and she is allowed to write such tripe, yet, the whole controversy about Arun Gandhi having to resign from his position as President of the Peace Foundation, SOLELY because Sally Quinn was afraid of Jewish opposition to his words, which were interpreted by some, (certainly not by all of us, those who can use their brain, that is!) as anti-Semitic. But oh no, stupid, shallow Ms. Quinn saw to it that he got fired from his position, because she is nothing if not ultra PC-and terribly afraid of "offending" some delicate egos out there. For shame! She would NEVER be allowed to write for any major newspaper except her husband's PURE AND SIMPLE! Her blog on Silda Spitzer makes one cringe with embarassment that Quinn can actually call herself a human being, much less a "writer!"

the anonymous comment at 5:15 was me, i forgot to type in my name.

elizabeth6-this is the only comment in response to you, when you said mccain is a stand-by-his-woman man. all of my other comments were directed at mrs. bill quinn.
==========
i said----elizabeth6-

using mccain as an example of a 'stand by your woman man'?
mccain? oh, you mean the one who didn't stand by his other wife cuz he was having an affair with his current wife, cindy? that mccain?

geeeeeeez
=============you answered with this:
elizabeth6:
DMAC
That was a statement of fact. I leave morals for the experts to sort out. I do not have the credentials. Do you?
==========

statements of fact is what i was agoin' for.......were you referring to when he 'helped' his wife cindy with her drug problem by hiding it under the rug, made sure she wasn't charged with many felonies, like anyone else would have, and not even checking her into rehab? that time he 'helped' her?

i don't recall mentioning morals, but we could. and i don't think you need credentials for morals, just a little common sense, a few golden rules and compassion usually is all you need to get in the door.

i came on here to comment about sally quinn being a hypocrite, not john mccain, you're the one who brought it up, and what i said is true, a statement of fact, as you say.

so, if you're referring to some kind of knight in shining armor act that he did for his wife that i am not aware of, i would love to be informed and educated.

i said a truth, you copped an attitude..........not necessary.

his current wife was his mistress.
he shoved his wife's drug problem under the rug and didn't seek help for her because it would hurt his career.

that's a fact.

Sally, given your own status as the other woman ( http://www.salon.com/media/1998/03/09media.html ), are you really the best person to be moralizing about a married man having an affair?

Issues of morality come home to all of us times. Last night I ran into an acquaintance of mine that I have had some differences with in the recent past. The last time that I saw this man he said some very hurtful things to me. I did not tell him this but at the time that he said them I immediately walked away.

He approached me last night in such a humble manner and came right to the point, identifying the incident that I speak of above. After he identified it, he then verbalized recognition that he may have offended me by what he said. I acknowledged that he had “hurt” me by what he said. He then took full responsibility of his actions and apologized to me.

Based on his approach and sincerity to rectify the situation I immediately accepted his apology. Furthermore, I was so overcome by his sensitivity and acknowledgment of my feelings from his actions and his genuine remorseful attitude that as I forgave his offense I immediately felt a release from my hurt regarding the incidence.

This man obviously has a conscious and an inner conviction at work in order for him to do the above.

Now you ask how can Sidal forgave her husband after what he has done. Really we do not know the true answer but speculate the reason. However, I will tell you that there is “power” in forgiveness in combination with true repentance or remorse over one that has wronged another.

Jesus preached this same concept to freely forgive those that repent,

John 8:3-, {3}And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, {4}They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. {5}Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? {6}This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. {7}So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. {8}And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. {9}And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. {10} When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? {11}She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

Although, there will be a lot of healing for Sidal and her family to go through. The combination of “ true repentance” and “forgiveness” are a powerful source that is not easily broken.

Patrick, thank you for restoring my faith in men again because I had none. But you have given me a foundation to build on again. You are truly a man with conviction and good morals.

CF

DMAC
That was a statement of fact. I leave morals for the experts to sort out. I do not have the credentials. Do you?

SEX iS Not LOVE!

J [JO][ZE][VZ][.US].
O
Z
E
V
Z.US

------------------

WeeklyWeek-End "RAFFLE"(for Home)coming soon!

Please Visit from time to TiME. Thanka Shame!

Note: I.P.O., Initial Public Offerings for "W.H.O.R.E-HOUSE's" frachises through=out America & Beyond!

Imagine?

Eeeeeee Haaaaaaa, "i" love Prostitutes! "i" love that Hotel-life!

Beats Masterbation, hands down! but on the other hand.....?

Note: After So many Years 'Together', Sex w/each-other gets boring , no-excitement no?! So.... why not some side action aye?

imagine: Telling ye Madam-wife, "Honey I am goin to get me a "Message" see ya in afew.."

imagine: No more Jealousy? Especially when ye old Lady sais, "Have a Good Time Honey.."!

Note: W.h.o.r.e House seem more appropriate for MEN than Woman! Hay, if a Woman wants to have some Sexual fun, then she too should have a good time.

POINT: At least each other are TRUE to each other & hence got over their Pre-Apocalyptic Sexual Guilt's 'Biblical' Complex's etc...!

Remember: SEX IS NOT LOVE!

You're hardly in a position to be teaching others about how to handle adultery, Sally, are you? You wrote this column even so? What were you thinking?

Here's what I would do, and it is perhaps what Ms. Spitzer has done, or not.

First, stand still. Don't do anything in
haste, anger or otherwise, util the shock has abated. Who's smart enough to figure all the ramifications, perfectly, instantly?

But, make no mistake. After due consideration, unless staying means a major, benefit, in WHATEVER WAY,whatever say, I'd be out of there. Trust him again? TRUST him again?

Staying would mean daily bathing in humiliation for her and her daughters. Snickers, the lack of respect, leave outs. Will not abate soon. But leaving the jerk, in unimpeachable style would hasten the day surely.

I cannot understand who would want to be married to Eliot Spitzer?

what happened to 'till death do us part'? isn't this supposed to be the faith section?

you must not be as committed a christian as you claim, eh?

each person in a partnership/marriage decides what is a deal-breaker for their relationship.......what you wrote shows that you do not understand this concept. makes me wonder.

elizabeth6-

using mccain as an example of a 'stand by your woman man'?
mccain? oh, you mean the one who didn't stand by his other wife cuz he was having an affair with his current wife, cindy? that mccain?

geeeeeeez

you are SUCH a hypocrite.

dating a married man, while living with another, then married the man from the adulturous affair......didn't hurt your career any, did it?

and you wail and rail against women who made equally hard decisions, only they were the wife, you were not.

yep, you're an expert all right.

http://firedoglake.com/2008/03/15/shut-yer-piehole-homewrecker/

There are some real monsters in this forum, starting with Sally Quinn and including all of the other self-righteous commentators who think they have the right to tell Mrs. Spitzer how to run her marriage. Why don't you all stop peeping through the curtains and MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS...

Sally Quinn,

You write columns criticzing others, but you don't seem to understand that:

Blood and families are thicker than polemics and abstract doctrines.

Your feminist doctrines are irrelevant to a woman in distress.

You have no human sympathy or kindness.

You are not qualified by any of your personal attributes to write the columns that you do.

*********************

Get a life, but, before you do, try to understand people's real lives.

RS, I find it interesting that most of the people who responded to this column saying that Silda should stick by Spitzer seem to be men....isn't that a little self-serving? I don't ever recall a husband standing by his wife in public when she did something bad (I also don't recall women politicians doing this kind of stuff, but that's another topic). While I don't think it's possible to guess her motives, she clearly put aside her career to advance his, and maybe she is now too financially dependent on him to make her own independent choices. Until women truly achieve financial equality with men, I think it will be hard to guess what they really want to do."

****************************************************************

RS,

Wrong. John McCain stood by his wife when she had personal troubles. As did the husband of the woman who drowned their 5 children.

I agree, there are few husbands standing up on the podium supporting their errant wives but I do not believe many women politicians have been arrested for propositioning gays in public toilets, chastised for chasing interns, declaring their " coming out" and illegally entertaining prostitutes.

Your assumption Mrs. Spitzer's actions are influenced by financial independence is not only pointless but insulting. She is a highly trained and intelligent lady, I use this term not lightly, and one would imagine her to be quite capable of managing her life and her financial affairs.

Not only a biased post but irrelevant with bitter undertones.....

Faith? This article is far better described as an "Eye for an Eye!"

I do not believe that Mr. Spitzer had any right to order or require his wife to stand by him. I believe that she had every right to leave him to stand or fall on his own on that stage.

That having been said, I can't believe that the author has the audacity to suggest that we should be upset with Mrs. Spitzer for choosing to stand beside her husband. Morality? What about applauding her compassion and forgiveness. How about a nod in her direction for turning the other cheek? What she chose to do can't possibly be easy. That should be clear from the gut reaction of the author that somehow made it passed the editor and onto the page. This article was nothing short of bigotry.

RS, I find it interesting that most of the people who responded to this column saying that Silda should stick by Spitzer seem to be men....isn't that a little self-serving? I don't ever recall a husband standing by his wife in public when she did something bad (I also don't recall women politicians doing this kind of stuff, but that's another topic). While I don't think it's possible to guess her motives, she clearly put aside her career to advance his, and maybe she is now too financially dependent on him to make her own independent choices. Until women truly achieve financial equality with men, I think it will be hard to guess what they really want to do."
~~~~~~~~~

What a bias statement.

I find it interesting that most of the people who responded to this column saying that Silda should stick by Spitzer seem to be men....isn't that a little self-serving? I don't ever recall a husband standing by his wife in public when she did something bad (I also don't recall women politicians doing this kind of stuff, but that's another topic). While I don't think it's possible to guess her motives, she clearly put aside her career to advance his, and maybe she is now too financially dependent on him to make her own independent choices. Until women truly achieve financial equality with men, I think it will be hard to guess what they really want to do.

Indian women committing sati?? Sorry, the author's knowledge of Indian women is out of date by at least 200 years.

Sally has stated so clearly what I have felt for a very long time; what are we teaching our children? When will women understand that they are doing more harm than good? When I see the parade through the public confessional, it makes me physically ill to see the wives standing there as if they are complicit in the deception of themselves. In sickness and in health is one thing, but public humiliation and trampling on the entire family's self worth, goes beyond the pale. In this case, the hypocriscy is palpable. He got into the situation by himself, let him figure out what to do about it by himself. To Hillary's credit, when Bill finally confessed 8/17/1998, she was not by his side.

Wouldn't it have been delicious if she had given him a big sock in the jaw announced she would be filing to run for elective office and walked off the stage.

What a pile of hypocritical, sexist and hateful hot air has settled on this forum, issued from that balloon Sally Quinn burst.

Instead of helping this intolerable situation this poor woman finds herself in too many are eager to exacerbate her strife. All following their leader like self righteous sheep anxious to make a person look and sound bad in order to make themselves look good.

George Fox at the age of 15 discovered religious hypocrisy. After attending his village church on Sunday he noticed come Monday those very same people singing hymns and spouting platitudes were on Monday stabbing each other in the back. He went on to found The Society of Friends( Quakers) who believed, and still believe, to sin is human, to forgive is divine.

I grew up with a Quaker mother who believed "if you can not say anything good about a person, say nothing". Clearly if we all followed that the newspapers and media would have closed down long ago. However it does nor hurt to ponder a little here and consider the Spitzer family. The choice to stand by her husband was clearly hers and the journey they are travelling is their journey. Considering this is supposed to be a religious forum why not button up the self righteous and judgmental talk for a while? Let us try to walk in the shoes of those who need help Instead of using those shoes for kicking them further down.

I agree wholeheartedly. Shameful for these wives to continue to pretend that everything is going to be alright. When are our words, our aspirations going to matter, if the default (the male gaze/will/say, etc.) is always acceptable?

Presumably tough American women are amazingly naive... [The same goes with the whole country: to outsiders, America appears liberal, progressive--even decadent for some; in fact, it is atrociously self-righteous and conformist. But that's another story.]

Where I come from (Old Europe), men don't say sorry easily, but when they do, their seriously angry female partners will likely respond: okay (read: don't do it again, or else). In this country, women treat their men like little boys: e.g., a little boy has broken a lamp in the living room even though his mother had warned, 'stop running around, you'll break something.' The little boy does this over and over again, and every time he's broken the lamp (actually, his promise), he rushes to his mother, crying, and asks for her forgiveness [I am SORRY, mommy!!]--which she does on cue, and immediately proceeds to comfort him--to boot. Until the next time....

Grown men do the same thing with their wives who, in turn, repeat the mommy scenario. Imagine if Hillary Clinton, when confronted with the first mistress, had told and meant it: "Bill, we both want to become politicians; so choices must be made, you can't have it both ways. If you want me to stand by you, help you achieve our Dream, you never do this again. If you do: I am out, for good. The earlier the better, I am still young; I can start again." Perhaps she could have spared this country nasty impeachment hearings, and, more importantly, eight sad years of BAD government.

I have taught my US-born daughter to watch out for these boy-men when dating... My advice: if you think it's going to be serious, first meet the mom: if she's a no-nonsense mom, then, he might be alright. Often, boys raised by strong-willed (and usually single moms), like Obama's mom? are more likely to mind the other sex--as any mature adults should.

SALLY WROTE, "I know why he did what he did. Because he could. Arrogance and power are a lethal combination, and men who combine both often begin to believe in their own invincibility."
~~~~~~~~~~~

ANS: How right you are, the arrogance and over inflated ego syndrome that says, "I am above being the law, can’t get caught or charged because of my status and level of power. So I am free to act on any impulse that I, no matter how immoral the act, to satisfy that impulse."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
SALLY WROTE, "The more baffling question to me is why she did it. All I could think of, watching Silda Spitzer’s defeated expression.......Think of the message this image sends -- not to just adults, but to young children, both boys and girls. For young girls, it says this is an acceptable role for women -- to be lied to, cheated on, disrespected and humiliated in public/ You take it and must still be supportive. because that is what is expected of women."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ANS:Exactly, a 49 second apology does not cut it. This is just a formality anyway often times recommended by their political advisers. But for the woman to stand by her man after such egregious behaviors may only reinforce the behavior of the man for them to continue in the behaviors again, and again.

It is hard to tell the sincerity of the person apologizing, only time will tell if Silda made the right choice to forgive and stay with him. I do believe that if true remorse exist that under certain situation, the person does deserve a second chance.

Since the scandal broke I've been asking the exact same question. As Silda Spitzer stood next to her husband in the clip that was played and replayed numerous times on newscasts, I felt anger simmering below the devastated expression.

We haven't come "a long way, baby" until we can stand up in front of that podium and say what is on our minds...

Thank you for the powerful and well-written piece.

The judgmental and arrogant tone of this piece makes it quite possibly one of the worst Post pieces I have read in many years. I've seen some suggestion that there's favoritism afoot in giving this author space in a respected newspaper. I don't know anything about that and would automatically assume to the contrary. But unless the paper actually wants to publish the work of people who will stir the pot with incorrect statements and poorly reasoned and embarrassingly obnoxious commentary, I can't understand why someone who writes this way would appear here. That this appears as part of an "On Faith" feature only compounds the problem, given the fairly open contempt for the decisions of others and the institution and commitment of marriage, let alone the unmitigated rush to judge others.

Many other responses have addressed the audacity of the author in presuming to know about the situation and decide for Silda Wall Spitzer as to what's right for that family, so I won't repeat their work. And I won't bother to address the overblown comparisons to the Taliban and sati, the inexplicable conclusions (including that this wife is somehow "enabling" anyone or anything), or the many other errors and problems in this item. But here is just one of the author's egregious segments:

"For boys, it says it’s okay to lie and cheat and dishonor your family, and you might grow up to be a senator or a governor or a president. You can get away with it."

How long could the author have actually thought about this paragraph before committing to putting it in printed circulation? "Get away with it?" He clearly didn't. He's facing criminal prosecution. He's resigned from the governorship. And what do you know of the consequences within this family, which are most likely undetermined for now?

A response to an item as weak as this one could go on forever, but I won't, largely because so many others have already done an effective job of excoriating this awful work. Even after qualifying this as an opinion/columnist type of piece, I find myself bewildered and saddened at how someone could generate such mortifyingly bad, and indeed rather mean-spirited, product. The other hard-working people who produce this paper, as well as the readership, are all poorer for having had this appear alongside the otherwise usually good work seen in the Post.

It is interesting that Ms. Sally Quinn who destroyed her husband's first marriage by having an extra-marital affair with him would have the gall to judge Silda Spitzer who is displaying courage and moral judgement by not judging Eliot Spitzer in public for a private lapse. I am sure he is facing hell from her in private.

How do we /know/ he even had sex with that hooker? First of all, for 4300 dollars, you are probably getting more than just sex, perhaps he was only looking for good, intelligent conversation, maybe he felt he couldn't talk to his wife about something, so he needed somewhere to talk.

Granted this scenario is unlikely, but it is always something to consider.

What happened to "for better or for worse." I consider myself a feminist, but I am troubled by the calls for women to ditch their husbands when the going gets rough. What exactly does that phrase mean, or the lifetime commitment, if you get to toss them out when the ride is really rough. And what type of rough patch allows you to employ the heave-ho, and what demands that you stay? The Spitzers' marriage is a personal commitment, not some proxy for the feminist movement. Let's not add to the wife's difficulty by holding up her decision against some standard that we have decided is the test for modern women. I think the true test is to allow each woman to think for herself and to decide what is best for her own situation.

To what can be observed Salida Walls physically stood by the SOB but rather to prop him up. This is far different then the like of these conservative republican women with their being subservient. AS in the case of prescription drug addict Cindy McCain and her painted face.

One would seriously hope that the next one will have the guts and fury to punch the SOB in the kisser on national television.

Sorry, Sally Quinn, but you don't get to tell another woman or man whether to leave their spouse or not. Not every person whose spouse cheats leaves that spouse. In fact, I bet most don't (either way.)

If your husband cheated on you and just that alone is enough to make you leave him, then be my guest. I bet you that has already happened to you.

Otherwise, keep your nose out of someone else's personal business.

"maybe Ms Wall Spitzer is primarily concerned with helping her daughters get through this?" Yes, another excellent point.

Another question: WHAT is with the woman bashing (by other women) in this paper lately?

Physically standing by your spouse in public is making a statement to society. What really matters is one's position in spirit. Does God leave us when we fall? Did the father of the prodigal son leave the son?

I suggest God is disappointed in us when we fall. His preference is we learn through our life action. Yes, we must suffer the consequences.

Then again, when we stand by our spouse, we too are human. Standing by a loved one who falls is not always easy. We too must pray to God and ask, "What can I learn in this?"

maybe Ms Wall Spitzer is primarily concerned with helping her daughters get through this? maybe she is a grown up and able to put their welfare above any other concern?

"Walking a mile in someone's shoes," "for better or for worse," "being courageous" and "standing by your man" does NOT mean having to be a doormat for your spouse when he does something reprehensible, and however brave and courageous Silda Spitzer may be in private in dealing with her husband's horrible behaviour, a doormat is exactly how she came across facing the cameras with Gov. Spitzer---twice. It was painful to watch, and it wasn't necessary. There is a time and a place for keeping up appearances, and there's a time when the offending party should face the music by themselves. Out of the view of the reporters, TV cameras, bloggers and whatever, I hope the Spitzers come to a resolution to this that they BOTH can live with, however that comes about. But while my heart goes out to Ms. Spitzer having had her life and marriage roiled by her husband's folly, given the nature of that folly, my empathy doesn't extend to believing that she needed to physically be there when he 'fessed up. He's done enough to her already. Let Elliot Spitzer stew in his own juices awhile.....alone.

Wow, is there no limit to what mean spirited arrogance will cause a person to say (or write). Bottom line Ms. Quinn, you do not have the information to adequately assess the motivation for Mrs. Spitzer's decision. Why so harsh? Why so arrogant?

If every marriage that had infidelity in its past had ended do you really think their children, communities, extended families, and country would be better off than the alternative of each person making their own decision and other less destructive adjustments in their marital relationship?

Why is this article about "SILDA'S sad choice"? For God's sake, HE was the one with the hookers. Why are we hanging her on the cross? For shame!!!

Amen! Thank you for this op-ed. What is it with people? Ok, if men are making comments about women should do this, that is one thing. But I can not believe the women of this country are still stuck in this "Tammy Wynet world!" When will we grow up, we can not expect these men to change until we have the strength to say, "This behavior is not accectable and IF you choose it, you will stand along. I think Women hold on to whatever relationship because they don't want to give up what they think they have---a relationship that the man is trying to destroy and does not have the guts to ask for a divorce because it might mess up THEIR career. The damage is does to the rest of the family is NOT his biggest concern and apparently not HERS either. I am extremely sorry for their girls because this is going to take a long time to recover from.

Why did she do it?

Maybe she loves him, despite his flaws, despite his stupidity?

Maybe she's committed to the marriage whatever happens?

Maybe she's acting out of strength and not weakness?

One can be severely, cruelly, brutally disappointed in one's spouse and yet still hang in there. People we love fall from themselves sometimes, and we can feel compassion in the midst of our rage and shame. Why is it wrong or weak when compassion wins out?

Sally - Many value so much more than self. Why don't you inquire with Ms. Spitzer and find out what it is that she truly values?

I find people like Sally Quinn to be far sadder than Eliot Spitzer's wife.

Maybe Sally Quinn doesn't realize that marriage is a commitment. Most of us have taken public vows to stick with our partner "for better or worse, richer or poorer, in sickness and in health."

At the very least, it's decidedly unChristian for Sally Quinn to believe that it is her job to judge others on their painful, personal decisions.

Writers like Sally Quinn have no recognition of their own sad and empty lives.

N Lacey, I TOTALLY agree with you. To call Sally Quinn a journalist, even for the Post, is a stretch. She is where she is solely because of her husband Ben Bradleee, and not for any reason related to good writing, and particularly perceptiveness or insight. A gossip monger (and not a very good one, even with that low bar).

Amen! Thank you for this op-ed.

How many people read this article ? 99.9% of them said " Boy oh boy , am I glad I am not married to Sally Quinn, when things get tough , don't look for her to hang around and help.

Much has been said about Silda Spitzer's suffering, but nothing about her strength. I saw no shackles on her legs, dragging her to the podium, forcing her to stand next to her husband. I believe this was her choice -- who are we to judge her, at this time?

Who is Sally Quinn to say what is wrong and what is right? This type of decision can only be made by the wife.. to leave or stay. And she will have no reason to give as to why she made it. This is a totaly personal and private decision. And should be.

How many people read this article ? 99.9% of them said " Boy oh boy , am I glad I am not married to Sally Quinn, when things get tough , don't look for her to hang around and help.

Sorry to all you that think public humiliation is a sign of courage, I agree with Sally. Remember Mad Magazine used to have a section called "Scenes We'd Like To See"? Rather than the wife not appear at all, I'd rather she haul off and belt him live on national TV! But since that will never happen, I'd settle for the separate press conference.

Dina McGreevy wrote in the NYT that she stood there for her daughter and if she had to do it again, she would. I think this is a total cop out. If she wanted to teach her daughter something it should be that she doesn't have to put up with this crap, that we live in a country where women don't have to be subject to men and she can be her own person and achieve her own goals without a man.

I would be voting for Hillary Clinton if she had dumped Bill, won her senate seat twice and ran for president all on her own. The fact that she "stuck by" Bill just so she could use his name, clout and power to get herself elected, despite the NUMEROUS times he publically humiliated her, speaks volumes to me on her character.

I didn't "stand by my man" when he cheated on me. That was a very personal decision. However, I did not have children with him so the outcome may have been completely different had there been a child. However, I know what divorce does to young and adult children and it is nothing good. Do not judge a woman or a man unless you have walked a mile in their shoes.

Sally Quinn is pathetic.

It's called walking in someone else's shoes; empathy; whatever. Instead we have the oh so smug village matroness who's in it for the gossip. How sad.

I couldn't agree more with Ms. Quinn in her condemnation of Elliot Spitzer's personal behavior which was certainly despicable, self-serving and most probably sick. His betrayal of the public trust and of his family has set a new standard. The entry for "Hubris" in the dictionary should have his picture.

However, I have a different read of Silda's actions. Risking personal exposure to extreme criticism and judgment from many in the media; she exhibited loyalty, love and courage to such a marked degree that it brought tears to my eyes.

We shouldn't ignore the beauty and integrity of her actions in our desire to punish him for his.

The image of her beautiful, strong and courageous face will stay with me for a long time. I will pray for Silda ...and for Elliot Spitzer.

This column is of a piece with the recent Charlotte Allen "parody" about the stupidity of women, as well as Dr. Tina Alster's piece in the health section, still online after all these months, about how man can wrinkle up like prunes but ANY wrinkle on a woman is socially unacceptable.

Let's face it -- the Post hates women, and who better to voice hate against women than other women?

Time to turn the page and find different reading matter. This is why newspaper readership is down.

You guys and gals just don't get it. Old news.

Turn the page.

Sic Transit Gloria, Woman's independence.

Looks like the notion that a woman is an independent self defining individual is passe.

Instead of being subordinate to her husband's will, a wife is now subject to the orders of a Poltically correct coterie which presumes to dictate a "one size fits all" cultural standard, to which they all must submit.

I'd like to ask if this showing up with the husband in such a situation could connect with the 'good times' and 'bad times' line they tell you (in case it's a christian marriage ritus) during the wedding ceremony?
Not out of obedience, but out of loyalty to your partner, even though he committed an error?

Could her standing there be a sign of moral strength, to not let him alone in this moment?

Would it show a great step forward, if partners in such moments of crisis pull back? Even though the origin of the crisis is self-inflicted and inexcusable, I'd think a multiple year marriage and kids weigh more. By going out there, Silda Spitzer showed too, that it is their marriage crisis they are facing.

If she decides she can stand out there with her man, who are we to judge how she should act?

Sally,
the truth is that Silda is many times a better person than you. It's simple as that.

I'd like to ask if this showing up with the husband in such a situation could connect with the 'good times' and 'bad times' line they tell you (in case it's a christian marriage ritus) during the wedding ceremony?
Not out of obedience, but out of loyalty to your partner, even though he committed an error?

Could her standing there be a sign of moral strength, to not let him alone in this moment?

Would it show a great step forward, if partners in such moments of crisis pull back? Even though the origin of the crisis is self-inflicted and inexcusable, I'd think a multiple year marriage and kids weigh more. By going out there, Silda Spitzer showed too, that it is their marriage crisis they are facing.

If she decides she can stand out there with her man, who are we to judge how she should act?

Sic Transit Gloria, Woman's independence.

Looks like the notion that a woman is an independent self defining individual is passe.

Instead of being subordinate to her husband's will, a wife is now subject to the orders of a Poltically correct coterie which presumes to dictate a "one size fits all" cultural standard, to which they all must submit.

Perhaps a smart, talented spouse stands before the press because she is courageous - because she's done nothing wrong - because her husband's failings don't define her - because there's no need to hide - because moving forward is better than running away - because her strength, and the strength of her daughters, will cement the family, even as a father falls apart.

Standing by her husband is a choice she made. How would that equate to Men being invincible and able to get away with adultery. The American Society in general is not honest with it's sexual history and present. We parade women as sexual objects. Women are created from within us to bring a partner in life to bring us closer to God. America must come to grip with the reality of how we interpet and engage in sex in this country. Just because he had a picutre perfect marriage, does not necessarily mean the former Governor and wife did not have marriage issues. The reason a person cheats to to seek support of something they are not getting at home. There are many angles to gain perspective on this issue. This is not a shock, and it will not be the last time this happens.

A little misleading to imply that only wives of those in public office, "stand by their man."
I don't remember actually percentages, but I understand that a very high % of men and women conduct ilicit affairs, at one time or another.
Who are we to question their motives? Frankly, most of us have had to make the same deceision, at one time or another, althought maybe in not so public arena.
Still, most of our friends & families will know.
There is something said for trying to protect your home & your life. Although it may be misguided effect. Who knows.
But, my thoughts are with the families. What cost collateral damage!

The "On Faith Moderator" should know the answer or surrender the title.

Like Hillary, Silda demonstrates to her daughters and to sons and daughters everywhere........ that an oath before Eternal God for better or worse until death do us part has consequence!

For my part I say thank you Silda.

Some of us take the promises we make seriously. It isn't for better or else, it's for better or worse.

After forty-one years of marriage, I rejoice in a relationship of joy and forgiveness, dumb moves and a sense of the ridiculous.

I'm curious: did you also write the same when Hillary Clinton stood by her husband? When Hillary Clinton hired PI to find "dirt" on the women he was involved with? I guess it's safe to come out now, now that Hillary has disgraced herself and earned the right to piggyback on his shoulders at the cost of her dignity as a woman.

In our society we seem to think that leaving our spouse is the right thing to do after he/she is unfaithful. We seem to believe that the episode of unfaithfulness is the deal breaker. But that is not the promise we make when we marry. Yes, Governor Spitzer needs to be punished. He broke the law. He betrayed the trust of not only the public, but also, and especially, his wife and children. Should this family be further punished for his sin? I admire this woman. Even though her husband has not kept his promises, she still has. Perhaps if we had more people with this kind of comittment we would not have a fifty percent divorce rate and all the trauma that it causes to families.

Sally Quinn is usually pretty sensible; it's disappointing to see her join the chorus deploring Silda Spitzer's appearance with her disgraced husband as he bowed out.

Smart as he is, Spitzer seems to have a screw loose. His personal recklessness matched his belligerent arrogance in office and he had to go. But whether Silda did or did not choose to stand by him publicly is nobody's business but theirs. The easy moralizing about her proper role is not only hackneyed--how many times have we heard it by now?--but more than a little presumptuous and disgusting.

I agree with Sally Quinn's statements and would add another "lesson" to remember - never quit your job for your man. So many women have found themselves in lousy situations many years later because they have.

Yonkers, New York
15 March 2008

Would it be morally right for Silda Wall Spitzer to leave husband Eliot for this one moral lapse?

Sally Quinn answers in the affirmative.

But Ms Quinn is not Silda Wall Spitzer. She is not the wife of Eliot Spitzer. She is not the mother of the Spitzers' three children.

When they were joined together in marriage, Silda Wall and Eliot Spitzer surely must have vowed to stick together in sickness and in health, through thick and thin, for richer or poorer, through life's ups and downs.

Does Sally Quin pay only lip serve to those marriage vows?

Obviously, Silda Wall does not. She obviously is made of stuff superior to Sally Quinn.

Obviously, Silda Wall has the capacity to forgive an errant husband, the loving father of their three children, whom she must have loved deeply for so long.

Obviously Silda Wall knows quite well that husband Eliot is not a saint, but a human being capable of making mistakes, including those mistakes which "flesh is heir to."

Obviously, Silda Wall has the good sense to realize that saving her marriage and her family takes precedence over issues of personal hurt or pride.

Personally, I admire Silda Wall Spitzer. I wish her, Eliot Spitzer and their children happiness as together they defend themselves from "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune"--to borrow the words of the Elizabethan bard, W.S.

Mariano Patalinjug
MarPatalinjug@aol.com

I'm tired of reporters who can't get their facts straight, especially when it comes to relentless digs on Hillary Clinton. She did not attend the Lewinsky press conference. Look it up. Course facts don't get in the way of reporter bashing do they?

"One can only assume that the women who do this are just as enamored of the power and the position as their men. Of course their power is derivative, which makes it all the more difficult to lose. (It was reported that Silda Spitzer did not want her husband to resign.) Would Hillary Clinton have run for the Senate or even President had she not stood by her man after the Monica Lewinsky episode and insisted he not resign?"

Thank you...you're the first columnist I've read to tell the TRUTH.....these women probably (certainly in Clinton's case)knew what their husbands were doing, but they didn't care as long as they shared in the prestige, power, and money. Does anyone in their right mind really believe Hillary Clinton would have given up life as the First Lady (and her future political life, including the possibility of becoming the President of the United States)because Bill ahd sex with other women??

It was Mr. Spitzer's choice to go to prostitutes for years and spend thousands of dollars using women's bodies as a commodity. He did that on his own, so he can apologize and resign on his own as well. It's one thing for Mrs. Spitzer to forgive him to keep the family together, but that is a private matter. She shouldn't be obligated to stand next to him as he apologizes for his own "failings." And by the way, in all his apologies, there was no apology to the women involved in the prostitution ring.

The reason married people (both men and women) have affairs is that they are bored to death with their spouse, sexually and otherwise. It's not any more complicated than that.

The reason political wives stand by their philandering man is equally transparent. Even with the humiliation, it's a better deal than losing what Quinn describes as derivative power. It's the real aphrodisiac that drew them to their husbands in the first place.

It was Mr. Spitzer's choice to go to prostitutes for years and spend thousands of dollars using women's bodies as a commodity. He did that on his own, so he can apologize and resign on his own as well. It's one thing for Mrs. Spitzer to forgive him to keep the family together, but that is a private matter. She shouldn't be obligated to stand next to him as he apologizes for his own "failings." And by the way, in all his apologies, there was no apology to the women involved in the prostitution ring.

Perhaps she loves him. Is that too hard to imagine?

Perhaps a lot more forthright talk about sex would help couples to keep the sex in their relationship instead of outside of it. But, alas, its not our relationship is it? Its theirs, and now that he is no longer a governor its none of my business.

May the Spitzer family find a way to their own prayers and peace.

The reason Silda Spitzer stood by her man is because they are playing the victim and the martyr or sado-masochitic game. They love torturing each other, and this was his get even chance. He is intrinsically unlovable, she married for money - a social climber-he married for her looks. They are both bottom feeders - so
deserve each other. AFter learning she wanted him to stay on as GOv. it proves she also loves for power and is beyond humiliation. SHe only lost sleep to helo him scheme his way out of this. They are sociopaths.

I totally agree with Sally Quinn regarding Silda.
She should have not stood or supported in anyway with her disgraced husband as he never thought of her when he was having sexual trysts and did not even think of the future of his teenage daughters who will be taking this incident for their whole lives. Shame on you Governor and hats off to this lady who should have slapped you in front of the media.

This is just mean. Walk a mile in her shoes, first, before offering unasked-for advice.

Who are you to judge Mrs. Spitzer? Did your husband make a public apology to his ex-wife after his affair with you was made known?

People are the worst type of carnewores, are they not? This case of Silda Spitzer shows it brightly. She needs some help, and encouragements, but, instead, the people are trying to rip her fully off. I am experiencing the same "nice" treatment; and Richard Morris, if he is Dick Morris of Clinton's time scandal, is contributing to this treatment, as much, as he can.

I would like to see Hillary win the White House and then announce she's ditching Bill. From the Oval Office. That is justice.

I think that I share the point of Richard Morris.
Why does the author of this article need so much to hit Mrs. Spitzer right now? It, sure, looks cruel and sadistic. Is Richard Morris the hero of Clinton's time scandal and the former advisor of Clinton, who runs now NewsMax?

"Taliban women covered from head to toe in burqa, standing a few paces behind their men, appendages to their all powerful husbands."This statment is ridiculous,and untrue. A Muslim women would never be humilited like this,because the punishment for adultry in Islam is death. Shw wouldn't have to leave because he'll be dead.

I'm not sure I agree with the sentiment I am about to express but shouldn't we consider the fact that perhaps these women stand by their men because they believe in their wedding vows --to stay with their husbands through thick and through thin. Yes, he broke the vows by cheating and that was really wrong, but what role does religion play in this and if that is the reason some of these women stand by their men, should they be criticized for it? Do you think every woman who gets cheated on by her husband should leave her man, or just the ones who get cheated on publicly?

The answer is, I think, pretty obvious. She was thinking that he became the victim of the provocation because her was too active in actions against many influential people. So, she considered it unfair and stood by him. Maybe, their family doesn't require mutual fidelity. Maybe, they are together because of mutual children and mutual life goals, not because of already disappeared within years sexual attraction.

Maybe the question here is, what is Sally Quinn thinking? Is Sally expressing grief over the loss of a loved one, by striking out at Silda Spitzer? Sally check in with your own feelings about broken trust and abuse.

Well done, Sally.

The women like Hillary and Slida are disgrace. They are good examples of hypocritical women who are blinded by ambition. They would willingly play a role of vulnerable, victimized women, even though how demeaning it is, draw a public sympathy and exploit the situation, if they can, to hang on to their power and influence through their spouses. They are the kind of women who would betray the principles of sisterhood.

To use an example set by someone you and your husband admired, how many times did Jackie stand by Jack after she KNEW he was fooling around the night before? If anything, she set the example.

But, to echo Jim's comments, this is an ON FAITH column? Seems like a stretch since "On Faith is the first worldwide, interactive discussion about religion and its impact on global life." A throwaway line about burkas and sati makes for a weak justification for this column to be placed on this board. I don't see ANY mention, or even an attempt, to tie in her decision to stand by her husband with her faith.

A more appropriate column might be one on the ideal of "Judge not, lest ye be judged?" Then maybe you would be justified in writing about this matter. But you didn't do that...

Is your whole effort wasn't a joke before with its censorship a few week's back, it's a complete laughingstock now.

Where's the ombudswoman when you really need her?!

To use an example set by someone you and your husband admired, how many times did Jackie stand by Jack after she KNEW he was fooling around the night before? If anything, she set the example.

But, to echo Jim's comments, this is an ON FAITH column? Seems like a stretch since "On Faith is the first worldwide, interactive discussion about religion and its impact on global life." A throwaway line about burkas and sati makes for a weak justification for this column to be placed on this board. I don't see ANY mention, or even an attempt, to tie in her decision to stand by her husband with her faith.

A more appropriate column might be one on the ideal of "Judge not, lest ye be judged?" Then maybe you would be justified in writing about this matter. But you didn't do that...

Is your whole effort wasn't a joke before with its censorship a few week's back, it's a complete laughingstock now.

Where's the ombudswoman when you really need her!

Ms. Quinn is quite correct in making an intellectual argument against Silda Wall Spitzer's decision to appear with her husband in the worst of times. But I cannot imagine the numbness and pain Ms. Wall Spitzer would be feeling as this news hit her from all sides in such a short period of time. Indeed, it is a private matter writ large publicly, and while we look in from the outside and assess, perhaps we might be better sisters by sparing this burdened woman further judgment, and say walk when when you need to, but not when we say.

To use an example set by someone you and your husband admired, how many times did Jackie stand by Jack after she KNEW he was fooling around the night before? If anything, she set the example.

But, to echo Jim's comments, this is an ON FAITH column? Seems like a stretch since "On Faith is the first worldwide, interactive discussion about religion and its impact on global life." A throwaway line about burkas and sati makes for a weak justification for this column to be placed on this board. I don't see ANY mention, or even an attempt, to tie in her decision to stand by her husband with her faith.

A more appropriate column might be one on the ideal of "Judge not, lest ye be judged?" Then maybe you would be justified in writing about this matter. But you didn't do that...

Is your whole effort wasn't a joke before with its censorship a few week's back, it's a complete laughingstock now.

Where's the ombudswoman when you really need her!

Lied to cheated on and disrespected in public. How about treated used like disposable tissue? How about this is what you can do if you are a man. Don't worry you don't have to be a Spitzer; there will always be a woman less than you. All women are. Your choice, if you're a woman, is to be his wife or his rented organ.

Heck yes! I agree 100%, there is enough betrayal and infidelity in this world. Having to see the look of defeat on yet another politicians wife(New Jersey ring a bell?) makes me wonder how many others out there are unknowingly going to bed at night with a stray dog. You will not see a female politican admitting to an adulterous affair with her loving, supporting husband by her side, because it would never happen.

I am not sure we can ever know what is in the mind of a man and a woman who are married, and one or the other is unfaithful to the union. I am sure there is much pain, when a union is broken, for whatever reason.

When a woman is mistreated, abused, emotionally or physically battered, it is not always easy to simply walk away, get a divorce, or throw the bum onto the street.

To lay this instance of mistreatment by a powerful, overbearing man on Silda Spitzer strikes me as silly. Let's treat her with dignity, and respect her privacy. We cannot know what motivates her to "stand by her man", when he appears to be a monster.

Sally, you sound like a sanctimonious b$#!* who should mind her own business.

She who lives in a glass house shouldn't throw stones.

This is the On Faith Column correct? So here are two faith based concepts for you - vows and forgiveness. Why is it subservient to forgive someone, especially someone you truly love? Also, two wrongs don't make a right, such that if one spouse violates their vows, the other doing so via divorce does not fix the situation. I don't recall my vows being "until death, or cheating, do you part"

A rend in a marriage is only beyond repair when both parties refuse to continue to try.

I'm not even that religious...and I certainly wouldn't be seen on camera as supporting him. But I would at least look in my heart to forgive and to continue to honor MY vows to him, hopefully bringing him back to honoring his vows to me.

Sally Quinn: How nice it must be to have a pulpit entitled "On Faith" from which to substitute your judgment for others, and to be blessed with the moral authority and impeccable background for exercising that judgment. It is kind of you to share your unique perspective such that we might be less likely to stray from the ideal which you've set. Thank you so very much.

Would that all the attention being put into Silda Spitzer's private life were spent instead on resolving Iraq, where people are dying.

You know, from the outside looking in, all of us can say, "Oh, in that situation, I'd do this." But the thing is, until you've been there, you just don't know. Silda Spitzer is probably in shock that her husband was cheating on her. She might need time to think about her next move... novel concept that is.

And from what I've read in the previous comments... you are the absolute last person who should be talking about what a cheated-upon wife should do.

Sally,

Terrible piece. Sanctimonious, judgmental, and probably erroneous psychobable. You need therapy to address your misogyny....or is it Hillary hatred????

Who gives Sally Quinn the right to judge anyone?! She is primarily a socialite, a party-giver. She is extraordinarily proud of her social contacts. Why, how, would she have any better idea about deep committment than any other public wife? ? Live and let live ,Sally, especially when someone like Silda,who is so very intelligent, perceptive, accomplished, graceful, ladylike, practices forgiveness. Learn from your betters, don't pass judgment and criticize them like a provincial busy-body.

Could your questions be simply answered with: individual differences. Women you mentioned may have different husband-wife relational perspectives than you or I and other women might have about marriage, theirs in particular. Why is it so important for others to put them under feminist cultural pressures and speculations. Or else question and denigrate the motives behind those intelligent women's decisions not to break their marital ties but continue on working hard to preserve and keep their families together. I do think it is something very difficult to do but a very Christian way of keeping intact marital vows made on their wedding day, till death do they part, you know...

And how about the humbling concept and thought of forgiveness. After all, married couples who have experienced and shared so much with each other and have gone through extraordinary life together could have bonded and developed something much, much deeper than merely living as married couples, beyond other people's comprehension.

Also, these women you have mentioned, must be strong, independent and intellectually superior must still know and continue to experience the depths of love, trust and kindness from their philandering husbands that they don't break so helplessly or easily, like dolls or other door-mat types. Remember Eleanor Roosevelt? Jackie Kennedy?

So, instead of demeaning their status as women, I consider them with a huge reservoir of grace and strength as human beings and as women, not only for themselves, but for their entire families, and even the outside world when they continue to render government service to make it a better place.

I am sorry for the pain caused them but not blame them or disparage their intelligence or reasons why they have continued to support their husbands and keep their families together. We cannot nor try to attempt to know the depths of love, trust, kindness, forgiveness and understanding between husband and wife. To each our own...

You will never read this but I would bet a million dollars that if Ben Bradlee had had sex with another woman or man Sally Quinn would be standing beside him, you may love him but you also love the stature he gave you. Your comparison of Silda to truly subjugated women is so offensive as to make me sick to my stomach.

All this high-minded commentary is a crock.
The fact is, this is the way people behave. Him AND her. The same holds true for the people commenting.
Need proof?
Silda is smart and attractive.
Imagine what would have been written here if she looked like Totie Fields.

Spitzer used his wife. Having her there by his side must have been very difficult for her. If he cared about her he would have told her that he would front the media alone. I did not hear him talking about his wife's suffering and I cannot recall him turning to her as a sign of caring and respect.

I suspect that facing the media was spin. If there is one thing that is clear about politicians it is that they can dish it out but they cannot take it.

Spitzer should go down the drain hole.

I would have had more respect for him if he had stood there alone and had given a frank disclosure of what had happened. Instead we got a confession by way of innuendo.

He deserves obscurity.

By the way you say that his wife is 'beautiful'. Why does that matter? Are you suggesting that ugly wives do not need our sympathy or that they do not suffer?

I personally admire Ms. Spitzer for her bravery in standing with her husband despite his actions instead of leaving like most women would. Now, that is class.

I personally admire Ms. Spitzer for her bravery in standing with her husband despite his actions instead of leaving like most women would. Now, that is class.

I personally admire Ms. Spitzer for her bravery in standing with her husband despite his actions instead of leaving like most women would. Now, that is class.

Gosh Sally,

I have to wonder how you view your own marriage if you advocate leaving your hubby if you discover he is sleeping with a prostitute. I could understand if he has some form of emotional connection with another woman but this is a prostitute so we are talking about sex and sex is pretty trivial in the larger scope of a lifelong relationship. If you have a deeper connection to your spouse beyond sex I think the morally correct thing to do would be to deal with it; not leave like a hurt child. I think Ms. Spitzer showed real strength standing beside, not behind her man and facing everyone during his humiliation, not hers. He was the one that showed weakness here Sally.

Also keep in mind, prostitutes generally make their living off of married men. There are obviously alot of women married to men who have been with prostitutes, maybe yours as well...

I am a proud Indian.
I am proud of Sati.
Why do American's only see with Western View?
Sati happens everyday in modern India.

Vijay

What thoughtul comments I'm reading here. Time, not Sally Quinn, will tell whether Spitzer's wife is making the right choice, but I'm willing to give her (the wife) the benefit of the doubt. I would also argue that not every wife sees paying for sex as the worst thing her husband could do. It smacks more of addiction than infidelity. I'd be more concerned if my spouse had a long-running affair. But it depends on the marriage and the circumstances.

The best we can hope for is that she made her deal before getting up there, "I get the house and you sleep in the car for two years." Considering what little he said, it is a wonder that he made any statement at all. His next wife's IQ will be the same as her age, and she'll laugh about this kind of thing.

Being extremely surprised by Elliot Spitzer's conduct is one thing. Being in shock is another.

We are "in surprise" and at a safe distance. We are free to analyze her behavior, turn it over in our minds, pretend to know what we would do in the same situation, and quite happily moralize about it.

But for Silda this is not a head game; this is her family. She may be trapped in shock right now. Let's give her a break.

Alleluia Sally! I have been asking the same question.

Your collegue Mr. Robinson addressed this topic much more effectively, but, Sally, I beg to differ with both of you. In the face of such a hideous surprise, don't judge Silda Spitzer for responding in the manner she saw fit. The Spitzers have a long history together that cannot be erased overnight, no matter how grievous the offense. Being present at this week's press conferences certainly was not the easy choice, nor was it necessarily a weak or submissive act. Many news organizations would have loved to chronicle a public spousal display of wrath and vengence, but I can't expect that it would ease Silda Spitzer's pain. In the end, she appears to be acting with regard for those she loves, not for the media or historians of the feminist movement. Cheers to her.

I won't ask what you think of me for what we did to Tony.

We don't know anything about the Spitzers' marriage or how they will deal with this. One thing I'm sure won't be helpful is for Mrs. Spitzer to go to Homewrecker Sally to for advice. She surely must be the most arrogant woman in DC.

It is disappointing to see a woman...particularly in a column "on Faith"...stand in such harsh judgement of another woman in such a difficult situation.
Your harsh judgement discounts the impact of the astounding shock that Mrs. Spitzer must be feeling. How does one in the immediacy of such a moment decide to "cut bait" on her husband of so many years with no time to evaluate the long term impact of such decision on her children and family...with insufficient time to even filter through her own reactions to wrap her mind around such news and understand her own feelings and reactions. You ought not to issue such proclamations of judgement on Mrs. Spitzer, reducing her motivation to political position...lacking any understanding or compassion for the myriad thoughts and feelings with which she must be struggling til you've walked in her shoes.
Eliot Spitzer has and will continue to suffer the consequences of his actions...His wife, Silda should be acknowledged for the class and grace with which she has weathered this most difficult experience.

Isn't it a shame our daughters are exposed to this behavior and isn't it a shame we have to try to separate ourselves and our families from it? I can't explain it. I'm offended by it.

The hypocrisy of Spitzer's actions is breath-taking but if I try to put it into some kind of perspective, I'd ask more questions about Laura Bush staying with George - his lies have had much more serious effects, he's done more harm to the people who elected him, they have been going on for a longer time, and his hypocrisy as a "Christian" has no limits. Sex of course sells more newspapers but perhaps if journalists had investigated Bush's lies with as much energy and speed, we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now.
As for Silda standing by her man, she has perhaps taken her marriage vows seriously - "for better, for worse, in sickness and in health". He's the father of her children and they will all have to work out some kind of future - whatever awful things he's done, children need their father.

>

I do know. The answer is ... no.

What was Silda thinking?

I do not know. No one would know the answer to this question unless Silda communicated her thoughts to them. It is incredible that so much is being made in the media of Silda supporting her husband but that is her choice and her business - just as it would have been if she had decided not to support her faithless spouse ...

Perhaps, to Silda (and to other ladies in this article), this one event is not the be all and end all that sums up her married life as it appears to be for the rest of the country.

Perhaps, to Silda (and others), to err is human ...

Cawing, feminist magpie alert! I'll give another reason Silda Spitzer may have stood by her husband: she loves him. She forgives him. She's aware of her own baseness before God and that his sins are worse by human standards but she and we all fall equally short of the glory of God.
She has a family with him. She is nobly teaching her daughters a much greater truth than the falsity of "self-esteem" the feminist world offers. She is teaching her daughters, and those in the public who will learn, that God's greatness is best defined by His mercy. He could condemn us all. And well we would deserve it. But we hope for mercy. Should we not give it?
Out of love, Silda Spitzer teaches us to forgive, to get up in humility and start again after our falls from grace, to love. She is a model for all women of intellect. She is a paragon of femininity in a public of shrews. She is the quintessential First Lady. I wish we had an entire generation of her type. Let her daughters and mine grow up to be such LADIES. And let her husband be grateful every hour of the day that God has endowed him with that gift. I hope she endures and has as merciful a heart toward HER persecutors, who so ironically have much to learn from her.

If Hillary Clinton had divorced her husband, she would have my vote in the coming election. Convoluted hypocrisy is not appealing, and my son, who is seven, ought to be shown that no one, male or female, should "get away" with such behavior as has been described in your article. By either the men or their partners.
Their choices are uncreative, redundant, and frankly, boring.
Better to leave one's spouse and get on with it, whether in pursuit illicit sex or just to proclaim one's freedom from the audacity of dopes.

I command you for your article. We should not send the wrong message again and aging to the public. This is the mesaage : If you are Powerful you can get away with lying, cheating and stealing were as common people can not.

I cannot say enough how refreshing it is to see a WOMAN say the things you just did. As a man and someone who has respect for himself. I will never understand anyone be it man or woman who will allow themselves to be so disrespected in such a terrible way by someone who supposedly loves them and "forsakes all others". Sadly it seems to be women over and over and over who tolerate this kind of thing. Men rarely do.

I think you have hit on the cause precisely. Women will simply "overlook" this type of thing from men. Why? Because they want all the little "perks" that come from being married to these type of men. Sadly though even women married to men with normal jobs tolerate this behavior also. Its just sad. I wish women would stand up and tell these men to "shove it" and leave them. I think something is going wrong in our society in the way young women are raised. All parents need to take a good look at the qualitys they instill in their children and that includes having respect for yourself. People who respect themselves will not tolerate this kind of behavior.

Do you have any idea of what has gone on in this relationship? Do you have any idea of how many times he stood by his wife through this and that? I know I'd do the same for my husband because of the way we've faced life together through thick and thin for so many years. What this says to me is that he has been there in the past for her and now it is her turn. Maybe the situations weren't infidelity. Relationships face many challenges and hardships. The good ones get through it intact.

Maybe she really loves him and wants to support him through this obviously stupid mistake. It seems to me that both Mr. Spitzer and his wife are people of high integrity and committment. She is in no way diminished by choosing (and I honor her choice) to stand for her family, which I suppose includes this flawed (aren't we all) man who is her husband. I also don't think our absurd American preoccupation with marital affairs and the evils of sex discounts all the noble achievments of Governor Spitzer. Let he who is without sin...

Dear Sally,
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! ...for saying what strikes me every time I watch a woman try to maintain her dignity while her philandering husband tries to rescue his career at her expense. The unspoken story of this remarkable political year is that writers and commentators - both men and women- still freely find ways to insult and demean Hillary Clinton in unacceptably sexist terms while being holier than thou about avoiding racist terms when dealing with Barack Obama. Neither is acceptable, yet we are still stuck in the mental burquas of an unabashedly sexist society. That is why we still see woman after woman paraded around and publicly humiliated by the actions of their powerful husbands.

We will never have a woman president as long as that is the norm.

The woman candidate for president who will win - whether it is Ms. Clinton or someone else- is the one who can regenerate women's awareness and empower them. It will be the woman who is unafraid to talk about women's issues as a priority matter. We still live in a world where the highest paying job an uneducated girl can get is as a prostitute. And, on the other end of the spectrum, we watch a highly educated, sophisticated woman who is equally "enslaved" to "her man", her power attained through his. What's wrong with this picture?

Until women free themselves of the emotional bondage of their relationships to men and recast those relationships as empowered beings, we will never be independent, free-thinking,or autonomous. It is not about ending relationships with men, but standing up to our full height as women. There is an old saying that says what a woman cherishes the most is her sovereignty. The sad reality is that few women know how to grab it for themselves.

The only way a "sea change" shift from male to female power will occur is when women are willing to say "No more." and stand together and support each other, regardless of their race, religion, philosophy or social standing. The way to do it is when women like you -in high visibility- are willing to demand that we take our power back. And, when women seize their power, their men will be right behind them.

Perhaps that kind of marital "fidelity" on behalf of women (only?), comes with the political territory. Those attracted to public life are officially self-sacrificing, while innately self-serving. Some women see the end of their marriage as an opportunity to "even the score," regardless of their particular circumstances. I personally wish my kids hadn't seen the huge destruction that their mother wrought, a 'financially independent woman,' whose career I had supported for decades, as she knifed me in the back, took all the money she could, and wasted hundreds of thousands on lawyers attempting to take the kids too, for nothing but ego. I guess besides the huge strength that Silda shows, and possibly still even love and understanding for her partner, she may possess that gift of humility, that her husband so clearly didn't.

Listen, SHE said she would love and honor through thick and thin or words to that effect.

Should she BREAK her vows just because her husband did?

You want her to become a shopkeeper or an accountant - do this then I will stand by you, do that then I won't.

He will suffer his own karma, why should she add to her bad karma.

Ms. Quinn, pardon me for saying so, but please don't be a complete twit.

Reading anything written by Sally Quinn always gives me a laugh-because I have never read the work of anyone so completely arrogant, snotty, judgemental, and self-important. In every single piece she writes, one way or another, directly or indirectly she is saying to her reader "I am better than you".

This is too rich - Sally Quinn writing about wanting to see women divorce their husbands who have affairs. That takes some chutzpah given her history!!!

Spitzer stood by her man for the same reason all the other women stood by theirs. Love. For better or for worse. We're all flawwed. We all make mistakes. No I have never cheated on my wife or kids the way Spitzer et al, including my father, cheated on their significant others. But I do understand why they stick around: Love! You're so high and mighty. Why???

a spouse must decide to make choices best suited for them and their respective families,
standing beside the jerk while they says opps...
that's just plain sad.
however, even sadder is your viewpoint or commentary in a section defined as faith.

Sally Quinn is always good for a laugh-because in every piece she writes, one way or another, directly or indirectly she is saying her her reader-"I am better than you". I have never read any columnist, blog moderator, jounalist, society maven, author-however she defines herself these days-so completely arrogant, snobbish, and completely taken with herself. She could never survive outside her rarified world.

Sally, I am sure that this sounds catty. However, you had an affair with your now husband prior to his divorce. At least, that is what the headlines said. I don't think it is YOUR place to comment on what Silda Walls Spitzer did. She sure has a lot more quality than her husband, and perhaps, more than you.

Maybe Silda Spitzer loves her husband, sees him for the foolish adolescent boy that he is, and is big enough to try to forigve him. Why label her as being subject to humiliation for standing by her man? He's the jerk, and she's being the mature, if somewhat disillusioned woman, who has the strength to try to heal the wound he has inflicted on her and their family.

Sally, I am sure that this sounds catty. However, you had an affair with your now husband prior to his divorce. At least, that is what the headlines said. I don't think it is YOUR place to comment on what Silda Walls Spitzer did. She sure has a lot more quality than her husband, and perhaps, more than you.

Wife's must decide to make choices best suited or them and their respective families,
but, to stand beside the jerk while he says opps.
that's just plain sad.

Dear Sally Quinn,

Aa a superannuated gossip columnist who made her profession the defaming the reputations of others you now feel you are the one to judge Silda Spitzer for standing by her husband in the hour of his fall from grace. How superior you must feel.

Absolutely. All I could think of when Spitzer was standing there - was that he expected his wife to be there - and she expected to be or lose more than she had already lost.

Women need to cut lose men who do this, esp. publicly. (There may be some private choices to make) -- but the public posture of women in these unhappy roles must change.

Those who suggest that the Post get rid of Sally Quinn are, of course right, but it will never happen.

Why? Because she slept with the right connected, powerful, married man at the right time (i.e. the Editor who in his interview of Ms. Quinn quipped "nobody's perfect" after she advised she had never written anything professionally before.)

Gotta love a woman who slept to the top and then sanctimoniously rips a self made woman like Silda Spitzer...the irony is palpable.

In the Spitzer scenario, doesn't Quinn realize which part she would play? Hint: it isn't Silda.

Those are other people's marriages, not for you to make any judgement on. Leave those people along. This is nothing but self-righteous and self-serving to write such passages.

I completely agree. My husband would show up bruised from the beating I'd give him at home.

A very good piece here... The pain on her face was heart breaking. What must the Governor's daughters be thinking? What would it be like for them at school in the light of all this?

In the midst of this family turmoil it must rest with the nature of their relationship.

Is there genuine contrition, repentance, a willingness to forgive?

One can only pray the family will receive strength, wisdom, and direction for the future.

When I saw Silda Spitzer, I saw a very sad woman dealing with shock as best as she could. Maybe they can save their marriage, maybe not. But I didn't think she had to decide immediately.

I did not see her as shamed, only as someone who had to deal with the shame of someone she loved. A very hard thing.Now, in the middle of her trouble, not trouble she brought on herself but which probably came as unexpectedly to her as it did to everyone else, people like Sally Quinn have decided she should be attacked, too. Is this simply another way of attacking Hillary? Or does Quinn really believe feminism requires one way of acting. I thought feminism was about choice.

I find Quinn's choice to attack Silda Spitzer disgusting.

Gosh, "these wives" must be grateful for a Sally Quinn come shame and glory, conversation and religion.

A very good piece here... The pain on her face was heart breaking. What must the Governor's daughters be thinking? What would it be like for them at school in the light of all this?

In the midst of this family turmoil it must rest with the nature of their relationship.

Is there genuine contrition, repentance, a willingness to forgive?

One can only pray the family will receive strength, wisdom, and direction for the future.

No way would I be standing by Governor Spitzer! He would be on the dais all alone. Women no longer need to "protect" their husbands reputations. Men like Eliot Spitzer certainly don't care about the reputations of their wives!

A very good piece here... The pain on her face was heart breaking. What must the Governor's daughters be thinking? What would it be like for them at school in the light of all this?

In the midst of this family turmoil it must rest with the nature of their relationship.

Is there genuine contrition, repentance, a willingness to forgive?

One can only pray the family will receive strength, wisdom, and direction for the future.

I agree with you 100%! And I was just having this exact conversation with a friend before I read your article. Well said!

I concur. I didn't feel that this was chastising, but rather voicing what so very many of us were thinking---Why is she there--with so much pain, shock, emptiness on her face. I do not perceive this as critical of Silda. But I do really worry about 3 teenage daughters. What an ugly way to find out about daddy's playtime and especially how much money exchanged hands. Yuk.

The word is ADDICTION! As in Bill Clinton and John Kennedy and Wilt Chamberlain and hundreds or thousands of other men and even women. Why will no one discuss it in these terms? It explains everything.

Surely you don't think this situation is as black and white as you've described. No one can ever know what goes on in a marriage. For you to judge a woman's actions after her spouse has cheated is patently ridiculous.

I maybe wrong, but some career marriages appear to lose the ordinary picket fence type marriage. Maybe just maybe something happened many years prior to this that led the governor to outside intimacy. Or, just maybe, the first lady has really known of her spouses absence as a husband for years and this inccidenc is the first for the public but not for them. If this kind of thing has been going on for ten years, something happened many years ago, either with the first lady or the governor that separated their marriage. She appeared stoic, not hurt, probably more humiliated that the media can be so cruel. But, I believe they both have their own intimate lives and the daughters are like any other normal children. If something is not right in the home, the children are aware of it. Mommy may have been the one who started outside intimacy or something that led to Daddy going outside the home. I just don't think it is as sad as the media is portraying it. The sad part is we as normal married folk without professional careers spend the time with our families doing family things. Career families just don't get involved with love, trust, honesty and the need for affection that binds a house to make a home.

Bravo on your commentary. It is time that women stop enabling their cheating husbands by publicly supporting them through their public confessionals. It would be gratifying to finally see a woman in this position refuse to go on camera and stand beside the person who broke their marriage vows, who betrayed her and the children, and who had so little regard for the laws he has sworn to uphold.

If anything, it suggests the continuing inequality of women in American marital relationships, that they are seemingly "required" to go public with their cheating spouse as opposed to having the option to stay behind the scenes during the public apology and confessional stage. To me, that would be more supportive of the children rather than allowing them to think what dad did was ok because mom is standing in front of the cameras along with him.

I really don't agree with you. I felt sorry for the whole family . . . even him. I admire her and acknowledge that we can never know her reasons and how this has affected their relationship. We should not judge.

Why didn't you just run Eugene Robinson's piece?

Why does poor Mrs. Spitzer deserve to be publically attacked by both of you?

These pieces are cruel and holier-than-thou.

One political wife did have the courage to avoid the humiliation of standing behind her philandering husband. In 2003 Gov. Bob Wise of West Virginia, had an affair with a state employee and when he admitted it to the press, Sandy Wise was no where to be seen. She took her dignity and her daughter and left. The Wises reconciled, and he left office at the end of his term.

I don't understand why standing by her husband is humiliating. She did nothing wrong. The one who humiliated himself is Eliot Spitzer.

Why do you pretend to know everything about the Spitzers' marriage? Maybe Silda knew about her husband going to hookers. Maybe she encouraged it. Maybe she watched. Or maybe she figures she'll stick around until her father-in-law, now 83 and worth an estimated $500 million, dies. I'm not suggesting that any of these is actually the case, just that you are not in a position to judge. Who knows what really goes on in the marriages of others? Fortunately, most of us don't have to endure the invasive scrutiny of you and your gutter media colleagues.

Right on Claudia! Sally Quinn is the biggest snobbiest most judgmental moralistic hypocrite in Washington, DC and the political elite. She's right on par with Chris Matthews in disingenuous elitist moralalist mendacity and intellectual dishonesty.

How she has the audacity to sneer at Silda Spitzer privately, much less publicly is beyond the pale.

It takes all kinds. And Sally Quinn is making her contribution to the annals of hypocrisy and snobbery like no one else.

I don't know what Mrs Spitzer is thinking and I don't know why Ms Quinn did in her private life should somehow disqualify her from stating how she perceived Mrs Spitzer’s action.

When I see all these ladies that society held in high regards standing by their ‘man’, they makes me ask :

- How much public disrespecting and abuse should I tolerate from my husband in the name of love?
- Should I put the sanctity of my marriage vow above those of his?
- Should I put love for him above love and respecting myself?
- Should my standing in this society be defined by how supportive of him I am being the 'biggest victim' of his actions?
- What do my actions teach my daughters about loving and respecting themselves?

Self sufficient woman who choose to stand by their men under these circumstances were praised for being ‘strong, classy, courageous, graceful etc.’, but what do we called those ladies that choose to walk away knowing that that they would face a tougher future alone supporting their children? Some poster e.g. Elizabeth6, David suggested that having average ‘breeding’, lower level of education and intelligence explain why these ladies make the stupid decision of walking away… This is utterly confusing societal standard...

This article about morality is funny coming from someone who had an affair with her married boss, broke up the marriage and then married him herself. She married a cheater -- what does that tell you?

"Think of the message this image sends -- not to just adults, but to young children, both boys and girls. For young girls, it says this is an acceptable role for women -- to be lied to, cheated on, disrespected and humiliated in public/ You take it and must still be supportive. because that is what is expected of women."

I guess as long as you're the one doing the disrespecting and humiliating, then it's OK!

What nonsense, Ms Quinn. And what arrogance for you to speak, apparently, for Ms Wall Spitzer, about whom you know nothing. Who know why she did why she chose to stand with her husband. Who knows why she was reportedly against him resigning. Frankly, who knows what goes in theirs or any other marriage. Perhaps, just perhaps, she might actually love the guy, consider her long marriage something not worth throwing away, and consider a few hookers not worth a hill of beans in the grand scheme of things. There are many ways to read this situation and her public stance; you've chosen just one. Perhaps you could be more balanced next time?

I think I understand her choice. She has three teenage girls, who presumably love their father. Mrs Spitzer did what was probably best for the girls at the time. There will be opportunity in the coming days to emphasize to the girls the unacceptability of what he did, and to make arrangements for a separate residence and start divorce proceedings. The girls are probably stunned and baffled right now, and a denouncement of their father by their mother would add to their emotional trauma.

Having said all that, if Eliot Spitzer makes some "I have a sex addiction and I'll go into treatment for it" excuse, I will then agree that his wife has made a mistake.

Ms. Quinn,

Assumption is the motherlode of all mistakes, and your column is at best, filled with assumptions, and at worst, filled with an arrogant perspective that the entire world is as only you see it and not as it is. Or perhaps your intent was to incite the reader and bring in more comments, securing your position with WaPo. Perhaps.

Since you profess your occupation as "journalist," why not do what a journalist does? Ask Ms. Spitzer why she stood by her husband. Go ahead, call her up and ask her.

We stand by our partners through, as the words state, "until death do us part," and like another very publicly wronged wife, the reasons aren't really any of our business.

I think that Silda showed great courage and class. She appeared to feel that he should own up to his indiscretion at his side. We don't know if she will be with him when this is all said and done. At the embarrassment he is probably feeling, she really wouldn't have to say a whole lot to him. What an incredibly stupid move on his part.

"I know why he did what he did. Because he could."

As if a woman would do any different. Cases in point: Leona Helmsley and Emelda Marcos.

And why does she stay with him? Because it's her choice. She can stay with him, she can leave, she can do any of thousands of different things. In the end, it's her choice and she chose to stand with him.

You may not realize it Sally, but there are some marriages in which the wife knows her husband needs (that's right, needs) to cheat on them in order to overcome some lack of confidence in his ability to perform in bed. And those wives suffer in silence.

Perhaps the reason they are wlling to stand being publically humiliated is that they feel guilty for "enabling" the errant husband and somehow contributing to his eventual downfall.

And, of course, it is important for the children to understand that the respect she has for the marriage can overcome the worst of calimities.

I am not a woman, but in over 80 years, I have known lots of them and they are all different.

An arrogant guy like Spitzer is probably not a warm, loving guy at home ... over the years the women make many compromises to live with such a person, making it that much harder to draw the line and say this is finally it.

At least that's my speculation.

Possible Answers:

1) She loves her husband even if she's furious at him.

2) She takes her wedding vows seriously. She married the man for better and for worse. She took the better. Now she's taking the worse. Novel idea. Keeping your wedding vows, even when your spouse breaks his. Eh?

How does this shame the wife? We all know she did nothing wrong. I see the wife standing next to her husband as he makes a public confession of infidelity not as humiliating to the wife but as an obligation of the cheating husband to face his wife, in public, and tell her what he did. Face the music. Make it as uncomfortable for that man as possible.
I don't know what the wife is thinking, feeling. Can't begin to imagine until you have been there yourself. I know what I'm thinking when I look at the wife and I'm not ashamed or embarrassed for her. I also think the wife is on auto-pilot. Are there established protocols for what a wife should do when her husband must announce to the public that he has cheated on her? Apparently not. Give the lady a break.

Oh for god's sake, let's pillory the poor wife. What is she supposed to do to make us happy? She 's in shock, she's depressed, she's got kids. You're binging her "YOU DECIDE RIGHT NOW WHAT IS THE YOUR RESPONSE!!!! "

It isn't that clear in the first days or weeks even. It's like someone smacked you in the head with a brick then said, "What is your investment strategy" How clear are you at that point?

God, give her a break.

Sigh. Why are women our own worst enemy.

When it a Democrate, the sky is falling and why do they, stand by their man, but when David Vitter and Larry Craig, it a differnt deal....
Bill Clinton, had a B.J. but nobody died.
So, what the hell is the matter with you people, get a live, mind your Business.....
I just like to no how many of the people writing to this stupid topic have cheated on their spouses?

40 years of the feminist movement is now officially dead, why would successful women like Hillary and Mrs. Spitzer be treated by these men? I guess Rosie O'Donnell was right, if Hillary did not divorce Bill, I have no respect for her. Very insightful Rosie?

Silda Spitzer has the greatness, not the weakness to forgive. You religious bigots will never get it.

This is exactly right i couldent agree more.

I agree that is pathetic to see a woman standing by her man in utter humiliation. Perhaps these woman were attracted to power so much that they are standing by the position rather than by the man. Hillary "forgave" Bill's affairs because she had to if she wanted power, and Bill knew this. She was not as upset with being lied to but that he had been so stupid.

My problem with Ms. Quinn's piece is the presumption it requires. How can we presume that Silda Walls Spitzer, a highly intelligent and educated woman, did not know what her husband was up to? Perhaps they had an understanding. Perhaps she told him, "Elliot, I no longer find you attractive and no longer want to have sex with you. Go find a prostitute." Perhaps she had something on the side as well. Perhaps. Yes, I know, this is all supposition, and the look on her face at those press appearances suggests that she was taken unawares by all of this. And maybe she thought they had the perfect marriage. But who knows? Does Sally Quinn?

In this age where more than half of all marriages go sour (even those that seem, to an outsider, to be storybook), I would hesitate before making the presumption that seems to underlie Ms. Quinn's article. Absent some inside knowledge of the Spitzers and their marital bedroom, that's a lot to take on faith.

What a load of melodramatic piffle.

"For boys, it says it's okay to lie and cheat and dishonor your family, and you might grow up to be a senator or a governor or a president. You can get away with it.

I know that many women are supportive of those who stand by their man, for no other stated reason than to keep the family together. Imagine, though, the scars that the children will suffer from getting conflicting messages."

Umm, no, he didn't get away with it; and, in fact, he stands a good chance of disbarment and a little visit to the slam.

And, lady, you ain't no psychologist--trust me, because I am: you haven't the foggiest notion whether the children will be more or less scarred by this woman's choice.

But since you people are so in love with your own stink: how about the notion that the children *won't* be scarred because their mother confronted their father and said "this family is integral, no matter what you've done; and now you pay the consequences."

You disgust all persons of even the merest common sense.

Sally

Every woman has a right to do as they choose in such a situation. Ms. Silda decided to stand by her man and that was her choice and not yours or anyone else for that matter. If you were to be caught up in same situation, please feel free to do as you please. If you would decide to hold your own press conference and pile up on your spouse, so be it.

Sally, you go girl. If I had done what he has done, my wife would be standing, with a lawyer, in front of a judge.

Ms. Quinn, once again having nothing substantive to write about, turns to National Enquirer tactics to fill up her allotted space. Worse, she inserts herself into a couple's private marriage business as if this is a matter for public debate. Absolutely disgusting and probative of the Post becoming just another celebrity mag. Sally, why not get yourself a good camera and go be a papparazi? Then, at least you could give us some disgusting pictures to go with your awful, no-substance column? Probably not; means you'd have to do real work. Sheesh, get a life. This isn't an issue for women, just you. Morality coming from Ben's other woman seems a bit ironic.

How is Spitzer sending the message that to boys that it's ok to lie and cheat? He had a successful career that is now ruined because he lied and cheated.

Ms. Quinn, once again having nothing substantive to write about, turns to National Enquirer tactics to fill up her allotted space. Worse, she inserts herself into a couple's private marriage business as if this is a matter for public debate. Absolutely disgusting and probative of the Post becoming just another celebrity mag. Sally, why not get yourself a good camera and go be a papparazi? Then, at least you could give us some disgusting pictures to go with your awful, no-substance column? Probably not; means you'd have to do real work. Sheesh, get a life. This isn't an issue for women, just you. Morality coming from Ben's other woman seems a bit ironic.

Mrs. Spitzer should NOT stood by when her husband
read his resignation speech. He's a NY BUMB.

Ms. Quinn, once again having nothing substantive to write about, turns to National Enquirer tactics to fill up her allotted space. Worse, she inserts herself into a couple's private marriage business as if this is a matter for public debate. Absolutely disgusting and probative of the Post becoming just another celebrity mag. Sally, why not get yourself a good camera and go be a papparazi? Then, at least you could give us some disgusting pictures to go with your awful, no-substance column? Probably not; means you'd have to do real work. Sheesh, get a life. This isn't an issue for women, just you. Morality coming from Ben's other woman seems a bit ironic.

Well done, Sally.

The women like Hillary and Slida are disgrace. They are good examples of hypocritical women who are blinded by ambition to advance their own political career and willingly to play a role of vulnerable, victimized women, even though how demeaning it is, and exploits the situation, if they can, to hang on to their power and influence through their spouses. They are the kind of women who would betray the principles of sisterhood.

If one remained married only in times that were not challenging or troubling, what is love and marriage but a fair weather tax break?

I am not one to indulge in ad hominem (or ad feminem) attacks, but one certainly must question the moral authority of a columnist who had an affair with a married person, and aided in the destruction of a marriage. Where would you be if your spouse had worked things out and tried to salvage his previous marriage? What does it tell boys and girls to marry a man who once cheated on his wife himself...with you?

Sally Quinn was Ben Bradlee's mistress.

Is she saying that Bradlee's wife shouldn't have stood for it?

Is that how she got Bradlee for himself?

And are we to believe that Bradlee didn't mess around on Quinn after they married?

The "journalists" who run the Washington Post may have recently helicoptered into town, but some of us are actually natives of this area and we know the facts.

Just one more reason to stop reading the Post, or at the least never subscribe.

Great call, "editors."

Oh, and now I see this all comes under a "faith" column.

Thanks for the extra laugh.

Maybe she likes him?

Maybe she felt sorry for him?

Maybe she thought she would help him get through this and then discuss where to go from here?

I think women who have their own money and who can pack up and leave know they have a choice and she chose to stand with him on one of the worst days of his life.

Any womanist worth her salt understands that life is made up of choices; everyone doesn't have to make the same choice, just have the capability and right to make their own.

As for him, Elaine,on a memorable Seinfeld, stated it best:

I don't know how you guys walk around with those things.

Oh, please Ms. Quinn! Who are you to judge this woman? This is her life, her family, her marriage you wish she had cast aside so you could have a moment of self-satisfaction thinking "the bastard got what was coming to him." Mrs. Spitzer has nothing to be ashamed of. I'm not sure you can say the same.

Regarding Sally Quinn's piece "What was Silda Spitzer thinking?"

The Spitzer trainwreck is further compounded by Sally Quinn's uncalled for criticism of Silda Spitzer who has acted with courage, grace, and dignity under completely unexpected circumstances. Isn't it patronizing, and maybe even a little peculiar for one woman to tell another how she should behave by writing it up to in a newspaper as part of her job?

Who knows why Silda Spitzer has done what she has done? Maybe she is thinking about her children and the need of their father to have a life after this recedes from the front page, maybe she cares more about the 16 million people who live in New York who need leadership from their governor than her husband ultimately did. I don't know, but I do know she has a perfect right to behave as she sees fit without fear being judged by alleged feminists who "know" how she should behave.

Yours, etc.

Why do you assume *she* is humiliated? I look at Mrs. Spitzer and I see a woman who knows that she is firmly in charge at that point. She's strong enough for both of them. He was weak and humiliated, not her. Ms. Quinn is guilty of her own stereotypes here. As far as "morally correct?" I believe the marriage vows read "for better and for worse, in sickness and in health, until we are parted by death." This would definitely be "for worse." Maybe Mrs. Spitzer looks beyond his pathetic humiliation and says "I'm strong enough to work through this. And dammit, Eliot, pull it together. Do it for yourself, for your children, and for this marriage. Be the man you claim to be."

Unless someone has been through what Selda Spitzer, Hillary Clinton, and various other men and women have experienced, you will never know what led people like Selda and Hillary to that podium or venue to support their spouse.

Often times we view a social setting where the wife is supporting their husband. In my case, I found on 9/11 after a futile search that may wife was having an affair. Subsequent revelations led to finding out that my wife had been cited for activity in a public setting. I was devastated with these discoveries, but I felt I needed to join her at the court proceeding. We both thought the offense would be a small infraction, but the judge asked her how she wanted to plead and he advised her it was a very serious citation. He proceeded to tell her the implications and the possible scenarios, and he asked her if she want to obtain a lawyer. She looked at me sitting in the court room, and asked me what she should do. The judge asked her is this the man that was also cited? She said, "no, that is my husband"! The judge, the court reporter, and people in the court room looked at me in a state of shock. When I saw Selda Spitzer's expression, so many emotions came flooding back, but to answer the question that Sally Quinn poses, there was no other place I wanted to be at that moment. When she asked me what she should do. I immediately told her that we would hire an attorney.
I would hope that everyone in their life would have have at least one person that could get them through at least that one brief moment of humiliation. Those actions by Selda Spitzer refected an amazing grace that comes from no other place than the deepest part of the human soul. It is an act of selflessness that comes without even thinking. That is what family, marriage, and unflinching support are all about. Many pundits have said that these women are force by their husbands to attend these ackward public knowledgements. If anyone took the time to ask these people, most would say there was no other place I would rather have been at that very moment. The doubt, self examination, and resolution will come later. I hope the best for Selda, her husband and their family. Selda is one class act. To anyone who poses the question, "what she was thinking"? You truly don't understand the meaning of love and commitment!

Be dovoted to one another in brotherly love. Honor one another above yourself.

You are quite correct , David. there is a code of behaviour entirely synonymous with good breeding. One learns through example from family and social influence. The Kennedy wives, Rose, Jackie and Joan are good examples. Outsiders cannot break through that shield, no matter their wealth or how many sleep overs they may have had, delivering them to that coveted social position. The old saying, "one can not make a silken purse out of a sow's ear" is explanatory. To speak ill of one's family rebounds and the one who is is intent on humiliating becomes the humiliated. A good example would be Prince Andrew of Great Britain. He was humiliated by his wife's affairs and they were eventually divorced, but he never spoke an ill word about the Duchess in public. They still keep a good relationship for the sake of their two children.

Agree with you.

Ms. Quinn,

You mention:

"Or Indian women committing sati, throwing themselves on their husband’s funeral pyre."

Perhaps you are unaware that this practice arose because Indian women did not want to be defiled by the men of conquering armies. The nobility of this concept often escapes those women who have been with men after men.

Wives with children must stand by their children's father; its almost as simple as that.

Silda Spitzer

I have seen less visible but highly intelligent women endure infidelity from their husbands and take them back, trying to restore the threatened marriage. Both with kids, maybe for their sake, and after kids.

The latter has more to do with the fact that the woman loved her husband, saw his weakness and decided not to desert him because of it. And Women cheat too.

Young boys hearing the Spitzer story would get a message of humiliation if one is caught cheating, and learn what happens to a prominent man who is found out. Another words, the message to young boys is if you play, you could pay. After all, Spitzer didn't get away with it.

Some day feminists will perceive the relationship between men and women as potentially less adversarial and more loving. At 64, I know lots of successful marriages. I am empathetic toward Silda Spitzer as she endured the public scrutiny with obvious pain. It took strength and courage to do what she did, and as a man, I think more of her for it.

No one would blame her for running away while spitting fire; however nothing would have been accomplished except to reveal what we all knew, that she was hurt and had the right to be angry. But to hang in there, take the pain perhaps to portray an image of unity to her children, that was contrary to expectation, classy and gutsy. And just maybe, she loves him (is that a novel idea in Washington?).

But to excoriate E. Spitzer to the nth while fretting why is a waste of energy. As John Adams noted, people are capable of the best of things, and they are capable of the worst of things. Who knows why. What we do know is that Spitzer is paying deerly for his indiscretion, while his wife is admired (except by feminists) for the elegant manner in which she has conducted herself.

Jim Methven
San Diego

I have often thought about this very same question, what I would do in the same situation and why? And I too am with someone who is very ambitious, who is a rising shining star and who is gaining fame and power every day.

What I think people completely fail to realize is that these people did not get to the levels of fame and power alone. Besides the hundreds, if not thousands, of associates, friends and supporters, there is the spouse. Usually, this is a team effort by both the spouse and the family. You want to support the rising star in your family, often for just the simple reason of what else would you do?

I'm sure there are very ambitious spouses that live vicariously through their rising star spouse's famous and fabulous lives. But I think for many, the joint effort is something you do out of love and dedication. If your child suddenly developed a passion or talent for say chess or ice skating or singing, you would support that effort 150%. And the same goes for a spouse. And any family would rally around the one that is having the most successful career often sacrificing many of their own needs and desires.

Everyone pitches in and suddenly the star's rising career becomes the family's focus with every rise and fall a family experience and not just an individual one. And the family, especially the supporting spouse, does a great deal. It becomes a huge investment in time, patience, support, love, attention, money, and the list of tangibles and intangibles goes on and on.

So when something this devistating and this quick were to arise, again, I would have to ask myself, what else would I do? I may not be happy and I may not even be feeling all that supportive. But this has been a team effort so far and before this glorious team is possibly dissolved forever, this is the last team effort you can make to put a brave face on a crumbling situation.

When you have invested so much in one person, it's not so easy to walk away so quickly. So I probably would be standing there as well thinking of a million things but mostly thinking if only this had not happened everything would still be ok. And I'd be asking myself what I'm going to do next. But standing there, next to my disgraced spouse, would be the only thing I could think of doing at that time and later, I'll consider what other options I may have.

I hope that helps.

Bill

I see why McGrevey's wife stood by him.

She completely clueless.

Hi,

I could not agree with you more on the points you have brought up in this essay. For days, it has bothered me very much to see Silda Spitzer stood by her husband and shared his humiliation.

As a woman who grew up in Vietnam and was told by older women then that it was ok for men to buy sex or to have a mistress - something that has disappointed me so much about Southeast Asian culture and people. Yet, it seems that women universally have very little expectation and respect of themselves.

Of all people, Ms. Quinn must realize that you can never really know the true dimensions of another couple's relationship.

It is easier to critize Silda Spitzer for standing by her husband than to commend her. I think her staying says much less about the degree women can be duped by their philanerous spouses and more about the degree the society believes in marriage and about the human spirits' better angels. Staying in this case demonstrates commitment and mercy to the other when otherwise it would be far easier and less humiliating to cut and run to be. Mrs. Spitzer seems far too bright and capable to be used and, as many spouses do when the other strays, consciously chose to stay. Everyday we are drawn to the failings of people but less attention is brought when people exhibit virtues.

Very interesting and, at least conceptually right, Sally.

But practically wrong, becuase there are invisible variables in the equations of political wife. Havent we all heard the expression "her husband ran around because she was too cold to give him attention"?

The trick is to distinguish between cases --- when is a husband's affair somehow the fault of a wife, and when is it, as you imply it was, an act of power --- 'Spitzer did it because he can'? BTW, I agree on your assessment of Spitzer and Clinton. But Craig? Vitter? Wayne Hays? John Doe? Surely marital counselors will tell you that it isnt ALWAYS the husband's fault. Even when the husband is political. Sometimes, just sometimes, it maybe mother nature's fault. Why would Mts Spitzer want to rush to judgment on that?

Getting back to practicality --- how is Mrs Spitzser's life going to improve if she leaves him? Would such a breakup be more than a massage for a scorned woman? The Economist magazine sai dthat Hillary stayed with Bill Clinton because "she liked the way the world looks from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave." Hmm, isnt THAT an action of power --- she stayed with him, BECAUSE SHE COULD?

The tangible impat here may just be on Hillary more than Silda Wall. Derivative power has its benefits, too. One may be a life of comfort. Another may be, to borrow a term from space exploration, " a gravitational slingshot" for a political career. And who knows, perhaps Ms. Wall-Spitzer may run for something. ya never really know do ya?

Lady -

I realize you have to push out words on a regular basis and make deadlines, but
it is really none of anyone's business why Silda Spitzer was up on the podium. Have you tried -SHOCK?

It's pretty gross that the media thrive and gorge on these kinds of scandals, and That prostitutes get PR like "IT" girls... The cameras zoom in for Schadenfreude and that's all there is to it. It's not as if more than half the couples in this country don't experience infidelity...and divorce, well, let's be frank - marriage doesn't work at least for more that the usual 4.5 years - death do us part -ha ha, so why does our society pretend and brush it under the carpet?

It would be refreshing to see the press focus on more
meaningful issues - instead of pumping this sensational dross beyond human tolerance.

Turn the page.

Thank you, Micheal Patterson from Scotland. My comment was too long to include what you stated. Mrs. Spitzer has done nothing wrong. She should not be attacked in the media.

This is a harsh view on events. Spitzer's wife is in shock. The marriage will not survive. She will not stand by her man. Right now, she's doing what she has to do to move forward as she processes the information she's just received. You don't just throw away a long-term relationship overnight. She has to process in her mind that there is NO way to get around what happened, NO way to forgive the situation, and NO way to move forward without leaving. She won't stay with him. Hillary, on the other hand, stays because she has a personal agenda that requires her to be married not because she forgives her husband and "stands by her man."

Ms. Quinn, I think you got it wrong. The men in those cases, political or not, behave this way because they have no self control, and a character flaw so deep that they can, and never will, live up to the standard demanded of those in public service, or the trust placed in them by their family. It has, in my view, nothing to do with arrogance - that they get away with such behavior for some period of time reinforces my view of their flawed character with all the lying and acts that demonstrate such a lack of honor. In some cases it may be a loss of personal self direction, but still a demonstration that they never deserved the trust given to them by their wives, family and the people who voted for them.
The wives are not demeaned or somehow belittled by standing by their partner. In my view, the wives appear to show the strength of character lacking in their wayward husbands. They live by the vows they made - and when I see them, I believe I'm even more disappointed at their husbands failing - such upstanding women deserve better than they received.

As a married heterosexual male, I am continually confused by women. As a group, they claim to want respect. But then in one incident, you have a woman demeaning herself by selling her body, and another woman accepting the ultimate disrespect from her "husband". Every woman who supports equal rights should be infuriated with both these women. Fortunately, I am married to a woman who would never stand by me if I violated my commitment to her.

I'm puzzled by what to me reads like an attack on Mrs. Spitzer. As far as I am aware, she has done nothing to merit such abuse. Maybe she loves her husband and plans to stay with him.

You wrote: "That is why these wives must stop standing supportively next to their husbands as they confess and explain and apologize. They are just as enabling of them in their shame as they were in their glory."

Do you know Mrs. Spitzer? Are you planning to manage her life for her from now on? Your remarks do come across as intrusive, offensive and very hostile.

You know, this story is not finished.

Ms. Spitzer may be helping get her husband, and herself, through this crisis right now. Maybe she's that kind of woman. But when the worst is over, and things settle down so that she can take measure, she will have choices to make. And don't bet your farm that she won't make them.

Those who suggest thst the Post get rid of Sally Quinn are, of course right, but it will never happen.

Why? Because she slept with the right connected, powerful, married man at the right time (i.e. the Editor who in his interview of Ms. Quinn quipped "nobody's perfect" after she advised she had never written anything professionally before.)

Gotta love a woman who slept to the top and then sanctimoniously rips a self made woman like Silda Spitzer...the irony is palpable.

In the Spitzer scenario, doesn't Quinn realize which part she would play? Hint: it isn't Silda.

It seems to me that Ms. Quinn is determined to teach women how to be combative yet correct in response. The fact that Mrs. Spitzer stood by her man in times of trouble just shows how much more grace she possess than Ms. Quinn who basically wants to see Mr. Spitzer further humiliated by an outraged woman who runs to the best divorce lawyer in the New York and so on...
straight out of Jerry Springer school of shame.
Let me give you a piece of advice Ms. Quinn- Expect a combative behavior filled with anger and revenge from an average woman who is only exposed to day time soap opera as well as the Opra point of view. Both Mrs. Spitzer and Senator Clinton are way above average. Does Harvard and Yale ring a bell Ms. Quinn?
Backround and level of education are 2 indicators of a certain code of behavior.
Counting to 10 and accepting humiliation at times are critical to survive and salvage a complicated personal crisis.
I sincerely believe that your input on the matter is different simply because you are an AVERAGE person with an average level of intelligence. Maybe masking it with a well articulated article is working on some of us. But it does not rise to the level my expectations.

Of course we expect the media to cast the first stone, but it seems unfair to an innocent party to insult her for putting her family ahead of her public reputation. Many people consider this forgivable. That's a decision for the family to make. Not everyone shares the media's obsession with scandal; some people make choices for what's best for themselves and their families, not for what plays best in the tabloids.

What a lot of self-righteous bunkum.

I agree with you completely, Sally.

What a bunch of self-reighteous whackos!

Dear Ms. Quinn,

Although you have stood on a point different from Mrs. Spitzer, Mrs. Hart, and Senator Clinton, you have been caught up in a similar extra-marital triangle. (I believe Mr. Bradlee was quite candid in his autobiography that you two began dating while he was still married.) That you might position yourself as a judge of the behavior of these women strikes me as tacky, to put it in the kindest way possible.

What makes your essay altogether ghastly is likening Mrs. Spitzer’s decision to support her husband with religious- and state-sanctioned misogyny, which elicits as much outrage as jaw-slackened disbelief.

In addition to a competent editor who might save you from such egregious writing, you could stand a healthy dollop of grace and humility.

Ms. Quinn, I think you got it wrong. The men in those cases, political or not, behave this way because they have no self control, and a character flaw so deep that they can, and never will, live up to the standard demanded of those in public service, or the trust placed in them by their family. It has, in my view, nothing to do with arrogance - that they get away with such behavior for some period of time reinforces my view of their flawed character with all the lying and acts that demonstrate such a lack of honor. In some cases it may be a loss of personal self direction, but still a demonstration that they never deserved the trust given to them by their wives, family and the people who voted for them.
The wives are not demeaned or somehow belittled by standing by their partner. In my view, the wives appear to show the strength of character lacking in their wayward husbands. They live by the vows they made - and when I see them, I believe I'm even more disappointed at their husbands failing - such upstanding women deserve better than they received.

This is the most idiotic line of thought I have read in a long time. Most impressive, for me, is to see that it is written in a so-called religious blog.

I thought marriage was also about love and forgiveness, am i wrong?

I'm not trying to justify mr. sptizer's mistakes. He was wrong, he sends the wrong message to his kids and he is guilty for hurting his family. But don't we all make mistakes?

I'm a wife and pray that my husband never betrays me. I truly don't know if i would be able to stand by him. But i understand and respect those that do.

What a great column. The best column written so far on Mrs. Spitzer. It does not have the one-dimentional perception of Mrs. Spitzer that the other columns were.

Why should it be a matter of choice for a woman? We forget that its not just politicians wives who stand by their men, often forgiving them, taking them back after being betrayed and hurt. Many women in everyday America face the same problem...and many stand by the men even after the fact. Is it possible that there could be other reasons for a woman to decide not to leave her husband during such an exhausting time? I come from one of those homes...one of those families where such an unfortunate situation has occured, and a beautiful, strong and compassionate woman decided to stand by her husband. Think again...

Why should it be a matter of choice for a woman? We forget that its not just politicians wives who stand by their men, often forgiving them, taking them back after being betrayed and hurt. Many women in everyday America face the same problem...and many stand by the men even after the fact. Is it possible that there could be other reasons for a woman to decide not to leave her husband during such an exhausting time? I come from one of those homes...one of those families where such an unfortunate situation has occured, and a beautiful, strong and compassionate woman decided to stand by her husband. Think again...

I think the point is we really don't know what she was thinking. I think it's demeaning to her for us to assume that she has somehow abdicated her free will in this case. She's not stupid and she's not not necessarily in a 1950s subservient woman frame of mind. Treating her simply as a victim demeans her. We don't know what sort of agency she might be exercising. I suspect she's stronger than people give her credit for.

The LADY DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH, given her
background.

(and if handing out the title 'lady' to Sally is appropriate here. Think not.)

Note how it's always the self aggrandizing religious type, the editors of such as ON FAITH
who come up with uglinest 'unChristian, unforgiving nastiness. Really, it's too cliche.

And let's bet Sally supports Hillary Clinton, fawns over her and runs right over when invited, and has for years. Let's talk hypocrit.

Silda Spitzer was probably in a deep state of shock. The resulting drama, of saying no, may not seem worthwhile.

Also, if she had not been at her husband's side, the media frenzy that followed would have been completely out of hand. She probably would have hounded for an explanation, until the press got an answer. By being there and saying nothing, she was able to preserve a morsel of her dignity.

Rick:

Men chase hookers. Wives chase money. Oh wait...that's a hooker

March 14, 2008 5:05 PM
------------------------------------------------------
No, Rick, that's a male-dominated society.

Didn't Sally Quinn seduce Ben Bradlee while she was a Post reporter?
Throwing stones is easy. We seem to forget about our own transgressions. And I've not lead a completely saintly life either.

To David Stallard: who wrote that Sally Quinn makes him sick by comparing Mrs. Spitzer to Taliban women & sati Indian women:

I agree with your saying Sally Quinn cannot know what went on between the Spitzers before he got up in front of the cameras. Their private relationship is their’s, nobody else has any right to know it.

However, I think you miss the point that women all over the world have long been taking 2nd place positions to men - with often catastrophic results - & do even in this society, which prides itself on not allowing this to happen any more.

In fact, the political use of women is rather outdated, don’t you think?

Still, watching a couple (or anyone) in trouble is a time-honored practice in any society, it teaches the rest of us how other people handle problems, & hopefully teaches us how best to handle our own. We learn by watching - that’s why we make TV that simulates reality instead of attending Roman coliseum-type fights to the death in person.

Ms Quinn does not “trivialize” women’s real problems in this article. The fact is, we cannot know what “real“ problems the Spitzer’s have since they have not made their whole private life public. Ms Quinn simply comments on the public appearance of a consummate & calculating political wife still standing behind her husband as he is made ridiculous by his own behavior. And her standing with him does indeed involve her in his ridiculousness. She is taking on his problems. And that is her choice. As it was Hillary’s once before. I actually admire a woman who stands up to the pressure of the whole world to divorce her disgraced husband & refuses. It’s actually putting more salt on his wound, don’t you think? So many people will say how undeserving he is to have such a faithful woman.

Plenty of people have quoted, "for better or for worse," and, "until death do us part." I may have missed it, but I didn't see any reference to, "And, forsaking all others, keep thee only unto her, until death do you part."

I agree that the message communicated by the image of the "supportive" spouse is a dreadful one. It constitutes a societal approval of spousal abuse. And make no mistake, with or without physical abuse, infidelity is spousal abuse. I have had a marriage founder on this issue, and it was because I refused to be a victim, and to put up with it. I set out on my own, and, while it wasn't an easy road, I became economically self-sufficient enough to support both myself and my children. Ladies, you don't need to take it.

Obviously Mrs. Spitzer did this because it is what she thinks society and constituents expect of her. I agree that private life should be private, unless it become hypocrisy. However, it is also about time we gave these women a break and quit expecting them to be humiliated because it is supposed to show they are good women.

Great column!! I'm glad you provoked such interesting comments on a subject that is long overdue.

And of course Sally Quinn knows nothing at all

about cheating with someone else's husband.

And harsh, prim scoulding of others is in line.

And of course Sally Quinn knows nothing at all

about cheating with someone else's husband.

And harsh, prim scoulding of others is in line.

IF you STAY by a husbnand WHO HAS CHEATED, but whose outting doesn't demand a public statement...

...If other words, if you've been cheated on and stayed with the rat anyway, and lots and lots of people know...is your position different than Spitzer's wife?

Doesn't your STAYING make you more wunnerful
than te wife who does so in a big public show?

Ms. Quinn must be very sure her own spouse has never strayed. Or that if he has, she doesn't know.

Otherwise she has pounced a little too hard and primely and self rightously on Spitzer's wife.

And Washington is SUCH a small town, with memories that go way back, waaaaay back.

Anonymous wrote: "Show of hands gentlemen--
How many of you would get up in front of the cameras and stand by your wife if she were caught committing adultery?"

I cannot imagine my wife ever committing adultery; but if she ever did, there's no way I'd be willing to get up in front of a camera and stand by her, no matter what I might have to gain by doing so.

"What would you think of a husband who would do so? Would you admire him, or would you laugh at him as being less than wholly male?"

I don't know if I'd view him necessarily as less than a man, but I certainly wouldn't admire him. I'd be inclined to think he was slightly off his rocker.

Good point, Anonymous! I couldn't have said it any better.

It is inappropriate to criticize Silda Spitzer in such a harrowing moment. She did what she thought was best in the situation. I admire her for it. The press should leave her alone.

It is none of your business what she does or how she handles it.

I was horrified for Silda Spitzer and truly thought she looked shell-shocked. However, I reacted in much the same way as Sally Quinn. When women stop standing by their man in these situations, maybe their men will stop taking the chances.

Most of those writing here seem to forget that this is not just about dalliances with prostitutes. Spitzer broke many laws--some of the same laws that he has prosecuted and imprisoned others for breaking. The utter hypocrisy and arrogance of his actions tell us a great deal about what kind of husband and father he is.

This is none of your business.

It is none of your business what she does or how she handles it.

I never understood why these men had their wives stand beside them, rather than stand alone in openly confessing their contriteness to the world.

It seems rather cowardly, in that the wives weren't party to their sinful playtime, but rather kept in the dark,

But like it or not, the lawyers advise their clients to station their wives by their side, as it softens the crime in the viewer's eyes, subliminally linking the wife, suggestively, as the possible perpetrator in why her man to strayed.

Dear SteelWheel1:
Thanks for your post.

This preaches hatred and selfishness instead of FAITH.

Anyone coming down hard on Ms. Spitzer or who is agreeing with this column's author Sally Quinn needs to do a little research on the author.

I never understood why these men had their wives stand beside them, rather than stand alone in openly confessing their contriteness to the world.

It seems rather cowardly, in that the wives weren't party to their sinful playtime, but rather kept in the dark,

But like it or not, the lawyers advise their clients to station their wives by their side, as it softens the crime in the viewer's eyes, subliminally linking the wife, suggestively, as the possible perpetrator in why her man to strayed.

I never understood why these men had their wives stand beside them, rather than stand alone in openly confessing their contriteness to the world.

It seems rather cowardly, in that the wives weren't party to their sinful playtime, but rather kept in the dark,

But like it or not, the lawyers advise their clients to station their wives by their side, as it softens the crime in the viewer's eyes, subliminally linking the wife, suggestively, as the possible perpetrator in why her man to strayed.

You'd think he would want to protect his wife and children from further damage. Wouldn't that mean he wouldn't WANT his wife there? Isn't he adult enough to face the consequences of HIS actions without needing the "weaker sex" wife to hold his hand?

Is he really that much of a coward and a cad?

Evidently, yes he is.

I hate to sound cynical, but, given how smart, competent, etc. Ms. Spitzer is, isn't it possible that she has negotiated a deal with him whereby she stands there while he purports to apologize and she later gets something valuable that she wants? That's what I'd do in her position. That's what many of us suspect Sen. Clinton did a long time ago with her errant husband. These are people who went into, or at least stayed in, their marriages with their eyes open. They either truly love their husbands despite their failings, or they're getting something important out of their shows of support.

Um, does anyone recall that Sally Quinn was herself the other woman and broke up the marriage of Ben Bradlee ? That makes the sanctimousness of this piece MUCH harder to swallow.

Men chase hookers. Wives chase money. Oh wait...that's a hooker

Going by your past, Sally ,you would have done the same thing as Spitzer did if you were a man . So enough of your self-righteous and feminist writings.

Perhaps Ms. Spitzer loves her husband. He's made an unbelievably stupid and hurtful mistake, but can we really say we love someone and then not at least remain open to forgiving them when they make a mistake? Let s/he who is without sin...you know the rest.

Show of hands gentlemen--

How many of you would get up in front of the cameras and stand by your wife if she were caught committing adultery?

What would you think of a husband who would do so? Would you admire him, or would you laugh at him as being less than wholly male?

I bet that in this society, he'd be laughed at; not held up as an example of a good husband.

As for Silda, well, whatever she decides to do about her marriage is her business. But I fail to understand why she is tacitly approving of his actions by standing up there next to him.

He had more sex than she did, without her there, why did he need her there now? Is he that much of a coward?

Infidelity once is a mistake. Infidelity with prostitutes multiple times, while prosecuting others for the same activities is a character flaw. Perhaps he simply lacks a conscience and viewed this as a game.

Well, game over. He lost his cover.

Try as we may to create an illusion of grandeur about ourselves, the fact is we're not all that fabulously educated, brilliantly careered, and powerfully positioned as we like to think we are, and we spend a lot of time trying to convince ourselves otherwise. Like by being able to pay for an extremely expensive, beautiful woman who isn't aware of (or doesn't act like she's aware of) that fact that we are anything but perfect.

I disagree. If you took Ms. Quinn's opinion literally it means that whenever your spouse disagraces themselfs than it is justifiable to leave to avoid disgrace themselves. What she failed to mention is why women choose to stay and support the men who choose to let their power and ego to fade. What a marriage is a commitment between one man and a woman peroid. It does not include what others may perceive from outside of that marriage. And if Silda Spitzer choose to step beside her husband behind that podium and watch her husband repent with his dialiences with a hooker, so be it. None of us know what is going on behind closed doors and no one us should know for that matter.

That same argument of women leaving when a man acts a fool could be swung right at the woman? And what kind of marriage do you really have when your commitment is based on the perspectition of others opinion?

No I am not saying that Spitzer's behaviour appropriate, no I am not saying that at all, it was a complete disgrace to himesef, his family as well as the public office. But he stood up and acknoledged his error and asked for forgives, we do not need to rub salt in the woound.

But if a spouse chooses to support their spouse they do it in both sucess as well as their failures.

FACT OF LIFE:
No woman in her late 40s or early 50s can offer what a 22 year old woman can. No matter how good or gracious she is, she cant. Everybody keeps overlooking that simple fact of life. How hard is that to understand?
MARCH 14, 2008 4:12 PM
****************************************************************

I have read most of the comments on here today and this is the one that gave me the first laugh out loud.

My guess it is written by one of the following:

1. A high school girl with her eye on her sports teacher.
2. A high school boy with his eye on his Math teacher.
3. Their Father with his eye on the new receptionist.
4. The receptionist who has her eye on the C.E.O
5. The C.E.O.'s wife who just spent half a million on
cosmetic surgery, looks 22 and has run off with Donald
Trump.

I think Danielle Crittenden said it best in her article (attributing the wit to her journalistic husband) that when your marriage is on life support the first reaction shouldn't be to pull the plug. Ms. Quinn may think it best for the kids that mom up and leaves post haste, others, including me, would disagree. As rightfully angry as his wife and children must surely be, he is the only husband/dad they have and they have every right and should be granted the benefit of every doubt in coming to their own conclusions in their own good time.

Oh please. A woman gets cheated on by her husband with a prostitute and you decide to attack HER? Are you friends with Charlotte Allen?
No one knows what goes on behind the closed doors of a marriage. Why would you be so audacious to question her motivations? I certainly don't approve of the use of a prostitute by a governor, but I'm certainly not going to judge his wife in the immediate aftermath.

I commented earlier, but after scanning more of the other comments, I feel compelled to say something else. The number of media representatives and readers who are using the Spitzer episode as an excuse to pile on Hillary Clinton or once again trash Bill Clinton is simply disgusting and rather frigtening. I've yet to come across anyone from either group connecting Eliot Spitzer with say, Martin Luther, King, Jr., Ted or John Kennedy, Newt Gingrich, Larry Craig, David Vitter, or maybe even Thomas Jefferson or Ben Franklin. Or for that matter, any of their respective wives.

I commented earlier, but after scanning more of the other comments, I feel compelled to say something else. The number of media representatives and readers who are using the Spitzer episode as an excuse to pile on Hillary Clinton or once again trash Bill Clinton is simply disgusting and rather frigtening. I've yet to come across anyone from either group connecting Eliot Spitzer with say, Martin Luther, King, Jr., Ted or John Kennedy, Newt Gingrich, Larry Craig, David Vitter, or maybe even Thomas Jefferson or Ben Franklin. Or for that matter, any of their respective wives.

Ms. Quinn, your sanctimoniousness is despicable. How could you presume to know one shred what Silda Spitzer is going through as to pass judgment on her? You speak of Mr. Spitzer's arrogance, but your own arrogance is astonishing. Please spare us your self-righteous blathering.

This is outrageous and offensive nonsense.

What gives you the right to say what Silda Spitzer should do or not do in this situation? How do you know what went on between the two of them prior to their appearance on that podium? Maybe their marriage or their sex life was wretchedly unhappy. Or maybe he was stricken by remorse, sobbing his guts out and begging her for forgiveness. Or maybe they just don't want the public to know what's going on between them. You don't KNOW. And it's not your BUSINESS. You have no right to judge her - none, and no right to inject your foolish, self-righteous, and callow commentary into this excruciatingly private matter.

But particularly outrageous, offensive, and contemptible is this:

"All I could think of, watching Silda Spitzer’s defeated expression, was of Taliban women covered from head to toe in burqa, standing a few paces behind their men, appendages to their all powerful husbands. Or Indian women committing sati, throwing themselves on their husband’s funeral pyre."

This disgraceful sentence speaks for itself, and scarcely needs any elaboration. It trivializes the agonies of women in such cultures. It reduces to petulance and caricature the real issues raised by feminism. And it forfeits your right to be taken seriously in intellectual discourse.

I can assure you, more harm is done to cause of equality by women like you, then by women like her. You make me sick.

I doubt that I would have stood there beside him. He alone got himself into this mess and he alone should have held the press conference...on the other hand who are we to judge her motives w/o having walked in her shoes.

I totally agree with Sally Quinn. It doesn't equate that the wife who is with her husband for the glory should also share his shame. After all, Mrs Spitzer wasn't consulted about Gov. Spitzer's deliberate decision to be unfaithful with a hooker. Or his deceptive money transfers.

He didn't think about his wife or
family; only his selfish impulses. She should kick him to the curb.

Silda Spitzer had a successful career and returning to it will give her and her children the strength to start a new life without now exGov Spitzer. To shame his family like this for all the world to see is despicable. He doesn't deserve them. And they certainly don't need him.

Here is another example of degredation for the female.

Damned if she stands with him, and damned if she does not stand with him.

If she stands with him, she is an enabler...just like an enabler for an alcoholic.

The next question is: WHY? WHY did HE
EXCHANGE ANY TYPE OF FAVOR, FOR GENITAL SEX WITH A PROSTITUTE!!!????

THIS BEHAVIOR PUTS SILDA AT RISK OF BEING INFECTED WITH AIDS FROM HER HUSBAND!!!

WHEN the time arrives for Silda to consider
disolving the marriage....EVEN THE BIBLE SAYS EXTRAMARITAL GENITAL SEX IS WRONG.....
THE COURT SHOULD GIVE HER EVERYTHING.

I wouldn't assume she was clueless about her husbands predilictions. It is easy to jump to the conclusion that she is a victim. Perhaps she is, perhaps not. Maybe they had a terrible sex life and she condoned his looking elsewhere for satisfaction. We just don't know what happened in a marital relationship and it was her choice to be there. She's a big girl, Harvard educated a lawyer to boot. Let's not extrapolate from apprearances.

Mrs Spitzer was obviously stunned by the incident.She no doubt was advised by her husbands close associates to stand by his side and she complied as no one else probably advised her to avoid publicly appearing with him.The unsuspecting wife is always stunned when such matters surface.Maybe MS Quinn would react in the same manner if her husband pulled such a caper?When young children are involved a womans natural instinct is to think of her children and keep her family together.It is called survival of the family entity.In time she may realize that he is not worth her noble effort and dump him.Unlike most woman who face this dilema,MRS Spitzer would not have to concern herself with economic considerations in deciding whether to remain or leave the relationship.She may eventually seek a divorce and that would be the best punishment that could be imposed upon him. Most women remain with unfaithful spouses because they have no viable economic alternative.She does.

In response to Facts of Life
Neither can a man in his late 40s or 50s give what a man in his 2os can give.

Men are always seeking the "taunt fine sexy women", while bringing to the table flabby inoperable equimpent (men in the 40s and older).

this from a woman who couldn't get the editor of the wa post to marry her for years.
and she is an insider? sure, quinn has got where she got by sleeping with ben bradlee.

Fact of Life claims: "No woman in her late 40s or early 50s can offer what a 22 year old woman can. No matter how good or gracious she is, she cant. Everybody keeps overlooking that simple fact of life. How hard is that to understand?"
I completely, totally disagree. That is why, when I became a widower at the age of 49, I lost no time going right after a woman 4-1/2 years my senior. We were married within eight months, and neither of us has ever been happier than we have been for the last eleven years.
A woman in her 40s or 50s has experience in life, which almost always translates into maturity. Those are things that a woman in her early 20s completely lacks. She can be a true companion and partner in every sense to a man in her age bracket, again something of which a woman in her 20s would generally be incapable.
As for the idea that women in their 20s are better in the bedroom, that's an absolute myth. And by the way, contrary to the message broadcast nonstop by the entertainment media, marriage is far more fulfilling than fornication or adultery.

In response to Facts of Life
Neither can a man in his late 40s or 50s give what a man in his 2os can give.

Men are always seeking the "taunt fine sexy women", while bringing to the table flabby inoperable equimpent (men in the 40s and older).

It is so easy to judge the actions of others when we are not directly involved. I would think that Mrs. Spitzer has a lot more on her mind that just "standing by her man." What we need is understanding and charity not to mention compassion for a family that has been torn apart by yet another foolish man. She and her daughters need our support not criticism.

I agree; however, I am a private person, so I would never release my own statement saying I'm leaving him or anything else. My private life is my private business and I'd say nothing. So those who think the wife should publically blast the guy should realized maybe she doesn't care to air her laundy in public.

Right on Sally, I couldn't have said it better!

this from a woman who couldn't get the editor of the wa post to marry her for years.
and she is an insider? sure, quinn has got where she got by sleeping with ben bradlee.

I don't assume to know what's going on in their personal lives. I have heard, tho, that she advised him NOT to resign.

However,even if she decides to stay with him and work it out with him, she should have done it in private rather than appearing by his side - which sends a message to young women that's ok to be treated like crap. (My god woman, have you no pride???)

There are so many young women out there with low self esteem this kind of action really doesn't help matters much.

I'm sure like these young women, she assumes he'll get better and it will "never happen again." Unfortunately, statistics show that if happens once, the chances are it will happen again and again.

Astonishing that a blog that bills itself as being "on Faith" would put so little value on empathy, compassion, and the ability to forgive.

Anyone coming down hard on Ms. Spitzer or who is agreeing with this column's author Sally Quinn needs to do a little research on the author.

Ms. Quinn isn't a paragon of virtue on either side of this argument. She knowingly slept with Benjamin C. Bradlee,a married man who happen to be her boss at the time while working at the Washington Post. She was responsible for break up a family and sleeping her way to the top. And now she is presenting herself as some really tough feminist that wouldn't put up with a philandering man. WOW!

Ms. Quinn,

In all of your arrogant, self-righteous, smugly assumed superiorioty as you pass judgment on Silda Spitzer and other women who have endured similar trauma, has it even once occurred to you that Silda is still in shock? Or better yet, has it even once occurred to you that the choices she makes regarding her personal life are none of your business?

Right on Quinn!
I shared the same sentiments Wednesday on my blog.
www.5andapossible.blogspot.com

Can Sally Quinn point out to me ONE example in RECENT times of an Indian Woman committing SATI?
So it seems even if your are moderator in a Panel you cannot get rid of your sensational journalistic habits!

Savard:
**"Till death do you part" ... not till adultery do you part. To be a person of faith, and then criticize a woman (be it Silda Spitzer or Hillary Clinton) of standing by their man to make a marriage work instead of showing them the door is appalling.**

Actually, adultery is even recognized as grounds for divorce in the Bible. And the way I see it, if my husband can't be trusted with something as simple as keeping his fly up when he leaves the house, how can he be trusted with anything else? Once he whips it out with another woman, he has broken a sacred trust, and has effectively killed the marriage. A marriage can die and the individuals in it survive.

**Get real... before "liberation" many marriages survived infidelity to go on to be long and loving marriages. How does forgiveness of adultery become a sign of weakness?**

Long, perhaps, especailly since obtaining a divorce was more difficult. But loving? I doubt it. I've been married to an adulterer. You can't love him if you can't trust him. Howis it a sign of strength to stay with someone you know is not trustworthy and not call him on it?

I am in complete agreement. We as women MUST STOP allowing men/boys to treat us anyway and we still take it. If every lowdown man was told NO by his wife and told No by girlfriends the world would be a better place. We have not "come a long way". We as women have only made progress in the work world-violence against women is increasing. REFUSE TO BE A VICTIM IN ALL PARTS
OF YOUR LIFE!!

Hindu religious scriptures do not demand widows to commit Sati. Sati is an option of the woman who wants to go to the other world with her husband. The word sati has been confused with word Jauhar.

In the medeival ages, when foreign Islamic armies attacked India, Jauhar or mass self immolation was committed by women when their husbands died to protect themselves from the perversions of the invading barbarians.

In past one hundred years there has been only one recorded case of "Sati" in India. This event was rightfully considered illegal and those involved were charged with murder.

Dear Sally:

Arrogance and power! Wow!
You are exactly correct,in my opinion.

The "average" American woman, married to the "average" American man...
now I'm not talking about the person on the "fast track" or "destined for corporate leadership"....
is left with one less excellent role model.

What a pity.

psb/

We she did not have to stand next to her husband during the press conference. She did that ON HER OWN FREE WILL. There is no legal way to force her to be there. So, if she wants to be "humiliated" on national television, that's pretty much her problem.

This is what she could have done instead (and, she still can do this, the law allows her to). She could have simply told her husband:

"I'm keeping the house and half your assets. I'm taking full custody of the kids. I expect monthly alimony checks plus child support for the kids in the amount of $whatever. My divorce lawyer will contact you tomorrow, first thing in the morning. And as for that press conference you are talking about, well, you are on your own mister."

But no, she decided to be there supporting her husband, well, that's her business.

The moral of the story is that there is no moral. We should know by now that, generally speaking, politicians are not to be taken as moral role models.

It vas di munee!

I am just curious about possible answers for the following questions: What would have been the countries' reaction--all the men and women and politicians, etc.-- if the gender situation was inverted? That is, what if the "cheater" was a woman? Would he have had the guts and character that so many women have displayed?

Jorge.

When you saw her standing next to him, didn't you think, "Wow, he really screwed this up. He's never going to find another woman like her."

Plus, the power of guilt rays drops off with the square of distance. Eliot Spitzer probably would have been more comfortable on his own.

No woman in her late 40s or early 50s can offer what a 22 year old woman can. No matter how good or gracious she is, she cant. Everybody keeps overlooking that simple fact of life. How hard is that to understand?

sally-- " We are women, hear us roar!!!" Boy you sure know how to kick someone when there down---WHY do you so piously assume you would walk any differently in their shoes? Human beings are so much more than simply defined,"appendages".

I can understand Silda Spitzer's first appearance. The news had no doubt come as a shock to her, and she probably had not had time to think about what to say. However, on the occasion of his resignation, she could have grabbed the microphone and announced: "In case you all were wondering, I have engaged the services of [name of high-priced divorce lawyer], who charges $5,000 an hour, for all of which Eliot is going to end up paying. See you in court, dear!"

I agree fully with everything you said. Maybe the wife is too used to the way of life and likes his millions !

What you're advocating is an eye for an eye. It's a bit haughty to paint the whole spectrum of marriages (political and otherwise) with such a broad brush. It's impossible to know the inner workings of these relationships, much less the individuals, that bring them to make their decisions and it's an arrogant point of view to think that simply making a public statement about leaving the husband who committed such a gross public misdeed is in itself empowering. Even in a cynical age as this one, people can and still do have genuine love and respect for each other, even though we are inclined as human beings to be less than perfect. Bottom-line: Difficult, personal choices remain the realm of the individuals involved and not to the purview or judgement of those who play a role in the media machinery and thank God for that.

In this life, we ought to speak only for ourselves and our choices ... never to project our perceptions of reality on to another. For what ever her reasons, this lady has made the choices she deems appropriate for her and the rest of us has no right to pass judgment. Unless you walk in another (wo)-man's shoes, you will never know. I ask that you at least allow this lady the right, if she so chooses to be by her husband's side.

I have only one comment regarding Mr. Spitzer:

"let he who is amongst us without sin, cast the first stone"

In this life, we ought to speak only for ourselves and our choices ... never to project our perceptions of reality on to another. For what ever her reasons, this lady has made the choices she deems appropriate for her and the rest of us has no right to pass judgment. Unless you walk in another (wo)-man's shoes, you will never know. I ask that you at least allow this lady the right, if she so chooses to be by her husband's side.

I have only one comment regarding Mr. Spitzer:

"let he who is amongst us without sin, cast the first stone"

Dear Ms. Quinn:

I enjoyed reading your post on the developing saga of the Spitzer family and find it freshing and candid. From a practical standpoint, I am unable to offer an insight as to why Mrs. Spitzer would stand on the dais in support from my male perspective. I could offer some speculations like tremendous grace, forgiveness, sacrifice, etc, however the impact of those values are all contigent on the long-term attitude from her spouse after the fact.

Not to stray to far from your topic, but as a 42 single male in American society, the values and focus I sure would love to be inpsired by my peers and mentors is one who would stand up and live to never have to be on "that" dais over the course of a long career in business, politics, etc. rather than to find and understand that woman would be compelled to stand up and fall on a sword with me or ponder let alone ponder that direction of thought.

I do not know if these thoughts help or are what your are looking for, but as a man today, it does not make life any easier as this continues to occur. It seems like getting away with it is just not worth it.

Thank you for listening.

Sincerely,

David S. Conklin (Dave)
Silver Spring, Maryland
david.conklin@fda.hhs.gov

what about mrs. barney frank?

I agree with your statement, "One can only assume that the women who do this are just as enamored of the power and the position as their men." I am from the Philippines and lived under the Marcos dictatorship for almost twenty years. The main reason Imelda stood by her man through all his infidelities is the power she was given in exchange for her silent acceptance.

Your self-righteousness makes me sick. I guess you think you are a perfect human being.

I am afraid I have to agree with the writer - it is high time that women take a stand to reject this role that society has thrust on them. Sorry...my Mother was one of those who stood by and supported my Alcoholic Dad, and I will never know what it would have been like if she had acted differently, but I don't think she had it in her to do so.

I totally and completely agree with you Ms. Quinn.

As a child I was raised in an abusive family. I do not know if my father ever had an affair, but on a daily basis I witnessed and was a victim of physical and verbal abuse. I swore I would not have this in my adult life and my children would not have to live with those types of behaviors. Because I stood up for my beliefs and the rights of my children I am a single parent. I was walked out on for wanting better for myself and my children. Since then I have remained single for the simple fact that men believe they can treat women and children any way they want to and get away with it.

It is hard living life without a partner, but like I tell my close friends and family I would rather live my life alone than suffer in relationship where my children and I are not honored, cherished, respected and loved.

My youngest will graduate high school this year and will join the military. When this happens I will focus on my future and begin college. I hope that I will learn something that will help other women, like myself, have the courage to stand up for themselves and make a change that will be lasting and positive.

Why are you taking the stance that she is being humiliated as if she has done something wrong? She is not responsible for his actions. Just because she is physically standing beside him does not necessarily mean she is there in support. I perceive it as being present for a public apology as well as making him feel even worse that the person he harmed the most is right there and he cannot deny the harm.

Rather than criticize Mrs. Spitzer for "standing up there" with her husband, we should let her make her own decision. Obviously, she loves her husband. When anyone has such feelings and something happens like this comes along -- something you can hardly believe is happening and you have little time to sort out your feelings --, the natural instinct is to keep loving that someone, regardless. I'm sure she will eventually come to some decision, but in the meantime, we can only respect her for her innate courage and -- something her husband needs now, whether he knows it or not -- her compassion.

The kind of woman who marries a man like that is the kind of woman who stands up there next to him. It is self-selection - the women with the self-esteem to dump him now were the ones who saw through him on the first date.

Why don't we wait to hear all the facts before judgement is passed; maybe, just maybe, she had her own good reason for being there that has nothing at all to do with your analysis.

This is completely unfair. Somehow, through her hustband's wrongdoing, Mrs. Spitzer has become an object of scorn for those of us who claim we would never do such a thing. Why are we women so tough on each other? To think it is one thing. To publish criticism for the world to see is another. Some self-reflection before publishing such a self-righteous column would have been advantageous for all of us women who are trying to do it all.

These folks live in a world of pomp. Out in public you are regal, the First Lady. Spitzer can’t then come back home and ask for freaky stuff, a BJ. That would seem condescending. So these men need a ‘Ho’.

She went out and played the role. Trapped in power. Maybe she thought they could hold-on to that, and deal with Elliot in private.

Further, what is Silda to do in protest, at this point? Perhaps she encouraged her husband to seek sex in some new fashion. What does she lose by standing for him in crisis? You're full of double standards, aren't you?

Maybe she forgave him?

Could that her and her children's well being are at stake too if she walks away from him?
I bet you she have better reason than you can think of.

American politicians' wives may have trouble standing up for themselves, but not so Cécilia Ciganer-Albéniz, the wife of French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who divorced him a few months after he took office.

Sally, this is a shallow and foolish column.

Those of you who read Dina McGreevey's commentary in the NY Times on Tuesday or listened to her on NPR's Talk of the Nation yesterday got the best take on this kind of thing.

Mrs. McGreevey gave several reasons why she stood by her husband (NJ Governor) as he declared himself gay.

First, for her daughter. She was trying to avoid a scorched earth response that would harm her child.

Second, she was in a state of shock and didn't necessarily have time to come to the kick him in the groin response that many of us would like to see. I haven't read her book, but it would be interesting to understand her process in sorting it all out over time.

Third, she'd built a life with this guy and didn't jettison her love for him overnight.

And as far as all speculation about what Silda Spitzer knew or didn't know about Elliot's adultery, felt or didn't feel, blah blah blah endless media speculation - that's for her to know and for the rest of us to leave alone.

The irony (or hypocrisy) is that so many in the media express sympathy with Mrs. Spitzer while trashing her decision making and heaping on the coals. It's obviously too much to ask that she be left alone by bottom feeders like Ms. Quinn.

Dumb column Sally. Dumb.

What has the straying of a spouse have to do with the realities of marriage? It is in the nature of the species to stray, and we all know it. What a bifurcation of reality. Let's normalize it, as we do in reality, and remove another falsehood from our lives.

Amen!

Your story is right on. Silda, however, was in shock and unable to think clearly as everything was moving so fast. She wasn't able to think clearly and thus assumed the role of a typical victimized housewife "standing by her man." I believe she was devastated, humiliated, torn and conflicted by trying not to have to think about how their lives were going to change by this. It would have been better for her and her girls if she had not appeared by his side either day and let him face the media alone. While he goes through with all he has to do, she should shelter herself and the girls from all that his behavior has and will put them through. She needs to let him face his consequeences of his action alone.

Your story is right on. Silda, however, was in shock and unable to think clearly as everything was moving so fast. She wasn't able to think clearly and thus assumed the role of a typical victimized housewife "standing by her man." I believe she was devastated, humiliated, torn and conflicted by trying not to have to think about how their lives were going to change by this. It would have been better for her and her girls if she had not appeared by his side either day and let him face the media alone. While he goes through with all he has to do, she should shelter herself and the girls from all that his behavior has and will put them through. She needs to let him face his consequeences of his action alone.

Your story is right on. Silda, however, was in shock and unable to think clearly as everything was moving so fast. She wasn't able to think clearly and thus assumed the role of a typical victimized housewife "standing by her man." I believe she was devastated, humiliated, torn and conflicted by trying not to have to think about how their lives were going to change by this. It would have been better for her and her girls if she had not appeared by his side either day and let him face the media alone. While he goes through with all he has to do, she should shelter herself and the girls from all that his behavior has and will put them through. She needs to let him face his consequeences of his action alone.

Women like her have spent their lives chasing men like Elliot. She stands by him for one reason. It is all she knows. She is going to continue standing by him until the (BD) 'better deal' presents itself. If the better deal doesn't she will stay with him period. You really think she is going to date your average Joe running around New York? You think that in the social circles she runs where conceit is consider an admirable trait one of those men are going to take her and the children in. These women are defined by the men they marry period.

Wow, this is refreshing!!!
Sally got it right!!!

Women like her have spent their lives chasing men like Elliot. She stands by him for one reason. It is all she knows. She is going to continue standing by him until the (BD) 'better deal' presents itself. If the better deal doesn't she will stay with him period. You really think she is going to date your average Joe running around New York? You think that in the social circles she runs where conceit is consider an admirable trait one of those men are going to take her and the children in. These women are defined by the men they marry period.

Silda Spitzer is doing the same, embarrassing and belittling thing that Hillary Clinton did. I do not want the president of the US to be able to just stand their and accept the lies and refuse to do anything about it. How about you act like you have some sort of fortitude and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!! Does Hillary's vast experience in the public eye include her standing next to the scumbag who cheated on her?

Silda Spitzer is doing the same, embarassing and belittling thing that Hillary Clinton did. I do not want the president of the US to be able to just stand their and accept the lies and refuse to do anything about it. How about you act like you have some sort of fortitude and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!! Does Hillary's vast experience in the public eye include her standing next to the scumbag who cheated on her?

Yet another idiot pundit making far-fetched comparisons to make her point (whether tenuous or not.) In particular, this woman's referring to sati in India is idiotic since it has not existed in India since at least 250 years, and even when it did, it was an extremely rare occurrence.

As for the main point of the article of wives as the always suffering victims, sociology tells us that adultery is not exactly uncommon among women.

so maybe they feel obligated to stand by as part of their marriage contract.

How much does that contract cost her? I wonder how much he will agree to pay her, for services rendered on that podium.

He should have been a man and protected his family from further harm by standing on that podium by himself. After all, he didn't invite her to play with his little call girls, he did that all by himself!

Dear Ms.Quinn:

As one of the co-founders of NOW, I couldn't agree with you more. You omitted Effie Barry, who may not have stood alongside her husband, former Mayor of DC Marion Barry, but did stay with him and make appearances at his trial--although she divorced him thereafter--for being caught on videotape smoking pot with a hooker in a DC hotel room, if memory serves.

Best regards,

Sonia Pressman Fuentes
spfuentes@comcast.net
website: http://www.erraticimpact.com/fuentes

This is why western society should allow men to have many wives. You have the 'trophy' wife, and then the others for play time.

There is a difference between having a big heart and not considering yourself worth fighting for.

Silda Spritzer is simply taking advantage of her husband's position just as much as he did. I dont think she views his infidelity as a big deal. In fact, I would be surprised if this was the first time he had been involved with other women. In her own mind, she may think she is being smart.

The only ones that will empathize are women in the same situation.

Kim wrote -

"I dont think it makes the wives look bad at all to stand by their husbands during a time of crisis."

A crisis is when your husband loses his job and is penniless. A crisis is when he is ill and needs your support to pull him through. A crisis is when he goes away to serve his country and you have a family to raise. A crisis is when he is forced to work menial jobs to put food on the table.

A marriage that goes through all of this and still stays faithful should be NOT be considered equivalent to a marriage that is the victim of a wandering eye. It may sound harsh - but its true.

A crisis is NOT forking over thousands of dollars for sexual pleasure. A crisis is NOT forgetting about the reputation of your wife and children at stake. A crisis is NOT wounding the pride of a woman who you swore to cherish and love. A crisis is not hurting thousands of people who believed in you and your cause. A crisis does not include dropping your pants for a few bucks. A crisis does NOT constitute betraying your family.

Cheating is not a crisis - its an irresponsile and selfish choice you make voluntarily.

This is not the kind of example you want for your daughters. I would NEVER tell my daughter to stand by a man who hurt her so severely.

Which is why I think either Mrs Spritzer is not really hurting or she just doesnt find this to be a worthy battle. This is probably not the first time her husband has looked outside their marriage for pleasure. She has to be used to it by now.

I agree with Millie Bea.

I also hope that he gives her a really big check. Hmm, like 5x what he's spent on prostitutes over the past 10 years?

With interest too.

Seems the least he can do for needing her there to prop up his image as a family man for the media. It would've been better for him if he hadn't dragged her out into the spotlight right after he drove a truck over her heart.

I mean, he's using her image to buff his own. I hope she demands a big payday for it. I only wish she had put on her Power Panties and told him to sweat it all by himself, instead. But, that was their decision.

What a jerk.

Women have not come very far it seems. No matter how poorly Mr. Spitzer has acted, people are angry at the wife!

Mr. Spitzer deserves our criticism and judgement. He broke the law and acted immorally. Silda does not deserve judgement. It's nobody's business how she chooses to cope with this crisis. You have no insight into their private relationship. Who are you to tell her what her next move should be? Do you think that she should be unwilling to forgive and work things out? Why do you feel this way? Is watching a family break apart some sort of new entertainment?

Give her a break, and let her manage without your armchair family counseling.

I disagree with Ms. Quinn's opinion that standing by your man through adversity, albeit self inflicted, is a sign weakness. On the contrary, I think it demonstrates courage. I don't pretend to understand what the reasons were for Mr Spitzers unfaithfulness, but is it possible that his wife still loves him?
I wonder why the first thing that comes to Ms. Quinn's mind would be Taliban or Indian women. Does she believe that they are inferior to western women in some way? I would like to remind her that India elected a woman as prime minister almost 50 years ago. Indira Gandhi was accused of many things, but being weak was not one of them. And neither is Hillary.
I think Elliot Spitzer deserves everything that is coming to him. But have we become so cynical that we can't accept that a beautiful, brainy and undoubtably strong woman is capable of the noble, and and certainly Christian path of forgiveness?

Ask Eliot Spitzer whether he thinks he got away with it. And in case he remains delusional about this type of thing, let me know if you find any other man interested in trading places with him right now; that would be better evidence on the subject.

As for Silda Spitzer ... children play tit for tat. I do not see that that makes it wise for her to do the same. I give her credit for thinking for herself.

Eliot Spitzer is an idiot for cheating on his accomplished and spectacular wife. That being said, if it was my wife who cheated I would stand up by her and support her--because I love her...isn't that the point? I don't think I view it in terms of 'advancing equality' but in terms of the entirety of our relationship and how much my wife means to me. I find it sad that you may not be in a relationship that you could feel that way. It is less an outward statement of mens v. womens rights as oppossed to a personal statement of what marriage (and that person) still means to the individual (despite their tragic flaws).

Women are expected to stand by their man, but I just don't think people hold the same expectation for men. I mean could you visualize Spitzer standing beside his wife under the same circumstances? How about Bill standing beside Hillary at a press conference had the circumstances been reversed? If the men stayed they would be seen as weak.

I'm really tired of hearing people tell women what they must or must not do. To bully a woman into leaving her husband because he cheats is as wrong as guilting her into staying.

Silda Spitzer made her own choice. Why she did it is beyond Me. Quinn's right to speculate or judge.

Here's my advice to offended feminists; go home, talk to your daughters, talk about what happened and explain that what we think we see happening is only the surface of what really goes on between a man and a woman in a marriage. That Silda Spitzer has every right to make the choice she wishes but that choice may not be right for all women. We all have to fight our own battles.

Not one single one of us can truly say what we would do in her situation.

Just quit. Just quit with the silly speculation.

Rock on sister!

Those who suggest thst the Post get rid of Sally Quinn are, of course right, but it will never happen. Why? Because she slept with the right connected, powerful, married man at the right time. In the Spitzer scenario, doesn't Quinn realize which part she would play? Hint: it isn't Silda.

Glad to have found this article. It`s high time to criticise those well-educated women for their behaviour. As you rightly pointed out in your article Mrs. Silda Spitzer wasn't the first (Mrs. Gary Hart, Mrs. Bob Livingston, Mrs. Larry Craig, Mrs. David Vitter, Mrs. Bill Clinton) and I fear she wasn`t the last. I wonder what these women expect to get from those guys in return? Hillary Clinton didn`t find any much help in Bill campaigning for her.
Young women: it`s time to set precedents. Don`t let anyone treat (humiliate) you this way. Speak out!
Fellow-women: support those who speak out and distance themselves from their husbands who cheat on them and tell lies. They deserve our support as it might initially be harder for them.

Well Sally, given your subjective morality I can understand your question. But as way of information there are still some people who marry who take the oath of marriage seriously.
"In sickness and in health, for richer or poorer, in good times and bad. Till death do you part." Sally, please tell me you DON'T teach your morality to children!?

"Till death do you part" ... not till adultery do you part. To be a person of faith, and then criticize a woman (be it Silda Spitzer or Hillary Clinton) of standing by their man to make a marriage work instead of showing them the door is appalling.

Get real... before "liberation" many marriages survived infidelity to go on to be long and loving marriages. How does forgiveness of adultery become a sign of weakness?

Get real. Elliot Spitzer is in no way getting off easy from Silda. But it is NOT our place to tell her how she should choose to live her life.

Great column and spot on. It all starts with their decisions on picking men in the beginning. They want the money and power versus choosing a regular educated working guy. These pay the price and then they don't want to give up the perks. In the end, in a deeper way, they are prostititues too, and in a less straight-forward way.

Great column and spot on. It all starts with their decisions on picking men in the beginning. They want the money and power versus choosing a regular educated working guy. These pay the price and then they don't want to give up the perks. In the end, in a deeper way, they are prostititues too, and in a less straight-forward way.

a woman who burns her self on the fires of her deceased husband is 'moral and virtious' in India.

how barbaric

a woman who burns her self on the fires of her deceased husband is 'moral and virtious' in India.

how barbaric

a woman who burns her self on the fires of her deceased husband is 'moral and virtious' in India.

how barbaric

Great column and spot on. It all starts with women's decisions on picking men in the beginning. Ms. Spitzer is a Harvard MBA and that's not enough. They want more money and power versus choosing a regular educated working guy. These women pay the price and then they don't want to give it up. In the end, in a deeper way, they are prostititues too, and in a less straight-forward way.

I couldn't help but to sense an air of irony reading this article...I enjoyed it, don't get me wrong, but let's not lose sight that the author herself is one who slept all the way to the top at the Wahington Post!! Good article but written by the wrong person....

Silda is entitled to behave as she wishes.

Where do you get off dictating people's behavior?

Does it occur to you that she chose to be there at that time?
I can see why anyone would choose not be at their spouse's side at a moment like that, but who are you to pontificate?

Just once I’d like to see the wife take the microphone and say, “It’s time to end sexual hypocrisy in this country. For tens of thousands of years polygamy was the norm because society recognized that some men are biologically driven to need more than one woman. This isn’t a moral failure, it’s a biological imperative produced by millions of years of evolution. To require non-monogamous men to be monogamous is as contrary to nature as requiring gay men to be straight. How my husband and I conduct our sex life is our business, not yours. It’s time to separate church and state, separate religious morality from secular morality, and legalize polyamorous marriage as well as gay marriage in this country. Notice I say polyamory not polygyny because what goes for the gander should go for the goose as well. (Elbow to husband's ribs.)”

Silda is entitled to behave as she wishes.

Where do you get off dictating people's behavior?

Does it occur to you that she chose to be there at that time?
I can see why anyone would choose not be at their spouse's side at a moment like that, but who are you to pontificate?

Please go easy on Indian Women Sati business....You make it out to be a common phenomenon.

Why should she? Hillary stood by her man, and now she's a Senator who's running for president! Had she not stood by her man, she would be out of the limelight already!

What's really offensive is you Sally...you don't know Mrs. Spitzer and your presumption in tossing around her first name as if you are friends -- that moves me to more pity for her than her own decision to stand by her husband and the father of her daughters. You are ridiculous.

What's really offensive is you Sally...you don't know Mrs. Spitzer and your presumption in tossing around her first name as if you are friends -- that moves me to more pity for her than her own decision to stand by her husband and the father of her daughters. You are ridiculous.

Excluding the exceptional freaky men with low self esteem and pervy fetishes, when a decent family man strays, the spouse has played some roll in that...

It's because you know I'm right that it makes so many of you so angry.

People in general tend to place blame on others without any self reflection. Sure, he's the pig. Yes, he's the one who cheated and is the one who did wrong. But ask yourself, am I doing MY part in keeping things interesting?

I suppose it's possible that in spite of everything, she loves him . . .

sad truths, except for the acknowledgement that at some level the majority of women must face indiscretions or abuses of some kind or the other from their men. You can have your pride - but frequently, you'll have it alone.

But the same is true of men, women are not invulnerable to stupidity. There is cheating on the part of women, probably more so, since we've been "liberated" (not just in sexual liason, but in many other ways in relationships-selfishness, neglect due to obsession with house or children, financial ruin from shopping indiscretions for instance, drugs, name your poison).

Betrayel is so devastating because it comes from the ones we love. Forgiveness gives back power, and it definately comes from a place of strength and also choice; not weakness as you assume, because it is a much more difficult path to take. It seems to me we have a country of broken marriages because we no longer have the concept that at some time our spouse will fail us and that it is possible to forgive.

The difference between the average person and these people is their day in the sun in front of the cameras, the inability to hide sin behind closed doors. From the reports I've read, they did each chose that for themselves.

How about the women's responsibility:

This woman (prostitute) "chose" to have sex with a married man. Don't woman have social/moral obligations just like men? Or are they just prostitutes?

I appreciate Sally's insights on this article. I concur completely with her assessment--that one's incredibly damaging behavior (such as Mr. Spitzer's) such as lying, cheating and humiliating one's family is sending the wrong message to young women and men (especially to his own children).

Similarly, it sends a mixed message to children--simply put--it is not important to follow one's words with actions. I too think that it is sad that Ms. Spitzer, a highly educated, accomplished woman, and from what I hear an affable woman, must undergo this humiliating experience.

While there are indeed consequences for such harmful actions, sadly Mr. Spitzer does not publicly have to go through the requisite consequences on his own--instead he has the benefit of having the very person that he disrespected standing right next to him--it seems so counter-intuitive.

Moreover, I agree--it would be nice if for once a woman decided not to publicly support her partner's indiscretions that directly affect her personal and familial well-being.

Stop blaming the victim. None of us know what we would do if we were put in that position.

Perhaps Silda has decided to honor her marriage vows - for better or for worse. Yes, rare that people keep their promises, their vows, their oaths. But just because he broke his vows does not mean she should. Children play tit for tat, the mature deal with their problems in their own way and in their own time.

I guess Silda is kindof like Sally's Dad, while her mom carried on an affair with Barry Goldwater.

Former Governor Spitzer is paying a very heavy price for betraying his family and the public trust, as are his wife and three children. The entire Spitzer family is suffering public humiliation, and Mrs. Spitzer's public support of her husband in no way enables or absolves him of his wrongdoings. What this sad episode teaches us (if we are paying attention) is that it's NOT ok to lie and cheat and dishonor your family. Eventually the lies surface and you and those closest to you suffer dearly.

Concern for what messages the Spitzer children (and all young children observing) will take from this experience is valid. The best we can hope for is that Mr. and Mrs. Spitzer have had and will continue to have open and honest communication with their children, not only about honoring one's family, but also about supporting it through the worst times. That is, in fact what Mr. and Mrs. Spitzer likely committed to when they exchanged wedding vows. Mrs. Spitzer certainly deserves no additional ridicule for choosing the more difficult of the options available to her.

A short while ago I posted a comment without realising this is supposed to be a religious forum.

I just need to add a small post script to you, Sally Quinn. "whom God has joined together let no man ( nor woman I guess), put asunder." . it also probably could apply to coveting one's neighbour's wife( or husband ) or something like that. But I may be wrong.

It seems unfair these naughty girls are doing so well in their careers after the havoc and misery they have caused poor Mrs Spitzer and her children.

Regards to Bill. I read his biography a while back . Katherine Graham was my idol. She was endowed with intellect and grace plus an iron will. She met her many challenges with courage and
dignity.

Oh yes, I almost forgot,there is also something about "judge not, lest ye be judged'. i think that's the way it goes. But I may be wrong.

Although Mr Spitzer has clearly made a terrible mistake, Mrs Spitzer (and other women in the past) has chosen the more difficult path of staying with him through the situation. I do not agree that her choice sets a bad example. On the contrary, it is a beautiful example of someone with an enduring commitment and character.

While I can understand if a wife did NOT choose to stand by her husband in this circumstance, it is exeedingly commendable that they do so.

The writer states that staying with an unfaithful husband is a "demeaning role for women to play." Demeaning to the women? Does anyone blame the wife? The sins of the husband do not reflect poorly on the wife- just on him.

In Matthew 19:8 Jesus he says that marital unfaithfulness is the one reason to allow for divorce. Certainly Mr Spitzer has been unfaithful, so Mrs. Spitzer would be within her rights to leave him. But Jesus did NOT say that you HAVE to divorce for that reason, only that it is an acceptable reason. God hates divorce. He also hates unfaithfulness. Given that unfaithfulness happened, what would the best outcome be here?

Our culture is pretty casual about choosing divorce. I do not find the same casual attitude in scripture. Moreover, it would be in keeping with mercy that a wife might remain with her husband. Again and again, Jesus and his followers gave up their rights for the sake of loving sinners.

It is impossible for us to know Mrs. Spitzer's exact reasons for staying with Mr Spitzer. Should we even try to guess? I feel it is very unseemly to speculate that they are due to some sort of weakness or flaw.

I see a parallel. Jesus himself withstood the humiliation and pain of crucifixion because of his love for sinners- you, me, and everyone.

Look, we will all screw up, in big ways or in small. We are people with a sinful nature. So when our spouses or other loved ones blow it, how SHOULD we respond? I can only hope I respond to my spouse with as much compassion and humility as Mrs. Spitzer has shown.

How presumptuous and invasive the press has been in recent days to question the decision of Silda Spitzer to stand next to her husband during his public statements. This notion that a liberated women is compelled to leave a marriage under certain circumstances befuddles me. Shouldn't liberation mean that a woman is free to leave a marriage or not? Perhaps Silda Spitzer values other aspects of her marriage enough to attempt to rebuild it. Maybe she'll stay with him for the kids. Or maybe not. We cannot possibly know her reasons. We are not in a position to judge. We are certainly not in a position to make absurd and unfounded proclamations about the morality of Silda Spitzer's leaving or not leaving her husband. Perhaps her personal morality values forgiveness. I guess we won't know until she writes her book. In the meantime, journalists and commentators make themselves look like tabloid hacks with their obsession with this question.

Marriage vows are sacred. "For better or for worse, for richer or for poorer, in sickness and in health, cleaving unto one another until death do you part." If you are not willing or able to do that, don't get married.

A wife like Silda who stands by her husband in his moment of humiliation is not thinking of herself. She is thinking of her children and of her marriage vows. She may be angry enough at her husband to chew an iron I-beam into tiny fragments, but it isn't about her at that moment.

They may or may not stay together--that is for them to decide and to work through and not for us to know or even to get a vote. Their children are hurting and will continue to hurt, but if both parents do what they need to do for the children and for themselves as a couple and as a family, they just could come out of the experience stronger and closer.

It has happened before. I have first-hand knowledge.

I agree with Sally. Silda is sending a message that many of the above commentators want. OK let the tabloids, or even the little pulpits across America promulgate that agenda. The agenda that "stand by your man = virtue = what marriage vows are about". Let Silda talk about that herself on Larry King if she wants. Hillary publicly talked about her reasons in a separate venue. The fact that many of the same "female "forgiveness" = virtue" crowd condemn Hillary for it is interesting. It makes me wonder if the vitriol against Sally has more to do with keeping women in their place than extolling the virtues of "forgiveness" "fidelity to vows" etc. But if you really want to support the Christian (and Jewish) value of forgiveness then let the man take full personal responsibility ALONE. In Psalm 51
David took his full naked responsibility before God without the fig leaf. If Mr. Spitzer, Bill Clinton etc. etc. sincerely do that, then they don't need their wives beside them. If you really
want to talk about the virtue of "Christian forgiveness" don't confuse it with cheap grace!!

Your article is thoughtful and worth reading. I would have liked Spitzer standing alone, with Spilda issuing a seperate statement that she will not condone this, but would not abandon him, at least now. She could make a deal with him, so that he can help her become governer 10 years later, just like the Hilary's deal with Bill Clinton.

By the way, you are historically and factually wrong in your statement " Or Indian women committing sati, throwing themselves on their husband’s funeral pyre". That used to happen in the 1700's,was wrong obviusly; but historically the whole world was backward at that time. There was slavery and barbarism in the west, Europe and America used to treat women like cattle. Do you read history or have you travelled to India in the last 50 years?

Jyoti Prakash

If there's one compelling reason Silda Spitzer shouldn't have appeared beside her husband, it's that in doing so, she made herself available to the media as an artifact to be scrutinized to the same degree as any other figure in the scandal. "She shouldn't have quit her day job!" "She should have made him stand up alone at the podium!" "Political wives who don't leave their philandering husbands ought to be wearing burqas!" The so-called feminists who deem themselves authorities on how a woman should act publicly in the midst of a personal tragedy are have no higher claim to moral authority than Dr. Laura. Blame a woman for not "taking care of her husband's needs," blame her for sending the wrong message to women... victims do not need blame, but compassion. She did a brave thing by appearing in public. Now, can we please cut out the criticism and allow her to grieve in private?

What I find rather mindless is the idea that these people who feel comfortable asking wives to leave their husbands after they have humiliated themselves and the family might have something worthwhile to contribute. If Ms Quinn wants to leave her husband, she should feel free to do so. I don't think she or anybody else is in any position to suggest to a grieving woman to leave her husband as a way of coping with the grieve. My personal feeling is that marriage is ultimately a very private affair between the couple involved. If Ms Silda had decided to leave Mr Elliot, that would be fine if that was her way of coping with the humiliation. On the other hand, I do not see anything sad about her decision to stand by him. Their relationship is strictly a matter between the two of them to sort out.

What I find rather mindless is the idea that these people who feel comfortable asking wives to leave their husbands after they have humiliated themselves and the family might have something worthwhile to contribute. If Ms Quinn wants to leave her husband, she should feel free to do so. I don't think she or anybody else is in any position to suggest to a grieving woman to leave her husband as a way of coping with the grieve. My personal feeling is that marriage is ultimately a very private affair between the couple involved. If Ms Silda had decided to leave Mr Elliot, that would be fine if that was her way of coping with the humiliation. On the other hand, I do not see anything sad about her decision to stand by him. Their relationship is strictly a matter between the two of them to sort out.

If there's one compelling reason Silda Spitzer shouldn't have appeared beside her husband, it's that in doing so, she made herself available to the media as an artifact to be scrutinized to the same degree as any other figure in the scandal. "She shouldn't have quit her day job!" "She should have made him stand up alone at the podium!" "Political wives who don't leave their philandering husbands ought to be wearing burqas!" The so-called feminists who deem themselves authorities on how a woman should act publicly in the midst of a personal tragedy are have no higher claim to moral authority than Dr. Laura. Blame a woman for not "taking care of her husband's needs," blame her for sending the wrong message to women... victims do not need blame, but compassion. She did a brave thing by appearing in public. Now, can we please cut out the criticism and allow her to grieve in private?

Sally:
Why would you write this? Perhaps now you could enlighten us on how you feel about single women having affairs with married men??

I thought the women's movement was about CHOICE. Choose a career or choose to stay at home. (You're still an unequivocal equal to all.)

You have no idea what their marriage is like so stop judging. Maybe she CHOOSES to stand by her man cause she understands that people are fallible and do make mistakes. Maybe she sees the big picture of her life with this man and doesn't want to throw it all away.

Burka's? Sati? Who made you all knowing what's right? You're a rabble rouser just like Geraldine. Hillary would not be where she is right now if she wasn't a woman -who married someone who became president. AND YOU ALL KNOW IT. (Didn't you marry a former editor?)

Enough of the bitterness. I wouldn't want you raising my daughter. I want her to like men. As I want my son to like women. And if my wife was cheating, I wouldn't just cut and run but rather examine the situation as whole, deal with the insane amount of pain, try to understand the WHY, examine the big picture, put some time in and THEN decide if we are better off apart. Crazy huh?

I dont think it makes the wives look bad at all to stand by their husbands during a time of crisis. The men look bad for their betrayal and the women look strong and decent for showing up and being supportive during a difficult time. I think the wife should be at the press conference just to make a public appearance and to keep the press from hounding her and any children further.

Making the public appearance does not mean that a couple will stay married or that the wife won't hit the roof behind closed doors. Not showing up would be strange and probably fuel more rumors about what may have gone wrong in the marriage. Marriage is showing up during the hard times not just when things are going well. Also when I see the wife it sends a message that they are in it together and will take the next step to deal with what has happened as a unit even if means separating. A wife that stays at home is only going to make things harder than they already are.

What business is it of yours ?

It is so true that these accomplished, beautiful women time after time support their spouses when they get into trouble and disgrace them. I truly believe it is the power and position these women attain through their marriages i.e. Gary Condit's wife, Jim McGreevy's wife, Hillary, etc. I also wonder if there are men who have supported straying wives who are in prominent positions. Maybe the women are just smarter at keeping it hidden. I also can't believe I actually heard some women "counselors" suggest that the wives simply are not attentive enough towards their husbands and this causes them to cheat. HA HA, that's a laugh. I cannot condone cheating by anyone, but it is natural at some point in time by some men and women who develop close alliances with coworkers, etc. I just don't understand how the spouses seem so understanding in the face of such public humiliation.

Thanks for this article Ms. Quinn. As to the apology, the only thing this jerk is sorry for is the fact that he got caught. Ken

Well, I don´t know what she was thinking about what her husband did. But I guess she thougt she was expected to behave like Hilary Clinton behaved. After all seems to me that this belongs to the nowadays culture; that this bahavior is acceptable to all, considering what the religion says, beause in the bible says that the "woman shall be submited to her husband" although I don´t agree with it and I mean it, sure I don´t.
Sorry for my bad english but I am trying. this is an opportunity for me.
My other opinion: To women belongs the peace!
That is way I would vote for Hilary for president if I was an american citizen.So the Iraq and afganistan wars would be over once and for all!!!
Thank you

Ms. Quinn,

You hit the nail head on by comparing American women with the Islamic and Indian women.

This so called feminism/equal rights created by American society are lost on American women.

American women have "chosen" to be treated as pieces of meat when it comes to social/sexual situtations with men. How many women do you know who have approached a man, introduced themselves, pursued them for a date and then asked to marry them? My experience in this country is that, women have chosen to be chased like a piece of meat. There is no equality/choice displayed by women in this regard.

Therefore, this explains why middle aged (or even young) women are afraid to leave the man they currently have, even though he may love a prostitute more than you.

I don't think I could say it any better than Sally Quinn did. The first women who does stand up and says "this isn't acceptable, and you're going to go out there and face this on your own," is going to be a heroine to women every where.

This would have been a much better article if it were solely about Hillary Clinton. As a father of three daughters, I find Hillary's history of standing by her husband to be one of the worst examples that could be set for the young women in this country. A woman like Hillary who is disrespected and abused her entire adult life by her husband and yet she still 'stands by her man' is someone who should we should all feel sorry for and get help for and is not someone that we should elect as the first woman president and leader of the U.S.

Maybe someone can explain it to me how any woman in this country could support Hillary Clinton after showing such continuous poor judgement.

Would ya want to be in a relationship with a person who could set aside their feelings and join in a public attack against ya, for a victimless crime? Hope you're single.

Ms Quinn: You know nothing of Mrs Silda Wall Spitzer or what motivates this fine LADY. Mrs. Wall Spitzer is a great and magnificent person, not the pitiful "Taliban" figure that you suggest. Maybe she stood there with her errant husband for her three innocent daughters -- did you think of that? Instead, you desire some shabby marital drama to be played out in public for your benefit. Mrs. Wall Spitzer will sort out her marriage on her own terms and not for your jollies.

Guilianis wife comes to mind..I think her actions were more acceptable than Spitzers wifes........I would have sluggged him, taken the children and left!

First, not all political wives stay with their husbands. Corina Villaraigosa comes to mind (although, concededly, it was mayor Villaraigosa's second reported affair).

I'm far more troubled by the moral equivalence of comparing the forced wearing of the burqa or chadri (along with prohibitions against getting a drivers license, rights in a divorce, etc.) to standing by a husband who cheats. None of us has ANY idea what was going on inside the Spitzer's marriage, or what might be going on inside their heads now, and to presume to judge Silda's choice as anti-feminist, and on par with the subjugation of women by the Taliban (where, for example, a cheating woman gets the death penalty, and a cheating man gets a second wife) is galling.

I can understand why many women agree with Sally Quinn on this sad matter. But I have to ask, too: Can such women see the possibility that Silda Spitzer, in appearing with her husband, was not the victim of handlers seeking to "soften" him, but made an independent, individual choice to stand beside the person who has been her husband for 20 years, and who is the father of her children? To live her own marriage vow, even if he didn't live his (regardless of what she decides to do in the future)? Can we see her not as a pathetic victim but as someone empowered to make her own choice, which she did? As someone who may want to be able to say to her daughters, "Yes, I'm enraged. Yes, I'm humililated. Yes, I'm hurt. But I made a commitment, and in your father's weakest moment, I decided to stand next to him -- for him, and for myself, and to show you what commitment is." Might this be a form of self-respect -- keeping one's own sacred vow -- even in the face of our loved one's egregious behavior?

To state the obvious, ALL of us make mistakes -- minor to heinous. It's misguided to paint men as "pigs" when it appears there are just as many of us women who behave badly in a variety of ways -- including acting out a desire to hold on to "derivative power." While Silda Spitzer is no doubt enraged, humiliated and hurt, perhaps she's someone who also recognizes that human weakness and arrogance aren't the province only of men. Maybe she's honest with herself. Maybe she possesses humility.

Can we give Silda Spitzer credit for being the smart, strong person that she is, rather than seeing her as a pitiable reflection of women's collective suffering through the ages? No one deserves that kind of reductionism.

Ms. Quinn: You "...have come a long way baby."
And, your personal progress is actually based on science. Its science that provides the foundation to demonstrate that human females are at least equal to human males, if not biologically superior.
If you choose to base your thinking on your religious faith, fine. However, please don't get illogical about this issue.
Science and logic are not related to your religious rant. Both males and females of our species have extramarital affairs.
If Silda Spitzer chose to stand with her family perhaps her brain is more evolved than yours.
Sincerely, Joe Kocon

Ms. Quinn: You "...have come a long way baby."
And, your personal progress is actually based on science. Its science that provides the foundation to demonstrate that human females are at least equal to human males, if not biologically superior.
If you choose to base your thinking on your religious faith, fine. However, please don't get illogical about this issue.
Science and logic are not related to your religious rant. Both males and females of our species have extramarital affairs.
If Silda Spitzer chose to stand with her family perhaps her brain is more evolved than yours.
Sincerely, Joe Kocon

Ooohhh, the home-wrecker speaks... Do tell us, Sally, what is the moral thing to do? You were much better for Ben than his wife, right? And that is how you got to where you are, in your glass house, lecturing others?

We are each ultimately only responsible for ourself, our choices. To take the freedom to make one's own choices, for oneself alone, based on one's conscience, is the path to Joy.

Silda made her bed when she decided that it was in her best interests to set aside a high-powered career to wait amiably at her husband's side while he climbed the ranks politically. She deserved to stand next to him and think about her decisions as much as he did.

If you decide to be an accessory when it's politically convenient, you should stand there and take it when it stops being convenient too.

"Once, just once, wouldn’t you love to see the wife issuing her own statement saying that what he had done was unacceptable and that she was leaving him?

Wouldn’t that be morally correct?"

No, it wouldn't. That would be impulsive and childish and disrespectful of the vows of marriage. When a loved one has hurt you, it is not okay to immediately cut and run. Two wrongs do not make a right.

Let's just switch up the roles a bit to remove the issue of gender roles in this case. Imagine you have a child. You raise her lovingly and do everything "right". She grows up, becomes independent, then does something just horrible - she drives drunk and kills someone. This happens all too often, and the media usually covers these cases extensively in the local news. Are you suggesting that it would be morally correct for you to desert your drunk-driving daughter and leave her to appear in court alone? I've never read any opinion piece in any media outlet railing against the parents of drunk drivers for appearing in the courtroom with their children.

Eliot Spitzer has behaved despicably. And he certainly has consequences to face. However, attacks upon his wife for "standing by her man" are so repulsive it truly makes me sad for our country. As if we don't have enough problems, we have all these silly people in the media unable to recognize grace, commitment, and true morality when they see it.

I don't think that anyone should be judging Mrs. Spitzer's motive for standing by her husband. None of us are in that marriage. They have a history together-a family-and no one should pretend to know or judge anything she does in this situation. I think that people should stop trying to analyze this situation based on what THEY may or may not do. I know plenty of people who say "throw the bum out" who reconcile six months later, for WHATEVER reason. We also do not-nor we can pretend to know the reasons he felt the need to go outside of his marriage. What is needed here is support for the Spitzer family and prayers that whatever problems they have can be worked out. The best piece of advice I ever got was to never get involved between a man and wife. You will ALWAYS lose.

If you look at the faces of the women in the slideshow on NPR at http://www.npr.org/news/images/2008/mar/11/wives_gallery/index.html , they all look pretty much the same--pained, shocked, worn emotionally and humiliated.

In contrast, "Krista" doesn't look any of those, and it appears now she will be paid a lot to disrobe for the camera or sing.

Sally's right.

Why is this any of your business?

Butt out.

Get out now!

Sally, I agree with all of your points. However, what is true in the aggregate might not be in the exceptions. I've no insight into Mrs. Spitzer's private life and motivations. It is just possible that she loves him - improbable and undeserved as it seems to us outsiders. In the end, these choices are hers and we can grieve for her pain and the pain of other women who have endured outrages.

I know I wouldn't stand by my woman if she were caught committing adultery.....unless I wanted the world to see who I was and how graciously I handled the affair for future references.

Who knows what kind of shock spouses are in when they discover these scandals while living in a fishbowl?

Even Jackie Kennedy confided in a friend after the assassination of her husband, "I am untouchable, the whole world feels sorry for me."

I suppose standing next to a spouse in the middle of a train wreck is a small measure of being in control of a situation that has spun out of control.

Minimizing the humiliation of it all could happen if the public officials just sent out a press release instead of holding a press conference!

Americans do not understand Indian culture and religion. They think Jesus is great.

They do not understand that we love our gods just as much like the elephants, monkeys, snakes, etc. Yes we are idol worshippers, so what? How do you know that your god is better?

Sati is good.
Sati is real.
Sati is holy.

Do not be ashamed... Admit that sati will never end!

Prem

Americans do not understand Indian culture and religion. They think Jesus is great.

They do not understand that we love our gods just as much like the elephants, monkeys, snakes, etc. Yes we are idol worshippers, so what? How do you know that your god is better?

Sati is good.
Sati is real.
Sati is holy.

Do not be ashamed... Admit that sati will never end!

Prem

Americans do not understand Indian culture and religion. They think Jesus is great.

They do not understand that we love our gods just as much like the elephants, monkeys, snakes, etc. Yes we are idol worshippers, so what? How do you know that your god is better?

Sati is good.
Sati is real.
Sati is holy.

Do not be ashamed... Admit that sati will never end!

Prem

Americans do not understand Indian culture and religion. They think Jesus is great.

They do not understand that we love our gods just as much like the elephants, monkeys, snakes, etc. Yes we are idol worshippers, so what? How do you know that your god is better?

Sati is good.
Sati is real.
Sati is holy.

Do not be ashamed... Admit that sati will never end!

Prem

Does Sally Quinn, who is now apparently the wanna-be Doyenne of Washington society, not to mention a self-styled expert on morality and religion, think that our memories are so short that we do not remember her husband's description of how she aggressively pursued him when she was a single Post writer and he was a (by all appearances, and according to his then-young children) comfortably married man? Now that she has the money, power and platform that she craved, she has the unmitigated gall to castigate other women for the choices they make? Women who marry men who cheat on their wives shouldn't be surprised when they find themselves married to men that cheat on their wives.

Americans do not understand Indian culture and religion. They think Jesus is great.

They do not understand that we love our gods just as much like the elephants, monkeys, snakes, etc. Yes we are idol worshippers, so what? How do you know that your god is better?

Sati is good.
Sati is real.
Sati is holy.

Do not be ashamed... Admit that sati will never end!

Prem

This is the kind of psychobabble tripe that Sally Quinn has used for years to pass herself off as a journalist. What makes it most disgusting is the air of moral superiority that wafts from this reeking on-line rag sheet. How can this woman actually be employed by a major newspaper? Oh, that's right. She married the guy who used to be the editor.

I do not get what others – including you - are not getting. Her life is intertwined w/Spitzer’s in all the obvious ways, and one does not – and should not - disentangle oneself from the slew of commitments that make up life in a snap or under extreme pressure.

But perhaps there is another aspect of their intertwined lives that is less obvious. Presumably, she loves him, which is to say that he has a (probably inexplicable but nonetheless undeniable and to an extent uncontrollable) deep feeling of affection and solicitude for him, of the sort that has led her to conclude quite naturally that his life is hers too. This is . . . well, quite human of her. If this love is genuine – I have heard nothing to believe that in her case it is not so - then instinctively she will begin the effort to reconcile that love w/the disappointment, no matter how crushing the latter is. That effort may – or may not – include standing by her man in what for him is a supreme moment of need. But the point is this: she chose to stand there. While it is possible that he pressured her, and very likely that he implored her, to do so, I have a hard time believing that she had no choice in the matter.

I, for one, would not want to be married to, or friends with, anyone who did not shore me up at critical times, even if I caused the crisis. Loyalty is a prized characteristic, as it should be. Love – to coin but slightly alter a phrase – at least gives one some hope to believe that it can indeed conquer all. IOW, genuine love tolerates disappointment, even in the extreme, and may assuage and even redeem it.

My question is: what is wrong w/this, especially in the short run while she herself gathers her own thoughts about what to do next? It seems to me that it is much easier/wiser for her to stand w/him today and leave tomorrow (if that is what she chooses to do) than the other way around. In this respect, I think she made the absolutely correct call, and I wonder whether the best answer to your own question about whether her decision was the morally correct call is this: it depends on your point of view.

C. Gaetanos

I don't understand either. Perhaps I am just too much a southern Italian - all those stories about emotionalism in our cultural temperament is NOT that far from the truth - but If my husband of 32 very happy years tried such nonsense, Ms. Quinn, I would blow several gaskets screaming - not to mention loading my 40mm.. ok, I might not load my 40mm - I don't want to end up in jail forever & ever - and killing is wrong and I don't want to endanger my everlasting soul. But I would not take it kindly or submissively. I wouldn't stand by him, I'd be too busy kicking his shins.
I am not a submissive woman. I am not my husband's slave. I am not a burka-covered broken woman in Islam. I am free.

God doesn't want any woman to be a victim of her religion, society, family, father or husband. We have as much right to believe that the oath of marriage is forever as any man. We must believe in ourselves, in our worth and value to understand our role in both society and our marriages.

My husband and I, all joking aside, are spiritual people. We both love God and do God's will to the best of our ability. We are both very loving towards one another. We are friends. Neither of us boss the other, though I tend to allow him to have the last word, simply because I trust his intellect and good sense.
I would have liked Hillary Clinton better if she hadn't stood by Bill-the- zipper-less Clinton. I would have believed she had a heart, self-respect, and really did love her husband if she had thrown all his possessions out on the front lawn of the White House. (Actually she should have done that the first time she caught him cheating!)
Love is the issue, isn't it..? There is no love without respect. My husband respects me. I respect him. I truly believe it is a question of love, friendship & loyalty.
I have immense loyalty towards my husband because I love him and he loves me. "We are in this together" is what I always say whatever comes our way. We have been through so much together! But if he cheated. Looked for sex somewhere else - he would not only be cheating me of my bedroom pleasures and paying our hard-earned money for something he can get for free here --- it would be a betrayal on so many levels - I am his friend. It would be a betrayal of friendship. I am his wife. I meant my vows. He would be destroying his vows by cheating. It would mean I could never believe him or trust him again to mean what he says. The friendship and marriage would be over.
Trust, love and friendship are the roots of this thing we call marriage. Cheating - having sex outside of the marriage destroys all three.
Why do these rich, successful,famous women submit and allow their husband's their affairs. I don't know. I don't get it. They don't need their loser husbands to survive, they are free women, they aren't owned. They don't live in Islam or any culture that demands that a woman puts up with all kinds of abuse and smiles. What goes through their heads as they stand there in front of God and man and look like victims?
My husband answered this question 10 years ago : they weren't really married - it was a marriage of convenience, a political partnership, not a marriage of passionate love. It is as good an answer as I come up with. I couldn't be so ... cold-hearted about life, though.

Ironically, the Hindu term for sati literally means “a good woman,” a woman who has become capable of self-immolation. Sati is as a person one becomes, gradually through good behavior. Dying as a sati demonstrates to all concerned that the woman has developed appropriate and admirable behavior. In India, it is a tradition that has been instilled in all of us since childhood. It is very, very ingrained in the Hindu psyche. In addition, it is glamorized, eulogized, it is drilled into us, whether we are educated or not, that the husband is a god figure. Furthermore, according to Lord Shiva, committing sati guarantees that a woman, her husband and seven generations of the family after her will have a direct passport to heaven. Through her sacrifice, she releases herself and family members from the painful cycle of birth and rebirth. In this way, one can see the responsibility appropriated to women for not only the salvation of her husband but his family as well. It is through her suicide that all others can be freed from the painful cycle of reincarnation.

Having discussed the significance of this selfless act, one can see the reasons why millions of Indian women would happily perform sati. This religious ritual is believed to be an act of purity, self-sacrifice and dignity. In fact, a majority of men of India admit to being proud of what Lord Shiva has demanded in our holy book. As one man said “our women are very valorous. What they do has made the whole nation of Hindus respect sati women."

Shamin

Clearly you are basing your opinions without any idea what this couple's marital life may be. Without first hand knowledge of possible arrangements and adjustments they may have come to over the last 20 years or so, how can you do this?. There are scenarios known only to those two alone. Mrs. Spitzer is a mature women and has her reasons for her actions She does not need to listen to this ranting crusade of outraged womanhood. Suggesting a public outburst of anger from a woman decrying her husband's actions to be " morally correct" suggests a certain bitterness.

You name these unfortunate women enablers. They may have their reasons for standing there next to their spouses. Perhaps one of the reasons could be they have no intention of either dropping their dignity nor washing their dirty linen in public in order to give the world the opportunity to gloat over what the press and the media, always eager to see blood in the water, are more than happy to print..

I have much more respect for the woman who tells her cheatinghusband not to let the door hit him in the ass on his way out than the one who stays after such betrayal.
I know how it feels to find lipstick in a shade I wouldn't be caught dead in on my (ex)husband's underpants. Quite frankly, if he can't be trusted, he's not worth having, nor are any of the baubles (material or political) that come with him.

The quality of mercy is not strained,
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. it is twice blessed;
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
`Tis mightiest in the mightiest; it becomes
The throned monar