To the Editor:

After reading Kay Hymowitz’s article, “The National Adultery Ritual” [July/August], I would suggest that part of the reason the phenomenon of celebrity adultery continues to be an issue—on both sides of the political aisle—is that it is the last area of concrete agreement between conservatives and liberals. That is to say, a marriage, whatever else it is, is a promise, spoken in words, between two individuals above all else to be faithful exclusively to each other. It is a public act and a private relationship. Hence, even when a liberal politician like Anthony Weiner commits adultery, he can still be said to have committed the only sin admitted to by the left: hypocrisy. He does not even need to be a “values” politician, nor does he need to be concerned about whether other people uphold their own promises. What the public knows—what his wife knows—is that he has failed this very personal test of whether he upholds values he has publicly attested to in the very act of marriage itself.

Gregory Borse

Monticello, Arkansas

_____________

To the Editor:

First I must profess my great admiration for Kay Hymowitz’s work. Her article on the national response to celebrity adultery in America is another wonderful read. It is, as anticipated, both nuanced and direct. 

With Warren Farrell’s The Myth of Male Power in mind, however, I must raise a small objection to an aspect of Hymowitz’s argument. She is insightful in her characterization of the shame ritual. But we should note that although the vulnerability of men, and male empathy for betrayed women, may not be widely broadcast, it is deep nonetheless. Such empathy is primarily informed by the male experience of breaches of intimacy similar to those suffered by the women described in Hymowitz’s article.

Men talk about such things rarely, even among themselves. It is understandable how that has come to create a false impression of indifference, particularly among women. But the ancient and enduring jokes about men being cuckolded are proof enough that both sexes experience the same level of pain in these circumstances. Such jokes are also proof of something more. Men are obliged to bear their painful experiences more or less on their own. For them there is no ritualistic public shaming of the unfaithful partner.

Andrew Boughton

Syndey, Australia

_____________

Kay Hymowitz writes:

I agree with Gregory Borse’s implied point that monogamy is one of the few arenas of private life the sexual revolution failed to dismantle. True, there is a growing “polymory” movement. (If you’re curious about it—sociologically, of course—try a Google search.) But I tend to think it won’t gain much traction. The reasons for this are worth noting: people have higher expectations of intimacy from marriage than they had a generation or two ago. At almost every wedding I’ve been to recently, couples refer to each other as “best friends” as well as “soul mates” in their vows. It’s one thing to cheat on “the wife”; it’s another to cheat on your soul mate.

That helps to address the important objection made by Andrew Boughton. It’s true that women cheat and men suffer, especially today when marriage is expected to be a source of intimate companionship. There is some evidence that women are closer to achieving equality in this area as well as in the office. But the “adultery ritual” is a response to the historical fact that men, particularly men in power, have been the less fair sex.