Why Eliot's Wife Stood By Her Man

I have known more than one woman who married a man knowing full well he didn't love her. It was enough to just be with the man even though it meant, for the rest of his days, that he'd have a missing piece in his life. She didn't care. She wanted him. She used sex to manipulate him. If she could, she got pregnant to trap him.

In all but one case, the man eventually cheated on his wife. One lady just looks the other way as long as he comes home at night. Another lady played the victim and seemed dumb-founded about her sorry lot. Another lady hopes that maybe some day, he'll love her. One woman I know said to her husband,"I thought that once you married me and knew me better, you'd love me." She was partly right. His admiration of her has grown over the years, but there is still no love there. He languishes and she diminishes as time passes.

Anyone who is married knows that it is a mystery between two people. Families, friends, outsiders think they know what's going on behind the scenes but the people involved have a secret dance that only they share. Even in wildly uneven relationships where one partner is a certifiable psychopath, there was something, on some level, that meshed between the couple--a sympathy. They both know this.

When a woman stands by her man, as Eliot Spitzer's wife did literally, or countless of abused, neglected and cheated on women do metaphorically, they stand for themselves. In a sense, they are defending their decision to be with this man. Some women say that they were abused, in a bad mental state and almost fugue-like when in the presence of their man which is why they did something like standing supportive at a press conference. And that is partly true. Powerful guys like Eliot Spitzer hold sway in nearly every room they enter. It might hold for at home, too. Or maybe, home is the one place he feels small and helpless. Even still, the woman denies her power to choose when she plays the victim when making such an empowered choice to do something like stand in front of the world. That Eliot Spitzer or Bill Clinton or Jim McGreevy or any of these guys would be so callous to their wives in even asking that of them demonstrates their narcissism.

Dr. Laura Schlessinger incited the wrath of thousands for suggesting that women might play a part in their husband's cheating. Other women said, "that's like blaming the victim". Please. Are women going to hold forever this passive, babyish view of themselves? They are just along for the ride in their relationship, they have no power or say in how it goes?

I can count off five women I know, just off the top of my head, who might, just might, give their husband sex once a month, if he's lucky. And these same women, after years of this emptiness (for a man) will be able to play the victim when he goes out to fill a need? How is she absolved of responsibility for this act? And, he could divorce her, but often loves the kids. Loves the family life and doesn't want that to end. He just wants sex. Or affection. Or kind words.

Now, there are men, and I know them too, for whom no amount of "filling up" will make a difference. These bottomless wells seek affirmation everywhere and have a hole in their soul that is impossible to fill by anyone, no matter how hard a loving woman might try to fill it. These guys are like spirit-stealing predators conquering women and feeling more empty the longer they do it. They use women like drugs. They get a hit and a high and then crash and go for another one. Most men don't fall in this category but somewhere between neglect and narcissism.

I don't know what kind of man Eliot Spitzer is in his marriage. Is he a psychopathic bottomless well? Maybe. That would fit the profile of most politicians, wouldn't it? Born in privilege and weened on power, Eliot Spitzer believed, somehow, that he was above the law. He can make the law. He can enforce the law. But the law doesn't apply to him. He would be in good company. Bill Clinton went one further than old Eliot, as Dr. Santy notes, and abused his power while impugning the character of his victims. No wonder some Democrats want this whole sordid mess over with.

And what about politician's wives. They are often as smart, dedicated and willing to work for long years waiting for a pay-off for their husband. Far from stupid and weak, these women often demonstrate formidable intelligence and strength. They also seem to share their husband's jaundiced view of things. They are "realistic". It is understood that compromise is a part of life. Maybe some compromises build up and end up crossing a line somewhere. Well, obviously they do. And maybe, Spitzer's wife believed in his mission so much, she was willing to trade his indiscretions for the greater good he'd do.

I don't know Spitzer's wife. We can only surmise by actions what sort of people the Spitzers might be. Right now, she is publicly humiliated and embarrassed. And Spitzer has three daughters who will have a perspective on men formed by this revelation. Although, I'm guessing they've had a idea formed by now, already.

All I'm suggesting here, is that marriage is a complicated mystery. Marriages are contracts between two people and while many of the expectations aren't explicit, they are often understood. Deals are made. Ideals traded for other needs. Is this a bad thing? I don't know. These factors, though, might explain why Ms. Spitzer stood by her man.