On his radio show this morning before Anthony Weiner’s press conference, Dennis Prager said: “I don’t find scandals interesting as a rule because I just assume they happen. I find policy interesting.”
“I am convinced Anthony Weiner is lying to the public. I have thousands of followers on Twitter. I know exactly what you can do. You can individually respond to certain people but nobody can respond on my behalf. It would take massive work by some brilliant cyberperson to get into my account and send a private message to one of my followers. But if this happens, you get the police involved. Weiner does not want the police involved. That’s the giveaway.
“It’s so obvious that he sent a picture of himself in his underwear. He sent a photo of his penis in a certain state.”
“Aside from how childish this is, as an adult man to do this, as a man, I’m embarrassed. His lack of understanding of women.”
Why, I ask Meston, have people never really talked about this? Alfred Kinsey, the “father” of sexology, asked 7,985 people about their sexual histories in the 1940s and 50s; Masters and Johnson observed people having orgasms for most of the 60s. But they never asked why. Why?
“People just assumed the answer was obvious,” Meston says. “To feel good. Nobody has really talked about how women can use sex for all sorts of resources.” She rattles off a list and as she says it, I realise I knew it all along: “promotion, money, drugs, bartering, for revenge, to get back at a partner who has cheated on them. To make themselves feel good. To make their partners feel bad.” Women, she says, “can use sex at every stage of the relationship, from luring a man into the relationship, to try and keep a man so he is fulfilled and doesn’t stray. Duty. Using sex to get rid of him or to make him jealous.”
“We never ever expected it to be so diverse,” she says. “From the altruistic to the borderline evil.” Evil? “Wanting to give someone a sexually transmitted infection,” she explains.
Dennis: “There’s disgusting and there’s stupidly disgusting.”
“It’s not an affair, but in some ways it’s uglier.”
“The Republican [congressman who resigned] sent a picture of himself without his shirt on. Big difference. And he just said OK. I have brought shame to the Congress. I am a Republican. I believe there is such a thing as a shame.
“I believe Republicans have a deeper sense that there is shame you bring on institutions.”
Mickey Kaus writes: “I thought Weiner did almost as well as he could possibly do. He had the requisite L.A. Confidential bare honesty. … But if he isn’t addicted to sex, he’s clearly addicted to air time. He couldn’t get off the podium until he’d said at least one obnoxious thing, which is that he had “not much desire” to actually meet the women he was tweeting with (and that he was now supposedly apologizing to). … We await apologies from Kos (“Breitbart’s #Twitterhoax“) and his colleagues. … P.S.: What we will probably get is the MSM playing catch up and, out of guilt for missing the story, beating up on Weiner beyond the call–much as it is beating up on John Edwards, having been given the news peg of his (misguided) indictment.”