Michigan family lawyer Ryan Hill is so morally outraged by extramarital affair dating website Ashley Madison that he launched the "My Marriage Matters" campaign—and shot this awkward television spot—to bring the cheating service down. The result: Schmaltzy piano, sexy infidelity shots, and Hill doing the Bill Clinton thumb-gesture in front of a waving American flag. Vote Ryan Hill for Dude With A Website That's Against That Other Website, I guess? He's also currently asking 1,000,000 people to sign his petition against people who support cheating. [Thanks to Kay for the tip].

Mistresses! Whenever a public figure takes one as a secret lover, Society at Large is obligated to publicly shame this woman for her untoward behavior. But just how much shame shall we pile on a woman accused of having sex with a man who has pledged to only have sex with one other lady? Use this handy guide to determine how much irrational hatred she deserves:

a) if she is a mysterious and beautiful Argentinian mother of two, leak romantic e-mails.

b) if she is a fertile campaign videographer, proceed with light mockery over musical tastes.

c) if she is a cocktail waitress, insinuate that she is actually a sex worker.

d) if she works in a strip club, lose all ability to refer to her as anything other than "stripper."

e) if she is a porn performer, release grainy video stills of her shaking her boobs in front of a fire truck.

f) if she is literally the Devil, insinuate that she is actually a sex worker.

In this week's edition of Sexist Beatdown, Sady Doyle of Tiger Beatdown and I discuss why mistresses receive the brunt of all our projected self-hatred, wonder why the term "Mistress" has no male counterpart (I nominate "Mrstress"), and respectfully request that Tiger Woods set his Facebook statuses to private.

SADY: Mistresses!

AMANDA: Indeed. I have heard many sordid tales of their existence as of late.

SADY: sometimes, mistresses talk about being mistresses. At other times, they do not talk. In either case, it is fine to talk about them! For they are MISTRESSES, scourge of the "I am married to a cheater" world.

AMANDA: Can we talk for a second about this "mistress" business? Is there a word for the "mister" of a married woman? like a "Mrster"? Or something?

SADY: I prefer the term "Mister Mistress." Which is also the name of my new glam-metal band, in case you were looking for an update on that.

AMANDA: I think that was also a Hulk Hogan movie.

SADY: But really, we know that the appropriate word for "man mistress" is "totally rocking dude."

AMANDA: The only other term I can think of that is dismissive (dismistress!) in the same way is "pool boy."

SADY: Yeah. Basically, the only words we have for dudes who are being cruelly exploited for sex on the side by lady types are class (and often race) based.

AMANDA: Yeah. "Mistresses" (ugh) on the other hand, have to be cornered into this odd cultural Other Wife space, even though they are not married to this guy, and they actually have plenty of their own shit going on as well. They are still defined solely by this relationship.

SADY: Yeah. I mean, we have this strangely romantic Victorian version of the mistress, STILL. It is not just "I hooked up with a dude, he is married, sometimes I make bad decisions in my personal life," it is this strange thing where we still think of them as dissolute Women of Leisure who are sexfully attending to their patron's sexful needs while draped in diamonds which of course are the whole point. And I think, weirdly, though I definitely GET that intimacy and all of that are scary, and the fact that you could love someone and they could love hooking up with other people is really unsettling for just about anyone, our need to drag mistresses into the light and be like, "mistress! Behold ye alle this Creature, captured in thee most Wanton Abandon!" Well, it's people working out personal anxieties, sure. We WANT to hate them because then the people who are cheating on us are clearly choosing people lesser than ourselves. But also: it's a way of deciding which women are all right. A way of deciding what makes a good woman (being cheated on!) and a bad one (being cheated with!) if that makes sense.

AMANDA: Yeah, and I have found that to be a really weird part of the Sanford / Edwards ladies' narratives, where there is an attempt to make some sort of Character Coup out of being cheated on.

SADY: Well, but also, that excerpt from "Game Change," about the affair, went to great lengths to portray Elizabeth Edwards as a screaming, controlling harpy who clearly deserved to be cheated on.

AMANDA: But the thing that really disturbs me when people get to talkin' about cheating, is that we know that about 50 percent of married men and women (and men I think do it at higher rates than women, but not significantly higher) will cheat on their spouses at some point. And so all of this faux outrage tends to worry me, because either these people are just ignoring their own realities, or they are attempting to work out their personal issues by piling their hatred onto these women.

SADY: Right! And it is like: I would prefer people not to cheat on me. I am not a fan of cheating in general. I think it is a thing you should not do. And yet, affairs are such a commonplace part of human life that they form the basis of: much literature, much television, "Mad Men" specifically for like three seasons, many movies, music, and now apparently our salacious news headlines that are going on when also there is a huge recession which I find sort of important. So, when a marriage is found to contain cheating, and everyone panics gets all, "this is the worst thing! The worst thing that could happen! Ever! For marriage is a sacred covenant, united by God's holy tears of joy over the entwined bodies of lovers!" Well: but you know it happens all over, right? People just want to be clear that they are in the OTHER FIFTY PERCENT, maybe. Even right now, I am worrying that people are going to think I am a cheater because I am inappropriately freaked out by mistresses, strangely.

AMANDA: Cheater! Cheater! I think it's that people have always wanted to hold their public figures and role models to a higher standard than themselves, and that makes sense to me. But they also, now, want to bring them down to our level. Which is really easy! Because they have never been morally superior to us in the first place, and the news of their private lives has just been more strictly controlled. I think at some point we are going to have to just stop giving a shit, I guess? Because it is getting boring, to me. I don't think our 24-hour news cycle can endure the weight of all the revelations of cheating that will occur among the huge number of suddenly newsworthy people we're reporting on now. For example: I recently read a very large-fonted Huffington Post headling about Matthew Fox possibly cheating on his wife with a "stripper" (the most reviled form of Mistress!) How long can people keep clicking on that? Tell me it's not forever.

SADY: God. Okay, can we talk about this? Sex worker mistresses? One of Tiger Woods' mistresses was apparently a porn performer, and there is a lawsuit going on have been vague threats of a lawsuit which I don't clearly understand, but which has to do with her quitting porn for Tiger, and thinking she was his only girlfriend, and etc.

AMANDA: (I also don't understand the legal precedent here).

SADY: I think it is lost income? Because she stopped working due to their relationship? It does seem like a frivolous and fairly transparently mercenary deal, from all I can understand. And taking a dude to court over your failed relationship is a bit over-the-top. But also, people are just shocked, SHOCKED AND APPALLED, that a person who made PORNOGRAPHY could DARE to express hurt in public! Like: it is that, not the nature of the debate here, that is getting some I think unfair focus.

AMANDA: It ... has feelings?

SADY: She made PORNOGRAPHY Amanda! I do not understand it! I thought the pornography cameras stole your soul!

AMANDA: That is the rumor.

SADY: Like: that's the thing. Mistresses are always slutty, trashy, tacky, la la la. I think it is bad form to date a married dude, not least because what is the best-case scenario for YOU, Mistress, in this relationship? Dating a dude who hurts ladies' feelings? No. But when they are also sex workers—and there is always, if not a specifically Matthew-Fox-centric version of this rumor, a version of this rumor floating around— then they are basically the devil. Women get to be like, "and also, my husband cheated on me, and it was with Satan."

AMANDA: I think that the intensified shaming of the porn actress goes back to the idea of the Mistress as well being this woman who is committed to the married man, even though he is married. Tiger Woods has like a million "Mistresses" at this point, who are really just women he's seen at some point or another, and who were obviously not under any obligation to only have sex with Tiger Woods. But we are somehow encouraged to see them that way, because if you have sex with a married man, the only way to come out looking a tiny bit better in the public eye is if you were just so totally and hopelessly in love with him that you were sexually committed only to him, and all 12 of you thought he was the real deal, or whatever. Which is gross. Tiger Woods himself actually did get a little sensitive about his "Mistresses" seeing other dudes, from the literature I've read on the topic. So even Tiger couldn’t find a reasonable perspective on cheating with someone he was cheating on his wife with.

SADY: Right. Some mistresses get to be like, "well, but my heart and feelings were involved." And it helps if we can see them as not-at-all sexual outside of this relationship. But when a lady clearly engages in sexual activity elsewhere, people are like, "wait a minute! This is about FUCKING, isn't it? Gross!"

AMANDA: Right. Because if you're a porn star ... well, then, many other dudes who are not Tiger Woods have seen you, like, naked and stuff! Bad mistress! We grade Mistresses now.

SADY: Heart and feelings involved: A+

He really was getting divorced though and now also you have his baby: B+

Clearly having had sex with people not your Mistressifier: F. For Failure.

AMANDA: Being married to a guy who cheats on you with a woman who does porn: Priceless, or something.

SADY: Yeah. I feel for that lady. TO THE MAX. In conclusion, can we all just agree that sometimes DUDES who cheat are really the ones who Destroyed This Marriage, though?

AMANDA: Sure, but can we also agree that unless the dude in question is like a noted marriage advocate or some shit, I don't particularly want to see him stand on a podium and cry about it? Just go deal with your own business.

SADY: Yeah. Seriously. We are not Facebook friends, your Relationship Status Updates are not really my personal concern. TIGER WOODS IS IT'S COMPLICATED.

Image via Wikipedia Commons

According to a new Gallup poll,  Hillary Clinton is the most admired woman in America. Barely. Clinton's runner-up, Sarah Palin, almost knocked the Secretary of State from the most-admired perch she's assumed 14 times. If you think that's sad, check out the also-rans:

The third most admired woman in America is Oprah Winfrey, with 8 percent; fourth on the list is Michelle Obama, with 7 percent. Makes sense so far. Next up is Condoleezza Rice and Queen Elizabeth II—each with two percent. (Oddly, British royalty counts: The poll is actually meant to determine the most admired woman by Americans). Then we have the one-percent group: A four-way tie between Margaret Thatcher, Maya Angelou, Angela Merkel and . . . Elin Nordegren Woods.

Let's see: We've got heads of state, cultural ambassadors, high-ranking government officials, and a lady who married a douchebag. One of these things is not like the other!

Marrying (and divorcing) douchebags, sadly, has been hailed as a resounding achievement for women in 2009. Jessica Grose chastised Barbara Walters for placing Kate Gosselin and Jenny Sanford, two ladies who married douchebags, in the top 10 most fascinating people of the year: "Being publicly cheated on does not automatically make you an interesting person, much less interesting enough to appear on one of these silly lists." Phoebe Connelly also chimed in on the absurdity of giving the feminist treatment to Sanford: "The news that Sanford is leaving her national punchline of a husband, South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, is no reason to hail her as a feminist icon."

Look closer at the cultural narratives surrounding Gosselin, Sanford, and Nordegren Woods, and you'll find three different monsters born of our fascination with wronged women. Sanford gracefully endured her husband's infidelities before calmly divorcing him. She is respected. Nordegren Woods allegedly chased her philandering husband down with a golf club, leaving him laying delirious in the middle of the road next to his wrecked car. She is celebrated. Gosselin, star of Jon & Kate Plus 8 and wife to confirmed douchebag Jon Gosselin until their separation this year, broadcast her marital troubles for all of America to see. She is pitied.

When we have women like Clinton, Angelou, Thatcher, Rice, and Merkel to admire, why are we still eager to recognize the long-suffering wife whose greatest accomplishment is no longer being married to a douchebag? Perhaps it's because divorcing a douchebag is an achievement that regular women can foresee accomplishing in their own lifetimes. Most women won't become Secretary of State or a celebrated writer—or end up married to a catch like Barack Obama. But many, many women will marry douchebags, and about half of those douchebag unions will end in divorce.

Most women won't find the strength to face their divorce with Sanford's calm and collected exterior. They won't get away with Nordegren Woods' outburst of spousal abuse (though many will fantasize about it). They won't attract the unwavering public attention that Gosselin's divorce has. But these public narratives of divorcing douchebags lend a certain gravitas to the personal lives of normal women—women who are not likely to be admired or celebrated or even pitied for finally severing their marital vows. For a long time, getting a divorce was seen as a failure, which meant that half of married women were failing. No wonder America has labored to find something to admire about these women—they are us. The problem with the current narrative is that we're celebrating divorce as a failure of men and a triumph of women, instead of focusing on the real triumphs of women like Clinton, whose marital status has been made irrelevant to the discussion of her success.

Photo via marcn, Creative Commons Attribution License 2.0

Sweden, a nation that has managed to avoid war for over 200 years, has nevertheless been quick to condone overseas agression in one recent conflict: Stockholm-born Elin Nordegren's reportedly golf-club assisted assault on her philandering husband, Tiger Woods. Today on the Daily Beast, Katarina Andersson noted how some prominent Swedish media types have reacted to the Nordegren-Woods affair. Namely, "Swing it again, Elin!":

Swing it again, Elin!” wrote Jan Helin, editor in chief of Aftonbladet, the country's biggest newspaper, on his personal blog. One of the paper's top reporters, Ann Söderlund, proclaimed, “Thank God for girls like Elin. Next time, I hope she uses a bigger club."

Britta Svensson, a well-known columnist at the tabloid Expressen and a former U.S.-based correspondent, commented, “Our Swedish hearts are overwhelmed with pride, because our very own Elin didn’t take any s—. Just like a tough Swedish girl shouldn't. Elin is our heroine.”

The American media, too, has been quick to excuse Nordegren's alleged assault on Woods, which left him lying bewildered in the middle of the road, next to a busted car, with scratches on his face and possibly a broken tooth. Stateside, Tiger's cheating has been deemed far more scandalous that Nordegren's physical assault—commenters have labored to paint Nordegren as the victim to Woods' web of affairs, but have hesitated to recognize Woods as a victim of domestic violence. Still, I've yet to hear from anyone actually endorsing Nordegren's outburst as an act of girl-power. Until now. Writes Andersson:

The culture of child-rearing in Sweden makes sure that girls have a strong sense of self. "Swedish women like Elin are brought up to be independent and strong,” explains Karin Magnusson, the op-ed editor for Aftonbladet, "and you can only stand for just so much humiliation. We're excited about this. We're hoping Elin will file for divorce and show Tiger—and the world—what Swedish women stand for."

If Swedish cultural commentators want the world to know that Swedish women stand for divorcing cheaters, I think that's fine—if a bit odd. If they want the world to know that Swedish women stand for beating the cheaters and then divorcing them, I think that's a fucked up standard to set for an entire country of girls and boys. Plenty of Swedish girls will grow up to be cheaters, too—do we want their future spouses to grow up thinking it's empowering to physically assault them for screwing around?

Perhaps I'm working against a bit of a cultural "girl power" divide here, but I'm afraid that Nordegen's domestic violence role-reversal has gotten some feminist signals crossed. I don't know too much about the culture of Swedish child-rearing, but I do know some girl power universals: Girl power is about having a strong sense of self, standing up for yourself, and not taking peoples's shit. Sometimes, girl power is about being empowered physically—for purposes of self-esteem and self-defense. It's not about beating the shit out of people! And it's certainly not about encouraging domestic abusers to keep up the good work. I know that male abusers have been beating the shit out of their spouses for a long time now, but domestic violence is one male-dominated field where inviting more female participation does not help promote gender equality.

Image via Wikipedia Commons

Last week, Politico's Melanie Mason tackled the question of why female politicians are so rarely caught with their pants down. Mason starts out with a pretty good theory—"Men far outnumber women in elected office, and statistical probability dictates that if a random politician is caught in a sex scandal, it is overwhelmingly likely that the politician would be male"—and then offers up a bargain basement of half-baked ideas in order to cover all the basis—and sexist stereotypes against women. Most of these reasons would never, ever actually stop a woman from messing around, but that won't stop us from buying into it all again.

Strong Women Aren't Hot Enough:

“I guess men in power are terribly attractive to some women, but I don’t think that women in power are attractive to some men,” said former Rep. Pat Schroeder (D-Colo.), who was co-chairwoman of Gary Hart’s scandal-plagued presidential campaign in 1988.

Love Finds A Way: Please. This isn't true, but even if it were—everybody can find somebody who wants to fuck them. This theory also conveniently lets male politicians off the hook. It's not their fault! All the women who unexpectedly want to fuck them are to blame, somehow:

male politicians may be lavished with sexual attention they are unprepared to handle. “Most of these politicians were the high school boys that couldn’t get the cheerleader,” said [Suzie] Johnson, whose website GoAskSuzie.com specializes in issues of infidelity. “Now the situation is reversed.”

—

The Media Has Eliminated the Female Politician's Sex Life:

Being so outnumbered in the political realm can also lead to greater media scrutiny for politicians—think, for example, of the brouhaha over Hillary Clinton’s V-neck blouse that sparked a lengthy discussion on the appropriate amount of cleavage a female politician should reveal.

Love Finds A Way: I won't argue with the fact that female politicians are often unfairly scrutinized by the news-media. Even when they're not caught with their pants down, women are often scrutinized over infidelity—Bill's blowjob meant a lot of obsession over Hillary's reaction. However, it's not like the Governor of South Carolina doesn't have reporters watching his every cross-continental flight—and monitoring his sexy e-mails—as well.

—

Having A Career Is Hard Enough For Women!:

Others say women in high-power careers are so overloaded already that affairs are an unlikely possibility. As Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) points out, “Who has the time? I don’t have enough time in the day to take care of the responsibilities I have between work and family.”

Women tend to be able to juggle a lot, but with so many pressures, throwing an extra romance in the mix may feel like just another item to have to multitask. “In a certain way, it’s a privilege, and it still belongs predominantly to men,” said Williams, who is herself a mother.

Love Finds a Way: First, women were too preoccupied with homemaking and baby-raisin' that they simply didn't have the time or energy to hold down a career. They just couldn't handle it! Now, women are too preoccupied with homemaking, baby-raisin', and that career they insisted upon, they just can't manage to squeeze the infidelity in. Are female politicians too busy with their careers to ruin their careers, or are there—again—just not that many women who have had the opportunity to fuck up?

—

Women Can Make Babies, Didn't You Know!

“The tendency or willingness to transgress sexual boundaries in general is much more likely in men than in women,” said Paul Abramson, author of the forthcoming book “Sex Appeal: Six Ethical Principles for the 21st Century.” Abramson, a psychology professor at the University of California, Los Angeles, added that “women are socialized to be much more cautious about sexuality due to the fact that they can get pregnant. Having an affair is a sexual risk, and women are much less inclined to do that.”

Love Finds a Way: As Megan Carpentier points out on Jezebel, these women are in menopause. And if they're not: condoms.

—

Women Are Too Emotional To Have Casual Sex!

“That’s the reason you don’t see more female politicians having affairs,” Johnson said. “Women are less likely to have physical affairs but more likely to have emotional affairs, and there’s no way to bust those.”

Love finds a way: Emotional affairs leave paper trails, too. See: Mark Foley's illicit AIM conversations, Mark Sanford's flowery e-mails. Also, why are we listening to the advice of Suzie Johnson of GoAskSuzie.com again? You don't have to take the URL literally!

—

Women are wily bitches.

And, of course, there is always the possibility that female politicians have their own sexual indiscretions the public simply doesn’t know about. Those secrets may stay hidden for a while. According to Johnson, “women are way more clever at covering [affairs] up.”

Love Finds A Way: This is likely true—but it's likely true for many male politicians, as well. The idea that women are inherently better at hiding affairs is a tempting, completely unsubstantiated, and useless theory.

Photo by veni markovski