BS: Sexting and digital genitals

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: olddude
Date: 11 Jul 11 - 04:21 PM

I would but the camera would need to have a wide angle lens to capture it all ...

sorry

off to the basement I know

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Ron Davies
Date: 18 Jun 11 - 02:03 PM

It's not "we don't condone weird behavior".   It's, among other things, self-defense. The Democrats need to be concerned about what the Republicans would have done with this, had Weiner stayed.    They would have implied pedophilia, among other things--since Weiner really had no knowledge of the age of all the recipients of his "tweets".

And as I have already noted, what Vitter did has no bearing--that was a different regime. Under Boehner the GOP has had a policy of zero tolerance of this stuff.   See Chris Lee.

Also, Vitter did it with a prostitute.    Weiner's contacts were at least partly with high school and college girls.   And for some reason, though there was no actual sex involved, the fact that most of his contacts were not in the "sex trade" seems to make it seamier.

He did not help his cause by his general brash and aggressive attitude.   He had very few friends in Congress even before this--so the only one who even had any inclination to defend him was his former mentor, Chuck Shumer. Of course his lying about it probably alienated more people than anything else.

The Democrats were also just livid about the timing--up to now they had the GOP on the defensive about the Ryan plan for overhaul of Medicare, and they were making great headway in branding the GOP as against old people. They did not welcome any kind of diversion from this campaign--especially something of this nature.

On top of all this, as I noted earlier, is the Democrats' need to appeal to women.   At this point the gender gap with women favors the Democrats.    They cannot afford a loss of this.

And it is amazing how some women feel about it.   I told earlier about the 21-year old who was bitterly disappointed in Weiner.   That's nothing compared to Jan, who is as liberal (radical, even) as they come.   At this point she loathes and despises Weiner, and has told me his wife should divorce him immediately, since otherwise the father's conduct will follow their child his or her whole life. I thought it was more important that her child have his or her own real father--but that's just my view.

One other question:   I've read Weiner still has a $4 million campaign fund.   What happens to it now?

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Noreen
Date: 16 Jun 11 - 05:13 PM

US lawmaker Anthony Weiner resigns after sex scandal

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Noreen
Date: 16 Jun 11 - 05:11 PM

BBC news reports he has resigned.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,999
Date: 16 Jun 11 - 01:07 PM

An insider says Mr Weiner will resign within the next few days.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Jun 11 - 11:44 AM

It looks the Weiner's resignation is inevitable...just too much pressure from both inside & outside his party. It now makes little difference whether he broke any laws or not... or whether some Republicans have done worse.

The point has been made that Democrats are trying to say "We are NOT Republicans....we don't condone weird behavior in our party like 'they' seem to do"

Too bad it had to come to this...........

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 16 Jun 11 - 10:55 AM

The trouble is kids do come across these things by accident the same way as stumbling upon irresponsibly stored porn, videos and magazines. Photograph developers do not usually print anything that might be risque, but how can a law be brought in to ban something happening in private if for example it is part of partnership fetish?

Not me I hasten to add!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: gnu
Date: 15 Jun 11 - 10:22 PM

.73??? May actually have a twisted dick.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: frogprince
Date: 15 Jun 11 - 10:32 AM

...or .73" long...

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: frogprince
Date: 15 Jun 11 - 10:30 AM

"digital genitals"... why oh why do I have to be the one with a mind twisted in such a way that that makes me think of some poor guy with a schlong the size of a little finger...

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Jun 11 - 09:34 AM

Incidentally, anyone wishing to see the extent of this shit should google

sex scandals, politicians, usa

sex scandals, religious leaders, usa

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Jun 11 - 09:32 AM

I'm always surprised when things get blown out of proportion (no offense to Bill Clinton) or the MANY politicians who have been embroiled in sex scandals or religious 'leaders' who have likewise been brought low)) because too often the degree of the offense is so seldom considered in the equation.

I think they should be punished for their stupidity. If they committed a crime, then the law should be dealing with them. imo.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 15 Jun 11 - 08:28 AM

"The Court of Public Opinion at work."

Not exactly a 'court' as such, but as Democracy is essentially a personality contest where appearances are everything and content is nothing, if you want to win that personality contest I guess public opinion about you, is pretty much the only thing you have to worry about.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 15 Jun 11 - 08:12 AM

"which in turn would mean than virtual murder, is the same as real murder, or virtual vehicular homicide in video games can be punishable by law."

Err, well I suppose if you were successful in actually killing someone over the internet, it would still be murder. Exposing oneself to a stranger is exposing oneself to a stranger, it's a form of sexual harassment, be it in image form or otherwise. The internet, despite it's newness, doesn't make things 'unreal'. It's just a medium like any other. Poison pen letters are taken seriously despite the person making threats via the medium of paper correspondence, buying child porn on DVD is an offense, despite the fact the viewer isn't physically abusing the children, telephone harassement is harassement despite the fact that the person harassing you is doing so at a safe distance rather than speaking to you face to face.

So as far as exposing oneself is a concerned, personally, I'd be more freaked by a man singling me out over the internet in order to expose himself, than a random opportunist in a raincoat who wasn't targeting me personally.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,999
Date: 15 Jun 11 - 07:54 AM

"Perhaps if there was a drug that removed all imagination...hmmm"

There is, Don. It's called television.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Jun 11 - 12:17 AM

Regarding virtual cheating, Jimmy Carter probably summed it up best.
I've committed adultery in my heart many times....



Perhaps if there was a drug that removed all imagination...hmmm

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Donuel
Date: 15 Jun 11 - 12:11 AM

Yeah right,

Lets make VIRTUAL flashing as criminal as public flashing.

which in turn would mean than virtual murder, is the same as real murder, or virtual vehicular homicide in video games can be punishable by law.

This is the same kind of stupid thinking that conservatives tried when they said a gay judge can not rule on gay subjects.

As if Christian judges can not rule on Christians who blow up clinics.

As if Jewish judges can not rule in cases involving semetic people.


This folly is linear thinking at its best.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Jun 11 - 01:07 PM

Huh. The Court of Public Opinion at work.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 14 Jun 11 - 12:51 PM

"if it is trivial, why lie about it?"

Quite. And the fact that he did so, is possibly more concerning than the initial "flashing" episode. What people in power choose to do privately is important when what they choose to do privately (or not so privately in this case) has potential consequences for everyone else. The fact that he lied indicates that he wanted to keepthis matter a secret. Sexual secrets are good blackmail material. If you want to run the world, but are worried that the people you need to love you in order to run the world, don't like men who dance the can-can, then it's probably best not to dance the can-can in public and don't send pictures of yourself dancing the can-can in private to strangers who will make it public, over the internet either.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Donuel
Date: 14 Jun 11 - 12:13 PM

Anthoney Wiener aka Hand Solo, will follow the force and rely on the advice of his wife on whether he is going to resign or not.

It seems there are people here who do not think that masturbation is a private affair. Even if it is unseen by anyone except the perp.

If the Republicans were smart they would pass a Federal Feloney Masturbation law and not grandfather in Weiner.

Haul his ass to jail for federal felony masturbation! The Republicans always like poking laws into peoples bedrooms.
Maybe now they could really clean house with a great masturbation Inquisition. Remember, it does not have to be seen by anyone to be a crime...

BTW
lieing about Masturbation will carry a double sentence. Being a jerk or a jerk off will carry criminal implications. Nancy Pelosi will be accused of masturbation by John BOner. WOw things will really heat up while the debt ceiling gets ignored.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Ron Davies
Date: 13 Jun 11 - 11:31 PM

We see it as trivial.    But he showed thoroughly wretched judgment.   It's reasonable to require a modicum of common sense from a Congressman.   He showed none.

Also, if it is trivial, why lie about it?

Lying about it made it considerably worse.    He would have had a lot more support--at least from Democrats--if he had come clean at the start.

And what Vitter did has no bearing. That was a different regime.    Under Boehner the GOP has had a zero tolerance policy on this stuff.   The recent NY Republican--can't recall his name-- did nothing but take his shirt off and send that photo. And that was enough to can him.

If Weiner is not forced out--and it looks like he in fact will survive--the GOP will take this and run with it--and not be careful about facts. The Democrats need strong backing from women.    And it will be crucial how (non-Mudcat) women see this mess.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: gnu
Date: 13 Jun 11 - 03:32 PM

Ahhhh... that he used public money for this is the worst allegation? I assume the gov has a contract with the comm company at a flat rate? I assume he is allowed a coffee break? If so, he didn't fuck the people over. Even if he did spend a few dollars of the American tax payers' money it wasn't like he was firing cruise missiles at $600k a pop or fighting a religious and civil war 8000 miles away.

Jaysus! Why can't these people get a grip?

Yes, intended.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Jun 11 - 01:51 PM

People can get worked up over some of the stupidist things, especially if it has some connection with sex.

Ho bloody hum. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Ron Davies
Date: 09 Jun 11 - 10:57 PM

Another aspect of this:    due to redistricting, NY will probably lose 2 seats in the House.   Weiner's district was already a good candidate for this--others being less likely because of legal reasons. Now it's even more likely.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Ron Davies
Date: 09 Jun 11 - 10:02 PM

So that another Democrat (best choice here would clearly be a woman) can get in and build a bit of a record before the 2012 election.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Ron Davies
Date: 09 Jun 11 - 09:59 PM

One of the ironies here is that it seems he's managed to wreck his career without actually having any extramarital sex whatsoever.

Truly a signal accomplishment.



But I'm sorry, it's just too Puritanical to count what he did as cheating.

Not that he might not have cheated if his contacts had continued to develop.   He certainly might have.

But he is being punished for 1)   unbelievable stupidity and classically wretched judgment and 2)   lying.


Another irony is that he in fact does deserve to be punished--above all since he has committed the cardinal sin for any politician:    he has lost his effectiveness as a politician (and created a huge headache for his party). From now on he will be a laughingstock.

For this he deserves to lose his position as Congressman.    Immediately.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 09 Jun 11 - 04:49 PM

Or even a form of relationship between two people, which is primarily if not exclusively sexual in nature.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 09 Jun 11 - 04:46 PM

"It's sex between two people."

It's certainly a form of sexual relationship between two people.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: michaelr
Date: 09 Jun 11 - 03:54 PM

The sad part is that we simply can't afford to lose a progressive congressman. What the hell was that idiot thinking?

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 09 Jun 11 - 03:16 PM

I'm not a moralist. I don't care in the least what anyone does or with whom they do it. However, equating cyber-sex and simple masturbation ignores an important point.

I used to feel there was no difference between cyber-sex and masturbating to pornography, but I'm no longer of that opinion. The images and videos proffered by the porn industry are fantasy. Though the people are real, the viewer doesn't interact with them as real people. His relationship to them is strictly imaginary and 100% impersonal.

But when two people watch each other live on the Internet it's no longer impersonal. It's a form of shared intimacy, even if the two people don't know each other in real life and live thousands of miles apart.

Masturbation is a solo experience, but when two people do it together, whether in the same bed or simply connected via the Internet, it's not just masturbation. The mechanics may be the same, but there's more to it. It's sex between two people.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: gnu
Date: 09 Jun 11 - 02:51 PM

999... SOB! I haven't ejected my drink thru my nose in years but it was either that or spit it on the screen. HAHAHAHAAAA!

I need a tissue... for my tears... hehehehheeeeeee!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: frogprince
Date: 09 Jun 11 - 01:59 PM

There's nothing new about elected officials messing around, and in most cases it may not affect their ability to serve effectively. But this was a kinda like messing around on the White House Lawn in daylight.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,999
Date: 09 Jun 11 - 12:48 PM

"Notice that not another man here stands for masturbation."

That's cuz we tried it once and didn't like it.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 11:09 PM

Supposedly Breitbart (of all people) has a far more sexually explicit photo of Rep Weiner (again taken by himself? ).   If so, it don't look good.

And women in Rep Weiner's district are not happy with him.

He is in deep kimshee.    Possibly getting deeper.

Just talked to a young woman (about 21) tonight.   She is bitterly disappointed--since she thought he was one of the strong liberals with his head screwed on straight, and she had high hopes for him to be a power center in opposing the Right.

Hope he has a sword handy to fall on soon.    He may need it.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Jeri
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 04:57 PM

Don, I got to see that in real life. (The image, not the actual penis.) It's a fresco, not a mosaic, of Priapus. It was right by the door, and quite a few people took a photo of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: gnu
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 04:45 PM

"Notice that not another man here stands for masturbation. I guess they all sit down for it."

It depends how good the internut porn is.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 04:09 PM

Today in the 'news', I have seen 3 different commentators and/or emails from listeners categorically state that (paraphrased)"online sex is cheating and immoral, just as much as if it were physical in person."
None of these seemed to bother saying "in my own personal opinion" or even admit that different value systems and circumstances might be relevant. I heard ONE commentator allow as how it 'might' depend on whether one's spouse would likely be upset at certain activities.

Whether Rep Weiner keeps his job or not, it is interesting that so many people have simplistic, black and white views of morality and decency and can barely comprehend - much less tolerate - attitudes that differ from their own. I take the trouble to say all this because it illustrates a general problem inherent in choosing and evaluating elected officials. I worry that the traits of intelligence & competence to do the job are far less meaningful to the average voter than their superficial claims to some religion, moral system and ability to bring money to their district.

....oh, by the way, I DO think Weiner has handled it all poorly and used bad judgment in his 'hobby'. I do not think it is grounds for resignation... so far... but I sorta think it would affect his chances for re-election next year.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 03:27 PM

http://www.pompeii.org.uk/img/pompei_proibita_mini.jpg



When much of the excavation of Pompeii was done, a mosaic in the main room of a wealthy home revealed the legendary 'Bigus Dickus'.
It was a common theme displayed in many homes and was not vulgar but rather humorous as we might see a dogs playing poker picture.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 01:06 PM

Weiner was a piker! satellite penises

I guess it depends on how...ummm... real you view the image.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 12:54 PM

Hmm I knew I was rhyming the first part but the second part was unconscious.
12 years ago I posted mostly on Words on Fire.com which was mostly a black poetry site. I became personna non grata there when I critcised Farrakan and the president of Zimbabwe but when I said that I did not know who Beyonce was and thought she was just another singer and dancer without a political cause, I GOT BANNED!

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Jeri
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 12:17 PM

Wrong Carradine, Don. It was David.
I agree with you pretty much. About the only thing that bothers me is that the guy could make such a dumb mistake, but I suppose that's another thing to bother me: that a guy can make dumb mistakes because of proclivities.

And Don, were you rhyming on purpose?

"Though the scandal is pithy
it sure is a pity
that a man who fights
for the rights
of the common man and not corporations
has suffered a great fall
and is reduced to letch
who may soon crawl away.
Forty years ago I did not expect
smoking cigarettes
would become an offense
prosecutable by law.
Today I am begining to suspect
that masturbation in private
may become the next
new misdeamenor in the
American culture war."

Not a criticism--I'm impressed. You can rap that, man! Word...

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 11:55 AM

Donuel, did my posts sound like I was accusing you of being nasty or mean? I would hope not!

"Whether its impeaching a sitting President over a blow job, technicly lieing about a BJ, or Weiner sending pictures of his naughty bits, the whole idea of legal private personal behavior is being criminalized by social conservatives. When Spitzer paid a prostitute he lost the Govenorship. When Vitter saw a prostitute he was re elected."

RE Clinton, I don't care what any powerful political leader does with their private bits (so long as it's all consensual), but I do care if a powerful political leader lies when under oath, whatever it is they choose to lie under oath about (and however they try to bend the rules about what words mean).

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Donuel
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 11:18 AM

Whether its impeaching a sitting President over a blow job, technicly lieing about a BJ, or Weiner sending pictures of his naughty bits, the whole idea of legal private personal behavior is being criminalized by social conservatives. When Spitzer paid a prostitute he lost the Govenorship. When Vitter saw a prostitute he was re elected.

Little Hawk is half right when he says this is a sordid forgettable affair but when viewed as a political social phenomena it really does have great import on the principle of freedom and privacy.

Instant gratification and instant exposure over the internet compounds this issue. While everyone knew about FDR's mistress and his wife's sexual preference it was not a big deal. Now virtual sex by private masturbation in the privacy of his own home is considered grounds for investigations, firing and criminal probes just seems beyond the absurd.

Stewart had me laughing out loud last night. (blood and all)
There really is a powerful appreciation of shaudenfreud in this country.

Though the scandal is pithy it sure is a pity that a man who fights for the rights of the common man and not corporations has suffered a great fall and is reduced to letch who may soon crawl away. Forty years ago I did not expect smoking cigarettes would become an offense prosecutable by law. Today I am begining to suspect that masturbation in private may become the next new misdeamenor in the American culture war.




PS

Notice that not another man here stands for masturbation. I guess they all sit down for it. In this day there is more bandwidth devoted to internet porn than any other single subject, but that is a different debate I suppose.


note to lively,
I speak the way I do not because I am nasty or mean. I speak frankly because I have the morals to back up my integirty. I have never cheated on my wife, ever. I have never broadcast pictures of my genitals. Prior to marriage I could count the number of lovers on my fingers, and a few toes. Many people have thousands of sex partners because it is as normal as shaking hands for them. To each their own.






A warning for people who worship romance or sexual promisuity; it will lead to a constant feeling of having to maintain a frequency or competiveness that will end in a feeling of personal failure, disease, misplace jealousy or betrayal. If you over complicate anything including masturbation you are in for a mighty big fall.
Just ask Keith Carradine. oops, too late for that.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 10:33 AM

...and because when Weiner wasn't 'indulging' in his hobby, he was an outspoken, intense liberal and critic of Republican foolishness, those same Republicans will use this to hound him out of Congress. His offenses may not come up to the standard of some of recent Republican shenannigans, but the rules are different when a Democrat slips.....just ask Erik Cantor.

Too bad Weiner didn't save SOME of his otherwise good sense for his private life.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,999
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 10:23 AM

Much Ado About Nothing.

I agree in part with those who have questioned the 'taste' of this thread, but personally I don't give a rat's ass. I fail to see the difference between what Wiener did and what telemarketers do. Just go ahead and try to get THEM blocked. Hell, Palin appears on the www scantily clad. We've all seen Arnie stripped to his bare loin cloth. Burt Reynolds with his dickey hardened. Who gives a shit, really?

"A rich rocket scientist organizes an expedition to the moon, which they discover is inhabited by nude women." That is the summation of a 1961 'sci-fi' movie. NASA musta believed it, because come 1967, well, ya know.

I recall the Fugs in the 1960s who did a song entitled "Wet Dream Over You." It didn't change the world. Neither will this.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Ron Davies
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 08:40 AM

This incident has been one of the best gifts to comedians in several eons--as Jon Stewart acknowledged last night.    You really need to catch his "press conference" apologizing for how he has covered the issue--and as a result turning the Daily Show over to John Oliver , whose accent (British) "falsely makes you believe you can trust him."    Then John Oliver promises to deliver the "pre-pubescent jokes" the Daily Show audience had been waiting in 90- degree heat to hear.

Then the show tells us how men's obsession with their own sex organs has been responsible for so much progress:    Edison, for instance, realized that there were 12 hours in the day when women could not see his phallus--so invented the light bulb to alleviate this problem.

A woman points out that if you are a 7-term Congressman and a woman is still not interested in you, dolng what Weiner did is just not going to close the deal
What women really want is a a phallus which is a good listener, nurturing, etc.

I've also heard, for instance, one explanation of why Weiner did it:    to make sure everybody knew how to pronounce his name.

Also heard last week that it had been a bad week for cell-phone users:    1)   your phone may make you sick 2)    you may get a tweet from Rep Weiner.

This incident is the gift that keeps on giving.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: kendall
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 08:39 AM

Talk about a tempest in a tea cup!

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 07:01 AM

Oh PS, I certainly agree that sexual indiscressions are irrelevent to one's job, just so long as you are not using the power or influence of your professional position, to sexually impose on others.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: GUEST,lively
Date: 08 Jun 11 - 06:56 AM

I hardly expect *you* to feel guilt for the misdemeanor (or not) of another party! Just saying that posting intimate pictures of oneself to a stranger over the internet, can have consequences.

If your wife were sending pictures of her lady parts to another man (via the internet), you might see it as a simple biological necessity just like having a period, but I'd be surprised if most married men would be so pragmatic.

So as far as sexting is concerned, I guess it all comes down to what understandings one has with ones spouse and how honest one is regards ones sexual behaviours either within or independent of your relationship.

Subject: RE: BS: Sexting and digital genitals
From: Donuel
Date: 07 Jun 11 - 10:11 PM

John maybe the producer provided the gum he he



male emissions and female menses

The same? completely equivaent? identical?

never said that they were.

However they are both natural bodily functions.


As for Weiners wanker, if he inflicted its image upon some unsuspecting person who did not invite his wee wankeritude, then he is guilty of indecent exposure at the minimum.

Joe Offer that is a cheap shot linking me with drug use.
I don't believe that the idea of a Congressman masturbating is shocking. For Republicans to cry for his arrest and firing is hard to swallow.
Perhaps younger people are unaccustomed to speech about such a taboo as sex or masturbation (sub-sex) as well as older people no longer seeing the whole subject as such a big deal or mystical mystery.

........................
Ms. lively, I feel no guilt whatsoever regarding you claim that one person killed themselves over internet masturbation jealousy. IT is a tragedy that no one could speak sense to him when he needed some.

For a person to divorce and commit suicide because their lover masturbated in whatever bizarre way they chose, seems most likely due to an immaturity and taboo silence surrounding the subject of sex combined with a lack of any sense of self worth.

To put it more eloquently, it sounds like a matter of worshipping the wrong thing person or idea. You see everyone worships. Even atheists worship.
Anthoney Weiner sounds like a guy who worshipped himself. It is said he behaves like a bully to his staff. His needs, his jollies is first and formost in his church of Weiner.

Other people might worship intellect and they will crumble when they are proven stupid or unaware. Some people may worship beauty and it will fade from day to day. Depending upon what you worship is how you either find yourself liberated or enslaved.