Feminist On Spitzer & Scandals (or Set Ups? Gambinos & Wall Street)

It was Batesville, Arkansas, and Dean was a fish out of water. Used to small towns, and born in Wenatchee, WA, but unaware of the traditions of the Bible Belt.

In the Bible Belt, a young woman wore a stiff brassiere, plain and white, with cone cups, but readily took it off. That was in 1994. Nothing had changed much, as Dean had discovered this secret 20 years earlier, and for it, he was branded a bad boy. "Dean! Come on over here," said the town pastor, with his broad smile. "Now Dean, I can see the Devil in your eyes."

Dean recalled these words, last week, in 2008. We were standing inbetween orchards owned by two different families who had become neighbors and orchardists through two different sets of circumstances. Dean's father was the owner and he had decided to try something different, out South. 20 years later, he still had a southern drawl. I had asked him about using a phone nearby and I cannot even remember how church came up. He said he didn't go to church anymore, but he did his own thing out in nature, with God. I told him I felt the same about church--that while it had served a great purpose in my youth, I had seen too much and saw through the hypocrisy too easily to be interested. Still conservative, and believing the same things, I practiced on my own, and prayed and felt things were good between me and God. Dean told me the last time he went to church he was reminded what a grapevine for gossip it was. The first thing they ask, he said, was "What do you do?" Already in his business. He said, "I don't go to church for that. I go for this..." he said and put his hands together and raised them in a prayer. I wondered if something had "happened." So I asked.

"So, did something happen at church that turned you off?" He said yes and it was a one-word answer. I decided to pry. "What?"
"I've been kicked out of clubs, and I've been kicked out of bars before, but then I've never heard of--I was kicked out of church." He stopped there, and did not look as though he wanted to continue.
"You don't have to tell me of course, but I'm just curious, because I've seen some things too...WHY did they kick you out?"
"They sent me a letter, telling me I was no longer a member of the church."
"Why?"
Dean was silent. I really wanted to know why.
"Was it because of drinking or sex, or what?"
Dean told me he didn't drink at all then, but he did go out with women. He said they accused him of drinking even though he didn't drink but just hung out with other people who did, and, he said, they thought he was doing a lot more with the women and many more women, than was true. "How did they know what I was doing? They see me associating and just assumed."
I said it was weird and then Dean decided to let me in on a little more.
"Well, there was more to it. Me and my buddy caught the pastor, well, you know, and then I got the letter after." Dean described what had happened. It was a warm and muggy night and he and his friend were going "What you call, coon-huntin'," and they came across a familiar truck. It was the pastor's truck and what was it doing out there late at night? It didn't look like anyone was in it from afar so he and his buddy approached. His buddy was looking in the back window and Dean looked in the side window. He said they were so shocked they just stared for about 2 minutes. "We caught him," he said to me, and he said he rapped on the window and said, "Pastor Roach! What are you doin'?" He said Pastor Roach never jumped so high. They took off and later, Pastor Roach approached him and said it wasn't what it looked like. Dean responded, "Where I come from, we call it screwin'."

Dean said he then told the Pastor not to worry, that he minded his own business and wasn't going to tell anyone. And he didn't. I asked Dean how he knew for sure the pastor was doing what he thought.
"I saw his bare white butt going up and down and the piano player from church was underneath him," Dean said to me, "...and my buddy saw it too."

After that, the Pastor continued to preach about hell and against the sins of immorality. Shortly thereafter, Dean received a letter from the church, kicking him out. He said he'd go into a store and someone from church would approach him and say, "Dean! Why haven't we seen you in church?!" and pretend they hadn't had a part in it. "All two-faced," he said. "I knew they knew about it, because it takes a VOTE."

"Wow." I said. The worst part was how hypocritical it was. Dean said that's what bothered him most. But, he said, there is always payback. He said sometimes we don't know or can't see what's going to happen, and sometimes it takes time, but it eventually catches up with people. "Did anyone clear your name?" I asked. Dean said no, but that he didn't care what they thought after that. However, he said, "Two years later, Roach knocked up a 16 year old girl from the church and he got kicked out." It caught up with him.

I thought about human nature and how many times this "Get them before they get you" strategy is played out. Since the beginning of time I guess. It's a shame. It ruins lives. I like to think there IS karma or "payback" but I also know that doesn't always happen. Some things stay under the radar while the innocent party suffers. Still, I took comfort from hearing a small story about an attempt by someone, or some people, to defame someone else to cover their own sins.

I didn't even know about the Eliot Spitzer case until yesterday morning when he gave his statement to the press, his resignation. I've been out of the media loop, focused on my own legal and personal itinerary. I was thinking about Dean's story, and then heard about Spitzer. "To whom much is given, much is required," quoted Spitzer, in his statement. Spitzer had put others in jail for similiar offenses, earlier in his career, and taken a moral platform. I'm not surprised everyone wanted him to resign rather than take a vote. "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." On one hand, I was disgusted with Spitzer and glad they "caught him" and then I remembered, "Oh." This was the same FBI that covers for their own employees' betrayal of public trust, and sexual offenses. "Don't embarress The Bureau." This means, as it still does with the Catholic church, and other churches and organizations, don't get caught.

To Whom Much Is Given, Much Is Required:
The problem here is not that these guys failed to see themselves as beneficiaries of the public trust, but that they see themselves as a Gift From God.

Ego is what separates people from their sense of civic duty and moral stance. It is the same thing that leads to the cover up for their actions, sometimes with the help of others, who are also ego-driven and must believe their positions or their institutions cannot withstand the scandal of their personal moral failures. Ego is what leads churches to think the reputation of the church itself is at stake when a man/woman (or more) "falls". The FBI are policing the politicians; ummm...who is policing the FBI? and of all these various organizations where this sort of thing crops up: churches, FBI, government, all institutions which are predominantly run by men, how many are getting away with doing the very same thing, simply because they have attempted to keep their ego (or their big mouth) in check?

The good ole boys will look away until another group of good ole takes them to task. Then, once another gang has tread on their turf and exposed them publicly, they will do what good ole boys should do: assume the position. Make a scapegoat of one to preserve the rest and keep up appearances.

Maybe the others weren't talking so loud about morality. But it's never just the pastor acting alone. There's a vote. People knowing put this man in power, and knowing people vote on moral laws and measures and cases and even practice shunning of others all the time, while they carry on their contrary deeds in secret, hoping to stay out of the limelight and that by keeping their mouth shut, someone else will do them a favor if they need it, in the future. Which means, maybe they won't put someone away for sexual assault, because they know they too are guilty, but under public pressure and the spotlight, they will assume the proper position.

Let's not blame our patriarchical society either, for any of the conduct. One of the biggest challenges women face today, is accountability for sex crimes and misdemeanors. I'm not saying the prostitutes are innocent, but before these guys used prostitutes, what were they getting away with in college and on dates? and these are the same guys that enforce (supposedly) our laws and rights.

We are not in the post-feminist stage yet, and the women standing by their man...well, if it's a one-time pass and let's see if things change for the sake of the family, I can understand that. But not repetitive behavior, or standing by their man for the sake of their political careers or finances. These women need to feel strong enough to stand on their own, and start demanding respect as individuals and not just part of the marriage package. Men too. Marriage is seen as this kind of political or career cement, assuring stability and health to employers and the public, and it's ridiculous. Some of the most unhealthy people are in marriages, and their marriages are in the crapper. Half these people should never be married to begin with, especially if they think that once married, they have achieved the kind of responsibility that comes with being a PARENT.

For punishment, these guys should spend a month with me. I'll show them a thing or two that "isn't considered very safe"... here's an apple for your efforts (duck!). You can call me Eve.

Crap. This is an update. Now I read Spitzer brought down the Gambino family in 1992. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but the first thing I thought was: s---. Payback? Spitzer is responsible for his actions, yes, and made bad decisions, but I also know about being set up, and I wouldn't be surprised at all if more went into Spitzer's downfall than simple self-induced private failings. I don't know. I just wonder...I think an investigative reporter needs to do a little research into how this whole case came up. Supposedly, banks tipped the IRS off about suspicious activity. Which banks? Who at what bank? The same banks that held accounts for the Gambinos? I'd like to know for one. Who else did he anger? I would look at all the players and their backgrounds. U.S. attorney Michael Garcia has this case now. What's his background? I guess this went to the FBI which then asked the NYPD for assistance. All I know, is that there is mafia in law enforcement, and maybe someone was working overtime to bring this guy to his knees. Why Spitzer over all the other clients who remain unnamed? And how did Spitzer get introduced to this whole thing? or was it all of his own accord and kept private? I want to know.

Update 2. I watched a special about Spitzer. He also brought down Wall Street players (Merril Lynch included) and made them pay hundreds of thousands for deceiving investors. It's sounding to me like yeah, he did wrong, but he also did a lot of good for the public that made some powerful people angry. Banks and Wall Street have a natural relationship...and a bank reported Spitzer. There's all kinds of fishy account activity in the U.S., but they were watching HIS account?

At first I heard about this prostitution scandal and just accepted it, hearing that this guy had taken a moral stance against the same thing. But actually, it was different. I'm not justifying his actions, but he fought against human trafficking which is far different from a high end call girl service. Human trafficking is slavery for sex. Was "Kristen" a slave for sex? No. She chose to go into it voluntarily, when she could have taken more legitimate work, AND if she had done the exact same thing at the Bunny Ranch in Nevada, she'd be "legal", and so would Spitzer. So, the big difference is that prostitution is legal in Nevada but not in New York and Spitzer didn't fly to Nevada for the exact same thing he could have had legally in Nevada. This is an activity that becomes legal or illegal depending on what state you're in.

So did he really betray the public trust? If he's willing to do something illegal maybe he'd go further and do something worse that would affect the public. But in a way, his actions were personal. He wasn't ripping the public off, or using state money to finance his affairs, or committing sexual assault. He wasn't even using his position to get dates. He paid as a random John for services that were offered by women who were fully able to support themselves by other means, and chose not to. He could have done the EXACT same thing in Nevada and suddenly, he wouldn't be accused of betraying the public trust. What is it that makes it illegal and fine for one state, but not the other? State regulation? I think this escort services was even paying taxes.

I don't think he should be charged with commmitting criminal offenses. I think it doesn't make sense. And prostitution should either be legal or not at all. Putting all the prostitution in one particular state makes prostitution available to those who have money for travel expenses and time to travel. Those who are too busy to take off to Nevada, or who are too poor, but do the EXACT same thing, face criminal charges. On the other hand, I am concerned about abuses of women in prostitution fields. They are not all high end, or have the ability to withstand pressures, and maybe opening it up other places makes it more difficult to monitor. However, there is human trafficking, in our United States. In California, the midwest, New Jersey, and these women and sometimes children are literally slaves, brought over from other countries without knowing the language, having their passports taken from them, and forced to pay off an "indentured servitude" which is really slavery, sexual assault, racketeering, fraud, and a number of other things. They exist because there is a demand. There are people who want to pay for no-strings-attached and they don't want to make a big trip to Nevada whenever the mood strikes them. Maybe if prostitution was legalized, there would be more even distribution of legal prostitutes and fewer attempts at human trafficking to meet the perceived demand. States could have better regulations and those wishing to make money in this field could be legitimate rather than go underground. A lot of these guys, married guys, should be caught with their pants down, but part of the reason they're not going to Nevada, most likely, is to keep their girlfriends or wives from knowing or keeping tabs. Maybe if prostitution were legal, wives would know this is available next door and not just in Nevada, and hire their P.I.s and best friends to do some surveillance in a more pro-active manner if they suspect. Also, men who are less than honorable may be more likely to report trafficking when they have legal options and recognize the difference between trafficking and legal prostitution. I'm not approving, but our culture is already into the "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free" and if they can get what they want with zero risk of criminal charges, they may avoid paying the price for going along with trafficking when they could eliminate risk by providing supply to meet demand. As a woman, I'd like to think my boyfriend or husband doesn't have legal prostitution readily available and that the prospect of criminal charges would be a deterrent, but the only real deterrent is going to reside somewhere in the conscience of the man himself, that for moral or personal reasons, he is opposed to engaging in, or supporting the activity.

I am absolutely opposed to prostitution from a moral stance. I would also divorce my partner if I ever found out they were doing something like that. I don't know that someone should be asked to step down from public office unless they directly used public funds or betrayed the public and harmed the public; I think in a just world, where we acknowledge "all have fallen and come short of the glory of God," this man could have been given a chance at mercy. We could have extended mercy to him and also watched him like a hawk. What Clinton did was worse, in my opinion, because he did have a supervisory role over Monica Lewinsky and there was a power imbalance (not just position but age/experience); he had an obligation to her, as her boss, to draw the line. Do I think Spitzer's wife should stay? no, but I'm not the wife. More than betraying his wife, I think he betrayed his kids. He should know doing things like this puts his kids at risk of facing all the trauma of a divorce.

I believe women who end up in prostitution are often vulnerable and I would want to give them other opportunities and support for getting out of it, and enough strength to never go there to begin with. Men and women should know that 9 times out of 10, a woman who ends up in prostitution has been abused in the past--whether it's sexual abuse, emotional, or other physical assault...I think sometimes it is loss of self-esteem that leads to this path, and sometimes it is desensitization to the act because of abuse. There is still a difference between prostitution and human trafficking. The women who are trafficked have absolutely no say, are often beaten and intimidated, and completely without recourse to save themselves. Those who think about going into prostitution have welfare to fall back on, which may not be attractive, but they are not FORCED to do the work of a prostitute. Those who go as high end call girls do it for the money, and if GREED compels them to be so dissatisfied with their romantic relationships and their day job, they are partly responsible. "Kristen" was not a sex slave. She chose to do the work to fund her musical aspirations. I have aspirations too, and I don't sell my body for it, and I've even had offers to do things for large amounts of money before, and I don't go there.

What is crazy is that Spitzer is accused of violating the public trust for pretty much having private failures that involve his marriage and prostitution, that could have been legal in another location. I was told by the FBI, that what their 2 employees did to me was a matter of "internal misconduct" or using their position for personal gain. I was told not to go to police and not to tell anyone about it. I found out later that what they had done actually was a CRIME and fit the statute for a certain degree of Sex Abuse. They did not simply "use their position" or do something that was just private and personal. They committed crimes against me, and the FBI and the police who I later reported it to (within statutes) covered it up. There were other people involved, lawyers for the Catholic church, which I was in litigation with at the time, but that's something I'll have to explain later when I write on the true life story posts, which I want to do in order.

I think sensible laws should be in place for prostitution. It would be interesting to do a study to find out how many women are healthy emotionally and mentally before and during the profession. I also know that one of our society's biggest tragedies is the continued oppression of women through sexual harassment and abuse, and blame of the woman as the "seducer". We need better enforcement of actual crimes and misdemeanors against women, where they have not given consent. And someone reasonable needs to explain to the public and the government what the distinctions are between prostitution and it's risks and harms, trafficking, abuse of position/exploitation, and sexual assault and abuse.

Everything hinges on consent. Freely given and mutual consent. Consent that is not affected and made null and void by drugs or intoxication from alcohol. Consent that is not exploitive or manipulated through a power imbalance.