The Petraeus Affair

[Pearl]

This takes a look at why some men do this:

What is unclear is why. Is sex so fundamentally different for each gender that men see it as exerting their influence, while women somehow succumb to it? Have we simply not reached the point where there are enough women in positions of power, a critical mass that will make cheating an equal opportunity perk of office -- men do this because they can, and women don't because they can't...yet? Or are women just more moral than men?
The answer is probably all of the above, none of the above, and it is much more complicated than that. If -- when -- the scales balance (the last election was a good start) we will likely learn that it isn't just sex that means different things to men and women, but also power.
Until then, the parade of cheating men will inevitably march on.

Lisa Belkin: Why Petraeus And Other Powerful Men Cheat

I've heard that being in a position of power makes some men think they need to have a woman who is like a sycophant and worships their egos, because their wives aren't doing that. I've also heard having a mistress is another way to further prove their power after they've achieved so much.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by corianderstem

Percentages of blame for cheating? Really?

i'd like to see that algorithm.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by anitram

I know that sex is not at all a rational thing, but if he had just stepped back and committed 5 minutes of thought to the potential consequences, would he still have done the same thing? Was the sex worth all this trouble and public humiliation for his family? How stupid.

we should ask this guy:






i think the thing is that no one thinks they're going to get caught.

[anitram]

Yeah, for sure that is part of it. You'd think the head of the CIA could at least not get caught.

[corianderstem]

Speaking of the CIA ... nice new avatar, Irvine. Ha!

[Irvine511]

Claire's cry-face gets funnier every time I see it.

And I thought Homeland was really overrated.

[corianderstem]

You're off my Christmas gift list.

[Moonlit_Angel]

Originally Posted by Pearl

I've heard that being in a position of power makes some men think they need to have a woman who is like a sycophant and worships their egos, because their wives aren't doing that. I've also heard having a mistress is another way to further prove their power after they've achieved so much.

And if that is true (which I'm inclined to believe it is), to that I simply say this: Get over yourselves, guys.

[MrsSpringsteen]

I blame both parties equally, just to make that clear.

I think the fact that she's 20 years younger is a major factor too. That's part of the ego trip.

[purpleoscar]

Petraeus and the Rise of Narcissistic Leaders - Jeffrey Pfeffer - Harvard Business Review

What to make of the confluence of General Petraeus resigning as head of the CIA and Christopher Kubasik, vice chairman, president, and COO of Lockheed also resigning — both for having affairs — within days of each other? Certainly not the first men to be brought down by an inability to control their impulses — these recent examples join a long list including John Edwards, Bill Clinton, and Harry Stonecipher of Boeing.

There is a simple power story often told about such behavior: research shows that people with more power tend to pay less attention to others. They are more action-oriented, pursue their own goals, and exhibit disinhibited behavior in part because they believe that rules don't apply to them; they are special and invulnerable.

All of this is true, but nonetheless leaves at least a couple of questions unanswered. First, as my friend Bob Sutton noted in a conversation, these behaviors seem to be confined mostly to men. We seldom hear of powerful women who can't control their urges. Second, it at least feels as if this sort of behavior and the career consequences that result seem to be occurring more frequently now. Maybe that is because of more public scrutiny and the operation of social media. But maybe something else is going on — namely we are choosing more narcissistic leaders and the misbehavior is not just the consequence of power but also of excessive narcissism.

First, a definition: narcissistic leaders, as research by Stanford colleague Charles O'Reilly and colleagues notes, are characterized by the traits of dominance, self-confidence, a sense of entitlement, grandiosity, and low empathy. As Michael Maccoby pointed out in The Productive Narcissist, many well-known, even iconic leaders such as Martha Stewart, Jack Welch, and Bill Gates are almost certainly narcissistic personalities, and narcissism is useful for attaining leadership positions, maintaining power, and even stimulating creativity and innovation. O'Reilly's research on narcissism among Silicon Valley executives shows that narcissistic CEOs earn more, last in their jobs longer, and also have a larger gap between their pay and the pay of their senior team.

Evidence from surveys of college students shows that the level of narcissism has been rising over time — a possible answer for why leaders today are getting into more trouble than in the past. And examinations of the structure of narcissism and how narcissistic behavior differs between men and women helps explain the gender imbalance: "Past research suggests that exploitive tendencies and open displays of feelings of entitlement will be less integral to narcissism for females than for males" simply because women face more social constraints and social sanctions for grandiosity and self-aggrandizement than do men.

And while narcissism and the associated behaviors may indeed help people ascend into leadership roles, as recent experience suggests, narcissistic individuals also contain the seeds of their own (self)-destruction. And leaders' downfalls are costly — Lockheed now has to find another person to assume the CEO role, and President Obama must find someone to take over the CIA. So while indeed there are productive narcissists, narcissistic behavior can be very unproductive for both the work organizations and the people who experience it.

[Pearl]

I really doubt narcissistic traits in leaders is something new. I'm sure Julius Caesar, Napolean Bonaparte, Henry VIII and many others would be considered narcissists.

[Irvine511]

i walked by the reporter camp outside the house this woman is supposedly hiding out in. only a couple of cameras pointed up the steps. no one has seen her, so i suppose she's Peapod-ing?

the house is gorgeous -- i've admired it in passing for years.

As Paula Broadwell holes up in D.C. house, camped-out media wait in patience - The Washington Post



and that's all i really have to contribute to this silly story.

[purpleoscar]

Originally Posted by Pearl

I really doubt narcissistic traits in leaders is something new. I'm sure Julius Caesar, Napolean Bonaparte, Henry VIII and many others would be considered narcissists.

It's certainly not new. That's why I like the symbol of the ring in Lord of the Rings on how power and success can tempt people to follow their base ego desires. It seems so unnecessary but people fall for it generation after generation.

[ladyfreckles]

I'm torn on this issue because on one hand I have no idea why I should care or why it's on my news feed and on the other hand it's really fun to speculate.

Cheating is a funny thing. I've seen it justified in multiple ways and I understand the arguments and sentiment behind it but I still see no "valid" excuse for it. Going behind the back of somebody who trusts you not to is a horrible thing to do, especially when it risks STDs, pregnancy, or other repercussions (condoms are not 100% effective in preventing STDs). Open relationships are an entirely different scenario here because the couple has actually talked about it and they are okay with the decision.

At the same time, I don't believe this woman was a saint. She exhibits jealous and possessive behavior of a man that is already somebody else's wife. I think on some level she was stupid and young, but that argument only goes so far. I'm young and I'm not that naive. Getting involved with a married government official and hoping to gain anything other than liability is just plain moronic. In short, both of them made immoral and stupid decisions that greatly disrespected other people.

In this case he had a lot to lose from cheating and it seems like there's a risk of him having given away information to the woman he cheated with. You always get found out, even if the affair has been over for years, and when your spouse (or in this case the entire country you serve) finds out the wound will be fresh, new and brutal even though you've had time to get over it. I think there was not a lot of critical thinking going on here and that this guy has let his ego get to his head. He is no longer a good candidate for that high ranking position.

Personally, I don't trust anyone who shows that they make such poor life decisions to hold a high ranking defense position in government. This isn't even a moral thing, it's about common sense and having respect for other human beings.

I applaud him for stepping down gracefully though.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by ladyfreckles

At the same time, I don't believe this woman was a saint. She exhibits jealous and possessive behavior of a man that is already somebody else's wife. I think on some level she was stupid and young, but that argument only goes so far. I'm young and I'm not that naive. Getting involved with a married government official and hoping to gain anything other than liability is just plain moronic. In short, both of them made immoral and stupid decisions that greatly disrespected other people.

Paula is 40 years old, so in no way was she being "young". She knew what she was doing and didn't care about hurting others. It is best to say that she simply has very little or no morals.

[MrsSpringsteen]

Well 40 compared to 60 is young. Obviously he isn't young either.
She's young as far as maturity level in her decision making and other areas, perhaps.

People make big mistakes and foolish decisions. But yes- when you get involved with a married person it is just morally wrong, ultimately. I think it is possible to have morals and still make at least one immoral decision out of foolishness and stupidity, temporary madness, etc. It is still an immoral one, of course.

I don't know nearly enough about her to know what possessed her to do it. She does have a husband and two kids, so for me that should have been her primary consideration. Not to mention the general' s wife and kids and how it's hurting them.

Once you have those people in your life, for me that's a game changer and I don't get how you can do that to them.Rationalizing and compartmentalizing your life somehow, I guess.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

Well 40 compared to 60 is young. Obviously he isn't young either.
She's young as far as maturity level in her decision making and other areas, perhaps.

Well "young" isn't the word I would use toward a 40 year old. It makes it sound like she's a petulant child. Also to me, at certain age, immaturity no longer implies because I think by age 30, 40, 50 or whatever, there is something more wrong with certain behaviors than just being immature.

[MrsSpringsteen]

I just meant that's she's young compared to a 60 year old. The world tends to have a perception that any female over 40 is old/no longer young, no longer attractive, etc. I don't share that belief.

There are plenty of people in their 30' s and 40's and older who are emotionally immature. It's selfishness too, just doing what you want and basically saying screw anyone else's feelings. Selfishness knows no age limit.

[Pearl]

Originally Posted by MrsSpringsteen

I just meant that's she's young compared to a 60 year old. The world tends to have a perception that any female over 40 is old/no longer young, no longer attractive, etc. I don't share that belief.

Neither do I. But I think when ladyfreckles said young, she didn't mean youthful looks.

There are plenty of people in their 30' s and 40's and older who are emotionally immature. It's selfishness too, just doing what you want and basically saying screw anyone else's feelings. Selfishness knows no age limit.

I agree with the selfishness part, that it knows no age limit. But I also think it's not OK to be immature at a certain age. I might seem strict when it comes to personal development, but then again, I'm a perfectionist. Even I get annoyed when I exhibit childlike behaviors which I blame on other issues rather than immaturity.