Archive for the ‘Celebrity Relationships’ Category

Al Gore a Sexual Predator? I don’t think so.

Saturday, June 26th, 2010

Just weeks after former vice president Al Gore grabbed headlines when he and wife Tipper announced their divorce after 40 years of marriage, newspapers are latching on to a four-year-old story that Gore was accused of sexually harassing a massage therapist in Oregon.

The only recent update is that authorities have dismissed her claim of “unwanted sexual contact” and her attorney said the case would be handled “civilly.” Read: For money not jail time. The sources are mostly tabloid. The National Enquirer broke the story four years ago and this week the New York Daily News tells it this way: In 2006, while staying at an upscale hotel on Portland, Oregon, Mr. Gore scheduled a massage under the name “Mr. Stone.” Then while the massage therapist was doing the abdominal portion of the massage, he made some moaning sounds and asked her to go lower, even attempting to guide her hand down below.

There are few things to consider when thinking about this story. Included in my thought process are this: the physiological possibilities of a man in deep relaxation, the wide-range of services and specialties available in the massage industry, and the biggest issue of all, personal boundaries verses perception of personal injury. So, for the purposes of this hypothetical examination, let’s assume this woman’s allegations are true. We don’t even know it that is so. And, let’s start with what happens to a man in deep relaxation. Anyone with a husband knows that spontaneous erections happen all the time during sleep. Hard-ons happen. Especially during a massage. Which is one of the reasons that female massage therapists dominate the industry. Heterosexual male clients feel too uncomfortable having a spontaneous erection at the hands of a man. So, let’s assume a hard-on happened during the massage. And any woman with a boyfriend knows that when some men get a hard-on, it appears that all the blood from their brain drains out to puff up their appendage. Thus many men have the capacity to make poor decisions when they are aroused. Now, let’s assume, solely for the purposes of scientific examination, that this was in fact the inconvenient truth for our dear former VP.

But besides biology, let’s place a little blame on the massage industry. In America, the quality and nature of massage services can run the gamut from licensed physical therapists who work with doctors, spa therapists who focus on sports massage and relaxation, to massage studios that offer a “full body release” (yes, that’s code for a complimentary hand-job,) to illegal massage parlors that offer sex for sale. Who knows which kinds of massage services big Al has had in the past. Might he mistakenly assumed that he was getting a full body service in Portland? Opps. Wrong kind of massage therapist, Mr. Gore.

Finally, there is the issue of boundaries. Everyone has a comfort level with levels of sexuality, both in what acts they can tolerate and how comfortable they are in making sexual requests. Maybe Al Gore, if the story is even true, has a good ability to communicate his sexual needs. Kudos to Al. On the flip side, maybe the massage therapist is particularly sensitive to sexual injury. One massage therapist might have brushed off his advance with a tsk! tsk! and a little admonishing to the cheeky boy while another might perceive the same interchange as a sexual assault. Injury is in the eye of the recipient. Let’s hope the whole thing was a big misunderstanding. Miss Prissy massage therapist can hopefully get some cash to mend her wound and Big Al can learn to stay awake during a massage. Boys will be boys.

P.S. Only because blog readers will claim that I forgot to mention this. Al Gore was married at the time. Is it okay for a married man to have a sterile, hand job in a professional setting? That’s fodder for another blog.

Prince Albert’s Engagement No Fairy-Tale

Thursday, June 24th, 2010

Is a long-time bachelor taking a traditional route to the alter with a fairy-tale royal wedding in the works? Well, not quite. Prince Albert II of Monaco is the only son of the late Prince Rainier III and Hollywood icon Grace Kelly, but he’s just like the rest of us who are finding our way in the “No Rules Relationship Revolution.”

As the aging playboy (52) announced his engagement to a willowy blonde from South Africa, Olympic swimmer, Charlene Wittstock (32) there are at least two other women rolling their eyes. They are the mothers of his two children, one in California and one in France. Both women had to fight a court battle armed with DNA results to get Al to pony up as a legal father. Those children are now 18 and 5.

For thirty years, Albert has been a playboy dating celebrities, including Angie Everhart, Brooke Shields, and supermodel Claudia Schiffer, and even some reported strippers. So why would he suddenly step up to alter? True love? A need for companionship with a soul-mate? No, he’s marrying for the historic reasons that marriage was invented, economics and politics. There’s a 2.4 billion dollar fortune at stake and a small country to be a ceremonial head of.

The real reason Prince Albert is marrying now is because the Monoco constitution says a royal heir must come out of wedlock. Prince Albert II of Monaco has fathered two children but neither of them can become an heir. And, Prince Albert II of Monaco’s longtime hesitation to tie a marriage knot has forced the Monaco’s constitution change and under these changes the 700 year old dynasty would continue through female line if he leaves the world without producing an heir for the Monacans. Yes, he’s marrying to keep the throne away from his sisters.

How romantic. I stand by my many earlier blogs. We would do well in America if we looked at marriage through a lens of cultural trappings rather than placing so much emphasis on romantic love. There’s practical business to the institution of marriage. Ask Prince Playboy.

Kobe Bryant: Can Warriors Kiss Babies?

Friday, June 4th, 2010

This morning I watched an interesting debate on ESPN News. The male anchors expounded psychological theories of gender roles, the warrior code, and men’s ability to compartmentalize. Of course, they thought they were just talking about Laker Kobe Bryant’s pause to kiss his daughters at half time during game one of the NBA finals last night.

Most of the ESPN talent chalked up Kobe’s “transgression” (an act of tenderness mid-war) to the privilege of celebrity. They argued that a franchise player without a camera on his heels would have been reprimanded by coach Phil Jackson and called “soft” by his team mates.

Then they went on to ask how Kobe’s head could be completely in the game if he took time to act like a loving father while wearing the armor of a warrior at battle. After all, minutes before hand, he’d been oblivious to Chris Rock’s monologue beside the Laker bench. And now he was kissing babies?!

Well, gentlemen, let me break it down for you. A male brain is unique. Men have a very unique ability to compartmentalize, that is, go so deeply into a mental compartment that they tune out other stimuli. Studies have shown that when men watch sports, their wife’s voice in the background sounds a lot like the adults in a Charles Schutz “Peanuts” cartoon, “Waw-aw. Waw-aw. Waw-awn.” One fascinating study asked men and women to listen to two audio stories simultaneously yet follow only one. One narration fed through a right earphone and the other a left. Women, who tend to be multitaskers, found their brains scrambling to follow both stories and often got confused. Men were more easily able to key into one story and tune out the other. Now that’s compartmentalization.

The other thing men can do is slip pretty easily from one compartment into another when they perceive that it is safe to redirect their attention. Thus, a man can juggle calls from work, his mistress, and his wife when there is little threat of being caught. Should his wife, mistress, or boss enter his office, however, he will be quick to focus and eliminate the two other stimuli.

So, while Kobe couldn’t hear Chris Rock during the game, his stress responses were lowered with the half-time bell and the Laker’s comfortable lead, making it was easy for him to morph into “Daddy” on his way to the locker room.

But the bigger question had to do with masculinity and tenderness. Can a warrior be tender? Of course he can. And he always has been tender behind closed doors. And now he can do it publicly. Thank you Kobe.

Politician Preaches Abstinence — Except for Himself!

Wednesday, May 19th, 2010

The video is priceless. Picture this: a staged interview with Indiana Republican Representative Mark Souder, about the importance of teaching sexual abstinence. Tracy Jackson, the young female aid doing the interview smiles coyly as her hand nervously slides up and down her pen. The tape was created for a Christian radio station. But the inside story is this: That Republican rep, a married father and grandfather and self-proclaimed evangelical Christian resigned today after it was discovered that he was NOT abstaining from having sex — with his aid, Miss Tracy Jackson!

Yep. Another cheating politician. And this time, one who campaigns for sexual restraint. Why can’t some politicians keep in their pants? And what does it say about us as a country when so many of our leaders are LYING CHEATERS?

The answers are simple. We have become a country that has undergone a no-rules relationship revolution in our media. Granted, marriage vows still have deep meaning for some and when the going gets rough (read: sexually boring) many married couples remember their intellectual commitments. Long after the sexual hormones have done their work of creating a bond and a nuclear family, many smart folks simply choose to focus sexual energy on the task at hand, that is, raising healthy children in a crazy world. One recent article in Psychology Today said that 80% of married couples are happy with their sex lives but they are probably happy with less. And that’s normal.

So, what about the other 20%? Have they bought the media falsehoods that sex is free from consequences and that more sex means more happiness? By the way, I’ve never seen any study that connects promiscuity with general feelings of happiness. And they also seem to have no guilt when it comes to lying. The only defense I can make for those who sexually betray their partner is that they fell victim to a tried-and-true rule of sexual behavior — sex with an obstacle is always more exciting than completely safe and permissive sex. The more risk, the more arousal.

One other nifty thing about the huge explosion of sexual content in the media (this blog included) is that it is really difficult for married celebrities or public servants to keep their affairs under wraps, because sexy stories bring eyeballs to news programs. So, on one hand, the media glorifies sex without boundaries and on the other hand it acts as a watch dog.

Sorry, Representative Souder. Your video came back to bite you. In a news conference in Fort Wayne, the beleaguered rep said, “I am so ashamed to have hurt the ones I love. I am sorry to have let so many friends down, people who have worked so hard for me.” His resignation is effective Friday.

Kate Gosselin: The Single Mother Double Bind

Monday, April 12th, 2010

How can single mothers prove to the courts that they are the better parent when they are being forced to work hard to provide for their kids?


Single mother Kate Gosselin  is sweating it out working on “Dancing with the Stars” and her husband, Jon, has filed for full custody of the kids saying she is working too much and not available for her children. Never mind that he has gone weeks at a go himself, not seeing his kids while he shacks up with a morphing string of girlfriends.

This tragic story reminds me attorney Marsha Clark’s similar crisis while she was working on the prosecution side during the OJ Simpson trial. Even through she had custody of her two boys, her husband used the demands of the trial as an opportunity to try to attain custody himself. So, what’s a single mother to do? Stay home and lose her kids because they are starving to death? This is a double bind where a mother is damned if she does and damed if she doesn’t.

The saddest part of this bind is that it is also a double standard. Tell me the last time you heard anyone admonish a divorced Dad for working too hard!

The problem is that changes in family law have all but eliminated alimony for ex-wives. And child support payments to her are based on a ratio of child custody. So, all single mothers are expected to at least support themselves and they rarely get a full 100% of child support if the kids bunk at Dads some of the time.  Funny thing is, even though kids of divorce may sleep at their Dad’s every other weekend, Mom must still pay the rent for the entire month.

While I am a professional who specializes in attachment issues and my heart breaks for the Kate’s kids who may be suffering attachment injuries while she spends weeks in Los Angeles training and competing for “Dancing with the Stars,” I believe that she is fortunate to have this choice available to her. Only the entertainment industry pays the kind of money that could keep a single mother of eight out of poverty. I mean, really, would people rather see her working for $12 an hour somewhere?

In fact, she recently told Access Hollywood:

“Maybe because I’m in front of the camera so much and people see where I am – I’m in LA. I’m in New York. I’m here or there – the bottom line is I’m just doing what every other mom is doing. They just don’t have cameras following them so people can’t keep tabs on how many hours a day they spend with their kids,” Kate told Billy. “I have to do it. I have eight kids. It’s not a joke, it’s the truth. I have to provide for them.”

You go girl! Dance your butt off for those babies. And then head on home to bond and repair.


An Epidemic of Cheaters???

Friday, April 9th, 2010

First David Letterman, Tiger Woods and John Edwards. Then Jesse James. And now ex-Giant, Tiki Barber is reportedly having an affair with his kid’s babysitter while his wife is pregnant with twins! What’s going on??? The big question on many women’s minds is this. Are more men cheating, or are more men getting caught? I think both things are true.

Cheating husbands are not be a new trend. After all, we are a primate society with what anthropologists like to call “perceived monogamy.” Today 65% of marriages break up because of an extra-marital affair. Despite the sexual revolution and the reduction of the “double standard,” more men still cheat than women. Now science shows us why this gender imbalance has existed for thousands of years.

First, there could be a genetic link. Swedish researchers recently identified an “infidelity gene,” which is present in four of 10 men. This gene can explain why some men are more prone to stormy relationships and bond less to their wives or girlfriends. However, it’s important to remember that biology is not destiny. People born with genetic predispositions to say, heart disease or obesity, make lifestyle adjustments that compensate for the negative gene.

Secondly, men may find it easier to cheat because they feel less guilt than woman. A Spanish study recently revealed that the interpersonal sensitivity (empathy) of men is low compared to women. This clearly could affect a man’s ability to empathize with his partner’s feelings of betrayal. The study also showed that men feel less intense guilt and this difference is particularly stark in the 40-50-year-old age group, a group particularly vulnerable to the mid-life crisis affair.

Finally, more men fear emotional intimacy more than do women. Believe it or not, some men find lovers so they can avoid any real intimacy. Emotional closeness and the expression of vulnerability that goes with it scares many men, so they distance themselves from their wives by cheating on them. At the same time,  they don’t get too emotionally involved with their lovers. This kind of “watering down of the milk” feels safer to some men.

And, why are men cheating more than ever? Like the old joke about why a dog licks his genitals, “because he can.” The biggest sexual boundary that always curbed men’s appetite for sex was a strong woman. It used to be that women provided all the sexual boundaries in our culture. Single women had far too much to lose by entering into a sexual relationship with a man who might abandon them, impregnate them, contaminate them or disgrace them. And their own wives were more protected by stronger family laws that supported divorced women with hefty alimony payments and deterred men from risking divorce. Not today. Thanks to feminism, women are expected to make their own money after divorce. And single women now own their own orgasm and a box of Trojans. So they are off to the races. With so many willing female partners to have affairs with (married and single) men have little to stop them except their own ethics.

And some men have plenty of that. One of my favorite studies linked monogamy to intelligence. The smarter the man, the more likely he is to be faithful. The researchers speculated that monogamy is an intellectual decision that rises above animal instincts and better provides for survival of offspring. Yes, kids from two parent families are likely to do better in life.

As always, my solution to bullet-proof relationships is to grow a bond through emotional intimacy. To make a relationship  rock-solid, one must move a step or two closer to the bone, and hone some relationship skills. Compassion can be learned. Fair-fighting is a skill. And stonewalling is a killer of all connection. Intimacy is not easy nor painfree. Extreme emotional intimacy and mutual care may involve squeamish feelings of shame, the forced expression of awkward words, an ability to see the ugly in others and still love them, and worse,  the ability to glaringly see the ugly in ourselves and still feel lovable. But the pay-back is pure kryptonite. An I’ve-got-your-back-if-you’ve-got-mine emotional contract that can make your relationship affair-proof.


Famous Wives. Public Embarrassment.

Thursday, March 25th, 2010

Any wife who has been cheated on knows the visceral effect of embarrassment in her social circle. The gossips in the peripheral of her every move sing muffled chants about her role in the affair or why she bothers to stay in the marriage. But when that everyday wife appears in person, the tongues quiet and public smiles replace the wagging tongues.

A famous wife knows an entirely different kind of public embarrassment. She looks no further than her super-market aisles, the local radio, or the national news for the openly wagging tongues. Our hearts bleed for Sandra Bullock, Elizabeth Edwards and Elin Woods, and so we moralize, we bemuse, and we give advice as if these women were our own sisters. The media and general public feel safe in gossiping about famous people because they seem so far removed. We are reminded that their problems are much like ours, although often on a grander scale.

But what must the experience be like for an innocent wife who lives a public life? How can she tolerate the negative limelight now shinning on her family? Embarrassment often plays a role in people’s moral sense. It helps them “do the right thing,” but what if the scandal was not their fault? And what if their decision to save the marriage goes against the jury of public opinion?

The best answer to these questions, is to avoid. To emotionally survive the public humiliation, famous women must cloister themselves in the world of most intimate family members and wait for the media tide to change. Elin and Sandra are certainly doing that. And when they do eventually move forward they must defend against feelings of embarrassment by maintaining the fantasy that few people read those tabloid rags, anyway.

Case in point, a couple years back I was introduced to Christie Brinkley at a charity event. Our introduction came a few years after a media blitz concerning the infidelity of her husband with their young babysitter. When our mutual friend introduced us she attempted to find common ground for us by telling Christie that I had recently gone through a painful break up with the father of my children. Christie, immediately, clasped my hands and exclaimed, ‘Oh Honey so did I! And you wouldn’t believe what happened to me!” Then she proceeded to give me details of her husband’s bad behaviors as if I had never been in a supermarket in my life. Clearly her very efficient coping strategy was to maintain the illusion that few people knew. I commend her for that. It’s a high level survival mechanism. Compartmenting is the way our brain avoids being flooded with painful thoughts than can cause destructive behavior.And, by the way, I played along with her fantasy and acted astounded by her news.

Celebrity problems make our own pain feel, somehow, normal. Our very real human emotion of empathy helps us have a shared emotional experience when we witness a celebrity’s love life. Suddenly we are not alone in our own journey. And we are comforted by the knowledge that money and fame do not protect us from relationship problems. So, my advice, down the road if you are ever introduced to Sandra, Elin, or Elizabeth, pretend you know nothing.

The New Trophy: A Married Man?

Friday, March 19th, 2010

Not so long ago, women who had sexual relationships with men who were legally bound to another woman were considered social outcasts. Our language clearly illustrated the sexual double standard that existed. While he was a gentleman who “stepped out” of his marriage, she was a whore, slut, or home-wrecker (as if he had never laid hands on the wreaking ball, himself.) My favorites are “Mistress” and “Kept Woman” because they, at least, imply some outlay of financial resources indicative of an emotional connection.

In cultures throughout history our complicated human social structures have always made room for extra-marital affairs. During the sexual repression of Victorian England where a high status woman faced scandal if even an ankle were exposed, the brothel business boomed. It is estimated that the ratio of prostitutes to males over the age of 18 in Victorian England was 12-1. And most of those young women died early from STD’s.

Sadly, the same tragedy is living itself out in the Indian/Asian sex slave business today. One of the shameful growing pains of feminism is that high status women are delaying marriage (often to the age of 30) to pursue a career, while keeping their hymens intact. The result is a lack of available sexual partners for men who are still required to marry a virgin. Today’s version of Victorian England? Millions of impoverished girls being sold into brothels by their own families.

But here in modern America, women have almost as much sexual freedom as men, and many seem to be happy to live it to the fullest. And, while the media pays lip service to the tired refrain of  “she’s a home-wreaker,” Rielle Hunter, Rachel Uchitel, Michelle “Bombshell” McGee, etc., the truth is the freedom these women have to stage a tell-all about their affairs is the new boundary for men. Women who were kept secret and sequestered for fear of public shame can now, come out of the closet or Vegas hotel room and, finally blame the one who broke his commitment.

I know you’ll beat me up for saying this, but none of these women ever stood at an alter with the wife of her man and made a commitment to honor her. Of course, you can argue that any card-carrying member of the girls club should honor all women, and that being young, female, single, and orgasm hungry, shouldn’t give you a hall pass to bad behavior. I totally agree with that. But who really broke their commitment to marriage? The single woman who has never met the wife, or the guy who met her, married her, and made a giant promise to her? Gentlemen, I hand you the wrecking ball.

Sandra Bullock – So In Love with Hope That She Forgot to Believe The Background Check

Thursday, March 18th, 2010

Back in 2003 when glamorous Hollywood leading lady, Sandra Bullock first laid eyes on Jesse James, a tattoo-covered motorcycle enthusiast, the rest of the world collectively raised their eyebrows. But Sandra, apparently, was in love’s delusional la-la land, telling people that there are church going family men who fool around on their wives, so appearances can be deceiving.

In the case of Jesse James, appearances seemed to have been accurate. When she met James, he was already on his second marriage, this one to a porn star who would go to jail for tax evasion. He had two kids with the first wife and another child on the way when he shifted his focus from his pregnant wife to the bigger prize, Sandra Bullock. Today, after five years of marriage, the former body guard and star of Discovery Channel’s “Monster Garage,” has issued an apology to his wife and children, while a sexy tattoo model (who knew such a career existed?) is blabbing to the media about her hot affair with Mr. Sandra Bullock.

So, what’s a girl to do when a man targets her and then showers her with love and lies? Answer: Read his rap sheet not his lips. If the trail he took to get to you is lined with the bodies of disappointed women, your only job is to stop that bad boy before he reproduces.

It’s an old adage, but if you want to predict someone’s future behavior, look no further than their past behavior. As Sigmund Freud so brilliantly observed, “human beings have a compulsion to repeat.” Or, as modern relationship experts prefer to word it, “Leopards don’t change their spots.”

Could Sandra have avoided this the Jesse James heart break? After all, when she married at the age of 41, few potential partners would have a squeaky clean relationship track record — or they wouldn’t be single at all. What she could have done, if she, like so many other women could shake her infatuation with hope, is to keep her own values intact. The flirtations of a married man should never be accepted. Ever. And pay close attention to his history, not his rationalizations for his “situation.” Sadly, his history is her future. Not surprisingly, James told his latest paramour (likely not his only affair) that he and Sandra were separated while she was actually off filming “The Blind Side.”

The Marriage Ref “Find Someone You Can Sleep Next to Without Throwing Up”

Monday, March 1st, 2010

NBC’s new prime-time reality show is smothered in sauce, low on any real meat, but it’s the high fat we sometimes crave.

Okay, the critics hate it. But there is something refreshing about NBC’s new reality show, “The Marriage Ref” — it’s a new format. With Jerry Seinfeld’s genius behind the show, including his trademark ability to make six minutes of comedy out of a minute piece of life’s banality, this sit-come-meets-America’s-Funniest-Home-Videos could find an audience.

In “The Marriage Ref” sneak-peek pilot, Jerry Seinfeld and a celebrity panel that included Alec Baldwin and Kelly Ripa pick a winner on some  of the most bizarre couples arguments ever to make it to national television — whether a man can keep his deceased dog after a “resurrection” at the taxidermist, and whether the time is right for a longtime married couple to install a stripper pole in the living room.

Audiences learn in host Tom Papa’s opening monologue that this show in no way is intended to be real couples therapy when he advises people to stop looking for their soulmate and instead find someone they can sleep next to without throwing up. In fact with so much laugher there’s no way the show could ever deal with the sensitive trials that throw real couples on the rocks.

The American Idol style banter by the judges is given a whiff of credibility by the lovely Natalie Morales of NBC news who spouts statistics like “one thousand Americans have had their pet stuffed” or “stripper pole exercise can burn many calories.” A weird appearance by a now elderly sportscaster Marv Albert, who gives a play-by-play on the couple’s knock-out punches, is only interesting if you are old enough to remember Marv’s own infamous sex scandal.

As a Mom whose thoughts carry the daily burden of Haiti, kids grades, Afghanistan, and recession woes, The Marriage Ref is a light respite. A chance to giggle at silly family problems that shouldn’t ever be taken seriously anyway. Still Twitter hounds, Bloggers, and some real TV critics were clearly not blown away by the opening episode. But I am a mother who loves to nurture and give my children a second chance to succeed, so I’ll tune in again. Plus, the revolving celebrity panel promises future appearances by Madonna, Larry David, and Tiny Fea, among others. There could be some comedic jewels in upcoming episodes. I mean, who doesn’t want to hear what the material girl has to say about marriage?