FRC: Don’t hate the player

The Family Research Council is upset by this ABC News headline: “One in 10 Men Has Multiple Sex Partners.”

That’s the sort of thing they should be upset about, really, since it would seem to indicate that a whole lot of men are dogs and players and that there’s a whole lot of cheating, betrayal and Seventh-Commandment-breaking going on. That would seem like something the watchdogs of traditional morality ought to be barking about.

But that’s not why the Family Research Council is upset. They’re upset because they think ABC News is overstating the situation in order to make the case for better sex education. ABC, the FRC claims, just wants to “bring graphic sex ed straight to your kids.” (Emphasis original and, like so much of what FRC publishes, it’s best if you imagine it read by that movie trailer guy.)

ABC’s “One in 10” headline overstates the case, FRC says, because ABC reports:

Though the actual reported rate of such behavior in the study is 6.6 percent, the authors of the study estimate from adjusted measurements that up to 11 percent of men may have been involved with multiple sexual partners at some point during the previous year.

So here’s a bit of a role reversal: The liberal media is lamenting the sorry state of modern-day sexual morals, while the religious right is arguing that American society these days is virtuous and morally upright. I suppose FRC has a nit-picky point — “one in 10” is not precisely the same as “somewhere between one in 15.2 and one in 9.1.” (On the other hand, “One in 10 Men Has Multiple Sex Partners” probably understates the case if the men in question are Republican U.S. Senators.)

Male promiscuity, the Family Research Council argues, isn’t really much of a problem. “This kind of aberrant, dangerous behavior,” they say, “is confined to easily identified subgroups of the population.”

The implication there is clear: If you’re a woman and your partner is being unfaithful, it’s probably your fault since you should have known better because dogs and players are “easily identified” and thus easily avoided, so really you brought this on yourself.

Got that, Mrs. Vitter? Point taken, Mrs. Craig and Mrs. Haggard and Ms. Hanover and Mrs. Gingrich and Mrs. Terry and Mrs. Hager and …?

The Family Research Council’s own avowed principles ought to lead them to speak on behalf of women who have been betrayed and put at risk by their partners and spouses. But whatever those avowed principles might say, defending women — even married women — who have had sex is not something they’re willing to do.

So instead of hating the players, FRC hates the game. Instead of defending betrayed women, FRC attacks ABC News.

– – – – – – – – –

I recently wrote to FRC on an unrelated matter and received the following automated reply:

“Thank you for your interest in the Family Research Council. As you may be aware, FRC champions marriage and family as the foundation of civilization, the seedbed of virtue, and the wellspring of society.”

“The seedbed of virtue.” Ewww.