Russ: There’s a great term I learned in Analytical Psych back in college, Elite Deviance. This was used an explanation for the wealthy, politicians, professional athletes and others in similar circumstances, who felt that they could flout the law, social conventions, etc with impunity and all based on either their success, money or station in life.
I doubt very much that Tiger is feeling “conflicted”. He’s very sure what he wants and his marriage and family are nothing more than window dressing; part of the “Tiger Woods brand”, if you will. Undoubtedly, some corporate consultant explained the benefits of wife and family, especially as they contribute to the good, wholesome image Tiger projects and how this would help in acquiring all those lucrative endorsement deals.[/quote]
In my view, running around with a bunch of women isn’t Deviant Behavior (although clearly that’s just my opinion – and if it is, so be it). The problem, again, is that he was doing it within the mirage of a committed marriage. If Tiger was single, none of this would be news, just as no one has a problem with Derek Jeter and his Girls of the Month.
I’m not quite as cynical as you, Allan, on the roots of this behavior. I don’t think Tiger sat down and said, “I bet I could pull in another $50 million per year if I just got married and had kids,” although I could be wrong. I think it’s more likely a case of just assuming he could have his cake and eat it too. But, who knows…
On a related but different subject, does anyone else find it interesting that there really is no male equivalent to Groupies – whether they be of the musician, athlete, or other variety? I’m not saying that there aren’t some dudes who would hang around Britney Spears’ trailer to try to get in her pants, but… in a general sense, the population of folks who would be considered groupies is probably comprised 95%+ of females.
