T H E
C L I N T O N
C R I S I S

BY LAURA MILLER | Why would a smart, popular president facing a sexual harassment lawsuit and heightened media scrutiny imperil his administration and his place in history by dallying with a 21-year-old White House intern? Some commentators find this scenario so outrageous that, should the allegations of President Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky prove true, they can only conclude that the president is mentally ill. At least one critic, conservative author David Brock, has labeled Clinton a sex addict. And Washington insiders have begun saying, only half in jest, that the president's last hope is to go on "Larry King Live" and confess his addiction to the nation.

But how valid is the term "sex addiction," and does Clinton's alleged misbehavior, however foolhardy, really indicate that he's suffering from a psychological disorder? Salon asked sex therapists Dr. Marty Klein (author of "Ask Me Anything: A Sex Therapist Answers the Most Important Questions for the '90s") and Jack Morin (author of "The Erotic Mind").

If the allegations of President Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky are true, can you give us some insight into why he would do this?

Morin: A case like this underscores how the whole erotic process works. My book is based on research I did on people's peak erotic experiences, the ones they found the most memorable, exciting and fulfilling. Particular themes come up again and again. For some people in most situations and for most people in some situations, sex can be extra hot and compelling when it's on a dangerous edge, literally flirting with disaster. The adrenalin and other chemical charges pump up the excitement. Even regular people like to flirt with danger. So many of them told me that their best encounters happened when someone else was right nearby, perhaps a parent, with the risk of being caught. It's so common in the sex lives of everyday people that it would be a huge mistake to pathologize it. This is mainstream sexual behavior.

Some people take that to the limit. Clinton is the kind of person who takes big risks in his career, and he can handle massive amounts of anxiety and uncertainty, so he'd have a bigger tolerance. And most of us already feel invincible during an erotic high, and that's one reason why people do things in the heat of passion that they'd normally think twice about.

I've also seen, again and again, that those who need to uphold a certain image because of their beliefs or their position in the world -- politicians and preachers head the list -- are more likely to have very extensive, complex, secret sex lives. They almost have to. Secrecy, or the perceived need for secrecy, can also intensify the turn-on. I don't know if Clinton feels guilt, shame or regret, but many do when they feel they don't live up to their own standards. They have a secret bad part of themselves that's cut off from their good self, and it goes into its own compartment. Whenever sex is cut off from the rest of a person's life, it tends to be more problematic, but also extra exciting.

What about the term "sex addict," which is currently being bandied about?

Klein: This isn't addiction, it's poor decision-making. I mean that in a serious, clinical way. We know that people make bad decisions all the time, about parenting, cars, money, work. But when the content is sex, people get hysterical. We fall all over ourselves trying to find fancy clinical names and explanations. People seem to assume that poor decision-making about sex is different from poor decision-making about other things. It is indeed surprising and dismaying that someone would make a poor decision when the consequences could be so heavy, but calling it addiction prevents us from understanding that behavior. We're calling everything an addiction these days, and when everything is an addiction, nothing is an addiction. Most people who make poor sexual decisions aren't out of control. They say, "I really shouldn't do this, but I'm going to do it anyway." It's poor impulse control. They could make other decisions but they don't want to deal with the emotional consequences.

The people who claim to have this addiction seem to truly feel out of control.

Klein: If you go to a sex addicts meeting, most of people there are using sex in unhelpful ways. But "sex addiction" is really a moral conception. It refers to behaviors that aren't socially acceptable. Traditionally, "addiction" focuses on physiological changes in the body, the physiological basis for behavior. With alcohol or drugs, where it's a valid model, it refers to a person's compromised ability to metabolize substances, increased dose dependency, withdrawal -- all things describing a relationship to physical substances that help us understand that this person is out of control, his body is running his decisions because of his compromised relationship to this substance.

It's important to remind people that feeling out of control is not the same as being out of control. I have a thing about chocolate, for example. If the chocolate is not in front of me, I'm not suffering. But if you bring me chocolate, and it sits on my desk and I don't eat it, I'll suffer. Then I'll eat it until there's none left. That's me feeling out of control and making a decision whose consequences I don't like. But if that chocolate is not around, I don't suffer the lack of it. It's not seated in metabolism. It's wanting pleasure, being self-indulgent, maybe being bored. Comparing that to addiction is like comparing a fish to a bicycle.

N E X T+P A G E: Is Lewinsky nuts?