Rajagopalan: Powerful men on the prowl

Kavitha Rajagopalan is the author of "Muslims of Metropolis: The Stories of Three Immigrant Families in the West."

What do Anthony Weiner and Dominque Strauss-Kahn have in common?

At first glance, very little. One was a rising star in the U.S. House of Representatives and the other a firmly established member of the international economic policy elite. One admitted that he was guilty of online philandering and the other is pleading not guilty to an indictment for sexual assault.

But while these men stand accused of different degrees of sexual transgression with very different consequences, both dirty not-so-little not-so-secrets raise the same questions about power, trust and accountability in the modern age.

Some may ask whether high-tech philanderings constitute the latest version of simple cocktail-party flirtations or outright marital infidelity, but either way, it's clear that the women Weiner pursued online were younger and less powerful than him. The intended recipient of the now-infamous tweet of Weiner's erection that set off the recent frenzy is a 21-year-old student. Another woman who came forward about her sexualized online interactions with Weiner is a 26-year-old nursing student. Weiner is 46.

Strauss-Kahn, now the former head of the International Monetary Fund, has been accused of forcing himself on a hotel maid.

In 2005, columnist Maureen Dowd famously observed that "Men Just Want Mommy," pointing to countless examples of powerful men -- both real and fictional -- who fell for their assistants, their secretaries and their children's nannies. Falling in love is certainly different from attempted rape or fervent sexting, but the dynamic remains the same -- men in positions of public authority and power seeking the sexual attention of anonymous, less-powerful women -- even though, interestingly enough, both of these men are married to high-profile, influential women.

Although it seems that some of Weiner's advances met with willing partners, the power dynamic is still out of balance. How consensual can a sexual interaction be when one person knows what's in an email he sent and the recipient has to open it to find out? Perhaps it doesn't matter whether an erection is revealed in a message or a locked bathroom; if it wasn't sought out or expected, it can still be perceived as hostile.

Experts on sexual-violence have long said that rape is about power, not physical sensation. If so, then it becomes easier to see how an unwanted Internet advance falls on the same spectrum as physical assault.

But the Internet affords the receiver some degree of power, even in an exploitative scenario. Senders can be blocked, emails can be deleted, Facebook friends can be removed, chats can be turned off.

Most important, the Internet gives the receiver proof that the action took place. Weiner's online partners have an electronic record of the salacious emails they said they received from the congressman. One of the women seems to have documented Weiner's advances to pre-empt any character assassination by taking her story public herself.

The burden of proof might be more difficult for the accuser in Strauss-Kahn's case. She has her word and, some news reports say, the defendant's DNA on her clothing.

Political sex scandals like these turn on not only the violation of marital trust, but the violation of public trust as well. This goes beyond a simple abuse of public time and resources, edging on deeper abuses of power and authority. Maintaining trust is paramount because in egalitarian democracies like the United States and France, all constituents -- even women -- are the equals of their elected officials.