Hugh Hefner v. Silvio Berlusconi (and their divorce)

Both Mr. Hefner and Mr. Berlusconi are getting divorced, and neither is particularly apologetic of the circumstances. Berlusconi is a septuagenarian (that’s more than likely the wrong spelling and ask me if I care?) and Hefner is an octogenarian. Berlusconi is a billionaire and Hefner is worth a measly $43 million according to his financial affidavits (allegedly). Hugh is a great lover of having multiple women at his disposal and makes no qualms about it. Matter of fact, he made a career of it. He turned his kicks into a media empire. Hef’s currently dating 18 year old twins according to media reports – even though he is still married to his wife Kimberly Conrad who is in her forties (the horror!) and the mother of his two youngest children.
Berlusconi’s wife is in her fifties – which, I guess, makes her somewhat ancient as far as trophy wives go. So that’s a big scandal. The wife allegedly accused him of dating a 16 year old model, which, I must add, Berlusconi vehemently denies. In fact, he’s suing a bunch of newspapers for libel.
I was just reading on Reuters that Berlusconi stated recently:

In answer to a reporter from El Pais, he dismissed as “calumnies” reports that he had benefited from a prostitution ring and said he was the “victim” of escort Patrizia D’Addario who made tapes of what she said was a night spent with him.
Berlusconi, whose wife is seeking a divorce over his womanizing, has never denied sleeping with D’Addario but has said he did not pay her and did not know she was a prostitute.
“Never in my life, not even once, have I had to pay for a sexual encounter,” Berlusconi said. “And I’ll tell you why: for someone who loves to conquer, the greatest joy is the conquest, so I ask, ‘if you pay, what joy can there be?'”

Can you imagine such obscenities being hurled at a world leader of an intensely Catholic society? As if it is not bad enough he’s getting divorced? Now this? This issue of “conquest” is itself problematic (can’t even bring myself to discuss the other issues mentioned) – assuming he did utter these utterances. What should one make of this statement? What kind of man thinks this way and says these things?
Hugh, similarly, probably likes the “conquest” and would never ever be caught paying for this activity. Would he admit to liking the conquest? I wouldn’t be surprised. He strikes me as a very candid type of guy who is shockless and irreverent. Although, I don’t think anyone would blanche if Hugh said that. But a world leader? I am not blancheable, but I blanched when I read that. As a woman it makes me feel slightly ill. 
Boy. These rich tycoons.  I wonder if poor guys ever think like this? Like, say, getting their way with a woman is a “conquest” of her that is a “joy” to them? Hme…. Or, I wonder if poor guys ever think of having such young women (teens!) at their disposal even while they are married to an otherwise good woman? Poor guys are infinitely too virtuous to think this way, right? They treat women with more respect than this, right? They would never think of living the way Hugh and Berlusconi lives, having naked women cavorting around the place? Cheating with teenagers? Living pretty much an unapologetic debauched life that embarasses one’s wife? All that?
Poor guys respect women and their wives too much to do that, right? Poor guys are good guys, right? It’s just the rich guys who do this. It’s just the rich guys a woman should avoid?
Or are they all the same? Rich, poor, Black, White, striped, educated, uneducated, powerful, powerless? Are men basically all the same?
What is the solution to this genre of chauvinism? And what are women the world over to do? What are we to do?