Pointing fingers at sex pests
The news from the Illinois
Statehouse almost makes one nostalgic for the Illinois politicians of
old, those sticky-fingered but charming rogues. Today’s Capitol, we
learn, is a playpen for not at all charming jerks, creeps and pervs who
feel not only empowered but entitled to prey on any females who cross
their paths.
Sex at
the Statehouse is not a new scandal, just another old scandal that we’ve
forgotten. That subculture has been tolerated with a nudge and wink for
a long time. A half-century ago Mike Royko used to write about “monkey
girls,” the state of Illinois secretaries who hung onto their jobs by
their tails. Taylor Pensoneau covered the Statehouse in the 1960s and
’70s for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, when entertaining
“Springfield girlfriends” was an important part of the local economy.
Talking with Mark DePue of the state historical library in 2009,
Pensoneau recalled being at the then-popular restaurants – the Southern
Aire, the Black Angus, the Mill – where he would see legislators dining
at 11:30 “with this secretary or that gal who maybe worked over here for
financial institutions or something. You know, you could certainly draw
your own conclusion.”
You
could write about it too, but no one ever did. Yes, I know – that was
the era of sexual liberation and all that, women and men alike newly
free to seek and enjoy sex. Only for women, sex wasn’t, and isn’t free
if it’s part of a quid pro quo imposed by the males who control who gets
what. For the mistresses of the ’60s, the consequence of not going
along was the loss of a state job; today, female lawmakers or lobbyists
risk having their careers blighted by men who scupper their bills if
they dare to make a fuss.
The
problem isn’t just that men break the rules, but that men decide what
happens when they break the rules. The enforcement provisions of the
state’s ethics system are laughably inadequate. Sitting lawmakers are
given the power to investigate their colleagues and fellow party
members, and the legislative inspector general has no power to suspend,
fine or censure such offenders whose misbehavior is exposed.
In Pensoneau’s day, women had unofficial ways to make men pay for abusing their privileges. Mistreated
women got their revenge by talking to the press. “More major stories
that have led to the downfall of politicians, both in Illinois and
nationally, have come because of either wives or girlfriends that have
felt jilted,” he told DePue. Nor were “ordinary” women without recourse.
Ross Douthat of the New York Times reminded us the other day
that while the pre-1965 double standards that pertained for male and
female sexual behavior were terrible “it was also true that women had
real social power in those societies, and had mechanisms for essentially
punishing through social exclusion men who misbehaved egregiously.”
We
are seeing put-upon women assert that power again by recourse to
shaming as a weapon against male piggishness. Today, the slap in the
face in public takes the form of exposure on social media, which
conveniently allows a victim of an unwanted advance to slap a man 10
million times at once. At lot of
these guys seem immune to embarrassment, but, happily, their bosses are
not. The People are the bosses of the Statehouse crowd; the editors at
Champaign’s News-Gazette recently endorsed what amounts to political shunning in which voters punish not-quitecriminal misconduct at the polls.
Don’t
get your hopes up – nearly half the voters are male, after all. Nor are
lawmakers likely to discipline themselves as long as (in the words of
the News-Gazette’s unfortunate metaphor) “the foxes insist on
remaining in charge of the hen house.” If this is to change, it will
likely be women who will change it, and not just in the Statehouse.
Women in all walks of life have to work with men and live with men who
have or tried to take advantage of them, as Maya Dukmasova observes in The Reader. “We cannot and will not exile them all. We can’t and won’t put them all behind bars or sue them into destitution.”
They’re
talking about instituting antiharassment training at the Statehouse.
Let’s hope that in addition to teaching men how to behave, the training
teaches women some lessons that feminist mothers who matured in the ’60s
and ’70s apparently neglected to teach their daughters, like how to
dare speak to power or how to organize against a common foe. The whole
aim of feminism in its successive eras – indeed the aim of civilization,
by which I mean “civil-ization” – is taming male predatory instincts.
That’s why men resist both feminism and civilization, and why it is
essential that their resistance not succeed.
Contact James Krohe Jr. at [email protected].
Editor’s note
In
this our Holiday Guide issue, it is appropriate to pass along some
guidance for the shadow side of holidays, where not all is fun and
games. Staab Funeral Home, and other Springfield funeral homes, hold
regular gatherings aimed at helping their clients get through the
holiday season while grieving a family member who has died during the
year. At the Staab event Sunday, the 100 or so family members were
advised to consider setting an extra place at the table and speaking
openly about the “elephant not in the room,” especially to put other
guests at ease. Jason Troyer, Ph.D., a grief expert and professor of
psychology at Maryville College in Tennessee, advised family members not
to be concerned about doing grieving right. Elisabeth Kubler-Ross and
her five stages are so 50 years ago. Meanwhille, Illinois Times is
preparing our annual “Remembering” issue scheduled for Dec. 28, in which
we celebrate the lives of local people who have died this year. If
you’d like to participate by remembering a friend or family member, see
the instructions on p. 33. Submissions are due Dec. 15. –Fletcher
Farrar, editor and CEO