Publisher's Note — February 13, 2018, 6:44 pm

The Sleep of Men

“Why not mount a direct attack on economic discrimination and revive the campaign for the Equal Rights Amendment?”

A version of this column originally ran in Le Devoir on February, 5, 2018. Translated from the French by John Cullen.

At a dinner party in Manhattan toward the end of November—in the midst of the #MeToo whirlwind—I found myself in the company of right-thinking left-wingers, all of them strongly supportive of the women who have been victims of sexual harassment.

Given the progressive character of the gathering, I thought it presented a good opportunity to bring up some concrete ideas about improving the condition of women, over and above the daily denunciations of this or that villain in this or that enterprise. Having witnessed the anger that had led to the removal of several Confederate monuments erected to the glory of racism and the defense of slavery, I proposed what was perhaps an audacious theory: with all this dismantling of icons—marble-and-iron icons on public squares in Virginia and Louisiana, flesh-and-blood icons in luxurious offices in Hollywood and New York—did we not risk overlooking some real social problems that damage the status of women in the workplace and contribute to the most egregious inequalities in the business world?

Why not, I went on, mount a direct attack on economic discrimination and revive the campaign for the Equal Rights Amendment, a noble effort of the last century to establish equality between women and men in the area of wages, employment, and promotions? The ERA, which would have amended the United States Constitution to forbid discrimination on the basis of sex, was clear and reasonable and nearly won adoption. The project failed largely because of the fierce opposition of Phyllis Schlafly, a “conservative” activist who saw in the ERA the eventual weakening of the male’s primordial obligation, dictated by biology, to support mothers and their children. Moreover, she had no desire to see her two daughters (on this point, I was not in disagreement with her) called to military service in the Vietnam War. The amendment was ratified by thirty-five state legislatures, but changing the Constitution requires ratification by three-quarters (that is, thirty-eight) of the states; when the deadline for such legislative action passed in 1982, none of the required three additional states had ratified the measure and some of the states that had initially ratified the amendment had deratified. The amendment was not adopted.

Passage of the ERA would have legally required equality of opportunity and remuneration for members of both sexes, but I also had a notion that it would have compelled an office executive to hesitate before intimidating a female colleague if he knew she could be paid as much or even more than he was. The power not only of the law but also of money would create a certain psychological and social dam in defense of women, I suggested.

Whereupon my neighbor across the table, an experienced civil rights attorney, replied drily that the ERA wasn’t worth the trouble, because the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, adopted in 1868 to protect former slaves against discrimination, is quite sufficient protection for women too. I answered that the Fourteenth Amendment, which guarantees “equal protection” to “any person” who is a United States citizen, has obviously not been sufficient for women, who still earn, on average, less pay than men—studies on how much less vary—for equal work. The same goes for women competing with men at the highest levels of civil society and the business world, where men remain numerically predominant and distinctly wealthier. Let’s not forget that in 1868, women were not entirely “persons,” given that they had neither the right to vote nor the right to obtain a divorce without excessive difficulty.

The women around the table didn’t applaud my suggestion either. They were more interested in direct action. (One of them revealed how she’d been able to get her university salary raised by threatening to go to court.) And after the Weinstein scandal burst into the news, there wasn’t a single important politician who would take up the cause of the ERA. Admittedly, the legislative task would be much more difficult than the outing of sexual offenders on social media.

Would it be more worthwhile, perhaps, to look to literature, rather than to the law, to address the injustices committed against women? La Tresse (“The Braid”), the first novel of French director, actress, and writer Laetitia Colombani, might provide an excellent place to start. The author portrays three women of radically different cultures and classes: an Indian Untouchable who earns her living by collecting human excrement; a prominent Montreal attorney, a divorced mother, who falls gravely ill; and a young Sicilian employed in her father’s small factory when a sudden accident leaves him in a coma. Each of the three is afflicted by the inescapable rules of her society.

Smita, the Indian woman, is the most daring: she dreams of helping her daughter break free of their miserable existence by sending her to school. In a society that validates rape as a method of social control, Smita’s husband is exceptional; compared with the other men of his village, he’s practically a feminist. In any case, it’s Smita who can’t sleep peacefully, not her husband, who during the night “is a lake whose surface no ripple disturbs.” Smita sees that “men aren’t equal in sleep… Men aren’t equal in anything.” Destroying a few celebrities is maybe not the most enduring way to disturb the nocturnal rhythm of men and wake them up.

Share
Single Page

More from John R. MacArthur:

From the January 2018 issue

The Human Factor

How I learned the real meaning of dissent

Publisher's Note December 13, 2017, 7:25 pm

McCain’s War

“Although McCain participated in a morally unpardonable war in which the United Sates killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people, one can’t help sympathizing with him in his reduced state.”

Publisher's Note November 10, 2017, 5:29 pm

Industrial Tourism

NAFTA is an investment contract that protects American and Canadian goods and interests against Mexican expropriation, regulation, and pestering by local authorities.

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

March 2018

Nobody Knows

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Other Whisper Network

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Infinity of the Small

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Empty Suits

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Great Divide

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
The Other Whisper Network·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

No one would talk to me for this piece. Or rather, more than twenty women talked to me, sometimes for hours at a time, but only after I promised to leave out their names, and give them what I began to call deep anonymity. This was strange, because what they were saying did not always seem that extreme. Yet here in my living room, at coffee shops, in my inbox and on my voicemail, were otherwise outspoken female novelists, editors, writers, real estate agents, professors, and journalists of various ages so afraid of appearing politically insensitive that they wouldn’t put their names to their thoughts, and I couldn’t blame them. 

Of course, the prepublication frenzy of Twitter fantasy and fury about this essay, which exploded in early January, is Exhibit A for why nobody wants to speak openly. Before the piece was even finished, let alone published, people were calling me “pro-rape,” “human scum,” a “harridan,” a “monster out of Stephen King’s ‘IT,’?” a “ghoul,” a “bitch,” and a “garbage person”—all because of a rumor that I was planning to name the creator of the so-called Shitty Media Men list. The Twitter feminist Jessica Valenti called this prospect “profoundly shitty” and “incredibly dangerous” without having read a single word of my piece. Other tweets were more direct: “man if katie roiphe actually publishes that article she can consider her career over.” “Katie Roiphe can suck my dick.” With this level of thought policing, who in their right mind would try to say anything even mildly provocative or original? 

Illustration by Shonagh Rae
Article
Pushing the Limit·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In the early Eighties, Andy King, the coach of the Seawolves, a swim club in Danville, California, instructed Debra Denithorne, aged twelve, to do doubles — to practice in the morning and the afternoon. King told Denithorne’s parents that he saw in her the potential to receive a college scholarship, and even to compete in the Olympics. Tall swimmers have an advantage in the water, and by the time Denithorne turned thirteen, she was five foot eight. She dropped soccer and a religious group to spend more time at the pool.

Illustration by Shonagh Rae
Post
CamperForce·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

After losing their savings in the stock market crash of 2008, seniors Barb and Chuck find seasonal employment at Amazon fulfillment centers.

Amount one Colorado county spent in January 2016 to arm school security with assault rifles:

$12,000

A rabbit brain was frozen and thawed without destroying its memories.

The shooter discarded his AR-15 semiautomatic weapon, the model used in six of America’s ten deadliest mass shootings and referred to by the NRA as “America’s rifle,” and then fled to a nearby Walmart, where customers can buy rifles but cannot purchase music with lyrics that contain the word “fuck.”

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today