sex between congressmen and interns

[amykhar]

A move is being made to have this declared formally un-ethical

http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/...ics/index.html

Personally, I would hate to see this happen. It would be different is the interns were high school students. However, these are adult women who are mature enough to make their own decisions.

Granted, I tend to believe that the women are just falling for the power and influence of the congressment. But, if they want to make stupid choices, is that not their option?

Amy

[poseidon]

Wait a minute. These are not mature men and women at all. I'll tell you from first hand experience (I was a congressional intern in 1989), most interns are sophomores, juniors and seniors in college. This is an age where you still make very stupid decisions because of a lack of experience and maturity.

Moreover, you are there at the whim of your congressman or senator. You can be turned away for any reason whatsoever. 99% of the interns are unpaid internships. So you have another situation where the congressman (or congresswoman) is in a postion of power over a measly volunteer intern.

On top of that, it's rather sleazy to use your office as a dating service. From what we seem to be learning about Condit, that's exactly what he uses his internship program for -- a way to get laid. It's not exactly the same thing as running a whorehouse, but it's getting close.

This is already unethical.

Jeff

[amykhar]

Jeff, I realize there are a large number of cases where the behavior is unethical. However, I am sure there are also a few cases where there is a genuine mutual attraction. I would hate to see legitimate relationships termed unethical simply because of the slimy behavior of some people.

Amy

[poseidon]

Amy,

If that's the situation, then they should wait until the intern is no longer an intern.

This isn't any different than a teacher-student relationship, which is also wrong in every instance.

Jeff

[CeeJay62]

Originally posted by amykhar

Personally, I would hate to see this happen. It would be different is the interns were high school students. However, these are adult women who are mature enough to make their own decisions.

Granted, I tend to believe that the women are just falling for the power and influence of the congressment. But, if they want to make stupid choices, is that not their option?

Amy

It is their option, but I don't believe people in their early 20's are fully mature, especially if they are still in college and have not set out on their own in life. Chandra was going back "home" and I am fairly certain this means she was returning to her parents house to plot to course of the rest of her life, now that she had graduated and completed her internship.

I see nothing wrong with telling Congress that if we are to send our best and brightest young people to Washington to learn about the workings of government as part of their college education, they should please refrain from using them as sex toys.

I'm sure if it were Republicans with the craving for interns NOW would be hitting the roof, rather than calling it a choice the women made.

[amykhar]

I guess that I am biased on the maturity of 20 year olds. I had been married for 2 years by then, and already had my first child.

Amy

[poseidon]

Amy,

I think it is highly unusual for a 20 year old -- male or female -- to be mature enough to make good adult decisions. You were likely an exception to the rule.

Jeff

[CeeJay62]

Originally posted by amykhar
I guess that I am biased on the maturity of 20 year olds. I had been married for 2 years by then, and already had my first child.

Amy

That was actually part of my point. I married at 20 and supported my husband while he finished college (I know, a feminist nightmare, not finishing my education so my husband could finish his). I was much more mature than friends of a similar age that had stayed in college and still lived half the year in the cocoon of their parents homes and spent Friday nights at beer parties at their dorm. I'm not stating that my choice was better, but I do believe you don't really grow up until you set out on your own, completely and permanently, without the safety net of Mom and Dad.

[nicholmere]

I don't think it's right to tell consenting adults that they cannot have sexual relations.

If two people want to have sex, then that is their business.

If one person is using their position to coerce another into having sex then that isn't 'consenting' and it moves into the sexual harrasment area.

My reasons for having/not having sex were different when I was the age of these interns than it is now that I'm more mature, but the choice was mine and I'd always expect it to be that way.

[vemartin]

I have to go with Amy on this one; once you are an adult you are an adult, there should not be a protected class of adults that are shelter from making adult decision unless their intelligence dictates otherwise. If an intern enters into a mutual relationship with a congressman, or anyone else for that matter, I see nothing wrong with it. It is personal and between the two parties. If however, there is evidence of sexual harassment of either part then the appropriate action should be taken.

I reject the notion that all 20 years olds are too immature to handle adulthood. When should adults be allowed to enter into adult relationships, what is the cut off age? And since girls mature faster than boys in general should they be allowed to enter into an adult relationship sooner?

By the way, at age 19, I was riding nuclear submarines and made recommendations to the Captain of the boat on whether or not we should stay at periscope depth, based on the threat environment. The Navy trusted me with the lives of 120 other men and a billion dollars worth of equipment; surely we can trust college folk with their own personal relationships!

[KateTPZ]

I have to vote with Amy on this one. These interns are legal adults - whether they're mature adults or not isn't the issue. If a college-aged person is so immature as to be coerced by a person's "power" into a sexual relationship they shouldn't have been permitted to leave home in the first place. Oh wait - there is no legal way for a parent to keep an adult child home and out of harm's way? Welcome to the real world where some people do bad things, other people make bad choices, and often people get hurt. Sex between consenting adults should not be legislated.

[afropuff]

I think what's missing in this discussion is the element of power.

Although pages and interns are not *directly* employees of the senators and representatives, an intern or page spends most of his/her day with the senator/representative and not his/her organization/direct superior. While one could say that pages and interns are technically not employees, a strong argument could be made that these people are in positions that strongly suggest they could be vulnerable to sexual harrassment.

Isn't that the point? If you spend most of the day with a particular senator/representative and you come to know that person as your "boss", doesn't that make you an "employee"? And if/when your "boss" makes advances, does that not put any intern or page in an awkward situation? Even if you refuse, you have to spend the rest of your assignment running from or ignoring comments, censoring your words so you don't seem open to subversion, etc.

Oh, you can request a change of venue, but sometimes those changes require explanations or even permission from your "boss". Do you think the "boss" will admit his/her actions? Nah. And who's stuck? The intern/page is the one left with a reputation for being "difficult", all for trying to do the right thing.

While no one wants to legislate what adults do, I think something should be said for establishing limits, especially in the face of such unchecked power. And the legislators would do well to leave those pages/interns alone, anyway. Lewinsky became a millionaire for her behavior, and the past societal norms that would have kept interns and pages quiet has vanished. Media pays big bucks for scandal, and I would think it would be in the legislators best interests not to entangle themselves in something that could bring them down.

[AuntieEmma[$]]

I also agree with Amy. Chandra and Monica were young women, not girls. Even if they were emotionally immature (and I sure was at their age), they were still more than old enough to take responsibility for deciding whether or not they wanted to pursue affairs with married men.

As everyone said, of course that's assuming there's no harrassment or coercion. In Monica's case, she was the aggressor. We don't know much about how Condit and Chandra got started, but from what I've read about Condit -- he has a rep for being a player from way back in his days in the California legislature -- coercion doesn't seem to be his style.

I had a summer federal internship, although I was quite a bit older than Chandra and Monica, and it wasn't in Washington, so maybe it's not quite the same thing. But even though saying "intern" now brings snickers, it was just a job, one where I was actually treated quite well, and there were no more opportunities to screw around than on any other job.

If we need laws to protect women in their 20s, then what's to say we shouldn't just lock them in their parents' house until they're married?

It seems to me this may not be about protecting the women at all, but protecting the Congressmen.

[hadassahchana[$]]

If a college-aged person is so immature as to be coerced by a person's "power" into a sexual relationship they shouldn't have been permitted to leave home in the first place

Um, what do you think 'coerced' means? There are unfortuantely situations that people of that age, both female and male, can get into, and probably not all will have the wisdom and maturity to deal with it. Especially if you have lived a very sheltered life, (and I am not even trying to imply that Chandra and Monica did ) then it is sometimes even difficult to realize that coercion is starting, and by the time you realize that you're uncomfortable, it might be too late.

I agree with Jeff on this one. That argument, about not wanting to interfere with a valid relationship, is the same one used to try and argue against studen/teacher relationships being forbidden. In situations such as being a student, an employee or an intern, the problem is that one is not in a position of equality, and that is what sets the stage for problems of harrassment and coercion .

Cindy

[erik_kosberg]

I think what's missing in this discussion is the element of power.

I guess that I don’t see how it’s any different from the private sector. There are workplace romances all over, some of them between co-workers, and some between managers and those who are below them on the chain of command. If there’s a quid pro quo (sleep with me or you’re fired), then there are sexual harrassment laws that come into play. But if the relationship is between consenting adults, what exactly is the problem? Condit/Levy or Clinton/Lewinsky were wrong in the sense that both men are married but I just don’t see how those affairs were any different from ones in the public sector.

It seems to me this may not be about protecting the women at all, but protecting the Congressmen.

Bingo.

[KateTPZ]

In the cases of Chandra Levy and Monica Lewinsky, these young women were in love with (or thought they were) the men in question. If they were attracted by the power of the positions these men held, so what? These did not appear to be girls freightened into a relationship - by all accounts they were willingly and enthusiastically involved. I stand by my opinion - laws are not the answer. The laws of decency (and laws against adultery in some states) already make the behavior in question "illegal" - that didn't stop it, did it? I have a hard time believing any young woman raised in the United States, and educated, needs legislative protection from men who don't want to keep their pants on. Although Chandra may be a victim of fowl play, as it now appears, her relationship with the congressman (and Monica's relationship with former president Clinton) is not a case of woman as victim - it's a case of very poor judgement on the part of willing, competent adults.

[afropuff]

I don't think that anyone is implying that either Lewinsky or Levy were "victims". Lewinsky was the aggresor by her own admission, and we don't know Levy's side of the story.

All I know is that one should not paint with such a broad brush. I don't think that most of the interns/pages I knew (including myself) were doing their jobs with the intent of "seducing" anyone. I believe most people see their jobs as just jobs, no more and no less. Lewinsky and Levy do not speak for the attitudes of most interns/pages in state and federal government.

I agree that there is little to prevent situations like Lewinsky's (and/or Levy's), but I think it bears repeating that the legislator is the one in a position of power and s/he bears a good chunk of responsibility in such situations.

As for laws of decency and common sense, how helpful is that? Levy's family knew about the affair and seemed all too complicit with it; that, to me, is not common sense. I'd expect to be deported by my family if I told them I was dating a married man, and common sense dictates -- to me -- that this is not an ideal relationship. But, unfortunately, common sense seems rarer than dodos nowadays.

[poseidon]

Then remove the student/teacher relationship barriers. Based on most of the opinions here, there's not a single reason why a college professor can't have a sexual relationship with their students. This is the SAME EXACT THING folks. Perhaps you're not aware of what an internship is -- you get college credit for it and you are evaluated by your superiors.

I don't frankly care if a congressman, senator, or president wants to have sex with 20-year old women. That's not the issue at hand at all. I'm talking about something completely different. There are certain kinds of relationships that just aren't proper because of the kind of "professional" relationship that exists. If you want to have sex, then get out of the professional-end of the relationship and have all the sex you want.

[AuntieEmma[$]]

Originally posted by hadassahchana


That argument, about not wanting to interfere with a valid relationship, is the same one used to try and argue against studen/teacher relationships being forbidden. In situations such as being a student, an employee or an intern, the problem is that one is not in a position of equality, and that is what sets the stage for problems of harrassment and coercion .

I agree with you about students and teachers. But the intern situation seems different to me. If Chandra had worked in Condit's office, that would be the same as any other workplace situation, where there is a danger of harrassment and coercion. But she didn't work for him. They just happened to be living in the same city.

With Monica, I see it as being not so much like a student/teacher, but more like a student/president of a large University. In Monica's job, she wouldn't normally have any contact whatsoever with the president, except for one group souvenir photo session at the end. She had to really go out of her way and break rules to manuever herself into the same room with him.

Harrassment, to me, happens when there's someone you work for or whose class you're taking and that you see on a regular basis and that you can't avoid and that person has the power of judging you (grades, recommendations, promotions).

There wouldn't have been negative repurcussions for Monica and Chandra if they hadn't started their affairs. And I don't think they were looking for practical advantages outside of the affairs themselves, either. They both seemed mostly thrilled with breaking taboos, with carrying on in secret (or semi-secret, in Monica's case).

It's true they weren't equal in power (to Clinton/Condit), but seems to me they were absolutely in a position to say "no, thank you," at least in the beginning, without having to worry about any of the things someone might worry about in turning down a boss. And yes, they were attracted to power, and Clinton and Condit certainly have long histories of seizing every opportunity that comes their way because of women being attracted to that power, but if there's no coercion, how do you forbid women from making decisions, even really stupid decisions (as I think Monica's and Chandra's were), without infantalizing them?

[erik_kosberg]

Then remove the student/teacher relationship barriers.

Most of those regulations are relatively recent. When I was in college 20+ years ago there were no such formal barriers at the schools that I attended. I overheard part of a conversation between two women in the cafeteria (“I slept with him and he only gave me a B.”) that certainly seemed to imply that she could have gotten an A if she’d worked a little harder on her academic assignments but had chosen of her own free will to try for a good grade in a different way. One of my economics profs from the college that I went to in my freshman year had three rather attractive students living with him. Many private colleges and state university systems have since made these firing offenses but not that many years ago it was a very different story.

Sure, Congress can pass a law (or simply House and Senate rules) forbidding its members from having affairs with their interns. But consenting adults who want to have affairs will continue to do so regardless of what any piece of paper might say.

[CeeJay62]

I still can't agree. These women were not in balanced relationships, they were sexual pawns who had to follow whatever rules their "good friend' decided they should follow. They were blinded by power and I sincerely doubt they would have tolerated the same treatment from a peer. Early twenties is still close enough to being a child that men in their 50's who hold a lofty position should keep their distance, unless they want to have a complete and equal relationship, not a "give me a Lewinksy and leave before my wife sees you" deal.
Lots of young people do a lot of stupid things, grown ups in authority shouldn't take advantage of their youth and stupidity.

On the other hand, I think I'll go down the street and snooker some eight year olds out of their lunch money. They are fully evolved creatures with functioning intellects, they can choose if they want to give it to me or not. The fact I have 30 years of wisdom and maturity on them means nothing.

[magenta321]

Um, I would not be shocked at all to find out that at least 40% (at least) of women that age are sleeping with their bosses, providing that their bosses are male and not related to them.

Yes, they are two consenting adults. I just think their is something in our society which makes men in a position of power abuse it, and women try to take advantage of the situation (as a way to get ahead) or misunderstand the situation (he really likes me) or to fall in love with the power (he makes so much money, and look at his BMW!) It's sad, really, but I think that it's a learning experience for most girls of that age.

Not much you can do about it, unless they start castrating men Hey, isn't there an epinion on do it yourself castration?

[poseidon]

Um, I would not be shocked at all to find out that at least 40% (at least) of women that age are sleeping with their bosses, providing that their bosses are male and not related to them.

My guess is that if you took off the zero and divided by four, you'd probably have a more accurate number.