The New Marriage Compact
“I dare do all that may become a man;
Who dares do more is none.”
-MacBeth, William Shakespeare
People get married for various reasons. As an old-fashioned romantic, I like to believe that it is mostly for the traditional ones. A couple falls in love, finds that they are compatible, realizes they want to spend the rest of their lives together: raising children, growing old together, etc. But, as we know from the current divorce rates, it is more likely than not that it ultimately doesn’t work out that way. They come to realize that the benefit of “married filing jointly” on their tax returns is no longer worth the cost of staying together when they realize that they can no longer stand each other.
But, as current news stories demonstrate, the benefits of marriage, at least for men, have reached new heights (or lows) as prominent men accused of wrongdoing find it’s convenient to have a wife around to take the blame. The longtime U.S. Senator from New Jersey, Bob Menendez, who once avoided conviction on prior charges of corruption through the convenience of a mistrial, is now being tried in federal court for accepting bribes to intervene in the investigation of an insurance scam involving truckers and granting favors to the government of Egypt. Among the rewards he allegedly received were massive amounts of cash, gold bars and a shiny new Mercedes Benz convertible for his wife, Nadine Arslanian Menendez. The latter was a a particularly useful gift after she had wrecked her previous vehicle in 2018 while involved in a late night crash that left a pedestrian dead. A truncated investigation left her off the hook.
Ms. Menendez has been charged in the same scheme but since she is being treated for breast cancer, she will be tried separately at a later date. The Senator is conveniently pointing the finger at his wife who he said was “deceitful” and kept her financial woes from him. According to the defense, she engaged in cash and gold transactions with personal friends without her husband’s knowledge and used his position to further their business and political interests.
Then there is Martha-Ann Alito, wife of Associate Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, who flew flags, including an upside-down American flag at their Virginia home and an “Appeal to Heaven” one at the couples’ New Jersey vacation residence. Both are symbols of the MAGA-inspired “stop the steal” movement. Ms. Alito is certainly within her rights to express her views in any peaceful way she chooses, but, in the aftermath of this disclosure and its obvious conflicts, Justice Alito has refused to recuse himself from any decisions by the Court concerning Trump’s involvement in election interference cases or January 6 related matters saying: “[m]y wife is fond of flying flags. I am not.”
While Ms. Alito may have an attachment to flags in general, this fondness does not extend to all flags as she confided to a reporter secretly recording a conversation with her during an event at the Supreme Court that she wanted to see a multi-colored pride flag with the Italian word vergogna (shame) printed across the middle. The same reporter recorded Justice Alito saying that the left and right are impossibly divided and that one side is going to “win.” He agreed that “people in this country who believe in God,” as Alito clearly does, “have got to keep fighting for that — to return our country to a place of godliness.”
Certainly there is room in this country for husbands and wives to share political views, as well as love. But it seems that the Alitos actually share more than the Justice is willing to admit and should be regarded as equally culpable for so blatantly displaying their sympathies. Two peas in a pod as the cliche goes.
Of course, blaming the wife is not a new phenomenon. Right at the start of it all, in the Book of Genesis, we all know that Eve took the first bite of the apple and enticed Adam to take the second. Mankind has been going downhill ever since.
Imagine if other historical figures had followed the same route. Antony blaming Cleopatra for their mutual suicide pact (“Because of her, the asp bit me on the ass”); George Washington on whether he chopped down the cherry tree (“Ask Martha, I don’t even own an axe”); Napolean on his disastrous invasion of Russia (“It was only because of Josephine’s insatiable appetite for caviar”); or Lincoln deciding to go to the theatre (“That confounding woman is so unbearable, I couldn’t stand to stay home”).
Whether throwing the missus under the bus will ultimately be a successful tactic or is just a passing fad remains to be seen. But, for now, it certainly qualifies as the second part of “for better or for worse.” Are men so weak that they are led into a life of crime and corruption by the so-called “fair sex?” MacBeth may make it seem so. Then there are those who believe that manhood itself is on the decline. There is a simple response to that supposed trend: “Men, stand up for yourselves and admit it. Or kiss those tax benefits goodbye.”
