A kind reader – it was nice to find I had one – sent me an interesting paper that gives a bit of context to that “kind of love” reference in my piece earlier this week Jim and Junie’s kind of love and a lasting relevance for Tom Uren’s words? The paper ‘A KIND OF LOVE’: Supergirls, Scapegoatsand Sexual Liberation, written in 2011 by Kate Laing, referred to an interview Jim Cairns gave to a journalist from the late and great Sydney Sun about his relationship with Junie Morosi:
We know we’re being watched all the time. I don’t give a damn what people say. I have stuck by Junie all the way and I intend to keep doing this… I have not changed my opinion about Junie since the day a few months ago when somebody asked me if I was in love with her. I said then it had nothing to do with the love he was talking about. Love is a word that has many meanings. I said- but I was incorrectly quoted- that love ranged from the kind of thing I might have for the Vietnamese people to the kind of thing his boss had for money. I would like to add though, that in her capacity as my private secretary, Junie must command my respect and trust. Surely you can’t trust somebody in this world unless you feel something akin to a kind of love for them. [Emphasis added]*
*As a historical footnote I should add that in those days in the long ago 1970s politicians did not have chiefs of staff, with the private secretary being the key gate keeper in a minister’s office.
But of more interesting to me in the Laing paper than the main event of Cairns and Morosi were the references to an earlier example of controversy about a senior politician having a key female adviser.
Prior to this scandal, there had been another example that indicated the interest and intrigue in women in the political landscape: Ainsley Gotto was a young girl hired to be the private secretary to Prime Minister John Gorton.
Gotto was used as a scapegoat for an unpopular Prime Minister and the outrage was centred on his lack of judgment in employing her and listening to her advice. The headlines read, ‘PM listened to girl more than to his cabinet’ and ‘Ainsley Gotto (‘it’s shapely… it wiggles’) tells her own story’. They focused on her youth and beauty, implying the reason for her appointment was her sexual attraction rather than her professional experience. When Gotto flew with the Prime Minister to the US on Air Force One for meetings with the President of the US, the reporting seemed almost spiteful, as though she was simply a girl sitting ‘close to the policy makers, the architects of world power, the men whose figures loom larger than life, who with the stroke of a pen can change a nations history’. The reports despised her for thinking she was worthy to be in their presence because of her age and inexperience. …These two cases have often been compared when talking about the media treatment of women in the workplace and in government employment because of their proximity to each other, the Gotto affair occurring in 1969 and the Morosi affair happening in 1974. Similarly, journalist Alan Reid was highly critical of PM John Gorton and used the Gotto situation as a way of turning public opinion against him, outlining that Gotto was only 22 years old and unmarried, therefore could never be taken seriously, nor could a Prime Minister relying on her advice. …To compare this scandal once again to the scandal of John Gorton and his secretary Ainsley Gotto which occurred in 1969, this point identifies a fundamental difference. John Gorton and Ainsley Gotto were conservatives of the Liberal party, a party known to be fierce advocates for the nuclear family and the role of the woman as bearer of children and domestic ruler of the home.135 The 1969 scandal was a sensation because by employing the young woman on his staff and listening to advice from the ‘girl’ rather than from his ministers, Gorton was betraying the standards of the party and the conservative conventions of those that voted for him.