* The beginning and end of Rep. Kelly Cassidy’s op-ed as it appeared in the Tribune yesterday…

Kristen McQueary’s recent column (“The fall and rise of former state Rep. John Anthony,” Nov. 26), in which she declares former state Rep. John Anthony’s redemption from his #MeToo moment, denies the reality of his victims and raises important questions: Why is there such a disproportionate concern for the lives and well-being of perpetrators of abuse — and why do victims never seem to receive the same? […]

McQueary minimizes the story of what led to Anthony’s downfall while fawning over his rise from the ashes. The editorial page regularly uses Hampton’s name as a cudgel against House Speaker Michael Madigan. But these writers don’t care whether Hampton’s abuser, Kevin Quinn, repents. They don’t care about Anthony’s victims, and they have no expectation that he does the work to earn redemption. They care about ideology and they’re willing to exploit anyone’s pain they can to promote it.

The paper asked Cassidy to limit her submission to 400 words, so she rewrote it.

* Here is her op-ed as originally submitted…

Kristen McQueary’s love letter to former Representative Anthony, in which she declares his redemption from his #MeToo moment, reaches a new low in tone deafness. What is our obsession with what comes next in the lives of perpetrators of abuse like Anthony? Why is there such a disproportionate concern for their lives and wellbeing–and why do victims never seem to receive the same?

Time and again, we are subjected to questions of what constitutes an appropriate punishment for men caught up in public cases of abusing women in the workplace. The pearl clutching concerns over so called “cancel culture” have grown incredibly tiresome. When will we start talking about what the appropriate remedies are for the women subjected to this abuse? We should be focusing our energy on contemplating the long term trauma that can result from being abused within a power dynamic as complex as a political workplace.

And yes, let’s also have the conversation about what redemption looks like. I am certain there are men among my colleagues who look back and cringe at some of their past actions and wonder what they can do to make it right, and men caught up in cases who truly want to repair the harm they’ve done. But redemption is not a right or guarantee–one must do the work to earn forgiveness, to recognize the harm they’ve caused and to commit to working to repair it. As I tweeted the night the article posted, the bare minimum looks a little like this: 1) acknowledge the harm done and accept consequences, 2) seek guidance on changing your behavior and do the work, 3) NEVER DO IT AGAIN, and 4) help others learn how not to repeat your mistakes.

McQueary proclaims Anthony redeemed–because she says so. Did she call any of the victims? Did she ask Anthony whether he had apologized to any of them? Whether he had pursued therapy to address the underlying behavior behind the “mistakes” he says he has made? Did she ask the victims how they felt about whether he was deserving of redemption? If she did, none of that information made it into her column.

The women who have come forward about sexual misconduct they’ve endured are expected to just go back to their everyday work lives, frequently still in close proximity to abusers, without a system in place to address the damage done. As high profile sexual harassment victim Alaina Hampton has shared, even notes from therapy to address the harms done can be subpoenaed if the victim is seeking damages for emotional distress and mental health trauma, creating a chilling disincentive to getting help. Tie that with the effect of feeling shunned at work lest others be seen as a whistleblower too, and we have a perfect storm of challenges facing folks who come forward to bring an end to the abuse.

Every time I see a story mentioning one of the higher profile #MeToo stories in the press, my first thought is to check in on the victim in the story. Because, make no mistake, even when someone has no regrets about coming forward, new mentions bring new traumas.

McQueary goes to great lengths to minimize the story of what led to former Rep. Anthony’s downfall while fawning over his rise from the ashes. The women in that story had to see their stories belittled, minimized and disregarded in order to praise the man who changed their work experience forever.

For this to come from an editorial page that uses Alaina Hampton’s name every chance they get as a cudgel against Speaker Madigan and his allies is repulsive. These writers don’t care what happened to Alaina and they don’t care whether Kevin Quinn repents and finds a new life. They don’t care about the victims of former Rep. Anthony, and they clearly have no expectations that he does the work to earn redemption. They care about ideology and they’re willing to exploit anyone’s pain they can to promote it.

The phrase “a new low in tone deafness” was removed at the Tribune’s request, Cassidy said, because it “violated their standards.”