Last month Former First Lady, Former Secretary of State and
potential United States Presidential candidate Hilary Clinton said in an
interview that Julia Gillard faced “outrageous sexism” whist in the highest
elected office in Australia. Now while it was true that the criticism
surrounding her reign as prime minister was extraordinary, there is still a
resounding level of doubt surrounding whether or not what she experienced was
in fact sexism or something else. Outrageous ridicule? Yes. Outrageous coverage
of her wardrobe choices? Yes. Coverage on her partner?
Yes. On the fact she was not a mum? Yes. And that her choice made her unfit for
office? Yes. But outrageous sexism? Not sure.
Outrageous (adj). 1. Grossly offensive or extravagant. 2.
Being or having the nature of an outrage.
Sexism (n). Discrimination on the basis of sex, especially
the oppression of women by men.
So by these standards,
if Julia Gillard did experience sexism at the hands of the then Opposition and
particularly at the hands of Christopher Pyne and Tony Abbott, she would have
had to endure gross discrimination on the basis of sex, and by these standards
she probably did not. Did she not get to be prime minister because she was a woman?!?!
If she had been a Kevin Rudd 2.0 or a new and improved Bill Shorten would the
personal attacks been different? Less personal and more ‘policy’ based? Less
about clothes and makeup? Maybe, maybe not, but no other prime minister has
been criticised about the colour tie they wore and whether or not the suits
they wear cut them wrong…. So maybe yes…
It is no secret that the last Labor reign was plagued with
controversies, stuff ups, unstable coalitions with minor parties and
independents, but it was also a government –under both Rudd (with Gillard as
Deputy PM) and Gillard, a party who stuck to its own ideological base with a
focus on Education, developing the Asian century and in the end establishing
the National Broadband Network and the National Disability Insurance Scheme.
Whether or not you agree or disagree with these policies and spending programs,
one must give credit where it is due, and Julia Gillard conquered the feat of
first female prime minister paving the way for future female leaders.
The idea that Julia Gillard experienced more deliberately
personal attacks is without a doubt a fact to
most people, but the question remains, was this just a new phase for Australian
politics, along with Clive Palmer twerking and Kevin07’s selfie with Annabel Crabb,
or was it a deliberate attempt to hinder the progression of females in politics
in Australia? Taking a look at any parliament
in Australia at the state or federal level and one thing is fleetingly obvious
– it is overrun with men.
In 2011 and 2012 Australia saw a huge shift forward in
breaking the class ceiling when it came to politics, and for the first time we
have a female Governor General Dame Quentin Bryce AD CVO, a female Prime
Minister Julia Gillard, a female Speaker, Anna Burke, a female Attorney General
Nicola Roxon and as well as many females taking large roles in the
outer-cabinet, Kate Ellis as Early Childhood
Education Minister, Tanya Plibersek as
Minister for Health and Jenny Mackin as Family
Affairs Minister just to name a few. Perhaps we were spoilt for choice and
evidence suggest that we are no longer inundated with females in top roles
within the government, but why is
that? Was it just that Julia Gillard suffered immensely for the sisterhood? Her
internationally famous misogyny speech suggests it be so. “The Leader of the
Opposition says that people who hold sexist views and who are misogynists are
not appropriate for high office. Well I hope the Leader of the Opposition has
got a piece of paper and he is writing out his resignation. Because if he wants
to know what misogyny looks like in modern Australia, he doesn’t need a motion
in the House of Representatives, he needs a mirror. That’s what he needs.”
Whether or not he took what she said on board,
no one will ever know, but since that fateful day Tony Abbott has pledged to
pass a generous paid parental leave scheme and appointed himself Minster for
Women.
There seems to be this paradox whereby politics has become
increasingly personal and yet equally distant. It is perfectly acceptable to
wheel out your stunningly fabulous daughters who may or may not have ‘sex
appeal’ but at the same media event shut down a very valid conversation about
marriage equality and a woman’s right to choose. So my question still remains,
how did we get ourselves into a situation where one of the most powerful female
heavyweights in American politics can even single out a PM for enduring
“outrageous sexism” while doing her job? Something in our political dialogue
needs to change and soon, because whether or not Julia Gillard did experience
outrageous sexism, the political
atmosphere is toxic and navigation requires a hazmat suit.
