Political commentary has some fairly regular and predictable trends. In an average electoral cycle the consumer of political news is almost guaranteed to hear that political parties rely far too much on opinion polls, that media outlets are biased, that politicians either aren't paid enough or are paid far too much, and that journalists are either the solution to or cause of all political problems.
Julia Gillard's period as prime minister has introduced a new trope: that Australians are a bunch of terrible sexists for evaluating her leadership harshly. This week Bob Brown is leading the charge, somewhat unsurprisingly pointing the finger at the media, specifically its ''male commentators''.
Brown's characterisation of Gillard's critics is somewhat disheartening, not least because we heard this same tired argument a few months ago. By suggesting that a subconscious sexism pervades all criticism of Julia Gillard's leadership, Brown has effectively denied that there is any legitimacy to claims that Gillard has been a less-than-effective prime minister.
It is important to recognise that as a woman, and especially as a childless, unmarried woman, the prime minister is subjected to more scrutiny than her male predecessors. Part of this is because her position is new. Australia hasn't seen a female prime minister before, and unfortunately, there are sections of society for whom Gillard's femaleness is her defining characteristic.
There's a sort of women's magazine mentality to much of the commentary about Julia Gillard; almost as if an invisible editor somewhere has decided that news consumers — and particularly female news consumers — aren't interested in reading about the prime minister unless her femaleness is touted as unique and reinforced by constant references to the clothes, shoes and make up she wears. This is not confined to the prime minister; other women in politics, like Julie Bishop, Sarah Hansen-Young and Kate Ellis, are still subjected to disappointingly inevitable ''oh look, a woman in politics'' stories, as if femaleness and political activity were still largely incompatible.
That is a legitimate example of subconscious sexism in political commentary. Until we are able to refer to women in politics as ''politicians'' instead of ''female politicians'', women will remain a strange and slightly suspect quality in the eyes of some political consumers.
But when Bob Brown states that Julia Gillard comes in for unfairly harsh criticism because she's a woman, he is reinforcing her femaleness in the most unhelpful way. It is not an invalid or gender-based criticism to claim that the Gillard government has not performed to the standard that many would've hoped. Suggesting that criticisms of the Gillard government are inherently sexist reinforces the idea that we can't talk about women in politics outside the context of their gender.
There are very valid criticisms to be made concerning Julia Gillard's performance as prime minister. Her government has allowed itself to be defined by leadership tensions; Gillard has not proved effective at banishing the spectre of Kevin Rudd — his potential ambitions and intentions seem to have paralysed effective government communication to the electorate.
In addition to having a communication problem, the Gillard government has a policy problem. The prime minister has retreated from policy positions that previously took on the importance of an essential, unshakeable pillar of government reform, such as mandatory pre-commitment for poker machines. Political commentators and consumers sense that this is a government without a clear, planned policy vision for the future.
Criticising the Gillard government's disappointingly narrow policy ambitions has nothing to do with sexism or gender. It is a continuation of the same observations made about the Rudd government: all spin and no substance. However, the Gillard government also falls short on the spin. If the criticisms of Julia Gillard surpass those levelled at Kevin Rudd during his term as prime minister, it is because Gillard is operating the same policy-free government, with the added burden of an inability to communicate.
There is enough sexism in politics without having to invent it. The real problems with the Gillard government are a lack of vision and policy commitment, and a breakdown in communication to voters. These are problems that need to be addressed if the Gillard government wishes to be even vaguely competitive at the next election, but these issues are being obscured by yet another predictable and depressing focus on the prime minister's gender.
ADVERTISEMENT
No comments:
Post a Comment