Prev
Next

Women, including Gillard, should be judged like men

Wendy Tuohy

by Wendy Tuohy

17 Sep 05:50am

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Julia Gillard, Labor Party, Men And Women, Tim Mathieson

56 comments

Here I was, thinking that in this history-making era when we have our first female Governor General and our first woman Prime Minister, the genders may finally have laid down their arms.

'I'll look after you, Jules'. 'Sure, Tim, whatevs.' Photo: Ray Strange

But as the First Bloke himself highlighted yesterday, sadly it looks like business as usual. All of us guests at the national barbecue that is Aussie public life are still divided along traditional lines - men huddled together, stubby in hand poking at the snags, women at the other end of the yard, fussing with the salads.

Whether he was put up to it or not by Julia Gillard’s popularity paramedics, First Bloke Tim Mathieson made it seem that, unlike more enlightened nations, Australia is stuck in Jurassic Park when it comes to gender relations.

In what is probably a vain attempt to defend his defacto against a terminal decline in public opinion, Mathieson played “the woman card”. You know, that old one about everybody being so mean to (insert name of powerful woman having a professional crisis here) because she is a woman?

Never mind the fact his girlfriend spectacularly broke her carbon tax promise, allowed hideous cruelty to continue in the live export trade after her government was made well and truly aware, and produced a dropped-pizza of a border protection plan in the last 12 months; Mathieson would seriously have us believe the real issue is that poor little females in prominent posts are still more harshly judged.

I don’t buy this vintage argument for one second - and I am surprised our proudly feminist, fiercely intelligent PM would allow her man to wheel this antique idea out. It could be a case of desperate times, desperate measures - sorry, still not good enough.

What surprises me most about this cobwebby defence/sympathy ploy, is that Ms Gillard witnessed, only weeks ago, the outrage among men and women alike over Christine Nixon’s similar use of “the woman card”.

When Nixon suggested in her book that her spectacular downfall was fuelled by gender-hate and “fattism”, she did herself, and her groundbreaking generation of feminist activists a serious disservice. And, like the Prime Minister (via Mathieson), she contradicted the glaring evidence that she had, in fact, blown down the gender barrier with her authentic skills, merit and determination.

And the public, especially women who still call themselves feminists, didn’t buy it. Nixon attempted to garner support from other powerful women by meeting groups of them before the book’s launch, and, according to reports, suggesting they would understand that she had been savaged because she was a powerful woman in a man’s world. She offended her audience “to a woman”.

No doubt they could see, like the rest of us, that forward thinking Australians, from business chiefs to firemen, accept we have moved on from the idea of the “little woman” and “her indoors”; that whole cliched mindset about what women can, and can’t be expected and achieve (from separating conjoined twins with a fellow female neurosurgeon, to chairing the board of Telstra).

If the nation’s most powerful businessmen, including ASX chairman David Gonski, can make it their mission to attract more women to the country’s top boards - because the slow-to-change board gender-imbalance is “not a good business model” - then how can high powered women themselves even consider playing the “poor little women don’t get taken seriously, and are criticised more readily” card, when things do not go their way.

As esteemed women such as Heather Ridout, head of the Australian Industry Group, and Queensland Premier Anna Bligh have demonstrated, a woman at the top can, and should expect to be judged (like men), on their actions and their merits, and to be respected for those attributes - or not.

All that remains is for prominent women who have survived on their ability to thrive on our ever-more-level playing field to start talking like they believe that, even during a career meltdown. Oh, and while they’re at it, they need to tell their boyfriends…

Most commented

56 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • TChong says:

      06:07am | 17/09/11

      Heres a whacky idea from Left field, why not use the same standards and criteria , and judge people, male or female, equally ?
      Radical idea ?
      Hope not.

      Reply

    • Amused Qld says:

      09:59am | 17/09/11

      I would suggest that is what has happened, and guess what? Gillard has failed, but to make excuses for that, she (and the boyfriend) play the gender card.  NO more excuses.  Gillard is a dead loss as PM and it seems she and the boyfriend are the only ones that dont know it.
      Oh, and Nixon looked pathetic too, playing the fat woman card. I would suggest that neither of them are very smart.

    • Adam Diver says:

      10:36am | 17/09/11

      Ha, the first bloke said she is treated differently, it must be true.

      Be gone you trolls, if she was treated the same as Rudd she would be banished by now. The only one using sex as an argument, are those defending Gillard as though her shit performance is a result of sexist views towards her.

      So lets take sex out of it, and judge her by her own criteria, she had 3 priorities, mining tax, ETS and boat people.

      1. Boat people, probably the most incompetent policy issue of recent memory (along with live exports)
      2. Mining Tax, still got nothing
      3. ETS, transformed into a huge lie and a carbon tax no-one voted on.

      So any criticism seems fair to me.

    • acotrel says:

      01:51pm | 17/09/11

      @Adam Diver
      ‘So lets take sex out of it, and judge her by her own criteria, she had 3 priorities, mining tax, ETS and boat people. ‘

      An economy which during the GFC is the envy of the rest of the world ?  So it was all Costello’s doing ? - Let’s have a look at the facts -
      When Howard came to power Labor had left a deficit of $9billion along with a very clever economic model, devised by Hawke and Keating.  When Hawke came into power the Libs had left a deficit of about $9billion, which was substantially greater than the ALP left Howard, in relative terms, due to the time difference.  The ‘recession we had to have’ was caused by the RBA misjudging the effects of increasing the interest rates.  During Howard’s reign we had the resources boom, (and a smarter RBA ),  which paid off our debt, but virtually nothing was invested in infrastructure.  The GFC hit, and Rudd did the stimulus to maintain confidence - the rules changed !  We recently saw Hockey, Truss and Joyce talking down the economy for political gain.  I could never vote for such an irresponsible mob of idiots !  My money is in super, in the stock market.  Would you want someone putting their foot on your head while you were drowning ?  Look at the potential - if employers lose confiidence, we get job loss.  If the kids reneg on their mortgages the banks collapse.  We are then all in deep shit !  If we can keep going without further idiocy from the LNP, we will be alright, but the GFC is still a clear and present danger.

    • JR says:

      06:08pm | 17/09/11

      @acotrel
      Has something changed since 2007 with regard to how an opposition party is supposed to behave. The message I hear from people like yourself is that no opposition party before now had ever been critical of a government.

      I’ll leave the “recession we had to have” aside, it’s a contentious issue with many views depending what you read and who you listen to.

      You say the Howard government paid off the debt and did nothing else, which is pretty misleading. He had to reduce a lot of wasteful spending in order to just stop us going further into debt and more to pay down the debt.
      Costello setup the futures fund which had almost $60Billion invested by the Howard Government, with the premise that the Government of the day will tip into the fund any budget surplus at the end of the financial year. Considering Labor, there won’t be any contribution while they are in power.

      Anyway stimulus, yes it was required, but the manner in which it was done was haphazard and dodgy. Pink batts, school halls. If this is the type of infrastructure investment you think Howard ought to have done, well I’m glad he didn’t.

      You worry about people losing their jobs and employer confidence, job loss, etc.
      We’re already there, and it is a product in part of our current government that no-one has any confidence in. People are nervous and scared of what will happen especially under a carbon tax were were told would not occur.

      You’re blaming those highlighting the problem, when you should think about who is causing the problem!

    • Tator says:

      06:24pm | 17/09/11

      Alcotrel,
      the budget deficit that the then treasurer Howard left the incoming Hawke government in 1982/83 financial year was only $3.348 billion, the following year had a $6.8 billion deficit and then a $5.8 billion deficit, all due to increased spending by the ALP.  It wasn’t until 1987/88 that the ALP showed a surplus.  The deficit the Keating Government left Howard was actually $11.1 billion which reduced to $6 billion the following year and then a surplus of $100 million.

      The $9 billion was net debt, which the ALP increased out to $29 billion by 87/88 and then again blew it right out to $95.8 billion when the Howard government took over.

      http://www.budget.gov.au/2007-08/overview/html/overview_40.htm

    • acotrel says:

      05:41am | 18/09/11

      @JR
      Costello setup the futures fund which had almost $60Billion invested by the Howard Government, with the premise that the Government of the day will tip into the fund any budget surplus at the end of the financial year. ‘
      And Costello lost $40 billion of our funds playing the money market !  OOPS ! SAWREE ??’ Any way what sort of idiot would help set up something like the H.R.Nicholls Society ?
      I have never seen an opposition as unconstructive as Abbott’s - the poisonous negativity never ceases !  If you look at our history right back to federation, we’ve never had a personality like his trying to grab power with such perversity, and rat cunning.  The whole party is simply disgusting under his leadership !  And if you look at the women in the LNP - poisonous Sophie, Fascist Barbie, Bronny - they are enough to give a wanker nightmares !  How would you be if you were married to one of them - you’d end up in the loonie bin ?

    • acotrel says:

      05:46am | 18/09/11

      @Tator
      ‘the budget deficit that the then treasurer Howard left the incoming Hawke government in 1982/83 financial year was only $3.348 billion, the following year had a $6.8 billion deficit and then a $5.8 billion deficit, all due to increased spending by the ALP.’

      I base my figure on the book by Paul Kelly titled ‘The March of Patriots’, which seems to be relatively unbiased.

    • Tator says:

      03:06pm | 18/09/11

      Alcotrel,
      the figures I quoted are from official historical budget figures at the official Australian Government Budget website, these figures have been accepted by parliament as the official figures.  I would rather use figures from the horses mouth than a third party .  Even the last budget tabled by Swan have similar figures to mine, albeit actually with worse deficitis for the ALP after Hawke took government.  Also the fact that the actual net debt coincides with your figures probably means that both you and Kelly have gotten debt and deficit mixed up as they are not the same.

      http://www.budget.gov.au/2010-11/content/overview/html/overview_39.htm

    • dovif says:

      08:06am | 19/09/11

      TChong

      Agree, if Gillard was Female, she should still be known as the worst PM in Australian history

    • JR says:

      11:14am | 19/09/11

      @ acotrel
      So, you’re trying to say that Peter Costello personally chose the investment strategy, which currencies were invested in, that lost $40 Billion dollars. Rather than the independent RBA. Do you have any evidence to back that up or is that just an assumption. And how much money have the Rudd/Gillard governments tipped into the FF? From what I’ve read it’s a single circular figure.

      Yeah, already heard of the HR Nicholls society. I’ve also heard of balance; both sides fights to get all they want, which never happens, so they meet in the middle. Else a governments gets turfed if they go too far.

      Gillard was a member of the Socialist, nee Communist Party.
      And there are quite a few Labor MP’s that come direct from the unions, where they “allegedly” squandered members money on living the good life. But having known people on the inside of more than one union, it’s not surprising and not an isolated case.

      Now I don’t like Abbott, nor do I like Gillard or even Brown for that matter. They’re all sneaky creatures that I always see avoiding to answer direct questions put to them by talking around the topic and then saying, “well I’ve already answered that”.
      But I do see what Abbott is doing, and I support someone being hard up with a Government that has broken a promise and mismanaged public monies on a grand scale.

      Funny joke about the LNP women. But desirability or lack thereof of the women in politics is irrelevant. They’re voted into that position to represent their electorate.

    • Brian Taylor says:

      06:29am | 17/09/11

      Hey I’m quite happy to let the female of the house take out the rubbish bin or do the lawn mowing.
      Equal right’s, Right?
      Women have come a very long way since the 70’s
      Even I admit that a great many women are smarter than a lot of guys I know.
      Stronger in some ways also.
      every guy will freely admit that if we had to give birth, there’d ever only be the one child.
      Sure there are still heaps of males around that think the woman should be seen and not heard, bare foot in the kitchen, but realitly is totally different.
      I have a female boss (my wife) shes very good at what she does, sure she can be a little bossy at times, but thats only because she cares about her business.
      Most women are well and truely out of the kitchen/bedroom now and sorry guys, but they’re not going back and to be honest I like it that way

      Reply

    • Fiona says:

      05:59pm | 17/09/11

      Thanks Brian. There’s those of us that happily do that stuff too (hubby’s a shift worker, so bin dutys often mine). I do wish he’d let me mow instead of clean the loos. We have a ride on see and funnily enough he likes doing the lawn.

    • acotrel says:

      05:50am | 18/09/11

      @Brian Taylor
      I like my wife’s cousin.  She’s a journo on The Guardian, and earns big money.  Regularly takes three kids around the world on jumbos, and still cooks a great meal !

    • Othello says:

      07:01am | 17/09/11

      You need to grow up a little, in any relationship, both partners will and do defend the other. That is the way we are and Tim can probably see nothing but sunshine and light in Julia. I would feel more disturbed if he did not defend her. I would consider that very disloyal. I am glad I don’t know you to be honest, there is nothing as loathsome as a guest who comes to your bbq, eats the food, and guzzles the drink, then runs away and rubbishes you.

      Reply

    • Ian1 says:

      07:08am | 17/09/11

      The new world into which we are being thrust and bamboozled into accepting as inevitable, will be a world where women are judged like men.
      Despite generations of men giving their all to protect the status of women, and in so doing helping women to avoid the pitfalls of being judged, the globalist agenda will dismantle our efforts without fail.
      Of course, chivalry will endure, though you will not find it out in the open.

      Reply

    • murray says:

      07:58am | 17/09/11

      Sorry its all wrong the PM should be judged on her performance as a PM,not because she is a female?
      she is a total waste of space as a PM,as was k rudd,and anybody who thinks other wise has his or her head stuck up there ‘‘u no what’‘
      PS i was hoping she would of been a good PM but she is way out of her depth,and thats a fact.

      Reply

    • Chris L says:

      10:48am | 17/09/11

      “and anybody who thinks other wise has his or her head stuck up there ‘‘u no what’‘” -

      I’m not much of a fan of Gillard myself at the moment, but that sentence in your post makes me want to argue with you. Please don’t take it upon yourself to judge those who think differently, it is vital for democracy that they do so.

    • Notvelty says:

      11:11am | 17/09/11

      Agreed. There’s far too much of this sort of thing from both the right and the left these days. We seem to have devolved as a democracy.

    • acotrel says:

      01:55pm | 17/09/11

      @murray
      ‘she is a total waste of space as a PM’

      just because you say something, that doesn’t make it true.  Just do a simple comparision by watching parliament any day at question time.  You’ll see poor little Tony getting victimised by big bad Julia !

    • jo says:

      07:58am | 17/09/11

      Tim Mathieson,  has just shown his level of intelligence, by the fact he does not know what he is talking about,  I read his article, pure dribble.  Our first woman PM Julia is not PM material, it has nothing to do with her being a woman,  Whats the point of having a woman PM like Julia that has no female qualities, such as listening to her people,  Putting the wishes of her people before her own wishes,  attacking the media,  persisting with this bad Malaysian Policy,  even though it has deemed to be inhumane and illegal by the High Court.  I would be more than happy to have a female PM, but not Julia

      Reply

    • I Kidd says:

      10:53am | 17/09/11

      Listening is a female trait?!

      Admitting to being wrong is another?!

    • Gratuitous Adviser says:

      05:12pm | 17/09/11

      Hi Jo
      I think you mean drivel.  Julia Gillard is one very smart politician, however she accepted the Prime Ministers’ role at the wrong time and after a very poor decision by her parliamentary colleagues and Paul Howes, that’s all.  This is not her time, unfortunatelly.  To say she has no female qualities is stupid and sexist (I hope you are not a woman) and unobservant of the world around you and possibly poisoned by your circumstance.  Regarding the Malaysia solution, Julia is smart enough to know that the great unwashed do not like people that cheat and buy there way into our little Nirvana, and vote accordingly.  I would recommend you “dribble” on down to the polling booth at the next election and vote for Tony Abbott and then see what you get regarding illegal immigration, nee asylum seekers.

    • Fiddler says:

      08:01am | 17/09/11

      Yes, thankyou. I am a feminist in the sense that I want women to do well. Doing well however is not tearing up every time something gets hard and when you fail blaming everyone else or the fact you have a vagina. Nor is it using your vagina to get ahead. Work hard and keep a level head, you will find the world becomes pretty easy then.

      Reply

    • Joan says:

      08:06am | 17/09/11

      Any woman who can knife a rival overnight , make a promise to gain power then break it once in power, a woman whose first words to an opposition leader are `Game on` is a woman playing the game the mans way and can just cop it sweet. Gillard plays it dirtier than any male in Australian politics and gets away with it because she is a woman.  There you go Mr Hairdresser- if this is bullying then I`m a bully.

      Reply

    • Max, of Rocky says:

      10:00am | 17/09/11

      Absolutely, you play the game by the rules and take the ups and downs as they come.

      If it’s too hot in the office get out.  (kitchen is not PC is it ?)

      Women have pursued equality and gained a lot but they can’t have it both ways.  We are all equal so equal (same) rules.
      Respect is earned, not a right.  (for both sexes)    8-)

    • acotrel says:

      08:10am | 17/09/11

      I watch Gillard in Parliament, and the comparison with most men I know is embarassing ! I’d have love to see in action as a union rep.  She must have handled some really difficult situations, to get her current level of competence.  She makes Abbott look stupid ! And the rest of her team aren’t too dumb either !
      I know I’ll get all the same old nay saying responses to this comment, but I tell it as I see it , and I trust my own judgement after 50 years as a manager in heavy industry !

      Reply

    • Fiddler says:

      09:54am | 17/09/11

      really, I thought you were a scientist who worked in management for forty years and were 69 years old?

      Or did you have your degree at the age of 19 and then work the same job for fifty years? Shows how worldly your view is and hence why at your advanced age you are just starting to learn some life truths as is demonstrated in your comment below. Most guys learned them in high school but due to society were conditioned to ignore it. They learned these things for good in their early twenties.

    • Max, of Rocky says:

      10:06am | 17/09/11

      Yeah, you are right they are not “too dumb”  just plain dumb.

      This morning’s effort with the asylum seeker legislation amendments is further proof of the inept management of the current government.

      Your judgement is seriously under attack by your own statements and blind support of this tragically lacking government .

    • acotrel says:

      01:33pm | 17/09/11

      @.Fiddler
      Most of my qualifications were achieved while I was working.  I was still attending night classes at age 57.  I always studied subjects relevent to my employment, so I remained competent at all times.  Do you do that? In later years, I’ve lectured in a couple of fields at tertiary level, and lectured in aid of programmes run by Standards Australia. In a couple of my jobs, I’ve led medium sized groups, and been continuously involved in management, recruitment and discipline.  If you don’t believe I am a reasonable judge of character - think again ! I can see a rabbott move at a kilometer distance ! I said heavy industry and I meant it - what role do you believe a scientist would play in that ? I believe that you might be living in a world of paper clips !

    • Fiddler says:

      03:03pm | 17/09/11

      world of paper clips? You have no idea what I do because I feel no need to try and boast on the internet. Your incredible ability to see Labor through rose coloured glasses shows how poor a judge of character you in fact are

    • acotrel says:

      08:30am | 17/09/11

      A thing that amuses me about Julia Gillard is tha t most women seem to hate her.  It says something about sisterhood ?  Over a long time I’ve disagreed with Erick’s take on feminism, but I have come to recognise that these women strange cattle ! They can be really poisonous jealous bitches !

      Reply

    • sickemrex says:

      11:54am | 17/09/11

      Generalising much? I’m female and certainly don’t hate Gillard. I’d have a beer with her at the pub. However her government is a train wreck. Her criticism of the High Court was as undignified as Serena Williams’ attack on the umpire. Or NSW general moaning after Origin this year, just so I don’t sound like a jealous, poisonous bitch.

    • OchreBunyip says:

      08:46am | 17/09/11

      Women, including Gillard, are judged like men. The question should really be will they suffer the same penalties. Hopefully the answer is yes.

      Reply

    • Bev says:

      10:32am | 17/09/11

      That’s the real point.  When the heat comes on they run for cover claiming they are helpless female victims of the patriarchy and how it’s the fault of all those nasty misogynistic men out there.

    • Robert S McCormick says:

      10:18am | 17/09/11

      Wendy, you let the side down in your ontro! You referred to “me standing round, stubby in hand poking (sex-mad, they are) at that ultimate, legally naked symbol of masculinity: the Sausage. Something rather homoerotic in their behaviour methinks!
      Then, Wendy, you offer possibly the ultimate put-down to women in saying “women stand around fussing over the Salads”.  Women FUSSING?
      Not the women in our family. Even if they make the salads & the men go out & buy the chops & snags, once they are made that’s it. On the table & if anyone doesn’t like what’s there they are told to go into the kitchen & make up their own damned salads!
      Generally I think women in really high positions, as opposed to those in minor management who, on appointment, suddenly become obnoxious control-freaks, do a dmaned fine job. They take no stick from anyone. They can & do give as good as they get.
      Unfortunately there are some women, just as there are some men, who though they move into the top jobs are simply not temperamentally suited to those jobs, for the instant they are criticised they either go hide beind their male partners or play the “I’m just a poor, defenceless little woman & you are being nasty to me” game which immediately causes even the most feminist of feminists to come out all guns blazing with their stupid accusations of “Sexism”, “Sexist male bastard”, “Chauvinist pig” & possibly the most inane of all “You would not criticis a man if he did, said what she said”- even if the critic is a female!
      Talking of the word “Bastard"this is generally used when people refer to males. When are we going to get perjorative words which are gender-specific. Or can we legitimately (ooops) call a female a Bastardess?
      Mayhap we should just say “She (name) is a right bastard” I know quite a few & most of them are in Australia’s assorted Parliaments etc.

      Reply

    • John says:

      10:39am | 17/09/11

      I care about one thing, he performance of the government.

      It has been abysmal.

      As people have debated this at enormous length I am not surprised to see the discussion spilling over into personal terms.

      There is no professionalism in parliament to discuss!

      Until Australians can throw out the sorry bunch on both sides of politics, politics will remain personal.

      Reply

    • Felipe says:

      11:20am | 17/09/11

      Gillard has had her chances at making it to be a good PM.  But the way she came to office really was a step back from which she has not recovered.  She thinks she is tough (like a man) when she arrogantly dismisses the will of the people.  Her decisions on two main issues for Australia of Carbon tax and Malaysia solution show fallibility.  I think she listens to others instead of listening to her own female instinct/judgement.

      Reply

    • Cate says:

      12:01pm | 17/09/11

      He has no idea about money.  He just spent everything we had in the bank and is now trying to grab it back with so called good for the environment taxes and unexplained hikes in essential services.  He also needs to stop yawning at the Australian people on television.  He couldn’t care less. The Goverments performance is dismal indeed.

      Reply

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      12:12pm | 17/09/11

      Abbott has made a tactical mistake. By saying no to Gillard’s new migration legislation he has demonstrated that he is soft on refugees. This will hurt him.

      Reply

    • acotrel says:

      06:05am | 18/09/11

      Abbott is not soft on refugees, and he is consistent.  What he is about is grabbing power by any means !  If Julia Gillard wanted to accept a gift of 1000 tonnes of gold for Australia, he’d oppose it.  He cannot even see the disparity in his own crocodile tears.  Now he’s concerned about refugees human rights, and he thinks we’ve forgotten what Howard did with the asylum seekers on Nauru when he denied them access to our courts.  He’s been so intent on getting Howard vindicated and so tied up with his own ambition, that that he’s lost the plot.

    • Dave C says:

      01:01pm | 17/09/11

      Julia Gillard should be judged just like any other politician, on policy and and what she has done since she has been in power.
      As IR minister she repealed Work Choices (which gave employers too much power) to the point where now unions have too much power and small businesses are scared to take on new staff
      As education minister she was in charge of wasting billions on school halls, she also raised the leaving age to 17 which means if your kid wants to learn in Years 11 and 12 they now have more students who shouldnt be there to distract them.
      As PM she promised no Carbon Tax and then introduced one anyway.
      As PM she has got into bed (politically speaking and in no other way) with the Greens which has led to the carbon tax, a mining tax and useless media enquires.
      As PM she inherited Rudds decision to soften border protection policy then tried to use Malaysia and now has no idea to stop boat loads of unauthorised arrivals.
      Its the carbon tax and the failure on boat people which explains why her party has record low levels of support.
      Her Gender has nothing to do with it and her relationship with Tim should not put in the spotlight at all. Its policy that she should be judged on and that is why she is on the nose with the people of Australia, nothing more nothing less.

      Reply

    • Govt@FauxCitizen says:

      01:21pm | 17/09/11

      Gillards’ ignorance is only outweighed by her arrogance and it’s abundantly apparent that her diplomatic and leadership skills have suffered as a result of all this, IE:Assuming East Timor would accept her asylum plan without consultation,unwilling to sort out scandal,  most embarresing and shameful, .
      She is criticised for her lies, bombastic and condescending nature, constant bungling of domestic policy and the political freinds she keeps.
      Her rants in the parliament somedays even make Keating look a bit tame and she is more than capable of looking after hersel, it just shits me to tears when the feminist card is pulled whenever a female is scrutinised or mocked for being deceitful or dumb.

      Reply

    • Anjuli says:

      01:54pm | 17/09/11

      At first I thought good, we have a female as prime minister even though i did not like the way she first achieved the position ,and I am not a Labor voter. Now I think she has missed the chance of Australia ever having another female to be voted into the job again.

      Reply

    • Michael R says:

      02:32pm | 17/09/11

      What Prime Minister ever answered a question by batting their eyelids, flashing a sweet innocent smile, and prefacing every answer with “Oh, Kerry, come on ...”? We expect our Prime Minister to answer questions honestly, and rationally, not swayed with emotional gush. So, yeah, we should uphold the standards of Prime Ministership and not let Gillard get away with emotional manipulation just because she’s a woman.

      Reply

    • LJ Dots says:

      08:03pm | 17/09/11

      Michael R, *laughs* now you are just being silly.

      Incidentally, do you mind if I pat your hand repeatedly as I tell you how silly you are being?

    • Michael R says:

      12:23pm | 18/09/11

      LJ, only Kristina Keneally could get away with patting my hand. But after 5 minutes I’d come to my senses and be infuriated by her policies too.

    • LJ Dots says:

      05:51pm | 18/09/11

      Michael R, personally I’d allow 10 minutes, but then again I’m not from NSW so grant me some leeway here.

    • Al says:

      07:27pm | 17/09/11

      Nicely written; If they want equality and they want the top jobs they can take the lumps with the glory.

      Just the same as Australian women who now have the opportunity to be in combat units, they too can be disfigured, killed, dismembered, psychologically scared and raped by the enemy just like their male counterparts.

      I suppose we can thank Joolya for that too.

      Reply

    • Michelle says:

      08:36pm | 17/09/11

      Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! I’ve been screaming this very thing since Gillard stood giggling OUTSIDE that blasted shed batting her eyelashes and saying she knew her place! WHAT?! THIS FROM OUR PM! PM Gillard is responsible for the defence of our nation and all the other stuff not quite as dire. She’s the big Cohuna.  And we get a 5o year old adolescent eyelash batting and giggling in her place outside a shed?  The place of the PM is wherever they darn well please. Who’s running Australia then? Her boss unelected Tim?
      No wonder that union boof thought nothing about making a rutting gesture at her backside at the Hazelwood energy generation union meeting. She knows her place. And she willingly put herself there!
      Gillard has been in politics most of her life. Was deputy PM and now has risen to our highest office. The office of PM. Australia elected her to both if you overlook the help she’s had from the Greens and The Dependants.
      And now when she’s tanking we’re sexist?!
      She and everyone else making and accepting such bs excuses do ALL Australians a disservice!
      This is the reason ALL Australians should be elected on merit not quota.
      I hope the ALP haven’t sprung a cuckoo on us. A so~so PM instead of the best PM on offer all because of her sex and their need for blasted quotas!.
      Going on the incompetent mess government now is in Australia I don’t hold out much hope for females in public office after her tenure.
      And in case anyone gives a toss I think Rudd a lying incompetent totalitarian. Not because he’s a man but because he’s a lying incompetent totalitarian!
      They’re 2 Labor peas from the same pod!

      Reply

    • Amy says:

      10:04pm | 17/09/11

      I agree, both men and women should be judged on their merits. But this is a seperate issue from the fact that very often women in public life are subject to sexism and mysoginy. The Sarah Palin pornography episode for example occurred precisely because Palin is a woman, who some men apparently felt needed to be ‘put in her place’. The right wing media’s mysoginist tratment of Hilary Clinton’s during her election campaign is another example. I think any feminist worth her salt should be calling this sexism out, regardless of a particular woman’s politics or political merits. Women appear to be in a double bind if they suceed in public life - they’re often singled out for particular scrutiny as women, but then if they raise issue with that sexism they’re accused of ‘playing the woman card’. That’s not equality in my book.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      01:12am | 18/09/11

      Women don’t need advisors.
      This is Juliar’s problem.
      She’s smart, talks well, but she don’t trust her instinct.
      Hell, yer gotta trust a woman for what she does and does not like, ( I reckon that’s half my problem) yet our PM makes too much eye-contact and doesn’t ever screw up her nose at pesky interviewers.
      Never knowed a woman who did that.
      (True, and I’m trying ter find one ter marry.)

      Reply

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      01:19am | 18/09/11

      Hi Wendy,

      Of course, women should be judged like most men in our world!!  However, when it comes to the politics, it is a whole new ball game altogether.  We are still just warming up to the idea of women being seen as leaders!!

      Considering the fact that there have been only a handful of women leaders in our recent history., I just have to say no wonder!!  Margaret Thatcher, Hillary Clinton, Angela Merkel and Julia Gillard to name a few!!  When we look at how they got there in the first place, I am certain they all have their own success stories to tell.

      Why should it be any different for women anyway??  After all, I personally think most women are already very successful as surgeons, corporate lawyers, High Court judges and all the rest of professions traditionally seemed to belong to men only. We also have to think more carefully about women & their role in our society.  Are they mothers, wives & career women all at the same time. And most importantly politics should not be a men only exclusive club either.

      We still find that to get any where in life, as women sometimes we have to try twice as hard. It is highly understandable, when we look at the time most women try to establish a career as well as fulfilling family obligations.  It is not always a win win situation, it requires a certain kind of sacrifice & determination, most men may find almost impossible to achieve, in our everyday realities & struggles.

      I truly believe “yes” most definitely we should judge all politicians based solely on their performance,  integrity, achievements, leadership qualities & sheer hard work!! Being woman or a man should not make any difference! at all!  When we all look back on history, hopefully we will come up with the right answers we have been searching for!!  It is still to soon to decide who might make a better leader or a politician, at the end of the day.  Best regards to your editors

      Reply

    • B says:

      04:50pm | 19/09/11

      Misandrist

      “We still find that to get any where in life, as women sometimes we have to try twice as hard”  -  This is the biggest lie portrayed by feminists.  Yes in the world as an adverage maybe, but in Australia women are given every opportunity, at the expense of men, to suceed.  So dont play the victim mentality.  It is VERY old.

    • NESLIHAN KUROSAWA says:

      11:47pm | 19/09/11

      Hi B

      Thank you so much for your reply!!  Most certainly, we claim to have those equal rights & opportunities you have talked about!!  However, the only point I was trying to make, happens to be as women even when we decide to take those equal opportunities, there seems to be obstacles in our way!!  Since as women we are very new to the idea of making clear career paths, life choices based on our needs alone!!

      Lets all face it that traditionally women have been seen as main care givers in our society, right??  May be when that changes just like you mentioned we might enjoy those rights equally & fairly! 

      Personally speaking, I most definitely do not consider myself as a victim at all.  I was brought up by a working mother, just watching her juggle her work as well as family obligations was the biggest & best lesson in my personal life.  I truly believe that when we want something really badly, we can achieve it no matter what & at any cost!! 

      But lets also not forget the fact that sometimes our living environment, cultural background, socio economic background & peer pressure seem to be the biggest factors in determining our future plans & goals.

      Also another helpful hint would be, whether we happen to be male or female, is just remembering how much our mothers have sacrificed in order for us to have better living standards & work opportunities, which never existed in their generation.  I just want to make it very clear that, we have not arrived at this particular point overnight. Just looking back at your own family history might help you understand & see it from a different angle.  Best regards to your editors.

    • Michelle says:

      08:13am | 18/09/11

      Amy. When Gillard is plastered front page in a porn piece that’s a beatup and not actual, I’ll back you. That hasn’t happened though so why bring up US politics here in relation to Gillard and her treatment? I point out Abbott would be subject to the same story if it proved to have a pinch of truth. Is that sexist too?

      PM Gillard and whomever is coaching the giggly ditz bimbo fake or real PM Gillard aren’t helping the cause. There’s more than enough material. Sexism is what the party of incompetence pull when they’ve got nothing standing out as a success to trumpet.

      Really fake real Julia? please! This is self inflicted. Don’t try pinning Gillards woes on US politics.

      Reply
 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter