Bob Brown blames sexism. The Greens leader went to great lengths yesterday to blatantly admonish the men of the Australian media for their attacks on the PM. Calling them “subconscious, sexist and quite ridiculous at times”. And mostly distracting for a government already struggling with getting the important things done.
The PM herself has described the scrutiny as “unsurprising”. In an interview on Sunday night she told veteran journalist Mike Willesee, that at the end of the day, her position remained an ultimately positive and hopeful symbol of equal opportunity in this country.
They are both sort of right.
Julia Gillard has been subject to sexism during her term as PM. How else can a reasonable person explain the “At Home with Julia”. A national television show that honed in on her private life in an unforgivably inappropriate, disrespectful and immature way.
As Ant Sharwood wrote at the time: “Imagine if someone had pitched a similar show about John and Janette Howard, or – God forbid – Joh and Flo Bjelke-Petersen. The script would quite rightly never have made it past the security guards at reception.”
Ditto the public backlash regarding Gillard’s lack of “emotional” response to the Queensland floods. And the ruthless comparison to Queensland Premier Anna Bligh, who was praised for both her empathy and competence in her regular briefings on the floods.
Name one other national incident where a male leader has been compared to another in terms of their emotional response to a situation of grave national significance and I’m prepared to admit this is not sexism.
Here’s why. A fair fight is between parties of equal strength. Anna Bligh was fighting on home turf – premier of the state and close to friends and family. To say she was passionate and felt the true cost of the disaster is an understatement of epic proportions. As Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s role was to represent the rest of the nation, communicate empathically and drive the home the need for clear, decisive action.
Neither leader emulated the other because no two leaders are the same. Just because they share the same gender does not mean we should expect the same response from Julia Gillard and Anna Bligh.
Here lies the real tragedy of the Julia Gillard story. And it’s not far off the story of many Australian corporations, boards, companies and businesses around the country. Recognisable women leaders are too few and far between. This has severe ramifications.
At times of crisis, and not just of the national leadership variety, the lack of women in leadership roles, leave an almighty gap. Firstly in our acceptance of gender differences at the top. Just because women lead the country, this does not mean they have to cry on cue, raise a family or in any way conform to typical, and for the most part, old-fashioned gender stereotypes.
Disclaimer: Female leaders, like their male counterparts should be evaluated solely on the way in which they lead. The decisions they make, the policies they support and their ability to deliver. They also have a responsibility to reveal themselves authentically. And be themselves consistently. This breeds trust. Without trust, as a leader, you have nothing.
At the end of the day, more females leaders may not have made Julia Gillard a more successful PM. But their presence alone would have engendered a greater level of acceptance and understanding of her position. And a much healthier place from which we as a nation could make a fair and honest evaluation of the work she has done.
*With thanks to Suzi Finkelstein, Karen Adamedes and Kate Southam for contributing information to this piece.
No comments:
Post a Comment