Many readers will be aware that Australia's recent federal election (August 21) resulted in a hung parliament. In other words, neither of the major parties managed to garner a sufficient majority in the lower house to form a government and leaders of each party are now busily negotiating with independents to try to form a minority government.
While this is an interesting constitutional moment in itself for Australia, I recently read an online article that considers the issue from a gender perspective. In this article Madeleine Coorey argues that the election may demonstrate that Australia is not really ready for a female Prime Minister, particularly a female who is unmarried (although in a steady relationship) and has no children. While Julia Gillard did become Australia's first female Prime Minister some months ago, she did it as a result of an internal coup in which she ousted the labor party's leader (and then Prime Minister), Kevin Rudd. No woman has yet been popularly elected as Prime Minister while leading a major party in Australia.
Coorey's article focuses on narratives raised in the media during the election campaign that emphasized Gillard's family status and characterized her taking over the party leadership from the very unpopular Rudd as a bitchy, backstabbing act.
While I missed most of the election coverage, it is an intriguing way of looking at Australian politics where, as in the United States, women have typically not risen to high positions in government or, for that matter, in the High Court (at least until very recently). When I practised law in Victoria in the 1990s, no women had ever been appointed to the bench of the Supreme Court of Victoria (although that has changed recently too).
Comments