The Buck Stops With Abbott On Sexism

Tony has to be minister for women.

It's a vitally important portfolio - Tony has to be absolutely sure that no women manage to sneak up through that glass ceiling. Hence the 'personal touch'.

Should there be a 'Minister for men'? Any opposition to this could be deemed as sexist. 

When I heard about the Abbott taking over as minister for women (and Indigenous) I briefly flirted with the same idea you are exploring here. However I don't think in the society it has just being in the centre (voiceless) is enough.

Remember history? We had a "Protector of Aborigines" for a long time whose main job was ensuring Indigenous people didn't get a say in their own fate. Abbott thinking he can be a "minister for women" is just paternalistic. We don't need to accompanied by a male everywhere for goodness sakes in 2013!

I hope you are right that he will be subjected to high levels of scrutiny from everyone even the women inside his own party. But they have been fairly silent on the lack of female ministers so I am not holding my breath :(

You'll find quite a few examples at http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Tony_Abbott , Kevin.

For example:  

"I think it would be folly to expect that women will ever dominate or even approach equal representation in a large number of areas simply because their aptitudes, abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons" 

or

“What the housewives of Australia need to understand as they do the ironing is that if they get it done commercially it’s going to go up in price and their own power bills when they switch the iron on are going to go up.”

or

"While I think men and women are equal, they are also different and I think it's inevitable and I don't think it's a bad thing at all that we always have, say, more women doing things like physiotherapy and an enormous number of women simply doing housework"

On the substantial question that Eva seeks to answer, though, I'm afraid I think Abbott will make use of his position vis a vis women to make sure that the agenda is completely ignored for the vast majority of his time in office. As the next election approaches, I suspect, Textor or another advisor will suggest he makes use of the position for some sort of momentous announcement to show his "cred" .  He'll then say "see!" and far too many will accept whatever the proposal is as reality, while most issues of real significance will simply be ignored.

Thanks Rod Hagen...I'm not an Abbott supporter or a Gillard/Rudd supporter...just a person who sees labels sometimes unfairly arttached to people in public life. Abbott's statement re Bernie Banton not having 'a pure heart' would have to go down as one of the most politically disastrous statements since 1900.

However, I would've liked to have received Eva C's inputs as she's a person of considerable substance, whom I've admired for many years.

That said let's deal with each of the above examples you've provided:

1. "I think it would be folly to expect that women will ever dominate or even approach equal representation in a large number of areas simply because their aptitudes, abilities and interests are different for physiological reasons" 

Based on evernts globally of the past say 100 years, I'd have to agree with Abbott. Women - thank the cosmos -- are far too smart to be part of the current variouis political cultures globally.

2. “What the housewives of Australia need to understand as they do the ironing is that if they get it done commercially it’s going to go up in price and their own power bills when they switch the iron on are going to go up.”

I simply don't undertstand what he means in this statement. Similar to the Banton statement, I'd reckon he'd retract this statement if he could.

3. "While I think men and women are equal, they are also different and I think it's inevitable and I don't think it's a bad thing at all that we always have, say, more women doing things like physiotherapy and an enormous number of women simply doing housework"

Are feminists decrying the central role of homemaker by quoting this stateme4nt against Abbott. Running the household is a crucial part of the success of our society.

In summmary, I reckon a lot of the Abbott hating people in Oz, are reacting to the absolute disaster that Gillard was as PM. She is a disgrace to our political establishment, overseeing the Newstart and single mothers debacle, the arse kissing of Oz's far right Zionists and the Home Insulation Program & the BER.

Kevin - you totally miss the problematic aspects of abbott's word usage and attitudes towards women.

Aptitudes, abilities, interests - this is a deterministic statement with the underlying belief that genetics, chromosomes, genitalia and gender completely control what people are capable of achieving with their lives.  It states that women are NATURALLY not good at some roles and naturally ARE good at others.  These areas of achievement are influenced by culture, environment, life chances, socio-economic status, ethnicity, family/sub-cultures, even the influences of dominant discourses within the media.  For example, studies show that physical appearance is more important for female identity than it is for masculine identity - this is a societal norm, nothing to do with anything remotely "natural".  The HUMAN brain, mind, body etc has inherent capacities and predispositions - the environment that it then grows up, matures and functions in - determines the rest. 

abbott completely misrepresents this, if he has influence over issues that are significant to women - he can never do a good job because he already places us all within certain parameters and possibilities rather than empowering us to determine our own.  Women are not in governmental positions due to someone like HIM not being inclusive, societal structures like family roles also segment up time/priorities differently but this does not automatically mean women are not CAPABLE of performing political roles in exceptional ways, just that government/society is not structured to include women/mothers in more diverse roles.

ironing affecting electricity prices - well, if this is a demonstration of abbott's understanding about supply-demand aren't we in trouble!  If this statement were true - perhaps abbott and all politicians should drive themselves to work rather than constantly have chauffeurs...afterall by abbott's logic, not doing things yourselves drives up prices - he could save the public purse a lot of money by not creating such a demand for chauffeurs! Or men could do the ironing rather than expecting women to do it and place equal value on the skills, time, interests of women that lie outside of male interests...

difference between men and women and this determining what each does best - this applies once again, to the "natural" abilities we each are alleged to possess - as above, not true at all and not an adequate justification for excluding women from politics.  The fact that abbott has entered PMship and only has one token women on the frontline of service illustrates that abbott and the LNP are more than happy to completely enable abbott's one-sided ideology and religious beliefs to influence government.  This is a grave concern.

What is even more of a concern, is that in our modern age and alleged "democracy" how is this sort of thing being allowed to occur?  Something is drastically WRONG here.  And it is also WRONG with feminists who are failing in their self-assigned role of emancipation for women.  Or are there just no feminists in the Liberal party?  Anyone who has a daughter should be really worried!

fightmumma:  

Sorry but I'm not convinced at all by your reasoning, as the argumentsyou provide are cyclical i.e. you're not really making valid points, just moving some generalisations around the page. with no supporting data.. It's the king of writing in which The Spectator Australia specialises.

Also, you say: 

"...difference between men and women and this determining what each does best - this applies once again, to the "natural" abilities we each are alleged to possess - as above, not true at all and not an adequate justification for excluding women from politics".

This statement is nonsensical. Which women are being excluded from politics by Tony Abbott?

opinion experts should moncler certainly target precisely what VERY temps ugg pas cher the particular oocysts depart this life particularly. Plus everything that VERY ugg soldes temps the actual Toxoplasma Gondii drops dead inside it personal in concert being (Discluding any time inside of ugg pas cher it is really cyst). Together with just what exactly ACTUAL environment that latent Cysts and Lancel Pas Cher also tachyzoite's die-off. Avoid, Nichelle Nichols moncler is crucial. air max Uhura stirred me personally being partner (a white colored lady, however hey). The girl is ugg scarpe tough, certified not to mention versitile. An extraordinary Tony Doudoune Canada Goose adamowicz appeared to be worth to make sure you nike air max Minnelli with regard to splitting the particular boxoffice moncler log around the louboutin Winter weather Gardening Cinema moncler through 1973 on her behalf onewoman Doudoune Canada Goose present. Inside 1977, Lancel Pas Cher your woman go back towards the Broadway cycle longchamp pas cher within the starring factor on the Kander and additionally Ebb music The actual React, which is why this girl appeared to be honored the woman's 1 / 3 Tony a2z. canada goose Typically the play was basically aimed