No need to question new Premier Gladys Berejiklian’s ‘child status’

YOU know how you can tell there’s a new female leader on the scene? The sexist questions have already begun.

OPINION

AUSTRALIA’S first female Liberal Premier had barely been in the job an hour before she was asked to explain her childlessness.

Fronting the media for the first time after being appointed leader by her party this morning, Gladys Berejiklian was warned by a reporter that as an unmarried woman with no babies, she could face some sexism in the gig.

With more than a decade in public life and six years as a minister under her belt, Ms Berejiklian said she was prepared for all that came with life in the political spotlight.

But she probably didn’t expect the unique category of questions that only seem to strike women in positions of power to begin being fired so quickly.

When a member of the state parliament press pack pointed out that former prime minister Julia Gillard faced questions about her “marriage status and child status” and asked the new Premier if she was prepared the same, Ms Berejiklian fired back: “Sure, ask me one”.

“The obvious question is do you think this is a disadvantage politically because people have kids and they have families and people identify with that,” the reporter said.

Is that really the obvious question?

When former Premier Mike Baird last year announced policies to help empower women who were victims or at risk of domestic violence, it didn’t seem obvious to the media to question his authority on the issue because he wasn’t a woman.

There was little concern for members of the public who didn’t have children or who weren’t married and might struggle to identify with the retiring leader.

Former NSW Premier Mike Baird announced policies specifically for women but was never questioned over not being one. Picture: David Moir/AAP

When Malcolm Turnbull made it his first order of business as Prime Minister to announce a major investment in addressing violence against women across Australia he was praised rather than questioned over his lack of experience in being female.

And I’m certain Bob Carr was not similarly questioned over his lack of offspring moments after he took the same job as Ms Berejiklian in 1995.

These questions and the judgment that comes with them only seem obvious when it’s a woman in the job — just ask our “deliberately barren” first female PM.

The fact we consider these questions says that a certain section of Australians — including certain members of the media who perpetuate these sexist views — expect women to be able to do it all and have it all to demand their respect.

It says although we want to support women in positions of power and want to see them rise through the ranks, we still want them to fit the feminine, maternal stereotype they’ve worked to break free from.

NSW Opposition Leader Luke Foley seems to understand the advantage he now has over his political opponent who is set to suffer this criticism that he himself is immune from. During his own press conference on Monday he managed to twice drop the fact that he has three children himself.

Former prime minister Julia Gillard was constantly judged over her family and marriage status.

Plenty of women at the top of their game have sacrificed relationships and family plans in order to get where they are, while for others it wasn’t even an issue. Whatever the reason for their “marriage and child status” shouldn’t matter — they don’t need to have one.

Ms Berejiklian tackled her first sexist question perfectly: “Take me as you see me.”

“Not all of us can plan how our life turns out. I am a very happy person. If you asked me 20 years ago would my life look like this? It probably wouldn’t be how it looks like. But I am grateful for the opportunities I have had,” she said.

“I also want to say again, not because I have to but because I want to, the closest people in my life are my family. I am not going to judge anybody on their personal circumstances. I am here to govern.”