Male politicians are trading on their looks - lucky for them, they can afford to

For an ignominious moment in popular culture, US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was a sex symbol. The man who presided over the US invasion of Iraq, based on disinformation about Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction, and who never admitted to any serious failings in the decision, was a cover-boy.

In 2001, the American conservative magazine National Review featured a cartoon of Rumsfeld in a Betty Grable pose, with his back to the reader but his head coquettishly turning to face him/her.

“The Stud,” read the headline. “Donald Rumsfeld, America’s new pin-up,” was the write-off.

Peter Malinauskas pool photo attracted national attention.Credit: Twitter

The accompanying story claimed “Women confide that they have … well un-defense-policy-like thoughts about the secretary of defense.”

Fox called Rumsfeld a “babe magnet” and People magazine named him “one of the sexiest men alive”. The nickname “the Rumstud” was applied to him.

In 2007, reflecting on this strange conflagration of Rumsfeld-worship, American feminist and author Susan Faludi noted that after the 9/11 attacks, he had told the defence force that America would need more heroes. “The press, for its part, heeded Rumsfeld’s pronouncement by nominating him to the role,” Faludi wrote.

I don’t know if South Australia needs more heroes (who doesn’t, really?) but the election of new Labor Premier Peter Malinauskas came with a fair bit of heavy breathing.

Beauty is a form of power because it fascinates people and sometimes makes a fool of them. It was widely noted that the new Premier was handsome.

Those of us in states to the north, who might otherwise have glazed over at the election of another white-haired man to a state premiership, took more notice than usual.

In February, South Australia’s then opposition leader was photographed topless in a pool, showing off an athletic physique. “Peter Malinauskas was at the Adelaide Aquatic Centre to make a splash with a key ALP promise,” The Advertiser in Adelaide reported. “But after he got his shirt off, it wasn’t his policies people wanted to talk about.”

It’s what the kids call a flex.

Many have noted his good looks: South Australia’s new Premier, Peter MalinauskasCredit: Brett Hartwig 

Notably, the female Labor candidate who appeared with Malinauskas that day wore a rash-vest and kept her body submerged in the pool, at least while the cameras were out.

Federal Labor leader Anthony Albanese drew notice recently for an Australian Women’s Weekly feature for which he was photographed looking trim and steely. Albanese has lost 18 kilos over the past year or so. He has new glasses, new suits and new confidence.

It’s called a glow-up and voters do notice when it happens.

The beauty of male politicians is often remarked upon, without any risk that the intrinsic seriousness of the man is challenged.

Which voter – male or female – has failed to notice the good looks of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau? In 2011 (before he became party leader), Trudeau performed a charity striptease, so relaxed was he about being renowned for his face and physique. He only got down to his white singlet, and kept his trousers on entirely, but judging by the cheers of the women attending, they were happy enough.

When he became party leader, Trudeau’s political enemies tried to use the video of the striptease to discredit him. It didn’t work – but it did elicit a rush of new donations for the liver charity he had stripped for.

Trudeau, who was subsequently labelled a PILF (Google it), topped a list of “the hottest politicians in the world” compiled by the UK Mirror newspaper in 2015.

Others who made the list included former Mexican president Enrique Pena Nieto and former Italian prime minister Matteo Renzi.

It is impossible to search images of Bob Hawke and not see him, many times, photographed in nothing but his Speedos, and Tony Abbott was not shy of flesh-baring in the same vein.

Try as I might, I cannot think of any female equivalent, which is not to say there are no good-looking female politicians. Only that there are no good-looking female politicians who could afford to openly trade on their beauty, or even bare their bodies.

It’s a confusing patch of the gender equality wars - is it a good thing that men are being objectified in this small way, as women have been for centuries? Or is it yet another example of the barriers faced by female politicians?

Female politicians get so much grief for their hair, their clothes, their shoes, their demeanour (too smiley or not enough), their handbags (Maggie Thatcher’s was seen as a repository of power) and their earlobes (Julia Gillard’s were noted as large – suspiciously large).

It is easier for them to un-body themselves, pretending they don’t have any physical feminine attributes at all.

It can be discombobulating for some when they’re reminded female politicians do have bodies, In 2018, journalist Charles Wooley interviewed New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, who was pregnant, and he wondered aloud about the conception date of her unborn child.

“I have met a lot of prime ministers in my time,” Wooley said in the report. “But none so young, not too many so smart, and never one so attractive.”

It was true – Ardern is attractive.

But Ardern was reckoned to be even more attractive than she was young or clever, and no prime minister wants to be known for his or her looks above all other qualities. I cannot think of a situation where any male politician has been evaluated in this way.

Perhaps that’s why they can afford to play with their looks so lightly, knowing they will never be punished for them, knowing that any handsomeness they possess will form part of a suite of positive attributes, and will never threaten their standing with voters.

Twitter: @JacquelineMaley