Kim Beazley elected Chair of Australian War Memorial…

Australian War Memorial Media Release The Honourable Kim Beazley AC has been appointed…

Gallic Rebuke: France and the US Rules-based Order

Gérard Araud was not mincing his words. As France’s former ambassador to…

Floods of Challenges: The Victorian Election Saga of…

By Denis Bright Victorians rejected the instability of minority government in favour of…

Julian Assange and Albanese’s Intervention

The unflinching US effort to extradite and prosecute Julian Assange for 18…

Virtual tourists can now teleport back 600 million…

University of South Australia Media Release Fancy donning a VR headset and taking…

The Right is toxic: what next for conservatives?

The international right is cynical and dangerous. It is crucial we look…

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt !

The jury of eight women and four men have retired to consider…

To be truthful, "sorry" is a word so…

When you think there isn't much to write about in politics, the…

«
»
Facebook

Julie Bishop and the privilege of not self-identifying as a feminist

Originally published on http://polyfeministix.wordpress.com/

Is standing up and proclaiming to be a non-feminist a sign of personal success, or is it an insular subconscious privileged rejection or blindness to the existing failures in our system that still affect women in Australia today? How does the absence of self-identifying as a feminist affect policy issues at Government level?

Julie Bishop, MP & Foreign Minister, only woman on the front bench in the Australian Liberal (conservative, neo-liberal, right-wing) Government stood in front of the National Press Club on Wednesday and declared that she was not a feminist. She doesn’t reject the term, but she feels no need to self-describe herself that way. Her main argument was that she doesn’t define her success or failures through a prism of gender. Bishop also does not acknowledge the glass ceiling and says for her, she ‘will work hard and set her mind to it and if it comes off that is great.‘ If it doesn’t, she will try to understand if she was ‘competent enough or whether she worked hard enough or if the breaks went her way.’ She doesn’t look at this as gender specific.

Julie Bishop also spoke of feminism in the past tense, the role that it (feminist movement) has played, ’the barriers they faced and the challenges they had to overcome. This further re-enforces her position that feminism is no longer a necessity in today’s society. That we somehow have all ‘made it’

If we contextualize Julie Bishop’s stance of non-identification as a feminist, we need to understand her position in society. Julie Bishop is a white woman, raised in South Australia, went on to study law, practiced law, became a partner in a law firm at 26, married a property developer and has had relationships with a senator and former Lord Mayor (source: JulieBishop.com.au).

Is it justified to say that she holds this view, because she is a woman submersed in an environment of privilege?

Julie Bishop doesn’t believe it is a big deal. However, as a woman in Australia, I feel it is a big deal for any politician not to identify as feminist. They are the policy makers. It is their ideas, beliefs and experiences that lead them to policy decisions. Even people who are from positions of privilege attempt to engage with women from all walks of life, so they develop an understanding of barriers, discrimination, injustice and inequities women face and take a feminist position and advocate for equality for women. If someone doesn’t truly value equality for all women and identify as a feminist – someone who advocates for equality for women, then where does this leave us in terms of policy development, towards a more equitable future?

One of the main themes I heard in Julie Bishop’s narrative that I found concerning, was that feminism is irrelevant as because it is ‘all about her’ She never spoke of other women, only her own personal situation. Feminism is about inclusivity of all women.

If Julie Bishop could de-contextualize herself from her personal situation, upbringing, background and privilege; I wonder if she was another women in another situation, would she self-identify as a feminist?

Would Julie Bishop as an Indigenous woman, when faced with cuts to Indigenous Legal Aid Services, contemplate a future of staying in a violent situation, because maybe she didn’t work hard enough?

Would Julie Bishop as a teenager, faced with pregnancy discrimination and terminated from her traineeship, self attribute blame that maybe she wasn’t competent enough?

Would Julie Bishop as a woman returning from maternity leave, and missing out on training and development opportunities still not acknowledge the glass ceiling?

Would Julie Bishop as a woman and a victim of rape in our justice system, experiencing accusatory questioning and double the length of questioning than for other assaults, or as an Indigenous woman experience significantly worse questioning, with racist imputations being made in court – would she still not look at this through the ‘prism of gender?’

Would Julie Bishop as a woman working in two casual jobs, in a lower paid traditional woman’s field of work and experiencing non-secure work and a gender pay gap of 17% still truly believe that the feminist movement should still be spoken of in the past tense?

Would Julie Bishop as a woman seeking Asylum and fleeing from sex slavery, rape, sexual abuse and attack, fear of honour killings, female genital mutilation, domestic abuse, emotional abuse, one-child policies, discrimination due to sexual orientation or feminist political activism, children being under threat, general religious restrictions on women, sexual harassment, denial of education, forced marriages, slavery, trafficking, and imprisonment – and then sent back to that situation, due to poor policy on the processing of women and the legitimate attempts to understand their history and claim for asylum, still shrug and reflect on “if the breaks went her way?”

Would Julie Bishop as a retired woman discovering that she has substantially less superannuation than her male counterparts due to breaks in work, lower paid work and casualisation of work; or as an indigenous woman realise that as one of 40% of Indigenous women, who actually has no superannuation at all – still not feel the need to self-identify as a feminist and advocate to right this wrong?

Does Julie Bishop, as Julie Bishop reflect that 64% of law graduates are women, however only 22% of women hold senior positions in law firms. Only 16% of women are on the bench in the Federal Court of Australia. Does she truly believe that all of these women simply just did not work hard enough?

Does Julie Bishop, as Julie Bishop try to understand if there are inequities within the Australian Liberal Party for pre-selection of candidates, such as questions about parental and marital status? Or does she truly believe that she is the only woman of calibre and of suitable merit in the Liberal Party, capable of a position on the front bench?

Does Julie Bishop also stand with the Prime Minister and Minister for Women, hand on her heart and truly believe that “Women do not suffer legal discrimination in Australia?”

I see Julie Bishop’s announcement that she does not self-identify as a feminist a huge gap in policy decision making in Australia. Increasing the representation of women in Parliament should lead to a new perspective and a diversity of contributions to policy-making and to priorities of development, and it gives the female population a role in deciding the future of their country and the rights and opportunities for their gender. However, if one is not in touch with the inequities present in contemporary society for all Australian women, policy development towards equity will be very slow and still permeated with male voices and perspective.

Many people have touted Labor of late as ‘Liberal-Lite’ however, this is an example of a very stark contrast between the Liberal National Party and the Australian Labor Party. The Australian Labor Party has a policy platform on equality for women in Australia. They understand that equality for women is not only good for the economy, but essential for the progress of our country. Recently in my hometown, Bill Shorten gave a very powerful speech on the necessity of equality for women. Tim Watts, Member for Gellibrand as a male politician, advocates very strongly on domestic violence issues, as does Claire Moore. These are only two notable MP’s amongst many. Similarly, the Greens also have a strong platform for women, with Senator Waters a very proactive advocate for women.

What we hear on the Liberal’s side of the fence in terms of equality for women is silence and symbolic gestures from the only woman on the front bench, that ‘feminism is in the past’ and “is not a useful term today.’

As former Prime Minister Mr. Keating famously said about Tony Abbott (and I’ll extend to the team he leads) – “God Help Us, God Help Us!”

Note:

A) The sources for the claims for legal discrimination and discrimination by default in this post, can be found here

B) This post is not intended to take away from or de-legitimize any of Julie Bishop’s personal achievements or successes,
but to decontextualise her position, as a women in a position of privilege, to attempt to challenge her position on feminism and what it means for our country.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

 366 total views,  2 views today

19 comments

Login here Register here
  1. Lady Di (@DiGranger)

    Julie Bishop and Michaela Cash have both come out with similar statements. It fits with this version of the Liberals. If they support and/or promote feminism it would declare the Abbott position of sexism and misogyny. they are simply towing the party line, which is very, very sad. OR, the alternate position is they don’t see that those before them paved the way for their current successes and that too is sad — “how soon we forget” … it was in Julie Bishops era that married women had to leave the public service …

  2. Terry2

    ‘She doesn’t reject the term, but she feels no need to self-describe herself that way.’

    I have some sympathy for Julie Bishop as I have always understood that my personal belief system would normally categorize me as an atheist but I choose not to be identified in that way : I don’t reject the term but I feel no need to self-describe myself in that way.

  3. mark delmege

    Does it matter what she says? Apparently not, she can lie and lie and lie about foreign events and still have her tyres pumped by a fawning MSM – and the voting public is, for the most part, non the wiser as they are fed endless streams of bullshit to justify what a former ozzie diplomat referred to as our ‘governments’ satrap status.

  4. Nick

    Julie Bishop is nothing more than a genetic accident. She could have quite easily have grown up in a poor household with no access to anything and I’m sure her views would be vastly different. Once again we see how out of touch the privileged truly are….

  5. Kaye Lee

    There is a difference Terry. People can’t look at you, tell you are an atheist, and treat you differently because of it. A bank manager won’t refuse you a loan on the basis of your atheism whereas they refused to consider my wage because I was “married and of child-bearing age”. You won’t be refused entry to public bars and snooker rooms. You won’t be the victim of forced marriage or genital mutilation because you are an atheist.

    Women around the world need our protection and advocacy. Feminism recognises that for many women self-determination and equal opportunity is an unattainable dream.

    My view is that we all must be feminists to help those who still remain enslaved.

    As Jamila Rizvi reminds us

    “Women still earn around 80 cents for every dollar that men earn over a lifetime. And this isn’t just about who has the bits that make the babies. Australian women earn less from the very first year after they graduate from university and TAFE.

    Women still carry the burden of around two thirds of unpaid work and caring duties.

    Women are almost 51 per cent of the population and yet we hold less than 30 per cent of elected positions in the federal Parliament. We hold 8 per cent of board directorships and 10 per cent of executive management positions.

    Nearly one in five of us will experience sexual assault, one in three will experience some kind of family or domestic violence in our lifetimes.

    We earn less, we are heard less and we are hurt more.

    And all of this pales in comparison, to the women around the world who still do not share the basic rights, safety, freedoms and equalities that here in Australia we all take for granted.”

  6. audioio

    Nice post, Trish. But your questions 2, 3, 6 and 9 would be meaningless to her because they relate to children. She is, after all, deliberately barren.

    (Don’t look at me like that. If it was good enough for Gillard…)

  7. Trish Corry

    I don’t expect Julie is any of the items above. That was the point of de-contextualising her personal situation and position.

  8. Blanik

    Julie Bishop is not worth any discussion. However, nice one audioio. Thank you.

  9. Kerri

    Or does she truly believe that she is the only woman of calibre and of suitable merit in the Liberal Party, capable of a position on the front bench?

    Look at this through the prism of psychology. If she doesn’t see herself as a feminist then that means she is equal to the men and better than other women. In this self congratulatory miasma she elevates her worth in her eyes and the eyes of the misogynists she serves. It doesn’t say much for her “friends” like Michaelia Cash.

  10. M-R

    Only a smug person could say that – someone who is absolutely sure of her position.Someone who didn’t have to fight for it (as you say).
    Here’s hoping the rug is pulled out from under her feet in 2016. (I would say ‘praying’ but that I don’t.)

  11. Margaret McMillan

    The women of the western world have made significant changes to their lives through feminism but even if we had achieved all we need to in Australia we would still need feminists. Someone has to fly the flag for those women around the world who are imprisoned by discrimination for whatever reason, social or religious. Who better to champion the rights of poor uneducated women than women from a (relatively) wealthy, educated country such as ours.
    I am by no means suggesting that we can do the job for them, but we should be prepared to support them.

  12. Kaye Lee

    I so agree Margaret. The selfishness of those who have reaped the benefits of feminism yet who refuse to fight for those who haven’t makes me angry. We truly have become a selfish nation where “I’m alright Jack and bugger the rest of ya” has become the attitude.

  13. Matthew Oborne

    As a woman Julie Bishop is in a position to promote what are the widely held conservative views on women without too much backlash so she does just that.

  14. Andrea Kirby

    Given that the gender pay gap means that many women are now working for free until the end of the year or coming back from maternity leave, I was once told, you can’t have that role as you are coming back from maternity leave too late, I think it is appalling that all women and men do not stand up and self identify as ‘feminists’

    And for a politician, and indeed the only woman in a leadership role within Australia’s current government, to come out and say it, is diabolical.

    I have worked in law firm’s and seen discrimination take place against women both direct and indirect. In HR, you are faced with dealing with it every day.

    Another reason why this government will never get my vote.

  15. vivienne29

    Thank you Kaye Lee for your comment – very well said and so bloody right.

  16. Callie Ge

    The stupid woman obviously has no idea what feminism is , no , she is no feminist, she still sucks up & panders to the males in her party to give her her social standing & her identity as a woman.
    She needs to read this stuff
    everydaysexism.com

  17. aravis1

    Absolutely, Kaye Lee. But I believe Bishop is simply grovelling to the Party. She hopes for the PMship. She is using these occasions to proclaim her adherence to the noxious principles of the LNP. She should probably be ignored. Feminists really – no, women, all women – do not need her. We need her to be gone, with all her male colleagues.

  18. Kaye Lee

    Whilst female Liberal politicians tell us that feminism is a dirty word, Corey Bernardi, at a Senate inquiry into domestic violence, told representatives of the state’s oldest women’s refuge they were not “experts” and there were times it was appropriate for a man to put his partner in a headlock.

    http://m.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/putting-a-woman-in-a-headlock-sometimes-justified-cory-bernardi-tells-domestic-violence-inquiry/story-fnn8dlfs-1227115178445?nk=69964e90a4dce85133669712a73d1a34

  19. ROY EDWARDS

    I have a somewhat simplistic, possibly overly, view that she is self-grooming to become the replacement for Abbott in the not too distant future. Malcolm Turnbull is, perhaps somewhat too ‘nice’ for this current climate of greedy self opinionated Liberals and Joe Snowball Hockey is……….not much at all really, he simply IS and has already been overlooked by all and sundry inside and out of the Liberal Cabinet.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
%d bloggers like this: