Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Australia Gets Its First Female Prime Minister

Posted by samzenpus on from the sheila-in-chief dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Julia Gillard has been elected unopposed to the Labor leadership, seizing power in a bloodless Parliament House coup after Prime Minister Kevin Rudd decided not to contest this morning's leadership ballot. Ms. Gillard will now be sworn in as Australia's first female prime minister. Emerging from this morning's meeting, she said she felt 'very honored' and said she would be making a statement shortly. Treasurer Wayne Swan now steps up as deputy prime minister. He was also elected unopposed."

7 of 419 comments (clear)

  1. "First Female PM" is not news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The news value here being a Prime Minister's gender is condescending to Julia Gillard as a politician.

    The news value should be "Aus PM changes: Will she drop Conroy?"

    1. Re:"First Female PM" is not news. by KermodeBear · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sick of "First X Elected To Whatever Office." Haven't we moved past this yet? Ideas matter. Gender, ethnicity, heredity do not.

      --
      Love sees no species.
    2. Re:"First Female PM" is not news. by Abcd1234 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately no, we haven't. Sadly, we don't yet live in a utopia. Most power structures are dominated by men, racism still exists, etc, etc.

      *Should* this be news? No. But the sad fact is, it is.

    3. Re:"First Female PM" is not news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Really?

      You know that Australian political parties outside of minority parties have had a habit of dumping a senior female politician into a dog's breakfast role so she can lose an election? (I strongly doubt this is the case here though.)

      What exactly is newsworthy about "the first woman to..."? The gender balance in women pre-selected for electable seats is newsworthy. The gender balance in parliament by party is newsworthy. The first woman to play blurnsball isn't newsworthy, and it is a trite encapsulation of the idea that sexism is about extraordinary individuals, and not every day discrimination against every individual member of a group. Julia Gillard's particular political background, her association with the union movement and her strengths as a minister, are more newsworthy than the contents of her undies.

      You know, because Julia Gillard won a Labor caucus vote today, my professional female colleagues suddenly received pay status and seniority top ups to the level of equivalently employed males. In addition, as a result, more women applied for STEM undergraduate positions, post-graduate research, and achieved professional outcomes in line with their performance at University and at work, both institutions suddenly began dismantling their cultures of aggressive hyper-masculinism.

      Don't invest Gillard with symbolic imagery: she's a competent minister and ought to be a competent Prime minister. But this doesn't represent the culmination of the day to day struggles of millions of powerful, skilled, energetic women around Australia to achieve in their own lives.

    4. Re:"First Female PM" is not news. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, for fuck's sake. Do you really think the only difference between the sexes is "plumbing"? Stop listening to feminists and observe the world around you once in a while.

    5. Re:"First Female PM" is not news. by warrigal · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Like the first female President of the United States wouldn't be news? Like the first black President of the United States wasn't news?

  2. "BUT SHe'S UNELLECTED!! BLAAAAHH!!11!!!!!!" by brendan.hill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This argument makes me want to kill myself.

    Who cares that she was unelected? You voted for a party, not an individual, you moron. The policies of the party are unlikely to change significantly under Julia. The party leader can and is elected or negotiated) by the party, not the public.

    I mean are people really this fucking stupid? I'll give you a hint - yes they are.

    While I'm ranting, there's another thing I hate. I hate this ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wf3KovsW1Zo Actually I love the ad, it's friggin' hilarious. What I hate is the fact that this is the quality of election campaigning which political advisors think is worth engaging in. I hate this because this indicates that this is the sort of thing people are persuaded by when they decide who to vote for. People are persuaded more by a cute, idiotic cartoon, than actual political records, history and peformance. Those people are fucking stupid.

    I mean think about it - Kevin was replaced mostly because he was unpopular with voters, and Julia gives Labor a better chance at the next election. This in itself proves the point - despite things not being significantly different under Julia, this change of leader will sway people's votes. WHY SHOULD IT?! It shouldn't, but it does.

    Basically I hate the way democratic politics works, it's crap. And I hate stupid people. Stupid people shouldn't have this much influence.

    -Brendan