The Daily Telegraph recently ran an article claiming that Peta Credlin is under consideration as the next Sex Discrimination Commissioner.
The role has been vacant for five months now, mainly because of petty internal squabbles and power grabs over a role the government evidently doesn’t take very seriously. And, really, why would they? It’s not as if sexual harassment and discrimination is a problem for anyone who routinely wears a blue suit and tie to work.
For those of us who do care about gendered discrimination, the role is important.
Elizabeth Broderick did an outstanding job, and the fact that she has not yet been replaced is yet another ball dropped by a government that appears to think addressing the issues that primarily affect women needs nothing more than a placatory pat on the head and a white ribbon badge.
Which is why Credlin, if she were willing to accept the role, would be a brilliant choice.
She was a polarising figure in the Abbott government, because she was determined, forceful, outspoken and utterly unwilling to back down in the face of criticism.
Great. Sounds perfect to me.
I don’t want the sex discrimination commissioner to be nice or genteel. I want her to be fierce and uncompromising. I want her to be utterly unapologetic about her role. I want her to refuse to placate or submit. I want her to someone who cannot be intimidated or belittled. I want her to be a woman men are frightened of confronting.
She would be divisive, possibly even antagonistic. She would almost certainly get people off side. And the backlash she’d get is something I wouldn’t wish upon anyone. But the idea that the Sex Discrimination Commissioner shouldn’t do those things smacks of the “couldn’t you just be a bit nicer” attitude so often directed at women when they speak strongly about issues that matter to them. Where men are praised for being powerful and determined, women are told to “calm down” and “stop being so aggressive”.
If the stories about Credlin being the driving force behind Abbott’s polices are true, then her political views are not something most Australians found workable. But one of the few times she spoke publicly about her role and her understanding of the barriers women face she was succinct, powerful and on point:
You will want to have women like me in politics, you will want to have women like me sitting in seats of authority, whether it’s department or writing policy documents or if it’s in the media.
If I was a guy, I wouldn’t be bossy, I’d be strong.
If I was a guy I wouldn’t be a micromanager, I’d be across my brief, or across the detail.
You want women in places where they can make a difference. Half the policy in this country is for us, but only about a tenth is by us.
And if you do stand up and put women in the epicentre of decision making, whether it’s board rooms, government boards, politics, cabinet rooms wherever. If you don’t have women there, we will not exist.
I refused to be defined by insider gossip from unnamed sources when no one has the guts to put their name to it.
And if you’re a cabinet minister or a journalist and you’re intimidated by the chief-of-staff of the prime minister then maybe you don’t deserve your job.
I want that woman speaking on behalf of women in Australia. The one who has sat on the front lines of male dominated push-back and refused to give in, the one who said publicly she would “never see someone go through a tough time that I lived without trying to make contact”.
Because whatever else you might doubt about Credlin, you’d never doubt that she’d stand firm on what needed to be done. And that, to my mind, is something we need to see as an admirable quality in anyone, regardless of gender.