Germaine, you broke our hearts

Germaine Greer in 1970.

Germaine Greer in 1970. Photo: Getty

The last thing you would expect Germaine Greer, icon and iconoclast, to be is predictable. Or, even more bizarrely, predictably sexist.

What you can be sure of, in our rapidly spinning world, is that once a woman has climbed to any political height, people will be standing below with binoculars, checking out her frock and her shoes. Women of all dots and stripes, in all professions, know they will be judged on their appearance; so much so that it is frequently considered a measure of their success. This is predictable.

But you don’t expect this from a brilliant woman who has spent decades as an intellectual heretic and counter cultural mutineer. You don’t expect Germaine Greer, global feminist icon, to be now championing a debate about the size of a female leader’s bottom, or the cut of her clothes.

First, she said, unprompted on Q and A that Gillard had a “big ass” and had to “get over it” and dress accordingly. Then last weekend, she devoted an entire article to Gillard’s need to tailor, or discard her jackets. In doing so, she was simply upholding hoary clichés about women in politics. Cliches feminists have hammered with their fists for a century: that they win votes with posteriors, not policies, that their bodies should be the subject of public debate, that it is legitimate to distract from policy arguments with discussion of the pleats in a female leader’s jackets. Greer has previously expressed support for our struggling first female PM, so her words are just jarring, and weird.

“A jacket that rides up and creases between the shoulder blades is worse than no jacket at all,” she wrote. The consequence of such an ill-fitting garment, she suggested, could be loss of government: “If Labour [sic] is not to be annihilated in the next election, something has to give… I think Australians are big enough to cope with the sight of their female Prime Minister in shirt-sleeves.”

Really? Do we care that much, if at all? Do we think it has not occurred to Gillard that people notice what she wears? I hadn’t spent a second thinking about her jackets before Greer brought it up: I was more worried about the HSU and the carbon tax. Surely it is more relevant to wonder if Australians are big enough to cope with the sight of a woman in power. Not the sight of her backside.

What is perhaps most odd about this torrent from Greer is how retro and unoriginal it was: in the 1970s and ‘80s, tabloid newspapers frequently ran features on the style and clothing of women in politics, usually quoting dubious “consultants” who advised “ladies of the house” to have makeovers to woo voters, give them more authority, or soften their edge in an endless search for “the woman inside the politician”. In 1984, in an article about the supposed poor fashion sense of women politicians, a style consultant told the Melbourne Herald “poor image and dress sense hold women politicians back.” In the right wrap dress, we could rule the world! If only we knew which one.

The Australian media has a long history of telling women to embrace a new look when their political careers careen; not only is this insulting, they don’t work. We prefer the authentic to the contrived.

In 1991 former Democrat Janet Powell, who was called “Senator Sensible”, agreed to be made over by a paper – and filmed by 60 Minutes – when her leadership was under threat. Her sin? She looked “like a suburban mum.” (And looking like a mother is something we should all fear and avoid, of course, especially mothers. The horror!) She was still dumped from the leadership. Yet former Victorian Premier Joan Kirner was never more popular when she shook off a disastrous election result, squeezed into leather pants and sang Joan Jett lustily on national TV; flipping the bird to cartoonists who lampooned her weight and caricatured her as a housewife.

Gillard, too, will be more admired for being herself, the self that was once real before it was packaged and dubbed “the real Julia”. The less she listens to people badger her about a creased jacket, the more we will like her. Her greatest challenge is to try to convince us she is still real, and not distracted by a thousand clueless consultants, who seem to have lost the stethoscope that might lead them to the heart of their party.

It’s hard to be truly outraged by Greer though. Hordes of younger women who came after her now expect to disagree with her, while respecting her importance. Bombs she threw cleared space we now walk on. You only have to hark back to her once incendiary rhetoric to see how she stoked a fire in the gut of a generation. She urged liberation, not caution.

“If a woman never lets herself go,” she wrote, “how will she ever know how far she might have got? If she never takes off her high-heeled shoes, how will she ever know how far she could walk or how fast she could run?” Run to freedom, you’d hope, or to territory previously occupied just by men. Not just to the tailor, the treadmill, and a really large mirror.

 Julia Baird is the author of Media Tarts: How the Australian Media Frames Female Politicians. Follow her on Twitter @bairdjulia

 

 

 

 

114 comments so far

  • Didn't you know Greer just likes to hear the sound of her own self talking? In particular, she likes to get away with saying what nobody else can. Didn't she write a book about pretty boys? Call that politically correct? Now she wants to be more sexist than a misogynist. That's not what I call a feminist. I call it celebrity. Make her happy - put a camera in front of her; even better, write a column about her.

    Commenter
    wakeuptoher
    Date and time
    May 09, 2012, 9:09AM
    • Too right!
      What I find interesting though is the surprise over the focus on the PM's dress sense. If John Howard had worn a particularly ostentatious tie, or white patent leather shoes to parliament, you can bet the media would've had something to say. But Howard wore a suit and tie everyday he was in parliament. So do the vast majority of male politicians. Society has told men to conform and put on the ole business leash (the tie). Women have more freedom in what they choose to wear, but this of course is a double-edged sword.
      The solution is unfortunate, if women in power don't want to be judged for their dress sense, they might have to start dressing like men do: wearing the same type of boring conformist thing everyday...

      Commenter
      Heisenberg
      Location
      Townsville
      Date and time
      May 09, 2012, 9:38AM
    • @Heisenberg SAY WHAT??? Gillard has been dressing as close to a male unfiorm as possible - and this sort of attack is what she's gotten because of it!
      And it was Germaine Greer herself who has always championed the idea that women should *not* be impersonating men to get ahead. This has been the crux of every one of Greer's arguments since she first started writing.

      Commenter
      Sheba
      Date and time
      May 09, 2012, 9:52AM
    • Germaine Greer is just struggling for relevance so needs to say something. She undoubtedly had some good points back in her day, though I expect most intelligent women have now recognized that a lot of what she sold them was just feminist crap and was definitely no route to happiness.

      Commenter
      rkw
      Date and time
      May 09, 2012, 11:20AM
    • Are you kidding? Did you guys even buy the paper and read the article?

      FYI, it was printed on the back page of the Life & Style supplement. It was not printed in the political section of the paper. You don't read Life & Style articles to bone up on the budget.

      Get some context before you start spewing forth vitriol people.

      If you had actually read the article with an open mind you would have come to the conclusion that GG was advising Gillard to just be herself and not listen to the people who are advising her on what to wear. Quite simple really.

      And anyway, don't you remember the constant focus on Keating's wearing of expensive Italian suits? I am sure his minders were advising him to wear locally tailored suits but he was his own fashion person. That was GG's point.

      Commenter
      Wal
      Location
      Bush
      Date and time
      May 09, 2012, 12:39PM
    • It has been a very long time since anyone listened to Germaine; "The Female Eunuch" was probably it really and that is now what, 40 years ago. The poor thing will grab at any vehicle for a little bit of attention.
      It's quite tragic really. More so than even Julia's dress sense.

      Commenter
      crowsfeet
      Location
      Melbourne
      Date and time
      May 09, 2012, 3:57PM
  • As much as I like Germs, she is at heart a polemicist who spouts opinions not necessarily informed by anything beyond her own wind-bagery. Her writings are an undergraduate mish-mash of bravado and conjecture, and her comments should be seen in the same light.

    Commenter
    distopia
    Date and time
    May 09, 2012, 9:11AM
    • Good article Julia. Your piece may help me (and other sassy fashion/lifestyle writers) put a moral injunction on Greer to stop her encroaching on our territory.
      http://shassyandthecity.tumblr.com/post/20186879790/notcoolgermaine

      Commenter
      Shassy
      Location
      Sydney
      Date and time
      May 09, 2012, 9:14AM
      • Feminism is many things, but lately it seems to have a real split personality: one side is all bluster and bravado Germaine-style, and the other is at work behind the scenes achieving real gains for women. Naturally the latter has a lot of runs on the board but the former has only alienated people and achieved very little.

        Commenter
        mere male
        Date and time
        May 09, 2012, 9:31AM
        • I'm undecided about Greer. She may be very intelligent but these days she frequently comes out with foolish drivel. Just shows she's human after all, so time she stepped down off her pedestal.

          Commenter
          Tasha
          Date and time
          May 09, 2012, 9:33AM

          More comments

          Make a comment

          You are logged in as [Logout]

          All information entered below may be published.

          Error: Please enter your screen name.

          Error: Your Screen Name must be less than 255 characters.

          Error: Your Location must be less than 255 characters.

          Error: Please enter your comment.

          Error: Your Message must be less than 300 words.

          Post to

          You need to have read and accepted the Conditions of Use.

          Thank you

          Your comment has been submitted for approval.

          Comments are moderated and are generally published if they are on-topic and not abusive.