When newly elected Prime Minister Tony Abbott announced his cabinet in September this year, questions of sexism came to the fore across the national agenda.
Writing for the Sydney Morning Herald on 20 September 2013, columnist Waleed Aly took a closer look at the gibes surrounding Tony Abbott’s purported sexism, raising some serious questions not only about society’s approach to gender equality but about our liberal society’s approach to broader disadvantage.
Beyond the rather confronting recognition that there are now more women in Afghanistan’s cabinet than Australia’s, what does the one-woman cabinet tell us about our society?
It’s bigger than gender alone, writes Aly. It’s about a “broader philosophy… that calls into question our society’s ability to deal with disadvantage of just about any kind”.
Aly uses a perfect example from the mouth of the one woman to make the new cabinet, Bronwyn Bishop. “I never want to see affirmative action,” she said in defence of the Prime Minister’s appointments. “They didn’t choose me then, but I didn’t go away and whinge about it either. I just worked hard so they chose me subsequently.”
Ah yes of course. Anyone who claims disadvantage simply hasn’t worked hard enough, right Bronwyn? This, Aly argues, is the theory of success at the very heart of the Australian Liberal Party – and potentially our society at large. “Success is in the hands of the individual”.
Aly’s column echoes sentiments raised in Michael Apple’s Cultural Politics and Education (1996) in which Apple critically examines the neoliberal and neoconservative ideologies dominating American society where ‘market-based’ choice plans and ‘equal opportunity’ rule.
His reference to a quote from Jonathan Kozol perfectly illustrates the paradox of the liberal approach to success.
“…to ask an individual to break down doors that we have chained and bolted in advance of his arrival is unfair.” (Kozol in Apple 1996: 10)
Apple notes the term ‘disadvantaged’ actually implies that one’s problems are largely the result of bad luck and questions whether the term ‘oppressed’ is a better reflection of the oppressive structures that exist within our society.
At the crux of his critique is a concern for education and a plea that schooling be looked at ‘relationally’ and fundamentally connected to the systems of domination and exploitation in society.
In her essay on social justice in education, Sharon Gewirtz (2011) highlights that we can only create justice if we can identify and understand the systems and structures of society that are responsible for existing power relations.
Notions such as that raised by Bronwyn Bishop in Aly’s column ignore the structural aspects of society, which can stymie the disadvantaged and support the privileged.
With schooling a key component of society’s structure we must look at how the education system approaches the issue of advantage and disadvantage. Does it support and assist disadvantaged children and young adults or does it maintain privilege?
With Australia experiencing a flight to market-based private education, we could well argue that the commodification of the education system is increasingly polarising the advantaged and disadvantaged.
As Christina Ho argues in her paper on school micropublics, this polarisation should be a concern to anyone, with public schools at risk of being reduced to a “safety net system for the deeply disadvantaged” (Kaye 2011:2, in Ho 2011: 616).
References:
Aly, W. (2013). Abbot sexism gibes miss the point, The Sydney Morning Herald, retrieved 20 September 2013, from:
Apple, M.W. (1996). Cultural politics and education, New York, Teachers College Press
Gewirtz, S. (2011). Conceptualising social justice in education: mapping the territory. Journal of Education Policy, 13(4), 469-484
Ho, C. (2011). Respecting the presence of others: School micropublics and everyday multiculturalism. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 32(6), 603-619
I thoroughly enjoyed reading this post. While society does reflect the work and effort of individuals, I really appreciate the perspective you put forward from Kozol in Apple 1996 “…to ask an individual to break down doors that we have chained and bolted in advance of his arrival is unfair”. This is such an insightful perspective which can easily be assigned to a number of minority groups which suffer to achieve to their full potential due to the constricting nature of our society. While it is a lovely idea to believe we live in a world in which everyone is valued equally, this obviously isn’t the case.
ReplyDeleteThe point you raise regarding the new government cabinet and the lack of women appointed highlights this issue firmly at the forefront of our politics and media for scrutiny. If, as Aly suggests, “success is in the hands of the individual” then does this mean that women are not as successful as men? Or does it suggest that there are fewer women in politics than men? Or that women don’t work as hard as men? While none of these questions are easily answered, it is interesting to apply this theory of minority against the privileged white male, not just in terms of women’s issues, but also of a wider view of disadvantage amongst a range or groups and sub groups.
Posted by Emily Mitchell