Skip to main content
Part of complete coverage from

The speech every woman should hear

By Frida Ghitis, Special to CNN
October 19, 2012 -- Updated 1226 GMT (2026 HKT)
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • Fiery speech by Australia's leader slams a politician's newly found support of women
  • Frida Ghitis: Male candidates' promises to women usually forgotten after elections
  • Suddenly supporting women's issues is a hypocritical bid for votes, she says
  • Ghitis: Women must take claims with grain of salt and examine candidates' track records

Editor's note: Frida Ghitis is a world affairs columnist for The Miami Herald and World Politics Review. A former CNN producer and correspondent, she is the author of "The End of Revolution: A Changing World in the Age of Live Television." Follow her on Twitter: @FridaGColumns

(CNN) -- The fight against sexism has suddenly become all the rage among politicians. How curious. How timely. How suspiciously convenient.

It took one politician, a woman, to put it all in perspective. If you have not heard the speech from Prime Minister Julia Gillard on the floor of the Australian House of Representatives, do yourself a favor. This is one for the ages.

Nobody has unmasked political hypocrisy with such fire, with such passion, in a long, long time.

We have heard the poll-tested, calculated claims by politicians around the globe. We hear it in presidential debates in the United States, where the election may depend on the support of female voters, and we've heard it in places like Pakistan, where politicians want to benefit from the outrage over the shooting of 14-year-old Malala Yousufzai after assassins tried to kill her for defending every girl's right to an education.

Frida Ghitis
Frida Ghitis

In Australia, the political battle revolved around a very unique, rather strange, set of circumstances. But Gillard's words crystallized the source of the unease that hangs over so many people as they hear politicians courting them. How much can we believe what they say?

Much became clear after the speech in Canberra, when Gillard unloaded a sizzling rhetorical barrage on Tony Abbott, the leader of the opposition, who had presented a motion he claimed was motivated by his own support of women's equality.

Become a fan of CNNOpinion
Stay up to date on the latest opinion, analysis and conversations through social media. Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion and follow us @CNNOpinion on Twitter. We welcome your ideas and comments.



Gillard would have none of it. "I will not be lectured about misogyny by this man. I will not. Not now, not ever," she intoned, pointing directly at Abbott, who sat in his chair trying to keep a plastic smile on his face, no doubt hoping it would all end soon. But Gillard was just getting started.

Romney tells 'binders' of women anecdote

The Australian prime minister, glancing only occasionally at a sheet of notes, eviscerated her opponent's claim that he had a sincere interest in standing up for women. You could detect a brief wince of anguish in Abbott's tense brow when Gillard suggested "Let's go through the opposition leader's repulsive double standards."

She went on to list, one by one, instances that demonstrate a track record of disdain for women by the opposition leader. Abbott was claiming to be offended by crude, sexist text messages, sent by the speaker of the House, who happened to be a supporter of the prime minister. The speaker eventually resigned his position. But Gillard, to the consternation of some Australians, would not support Abbott's motion to fire him.

If Abbott thinks misogynists are not suited for high office, she said, he should take a piece of paper and write out his resignation. "If he wants to know what misogyny looks like in modern Australia, he doesn't need a motion in the House of Representatives," Gillard charged, "he needs a mirror."

Checkmate.

Gillard's now-famous "Misogyny Speech" became such a worldwide hit that publishing house Macquarie decided to update its definition of "misogyny." The old definition is "hatred of women." Macquarie said it will add a new meaning, "entrenched prejudice against women," reflecting the word's modern usage.

The speech became a hit because of its raw eloquence and visceral emotion. But it would not have ignited a fast-spreading fire if it had not touched flammable material. Gillard's words resonated because we have all heard hypocritical politicians make claims that have the tinny ring of untruth, an echo of political consultant and focus-group regurgitation.

The speech ... would not have ignited a fast-spreading fire if it had not touched flammable material.
Frida Ghitis

The phenomenon becomes more prevalent, not surprisingly, when elections approach. In Pakistan, for example, the country is preparing to hold elections this year. The attempt to kill Malala by the supremely misogynistic Pakistani Taliban came just in time for politicians to try to fuel their campaigns with popular sentiment.

The populist Imran Khan, a former cricket superstar who has entered politics, rushed to Malala's bedside and was quick to condemn the attempted murder, as were many politicians. But, like many others, he refused to blame the Taliban, even though the group openly admitted to the hit and vowed to try again to kill her, reaffirming its revolting anti-women ideology. A closer look at Khan's views, despite his show of support for Malala, indicates that he is unlikely to challenge the Taliban, even if that means sacrificing women's rights.

In the U.S., the last presidential debate came just after a Gallup poll showed Republican Mitt Romney tying President Obama in likely swing state votes from women. Obama had relied on an advantage with women to stay ahead in the polls. Not surprisingly, the two men came out prepared for a full-on joust for the women's vote.

By one count, the two mentioned women 30 times in the last debate, with Obama wrapping himself in his support for equal pay legislation and Romney making his much-maligned claim to have relied on "binders full of women" to find qualified candidates for high office while he was governor of Massachusetts.

Cardona: Romney's empty 'binders full of women'

I am not arguing that the "binders" are a fantasy, nor am I saying that Obama or Romney are sexist. What I do say is that, increasingly, what we hear from politicians is carefully calculated. It is not calculated for accuracy; it is calibrated for effect.

That means women, and those who want to see the realization of a vision of equality, of an end to sexism and misogyny, need to consume the words of politicians with a large serving of skepticism.

Every claim, every promise, must be checked against a track record to find whether it's true and whether it is a good predictor of what they would do after the election, when standing up for women's rights may not prove as timely and convenient as it does today.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Frida Ghitis.

ADVERTISEMENT
Part of complete coverage on
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 2156 GMT (0556 HKT)
Gloria Borger says the president should be leading the debate on balancing security vs. privacy.
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 2316 GMT (0716 HKT)
Alex Footman says he and a former co-worker successfully sued a movie studio over their experience as unpaid interns.
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 1729 GMT (0129 HKT)
Peter Bergen says the public record tends to cast doubt on the NSA's claim that its electronic surveillance has helped stop numerous plot.
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 1153 GMT (1953 HKT)
Fifty years ago, President Kennedy defined civil rights and equality as a moral issue. Patrick Kennedy says today's moral issue is that people with brain injuries and mental illness face stigma and inadequate treatment.
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 1947 GMT (0347 HKT)
The story of the boy bashed on social media after singing the National Anthem in mariachi costume is instructive.
June 16, 2013 -- Updated 1457 GMT (2257 HKT)
Bob Greene says the Lone Ranger rode into town, fought injustice and got out. He didn't stop to tweet that he just saved the day.
June 16, 2013 -- Updated 1625 GMT (0025 HKT)
Ruben Navarrette says that what many of us really want for Father's Day is an attitude adjustment for our kids.
June 17, 2013 -- Updated 1300 GMT (2100 HKT)
At the outset of his term, the new president of Iran, Hassan Rouhani, will confront a thicket of national and international challenges.
June 14, 2013 -- Updated 2058 GMT (0458 HKT)
Clifford Nass says talking to your car, even when you've got your hands on the wheel and eyes on the road, impairs your driving because it really confuses your brain.
June 15, 2013 -- Updated 1245 GMT (2045 HKT)
Paul Begala's not buying the argument that Gabriel Gomez represents a new version of Republicanism
June 14, 2013 -- Updated 1933 GMT (0333 HKT)
Alex Castellanos says Gabriel Gomez is an antidote to the stuffy GOP establishment that scares next-generation voters away.
June 13, 2013 -- Updated 2243 GMT (0643 HKT)
All across America, people are dying from bacterial infections that we used to be able to cure with antibiotics, says Helen Boucher.
June 14, 2013 -- Updated 1236 GMT (2036 HKT)
Nadia Bilchik writes how she grew up in a cocoon of white privilege in South Africa. But she grew to understand the horror of apartheid and the greatness of Nelson Mandela.
June 13, 2013 -- Updated 2056 GMT (0456 HKT)
Howard Dean and Christine Whitman say we must fix our pay-to-play political system by turning to public funding of elections.
June 12, 2013 -- Updated 1854 GMT (0254 HKT)
Ronald Deibert says unintended consequences of the NSA scandal will undermine U.S. foreign policy interests.
ADVERTISEMENT