Flat White

Gender quotas bite Labor hard

18 July 2022

9:00 AM

18 July 2022

9:00 AM

It is going to be extremely difficult to write this while maintaining an air of sympathy – so bear with me.

According to The Australian over the weekend, Annastacia Palaszczuk’s Queensland Labor government is set to ‘force’ (politely nudge?) three of its male MPs to resign so they can balance out the gender quotas in preselection.

What is it they say? Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

The alleged looming threat of coerced resignation is being made in line with the Labor Party’s ‘Affirmative Action policy’ – also known as gender discrimination when viewed in the daylight. How else could you describe a policy that advocates hiring and firing based upon gender (no – wait – do they mean ‘biological sex’?) instead of merit?

45 per cent of Labor preselection have to be women. No, Labor haven’t worked out how to define ‘women’ yet, but that won’t stop them writing policy referencing women.

The Australian names the potential unlucky gents as Jim Madden, Mark Furner, Stirling Hinchliffe, and Peter Russo. That’s four, but in the case of gender equality, the more ‘women’ the better.


‘All male MPs are affected by the Affirmative Action rule – all should be aware of that,’ said one MP.

Which begs the question, why does Anthony Albanese exist?

With all the quota girls padding out Labor’s ranks, it remains baffling that they chose a – how do we hear it phrased by the Left? Oh yes. A ‘stale, pale, male’ to lead the party… There is no point arguing on merit, experience, or hard work – as Labor have established, it’s all about the chromosomes in 2022, and Albanese has an errant ‘Y’ that no amount of Women’s Weekly makeovers can fix.

Unsurprisingly, several of the male MPs waiting for the ‘shoulder tap’ have chosen not to criticise the policy and instead insist that they are ‘hard working’ and ‘concentrating on their electorate’. It’s almost as if Labor MPs want something outdated like ‘merit’ to come to their rescue. Why are they fighting against the ‘greater good’? Do they ‘hate women’? Is that why they refuse to do the manly thing and step aside?

Kate Flanders, Labor Party secretary clarified the situation.

‘The rules are there to change the culture and they have we have a very proud record of increasingly female representation in the Parliament. It is about moving the culture forward and identifying great women who want to run in those winnable seats and so that is certainly something we will be aiming to do in the 2024 round.’

That said, the rule insists on 45 per cent so, when push comes to literal shove, three blokes are going to get shoved.

Meanwhile, in the real world, most women despise the very notion of ‘gender’ policies that reduce women to statistical requirements. It is a system that parachutes unqualified women into positions at the expense of more suitable candidates. At the same time, the women who deserve their roles are forever tarnished with the ‘quota girl’ suspicion.

It’s lose-lose for women, underpinned with a bit of extra resentment from men who (quite rightly) feel that it is wrong to award someone a job because they make the office ‘look right’ to meet some arbitrary virtue goal.

In this case, the Labor men deserve what they get. The party was happy to push ‘gender quotas’ as an election-winning (allegedly) campaign – so they have to live with it. Or retire with it, as the case may be.

As an aside, when are the media going to start calling out ‘positive discrimination’ and ‘affirmative action’ for what it is – racism, sexism, morally bankrupt and outdated discriminatory garbage…?

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.


Show comments
Close