The author seems to know all about “men”, (although she is not one of them), and typically she says nothing positive about men, and typically she comes from a university, which are typically training students to think negatively of men also.

The idea that men vote for women based on their sex appeal is stupid beyond all comprehension. I think only a male hate feminist would think of such a thing.

I can’t think of any female politician that I find sexually appealing, yet I have voted for quite a few female politicians in the past, and I would think this would be the case with most other men also.

HRS,

You make the same old mistake that so many men (and women) make in debates about women’s issues – you think they are all about men. With such a male-centric view of women’s struggle for equality, it’s assumed that if women try to analyse the ways in which sexual politics impedes their progress, they (women) are both blaming their lot on men and expecting men to fix it.

This is not the case. All the huffing and puffing about man-hating feminism takes away from women their right to own their struggle for equality – something which has to be won by women; it will never, ever be ‘granted’ by men.

Having said that, I tend to agree with you that people – male or female – don’t vote for female politicians based on their sex appeal. I suspect it’s quite the opposite. However, this is precisely why the perennial focus on women’s sex appeal or lack thereof – without a corresponding focus on men’s – is a gender power game. It simultaneously empowers women (by lavishing attention on them) and disempowers them (by creating a sense of ongoing discomfort in being voyeuristically assessed). The end result is confusion – not just for women, but for society in general

Is it sex appeal or personality that is the issue. because for every example the article gives for a woman and the examples are brilliant Munroe was angel/whore; in Minogue it is child/woman; in Gillard it is strine/smart; and in McKew it is competence/charm it is easy to think of similar examples for men: Say Mohammed Ali as the boxer who floats like a butterfly and stings like a bee!

Is fame the result of our admiration of contrasts wwithin their identity!

Certainly our Max Factor will be a force to be reckoned with!.

Judianne

perhaps i should never, ever say that men and women are animals. we've been looking each other over several hundred thousand years now, and the 'pairing' process is so fundamental to racial survival that it may override intellectual considerations.

men don't hesitate to use strength and aggression to get what they want, and in a world where women can not use these tools, it seems fair, and is certainly traditional for them to use 'charm'. i just wish more 'charming' women would enter politics, but of course they just marry politicians, thus proving their charm is only skin deep.

in ms mckew's case, i hope she succeeds for whatever reason or none: just get rid of john howard anyway you can, ma'am, and many will be grateful.

MLK,
The author uses the word “men” in the generalised sense, so in the generalised sense I can also take offence to the article as I am a man. Find me a man who does vote for politicians based on their sex appeal.

I recently heard on the radio some feminist from a University saying that men in parliament look up women’s dresses. Really

I think male hate feminists are now scrapping the barrel in their attempt to find some dirt to throw at men

The British author does the men of UK a great disservice. With all due respects to Maggie, I don't think to many men voted for her looks. I am sure the ABC will be trying hard to get her girl home.