It is not exactly rare for a nation to elect a woman as its leader; sixty-three countries have done it since the first, Sirimavo Bandaranaike, became prime minister of Sri Lanka in 1960. But it is far from the norm. Today only fifteen of the world’s nations have a woman at the helm¹ and many of those that were once led by a woman have not repeated the experience. Think Israel, France, Canada, Norway and the United Kingdom. In fact, in April 2013 just three countries that today have women leaders have had one (and only one) previously: Argentina, Bangladesh and Lithuania. For the other twelve nations, this is the first time they have been governed by a woman. Australia, of course, is one of these countries and you can’t help wondering whether Germany, Brazil, Denmark, Jamaica and Thailand—to name several of them—are handling the situation as badly as we are.

So far, with every Australian state and territory, except South Australia, having elected a woman to the top job at least once,² we have had ten women heads of government in this country, but if we thought having these trail blazers might make it easier for the first female national leader, we were wrong. In June 2013, Julia Gillard has been in the job for exactly three years. She has already exceeded the time in office of her predecessor Kevin Rudd and, a far more significant landmark for True Believers, has served longer than Labor hero Gough Whitlam. If she wins the election to be held in September 2013 she will quickly surpass the terms of legendary Labor leaders John Curtin, Ben Chifley and Paul Keating. She would become the second-longest-serving Labor prime minister after Bob Hawke and were she to win a third term she might manage to break his record. Yet most of the commentary about Julia Gillard, including from some of her parliamentary colleagues, gives the impression that she is a transitory and insignificant figure whose grasp on the levers of power is tenuous, who is incompetent at governing and whose very tenure is illegitimate.