Article content continued

But, the problem is, when I sat down and read all of what she had to say, I came away worried. Whatever sexism Rempel has no doubt faced, all I saw in her tweets were … entirely legitimate questions, as well as an unfortunate blind spot about her party’s own record.

Space doesn’t permit me to recap everything she said here, but in effect, Rempel shared that many people worry she’s, well, just not ready. That she doesn’t have a lot of support in caucus. That her pre-politics resume is thin, or that her actual accomplishments in office are limited. That she doesn’t come across well. She implies that a lot of people have been telling her to wait a bit, to pay more dues. That good things come to those who wait.

Some of these criticisms are almost certainly influenced, at least sometimes, by sexism. No doubt about that. But if you take a step back and consider the issues Rempel is raising … none of them are actually unreasonable concerns to have about any potential new leader. Would these questions be asked of a male candidate? I don’t know … and that’s a fair question to ask. But they sure as hell ought to be. This is especially true given that the party is going to have to reinvent itself in opposition, with fewer resources, less staffing help and smaller budgets than it would have enjoyed while in government. It’s going to be hard. Scrutinizing a potential leader closely shouldn’t be dismissed as just the old boys not liking an uppity girl intruding into their domain, though I acknowledge that there are no doubt many old boys who feel exactly that way.