Living next to the PM, putting up with party boats and hosting the Queen: Sam Mostyn on being G-G
I am about halfway through my lunch with Governor-General Sam Mostyn when I grow concerned about her nutritional intake. There is a structural inequality to Lunches With – the subject must do all the talking, leaving little time to eat.
And such is the pace of conversation, and the breadth of topics to cover, that the head of state can barely manage a mouthful. 'Oh no, no, don't worry!' she tells me. 'I can eat any time.'
We are sitting at a round antique table in the Governor-General's private study in Admiralty House, Sydney, having been served a light and delicious lunch of curried chickpea soup with a croque madame, prepared by the in-house chef, Graeme Stewart.
We drink water and there is no bill – lunch is on the gracious taxpayer.
The Governor-General and I had originally planned to meet at Deus Ex Machina, a cafe in Sydney's inner west which Mostyn frequented in her former life as a regular civilian.
But heads of state come with large security details, and it was deemed easier to eat together at the Governor-General's official Sydney residence, originally home to the Admiral of the Royal Navy's Australian Squadron.
The Herald / Age photographer and I arrive at a bucolic scene – a posse of young sniffer-dogs-in-training is frolicking on the rolling harbourside lawn.
Mostyn is weaving among them, chatting to their Australian Federal Police handlers, buffeted by the winds coming off the magnificent harbour. The view, a splendid eyeful, must surely be one of the best in the world.
The elegant sandstone residence, with its magnificent colonnaded verandah, is directly opposite the Opera House, under the gaze of the Harbour Bridge, and in full view of the sundry seacraft of the busy harbour.
Mostyn says that sometimes the passing party boat revellers yell out ripe comments intended for the Prime Minister, whose official Sydney residence, Kirribilli House, is next door.
There is no fence between the two houses (Kirribilli House once served as a staff residence for Admiralty House) but the Governor-General says the two neighbours do not socialise. 'He wouldn't come over and hang out,' she tells me. 'That would be a breach of convention.'
But the PM does use the Admiralty House pool, and on the morning after the federal election he contacted Mostyn to say he would be walking his dog Toto across her lawn. Mostyn, who has opted out of voting for the duration of her role, stepped out to meet the re-elected PM, and then invited him inside to discuss the timing of the swearing-in of his new cabinet.
This vignette strikes me as an exquisite glimpse behind the curtain of our constitutional democracy.
It's the kind of anecdote Ms Mostyn shares candidly, along with stories about the last Pope's funeral (where she lent a fan to the president of Iceland Halla Tomasdottir, who was schvitzing in the Italian heat), reminiscences from the King and Queen's visit last year (they bunked upstairs, while Mostyn and her husband, barrister Simeon Beckett, went briefly home to their inner west house, and Queen Camilla was thwarted from swimming in the pool by a paparazzi drone) and her trip to meet President Erdogan of Turkey.
The governor-general's candour is the natural corollary of her interpretation of the role. She wants the institution she represents to be visible, transparent and accessible. This is particularly necessary because many Australians do not know who the Governor-General is, or what she does.
'Wherever I go now, I'd say the majority of people start by saying, 'It's nice that you visited … but sorry, what do you do? What is the Governor-General?'' Mostyn tells me. 'They link it to some kind of royal role. Many still give me a semi-curtsy or a bow, which is absolutely not required.'
'It's clear to me we have done a very poor job talking about civics and our institutions, and the very basis under which our constitutional arrangements work.'
Recent exam results released by the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) show she is correct – Australian students' knowledge of civics and citizenship have fallen to their lowest level in two decades.
Queen Elizabeth II (an informal photo-realist portrait of whom the GG keeps 'at my shoulder', on the wall next to her desk) used to say of royalty that 'we have to be seen to be believed'.
Ms Mostyn has adopted the same credo for the vice-regal role. To that end, she has built a strong presence on Instagram (66,000 followers), where she serves up content such as videos of electoral commissioner Geoff Pope returning the writs for the federal election.
Working with the National Gallery of Australia, Mostyn has brought more modern and contemporary artworks into the official residences. This grand sandstone pile, with its heavily patterned Victorian wallpaper, used to be hung exclusively with dark oils of important men – former Governors-General, and 'a lot of Cook paraphernalia', she says.
Now it is adorned with an eclectic mixture of Arthur Streeton, a 1929 Grace Cossington-Smith painting of the Harbour Bridge being built, a bark painting by Nyapanyapa Yunupingu and a Sidney Nolan or two.
The Captain Cook painting that used to adorn the entry hall has been moved to a position underneath the grand staircase. In its place is a bright canvas by Indigenous artist Paddy Nyunkuny Bedford. 'In modernising the office, it was important to consider how the art and artefacts in official residences could reflect the full story of Australia in all of its diversity,' she says.
When the Prime Minister approached Mostyn about the job in January 2024, she was greatly surprised. Mostyn was not a male in the military, which made her unusual enough for the head-of-state gig.
She had spent most of her career in corporations, not institutions. A law graduate who worked as an associate to Justice Michael Kirby (when he was at the NSW Court of Appeal), she went on to become a policy advisor to two successive Labor ministers for communications, and then as a senior communications policy advisor to prime minister Paul Keating.
She left that job to take up a senior executive position at Optus Vision, and from there, she went on to an executive role at Optus and Cable and Wireless in London, where her daughter, Lotte (now 25) was born. Her business career flourished, and her CV is too dense to summarise neatly, but it includes senior executive roles at companies including Insurance Australia Group, and multiple board and chair roles at Virgin Australia, Transurban, Mirvac, Citigroup and Aware Super, as well as charitable organisations like Beyond Blue, Foundation for Young Australians, the Climate Change Authority and Reconciliation Australia.
In 2005, she was the first woman AFL Commissioner (she was accused of being a 'quota pick') and in 2023 the Prime Minister appointed her to the Women's Economic Taskforce.
As the daughter of an army colonel, who served in Vietnam during her childhood, Mostyn understands service and she respects institutions. 'I'd been to Government House many times ... I'd studied constitutional law in Canberra and I had been to the High Court many times,' she says. 'As a country, we had debated many years ago the issue of whether we would be a republic, and we'd just been through the referendum on constitutional change for a Voice for First Nations people.
'So I think the job of Governor-General was one I understood.' Next week, she will have been in the job a year.
Her law background prepared her well for the constitutional part of her role, which involves giving the royal assent to laws, but also providing extra probity for government appointments in presiding over the federal executive council, which gives legal effect to decisions made by ministers.
More generally, she is a guardian of the constitution and must help ensure the stability of the government.
To this end, she sought extensive legal advice from the Solicitor-General on what to do if the result of the last election had not been clear-cut.
Loading
'After the Dismissal in 1975, people were acutely aware the Governor-General could do one thing, and that was dismiss the Prime Minister,' she says. 'I talk to people about the reserve powers and why I don't believe that will ever happen again … as the Governor-General, you should always be conscious of maintaining the kind of relationship with the Prime Minister and the government where, if you see trouble ahead, you work with them to avoid the trouble.'
Because Ms Mostyn had been a strong advocate for progressive causes including The Voice, and gender inequality, she sustained harsh criticism when her role was announced. She was derided as an 'activist'.
News Corp columnist Andrew Bolt wrote that her appointment was 'the triumph of affirmative action over talent or accomplishment'. His stablemate Janet Albrechtson opined that Mostyn was 'no business heavyweight' and that she 'reflects the worst of modern woke Australia'.
Further, Albrechtson wrote, 'if her chromosomes were XY she wouldn't have been considered for the role'.
Is this the right time to note that the croque madame is delightfully buttery and exactly the right amount of crunchy? I have devoured mine. Beyond a few discreet mouthfuls, the GG has barely touched hers. I don't want to damage Australia's constitutional democracy, but my journalistic duty is to the reader, not to the Governor-General's blood sugar levels. I press on.
How did those personal attacks feel for her? 'How did I feel? I felt really disappointed that so many people were angry at the notion that a woman who had not served in the defence force could possibly be a governor-general,' she says, somewhat carefully.
Was disappointment all she felt? 'I had a lot of emotions running at the time, but I came into this with very clear eyes that this would happen,' she says. 'I can get angry about that, but I find anger is a pretty wasted emotion … so I think, 'What do they need to see?' What they need to see is a person showing up in the job and doing it.'
In preparation for the role, Mostyn spoke to former governors-general, and consulted former prime ministers about how they managed the relationship with the head of state. Sir William Deane, who is now 94, told Mostyn to always show compassion and to stay at each event for at least an hour.
He also advised her to find a seat. 'People don't share how they're feeling standing up, he said. But you sit down, and people tell you their stories.'
The Governor-General coughs. She is now getting a dry throat. I ask if she needs to pause and eat and drink something. 'No, no, I'm all right!' she says. 'I'll just drink this.'
She sips her water. I ask her what she does to unwind. 'I'm a knitter, I'm a weaver. I always have something in my bag that I'm doing,' she says.
An attendant clears our plates away – mine is clean, Mostyn's still quite full.
She asks for a tea with some lemon and honey in it. I take a regular tea.
I ask Mostyn if she is a royalist. 'What do you mean by royalist?' she asks.
'Someone who reveres the royal family,' I reply.
'I don't think I've heard any former Governor-General use that language,' she says. 'I'm deeply respectful of the role that the monarchy plays. I'm deeply respectful of our constitutional monarchy and our strong set of institutions. I think King Charles shows us what a modern king looks like.'
Loading
'But the King doesn't direct me and I don't seek his advice. It's the Prime Minister and the ministry I take my counsel from, and that I work with.'
Her larynx fortified by herbal tea, the Governor-General is happy to continue our chat. 'I talk all the time about a mighty Australian democracy,' she says.
But it is me who has to end our nearly three-hour-long conversation, to attend to the un-vice-regal responsibility of the school pickup. 'That is a real deadline,' Mostyn says, and she sees me out, while issuing an invitation to bring my daughter another day for afternoon tea.
I walk out through the entrance hall, now devoid of Captain Cook pics. Behind me, the door stays open.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Sydney Morning Herald
2 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Chalmers hits China-linked companies with landmark lawsuit over crucial military minerals
Treasurer Jim Chalmers has launched an unprecedented lawsuit against China-linked interests to force them to sell their stake in an Australian rare earths miner, whose products are crucial to warplanes, missiles and submarines. The lawsuit, filed in the Federal Court on Thursday against foreign investors in Northern Minerals, is also seeking financial penalties for allegedly refusing to obey Chalmers' direction to sell out of the company last year. The Australian-listed company is developing the Browns Range heavy rare earths project in remote northern Western Australia, which could be one of the first non-Chinese sources of the minerals used in military guidance systems, wind turbines and electric vehicles. Chalmers' court action against an entity called Indian Ocean International Shipping and Service Company Ltd and a former associate follows his order last year for five Chinese-linked groups to sell their shares in Northern Minerals to unconnected buyers by September. 'Foreign investors in Australia are required to follow Australian law,' Chalmers said in a statement. 'We are doing what is necessary to protect the national interest and the integrity of our foreign investment framework.' China's control of rare earths and critical products is an escalating cause of concern to the United States and countries like Australia, after Donald Trump's trade war prompted Beijing to restrict shipments of the materials. It has made similar moves before, including against Japan in 2010 during a territorial dispute. China controls nearly all of the world's heavy rare earth production and Australian Strategic Policy Institute senior fellow Ian Satchwell said the global superpower's interests were seeking to exert influence over Northern Minerals. 'Australia, with like-minded partner nations, is seeking to build alternative supply chains for rare earths and other critical minerals, and the Northern Minerals shenanigans are a very obvious example of China-linked bad faith investing to allegedly seek to disrupt those efforts,' Satchwell said. 'In Australia's case those rare earths are used for things such as F35 fighters, missiles attached to them and in the future, nuclear-powered submarines.'


The Advertiser
3 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Trump is absolutely not daddy. Let me count the reasons
NATO secretary Mark Rutte has made headlines for calling US President Donald Trump "Daddy" at the NATO Summit at the Hague this week. Reacting to Trump's NSFW comment the day before on Iran and Israel, Rutte sycophantically remarked that "Daddy has to sometimes use strong language to get them to stop." Rutte's remarks follow a trend of Trump supporters and Republican politicians calling him "Daddy" or "Daddy Don" since the presidential campaign. Reactionary pundit Tucker Carlson roused rally attendees in Georgia, for example, by likening Trump to a stern father-figure: "There has to be a point at which Dad comes home ... and he's pissed ... And when Dad gets home, you know what he says? ... "You've been a bad little girl and you're getting a vigorous spanking right now. And no, it's not going to hurt me more than it hurts you. No, it's not. I'm not going to lie. It's going to hurt you a lot more than it hurts me. And you earned this. "You're getting a vigorous spanking because you've been a bad girl, and it has to be this way." His disciplinary and paternalistic approach to governance also attracted comment in the pages of the Wall Street Journal, where Gerald F. Seib argued that Trump is "replacing the Nanny State With a Daddy State". In a clear embrace of the term, the official White House YouTube account posted a video covering Trump's attendance at NATO, titled "Daddy's Home". It is not new in politics for leaders to be compared to parental figures. Germany's Angela Merkel earned the affectionate nickname "Mutti" while China's Xi Jinping has been called "Xi Dada" and, more recently, "Xi Yeye". Closer to home, in a recent open-access study, I identified the emergence of two Australian political masculinities during the COVID-19 pandemic. First, the traditional "Daggy Dad" of former Liberal prime minister Scott Morrison, centred around the nuclear family and paternalistic protection. Second, the "State Daddy", embodied by Labor leaders like Albanese, who perform a more compassionate masculinity focused on social provision. However, as the scholar who theorised the term "State Daddy", I must firmly reiterate that Donald Trump is not a Daddy. It is worth noting that "Daddy" originated in US working-class Black LGBTQIA+ communities, but this black gay vernacular has since spread to broader queer and BDSM communities. It is a term of endearment in queer sexual relationships - Daddies are very nurturing, caring, guiding and so are looked on as mentors, role models, and providers. Trump is so obviously not a Daddy. He is cruel, not nurturing, callous, not caring, and he provides chaos, not guidance. While Daddies inspire love and admiration through care, Trump forcefully demands unwavering adoration through intimidation and domination. That a conservative and queerphobic administration is now borrowing language from the same communities whose rights it is actively working to erode is an interesting juxtaposition. That this term has been used overwhelmingly by men to refer to Trump makes explicit the homosocial nature of a homophobic administration. The popularity of the term has significantly increased since its adoption as internet slang on social media, as in the rise of the "daddy meme" playing on its sexualised connotations in a tongue-in-cheek, lightly self-parodying manner. The fact that "Daddy" is so commonly used, including by a NATO chief, shows how mainstream it has become. Yet Rutte did not seem to be in on the joke. Trump is also most definitely not a State Daddy. His dominating, paternalistic masculinity is the antithesis of the State Daddy, whose masculinity is compassionate, caring and inspires hope. READ MORE: The State Daddy is defined by collective responsibility, empathy and provision of social programs whereas Strongman leaders like Trump are self-interested, hyper-individualist, aggressive and seek to gut public services. State Daddies are also committed to women voters and gender equality, whereas misogyny and patriarchal domination are central to Trump's identity. As a patriarchal and authoritarian masculine protectionist persona who enforces obedience through punishment, Trump is a dominating and paternalistic authoritarian Dad. He aligns with the "strict father" model, viewing the world as a dangerous and competitive arena in which there are clear "winners" and "losers"- terms on which Trump often relies to frame his messaging. But I guess this doesn't have as good of a ring to it as "Daddy Don". NATO secretary Mark Rutte has made headlines for calling US President Donald Trump "Daddy" at the NATO Summit at the Hague this week. Reacting to Trump's NSFW comment the day before on Iran and Israel, Rutte sycophantically remarked that "Daddy has to sometimes use strong language to get them to stop." Rutte's remarks follow a trend of Trump supporters and Republican politicians calling him "Daddy" or "Daddy Don" since the presidential campaign. Reactionary pundit Tucker Carlson roused rally attendees in Georgia, for example, by likening Trump to a stern father-figure: "There has to be a point at which Dad comes home ... and he's pissed ... And when Dad gets home, you know what he says? ... "You've been a bad little girl and you're getting a vigorous spanking right now. And no, it's not going to hurt me more than it hurts you. No, it's not. I'm not going to lie. It's going to hurt you a lot more than it hurts me. And you earned this. "You're getting a vigorous spanking because you've been a bad girl, and it has to be this way." His disciplinary and paternalistic approach to governance also attracted comment in the pages of the Wall Street Journal, where Gerald F. Seib argued that Trump is "replacing the Nanny State With a Daddy State". In a clear embrace of the term, the official White House YouTube account posted a video covering Trump's attendance at NATO, titled "Daddy's Home". It is not new in politics for leaders to be compared to parental figures. Germany's Angela Merkel earned the affectionate nickname "Mutti" while China's Xi Jinping has been called "Xi Dada" and, more recently, "Xi Yeye". Closer to home, in a recent open-access study, I identified the emergence of two Australian political masculinities during the COVID-19 pandemic. First, the traditional "Daggy Dad" of former Liberal prime minister Scott Morrison, centred around the nuclear family and paternalistic protection. Second, the "State Daddy", embodied by Labor leaders like Albanese, who perform a more compassionate masculinity focused on social provision. However, as the scholar who theorised the term "State Daddy", I must firmly reiterate that Donald Trump is not a Daddy. It is worth noting that "Daddy" originated in US working-class Black LGBTQIA+ communities, but this black gay vernacular has since spread to broader queer and BDSM communities. It is a term of endearment in queer sexual relationships - Daddies are very nurturing, caring, guiding and so are looked on as mentors, role models, and providers. Trump is so obviously not a Daddy. He is cruel, not nurturing, callous, not caring, and he provides chaos, not guidance. While Daddies inspire love and admiration through care, Trump forcefully demands unwavering adoration through intimidation and domination. That a conservative and queerphobic administration is now borrowing language from the same communities whose rights it is actively working to erode is an interesting juxtaposition. That this term has been used overwhelmingly by men to refer to Trump makes explicit the homosocial nature of a homophobic administration. The popularity of the term has significantly increased since its adoption as internet slang on social media, as in the rise of the "daddy meme" playing on its sexualised connotations in a tongue-in-cheek, lightly self-parodying manner. The fact that "Daddy" is so commonly used, including by a NATO chief, shows how mainstream it has become. Yet Rutte did not seem to be in on the joke. Trump is also most definitely not a State Daddy. His dominating, paternalistic masculinity is the antithesis of the State Daddy, whose masculinity is compassionate, caring and inspires hope. READ MORE: The State Daddy is defined by collective responsibility, empathy and provision of social programs whereas Strongman leaders like Trump are self-interested, hyper-individualist, aggressive and seek to gut public services. State Daddies are also committed to women voters and gender equality, whereas misogyny and patriarchal domination are central to Trump's identity. As a patriarchal and authoritarian masculine protectionist persona who enforces obedience through punishment, Trump is a dominating and paternalistic authoritarian Dad. He aligns with the "strict father" model, viewing the world as a dangerous and competitive arena in which there are clear "winners" and "losers"- terms on which Trump often relies to frame his messaging. But I guess this doesn't have as good of a ring to it as "Daddy Don". NATO secretary Mark Rutte has made headlines for calling US President Donald Trump "Daddy" at the NATO Summit at the Hague this week. Reacting to Trump's NSFW comment the day before on Iran and Israel, Rutte sycophantically remarked that "Daddy has to sometimes use strong language to get them to stop." Rutte's remarks follow a trend of Trump supporters and Republican politicians calling him "Daddy" or "Daddy Don" since the presidential campaign. Reactionary pundit Tucker Carlson roused rally attendees in Georgia, for example, by likening Trump to a stern father-figure: "There has to be a point at which Dad comes home ... and he's pissed ... And when Dad gets home, you know what he says? ... "You've been a bad little girl and you're getting a vigorous spanking right now. And no, it's not going to hurt me more than it hurts you. No, it's not. I'm not going to lie. It's going to hurt you a lot more than it hurts me. And you earned this. "You're getting a vigorous spanking because you've been a bad girl, and it has to be this way." His disciplinary and paternalistic approach to governance also attracted comment in the pages of the Wall Street Journal, where Gerald F. Seib argued that Trump is "replacing the Nanny State With a Daddy State". In a clear embrace of the term, the official White House YouTube account posted a video covering Trump's attendance at NATO, titled "Daddy's Home". It is not new in politics for leaders to be compared to parental figures. Germany's Angela Merkel earned the affectionate nickname "Mutti" while China's Xi Jinping has been called "Xi Dada" and, more recently, "Xi Yeye". Closer to home, in a recent open-access study, I identified the emergence of two Australian political masculinities during the COVID-19 pandemic. First, the traditional "Daggy Dad" of former Liberal prime minister Scott Morrison, centred around the nuclear family and paternalistic protection. Second, the "State Daddy", embodied by Labor leaders like Albanese, who perform a more compassionate masculinity focused on social provision. However, as the scholar who theorised the term "State Daddy", I must firmly reiterate that Donald Trump is not a Daddy. It is worth noting that "Daddy" originated in US working-class Black LGBTQIA+ communities, but this black gay vernacular has since spread to broader queer and BDSM communities. It is a term of endearment in queer sexual relationships - Daddies are very nurturing, caring, guiding and so are looked on as mentors, role models, and providers. Trump is so obviously not a Daddy. He is cruel, not nurturing, callous, not caring, and he provides chaos, not guidance. While Daddies inspire love and admiration through care, Trump forcefully demands unwavering adoration through intimidation and domination. That a conservative and queerphobic administration is now borrowing language from the same communities whose rights it is actively working to erode is an interesting juxtaposition. That this term has been used overwhelmingly by men to refer to Trump makes explicit the homosocial nature of a homophobic administration. The popularity of the term has significantly increased since its adoption as internet slang on social media, as in the rise of the "daddy meme" playing on its sexualised connotations in a tongue-in-cheek, lightly self-parodying manner. The fact that "Daddy" is so commonly used, including by a NATO chief, shows how mainstream it has become. Yet Rutte did not seem to be in on the joke. Trump is also most definitely not a State Daddy. His dominating, paternalistic masculinity is the antithesis of the State Daddy, whose masculinity is compassionate, caring and inspires hope. READ MORE: The State Daddy is defined by collective responsibility, empathy and provision of social programs whereas Strongman leaders like Trump are self-interested, hyper-individualist, aggressive and seek to gut public services. State Daddies are also committed to women voters and gender equality, whereas misogyny and patriarchal domination are central to Trump's identity. As a patriarchal and authoritarian masculine protectionist persona who enforces obedience through punishment, Trump is a dominating and paternalistic authoritarian Dad. He aligns with the "strict father" model, viewing the world as a dangerous and competitive arena in which there are clear "winners" and "losers"- terms on which Trump often relies to frame his messaging. But I guess this doesn't have as good of a ring to it as "Daddy Don". NATO secretary Mark Rutte has made headlines for calling US President Donald Trump "Daddy" at the NATO Summit at the Hague this week. Reacting to Trump's NSFW comment the day before on Iran and Israel, Rutte sycophantically remarked that "Daddy has to sometimes use strong language to get them to stop." Rutte's remarks follow a trend of Trump supporters and Republican politicians calling him "Daddy" or "Daddy Don" since the presidential campaign. Reactionary pundit Tucker Carlson roused rally attendees in Georgia, for example, by likening Trump to a stern father-figure: "There has to be a point at which Dad comes home ... and he's pissed ... And when Dad gets home, you know what he says? ... "You've been a bad little girl and you're getting a vigorous spanking right now. And no, it's not going to hurt me more than it hurts you. No, it's not. I'm not going to lie. It's going to hurt you a lot more than it hurts me. And you earned this. "You're getting a vigorous spanking because you've been a bad girl, and it has to be this way." His disciplinary and paternalistic approach to governance also attracted comment in the pages of the Wall Street Journal, where Gerald F. Seib argued that Trump is "replacing the Nanny State With a Daddy State". In a clear embrace of the term, the official White House YouTube account posted a video covering Trump's attendance at NATO, titled "Daddy's Home". It is not new in politics for leaders to be compared to parental figures. Germany's Angela Merkel earned the affectionate nickname "Mutti" while China's Xi Jinping has been called "Xi Dada" and, more recently, "Xi Yeye". Closer to home, in a recent open-access study, I identified the emergence of two Australian political masculinities during the COVID-19 pandemic. First, the traditional "Daggy Dad" of former Liberal prime minister Scott Morrison, centred around the nuclear family and paternalistic protection. Second, the "State Daddy", embodied by Labor leaders like Albanese, who perform a more compassionate masculinity focused on social provision. However, as the scholar who theorised the term "State Daddy", I must firmly reiterate that Donald Trump is not a Daddy. It is worth noting that "Daddy" originated in US working-class Black LGBTQIA+ communities, but this black gay vernacular has since spread to broader queer and BDSM communities. It is a term of endearment in queer sexual relationships - Daddies are very nurturing, caring, guiding and so are looked on as mentors, role models, and providers. Trump is so obviously not a Daddy. He is cruel, not nurturing, callous, not caring, and he provides chaos, not guidance. While Daddies inspire love and admiration through care, Trump forcefully demands unwavering adoration through intimidation and domination. That a conservative and queerphobic administration is now borrowing language from the same communities whose rights it is actively working to erode is an interesting juxtaposition. That this term has been used overwhelmingly by men to refer to Trump makes explicit the homosocial nature of a homophobic administration. The popularity of the term has significantly increased since its adoption as internet slang on social media, as in the rise of the "daddy meme" playing on its sexualised connotations in a tongue-in-cheek, lightly self-parodying manner. The fact that "Daddy" is so commonly used, including by a NATO chief, shows how mainstream it has become. Yet Rutte did not seem to be in on the joke. Trump is also most definitely not a State Daddy. His dominating, paternalistic masculinity is the antithesis of the State Daddy, whose masculinity is compassionate, caring and inspires hope. READ MORE: The State Daddy is defined by collective responsibility, empathy and provision of social programs whereas Strongman leaders like Trump are self-interested, hyper-individualist, aggressive and seek to gut public services. State Daddies are also committed to women voters and gender equality, whereas misogyny and patriarchal domination are central to Trump's identity. As a patriarchal and authoritarian masculine protectionist persona who enforces obedience through punishment, Trump is a dominating and paternalistic authoritarian Dad. He aligns with the "strict father" model, viewing the world as a dangerous and competitive arena in which there are clear "winners" and "losers"- terms on which Trump often relies to frame his messaging. But I guess this doesn't have as good of a ring to it as "Daddy Don".


The Advertiser
3 hours ago
- The Advertiser
School's not out for YouTube despite possible youth ban
Children will still be able to use YouTube for educational content if the platform is included in a social media ban, Australia's internet safety watchdog says. eSafety commissioner Julie Inman Grant has rejected YouTube's claims banning those younger than 16 from using it would prevent videos on the site from being shown in class settings. It comes after Ms Inman Grant wrote to Communications Minister Anika Wells urging that YouTube be covered by laws restricting access to social media for people younger than 16 when they come into effect in December. YouTube was not covered under the laws - which applied bans to other platforms including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat - when they passed parliament. The eSafety commissioner said research had shown children were exposed to harmful content on YouTube more than on any other platform. YouTube hit back at calls for the ban, saying a large number of young people had viewed content on the platform in classrooms and for educational purposes. But Ms Inman Grant said YouTube had made "mistaken claims" about the social media ban and the platform could still be used to access school-approved content. "The new law will only restrict children under the age of 16 from having their own accounts - not accessing content on YouTube or any other service through links from the school or in a 'logged-out' state," she said. "There is nothing in the legislation that prevents educators with their own accounts from continuing to incorporate school-approved educational content on YouTube or any other service just as they do now." In a statement, YouTube's Australian public policy manager Rachel Lord said protections for children would not be available if the directions of the watchdog were followed. "The eSafety commissioner's advice for younger people to use YouTube in a 'logged out' state deprives them of the age-appropriate experiences and additional safety guardrails we specifically designed for younger people," she said. "eSafety's advice to include YouTube in the social media ban is in direct contradiction to the government's own commitment, its own research on community sentiment." Ms Inman Grant said advice had been given to the government that no single platform should be excluded from the social media ban. "YouTube currently employs many of the same features and functionality associated with the harms that the legislation is seeking to address," she said. "These include features such as autoplay, endless content and algorithmically recommended content." Ms Wells is yet to decide whether to include YouTube in the ban. Children will still be able to use YouTube for educational content if the platform is included in a social media ban, Australia's internet safety watchdog says. eSafety commissioner Julie Inman Grant has rejected YouTube's claims banning those younger than 16 from using it would prevent videos on the site from being shown in class settings. It comes after Ms Inman Grant wrote to Communications Minister Anika Wells urging that YouTube be covered by laws restricting access to social media for people younger than 16 when they come into effect in December. YouTube was not covered under the laws - which applied bans to other platforms including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat - when they passed parliament. The eSafety commissioner said research had shown children were exposed to harmful content on YouTube more than on any other platform. YouTube hit back at calls for the ban, saying a large number of young people had viewed content on the platform in classrooms and for educational purposes. But Ms Inman Grant said YouTube had made "mistaken claims" about the social media ban and the platform could still be used to access school-approved content. "The new law will only restrict children under the age of 16 from having their own accounts - not accessing content on YouTube or any other service through links from the school or in a 'logged-out' state," she said. "There is nothing in the legislation that prevents educators with their own accounts from continuing to incorporate school-approved educational content on YouTube or any other service just as they do now." In a statement, YouTube's Australian public policy manager Rachel Lord said protections for children would not be available if the directions of the watchdog were followed. "The eSafety commissioner's advice for younger people to use YouTube in a 'logged out' state deprives them of the age-appropriate experiences and additional safety guardrails we specifically designed for younger people," she said. "eSafety's advice to include YouTube in the social media ban is in direct contradiction to the government's own commitment, its own research on community sentiment." Ms Inman Grant said advice had been given to the government that no single platform should be excluded from the social media ban. "YouTube currently employs many of the same features and functionality associated with the harms that the legislation is seeking to address," she said. "These include features such as autoplay, endless content and algorithmically recommended content." Ms Wells is yet to decide whether to include YouTube in the ban. Children will still be able to use YouTube for educational content if the platform is included in a social media ban, Australia's internet safety watchdog says. eSafety commissioner Julie Inman Grant has rejected YouTube's claims banning those younger than 16 from using it would prevent videos on the site from being shown in class settings. It comes after Ms Inman Grant wrote to Communications Minister Anika Wells urging that YouTube be covered by laws restricting access to social media for people younger than 16 when they come into effect in December. YouTube was not covered under the laws - which applied bans to other platforms including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat - when they passed parliament. The eSafety commissioner said research had shown children were exposed to harmful content on YouTube more than on any other platform. YouTube hit back at calls for the ban, saying a large number of young people had viewed content on the platform in classrooms and for educational purposes. But Ms Inman Grant said YouTube had made "mistaken claims" about the social media ban and the platform could still be used to access school-approved content. "The new law will only restrict children under the age of 16 from having their own accounts - not accessing content on YouTube or any other service through links from the school or in a 'logged-out' state," she said. "There is nothing in the legislation that prevents educators with their own accounts from continuing to incorporate school-approved educational content on YouTube or any other service just as they do now." In a statement, YouTube's Australian public policy manager Rachel Lord said protections for children would not be available if the directions of the watchdog were followed. "The eSafety commissioner's advice for younger people to use YouTube in a 'logged out' state deprives them of the age-appropriate experiences and additional safety guardrails we specifically designed for younger people," she said. "eSafety's advice to include YouTube in the social media ban is in direct contradiction to the government's own commitment, its own research on community sentiment." Ms Inman Grant said advice had been given to the government that no single platform should be excluded from the social media ban. "YouTube currently employs many of the same features and functionality associated with the harms that the legislation is seeking to address," she said. "These include features such as autoplay, endless content and algorithmically recommended content." Ms Wells is yet to decide whether to include YouTube in the ban. Children will still be able to use YouTube for educational content if the platform is included in a social media ban, Australia's internet safety watchdog says. eSafety commissioner Julie Inman Grant has rejected YouTube's claims banning those younger than 16 from using it would prevent videos on the site from being shown in class settings. It comes after Ms Inman Grant wrote to Communications Minister Anika Wells urging that YouTube be covered by laws restricting access to social media for people younger than 16 when they come into effect in December. YouTube was not covered under the laws - which applied bans to other platforms including Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and Snapchat - when they passed parliament. The eSafety commissioner said research had shown children were exposed to harmful content on YouTube more than on any other platform. YouTube hit back at calls for the ban, saying a large number of young people had viewed content on the platform in classrooms and for educational purposes. But Ms Inman Grant said YouTube had made "mistaken claims" about the social media ban and the platform could still be used to access school-approved content. "The new law will only restrict children under the age of 16 from having their own accounts - not accessing content on YouTube or any other service through links from the school or in a 'logged-out' state," she said. "There is nothing in the legislation that prevents educators with their own accounts from continuing to incorporate school-approved educational content on YouTube or any other service just as they do now." In a statement, YouTube's Australian public policy manager Rachel Lord said protections for children would not be available if the directions of the watchdog were followed. "The eSafety commissioner's advice for younger people to use YouTube in a 'logged out' state deprives them of the age-appropriate experiences and additional safety guardrails we specifically designed for younger people," she said. "eSafety's advice to include YouTube in the social media ban is in direct contradiction to the government's own commitment, its own research on community sentiment." Ms Inman Grant said advice had been given to the government that no single platform should be excluded from the social media ban. "YouTube currently employs many of the same features and functionality associated with the harms that the legislation is seeking to address," she said. "These include features such as autoplay, endless content and algorithmically recommended content." Ms Wells is yet to decide whether to include YouTube in the ban.