Carmen Sammut took umbrage at the heading of one of my articles about the validity of new PN candidates. My heading in question stated that Dr. Maria Muscat’s brother is the well known Maltese priest David Muscat. According to Sammut, such a heading is not only banal but sexist. The reason is that feminists believe that women must have standing and identity of their own. Nonetheless, stating a parental relationship does not necessarily demean one’s personality.
Sammut continues by saying that it is because of such types of headlines that women do not want to enter politics. The reason given is that this blood relationship between Maria Muscat and David Muscat brought about a barrage of negative comments on Social Media.
Fr. David Muscat was described by Sammut as a controversial priest. I don’t think David Muscat is controversial. By this same token, one could consider Sammut controversial in her approach but there again there are many individuals, in particular from within Labour, who do not like Fr. David Muscat’s comments. And here is the fallacy in Sammut’s argument. What Carmen Sammut failed to state is that those who fired tirades at Dr Maria Muscat are Labourites. The truth is that most of all the commentators who politically attacked Dr Maria Muscat, if not all, did so because they despise her brother – not for his gayyagni statement – but for his blatant criticism of Labour.
Therefore, in this context, any reference to her brother should not be a reason to bar women, like Maria Muscat, from joining the political fray. She decided to candidate herself with the PN. Therefore, such a heading – more than being sexist as asserted by Sammut – exposes the political divide between both parties. I will not argue that in politics there is no such thing as negative publicity. All comments are welcomed. What Dr Maria Muscat wants from the electorate is the Nationalist vote. Therefore, those commenting against her will never vote for her, irrespective of whether she is the twin sister of Fr. David or not. I am sure that leftist feminists living in her district will not give her the number one vote. As a candidate, she needs foremost the votes of Nationalists.
If Carmen Sammut thinks that all the Labourites despise Fr. Muscat’s ‘gayyagni” rhetoric, I can assure her that she is politically mistaken. I know that this argument may sound patriarchal but this is not the aim of this issue. The point is that any person, whether male or female, who decides to enter politics should accept criticism and banal comments. Women cannot expect to be treated differently from men. All great female politicians or leaders militating in the conservative camp had to endure criticism and unfair comments. The world of politics is not for individuals with a “snowflake” character. Margaret Thatcher had the courage to affront politics and critics with her strong stance and the harshest criticism to Thatcher’s rule came from the feminist side!
At the same time, I would like to congratulate Carmen Sammut for acknowledging the good and impeccable character of Dr Maria Muscat, which is a point that I made in my article in question. I wish to remind Sammut, that before joining politics, Dr Maria Muscat applied for the top post in our police force. Unfortunately, she was not chosen for the job. Instead, a man was chosen. It is strange that when this happened, none of the feminists, who support the left gender agenda, criticise the government for choosing a man and not a female candidate. Nobody said that the choice smacked of sexism. For sure, it was based on political cronyism. All the feminists that support the Labour Government remained silent.
I am proud to have been one of the few who supported Dr Maria Muscat’s choice and have criticised the fact that she was not chosen for this top job. I believe that had she been given the job – not because she is a woman – but because I sincerely believe that she was the person best qualified to fill this top post – she would have done a better job than the present incumbent.