There’s nothing shameful about being a first lady

Being a first lady is an important national service in its own right, writes Salma Shah

Irina Karamanos, the first lady of Chile, has resigned from her duties (AP)

The first lady of Chile, the primera dama, has resigned from her duties; claiming the role of presidential spouse reeked of sexism and nepotism.

It is unsurprising that a modern presidential couple in their thirties who are well-educated and left wing would take this position. Irina Karamanos is a woman in her own right and doesn’t need to be defined by her husband’s job.

It’s quite laudable. In a country where former first ladies, like General Pinochet’s wife Lucia Hiriart, wielded enormous influence it’s also politically smart to not look like you might be running the show from the shadows.

But the first lady doesn’t always have to behave like Lady Macbeth. Sometimes, it’s actually quite an important national service in its own right.

Take the horrifying and heartfelt testimony of Ms Zelensky this week, urging the world to treat the systematic rape of Ukrainians as a war crime. She is running an international relay race with her husband and has no choice but to do it. Few have had to step up to fight for their country like Vlodomyr Zelensky’s better half.

She could not have known the weight of responsibility about to befall her, she has not hidden, she has not escaped with her children – instead, she’s on a mission with the only power she has: her marital status.

We saw Buckingham Palace host three Queens, two royals and the first ladies of Ukraine and Sierra Leone to speak out against sexual violence. People pay attention to causes and campaigns that are not just cynically political. In some ways, British spouses have an easier time – as do others who have constitutional monarchies. We have kings, consorts, princes and princesses to take the strain of being dignified and non-partisan.

That is ultimately where the power of the premiere Mrs comes from. Those who try to influence the political scene are often derided – it is not a democratically elected position, after all. Many first ladies face the job with trepidation, not knowing what to do or how they will be received. They are unlikely to share the same skills set as their husbands or a desire to be a public figure, but so many political figures are supported by their partners emotionally to be able to undertake the task.

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment sign up to our free weekly Voices Dispatches newsletter by clicking here

Politics and leadership is a family affair. This is not about dynastic power; it’s not the Kennedys or Clan Trump whose genetics seem to determine an exalted position. It is about the truest form of family. A support structure and a place of trust, where you can get honesty and be put back in your place instead of idolised by sycophantic aides.

You can be supportive without having a title, of course – but knowing that there is a person there to guide you and pick up the pieces means there is an interest. It’s almost better to formalise a position of such influence to recognise its importance and limit its remit by agreement.

It is sexist to believe that the female role is the only one that supports – and there is much unfairness in the job. No one cared about poor Mr May or even Mr Thatcher, who were not attractive adornments making for boring photographic subjects.

And it’s annoying that they are seen as wise counsellors to their spouses, but their female counterparts are reduced to simplistic side pieces.

We shouldn’t diminish the role of the first lady by casting it as outdated and outmoded. Instead, we need to acknowledge the good it can do – and the importance it has for the people who occupy it.