A WOMAN has a baby. Big deal. We do it all the time. But when the Prime Minister of a country has one – whilst in office – it makes headlines. New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern and husband Clarke Gaydon welcomed their daughter Neve into the world this week, to a panoply of reactions.

How inspirational! How aspirational to see a woman in the highest office having a baby during the biggest career commitment of her life! It’s great to see a woman in power holding a baby.

As women and girls, we don’t get many chances to believably see ourselves in Ardern’s position, so it’s nice to have a template. But beyond the obvious – that women are equally capable of growing a human and doing other things – Jacinda Ardern’s pregnancy offers a few stark reminders of how far we’ve still to go to achieve the real gender parity it’s seen to represent.

1. THE CHILD PENALTY STILL EXISTS FOR WOMEN

PREDICTABLY, PM Arden has attracted the ire of the essentialists, ranging from feigned concern for the welfare of the child to the slippery-slopeism of women abandoning their biological obligations. These types see the combination of motherhood and career as not only incompatible but as a violation of the natural social order, a canary signalling the eventual downfall of civilisation. Countless male leaders have had children. No time was spent fretting for the emotional welfare of their progeny.

The myths about women being unable to split their time and attention between child-rearing and work have surfaced, as have similar about the inadequacy of men to provide for a child. Similarly concerned are the evangelists of the maternal bond, who view women in work as an aberration. Despite social progress, people still see reproduction as the zenith of the female experience.

All this chatter contributes to keeping women out of the workplace. These attitudes and beliefs lead to a social and financial penalty just for being a member of the childbearing class, even if having a child is the furthest thing from a woman’s mind.

2. DADS BEING AT HOME SHOULDN’T BE REVOLUTIONARY

DESPITE women’s advances, many still struggle to get beyond the idea of a woman as the natural and therefore best option for a child’s primary caregiver. Ask any mother who has gone out alone and been asked if dad’s “babysitting”.

Fathers are fawned over for playing with their children, wearing or feeding their babies. Things women do every day without remark. Men at home are brave, virtuous, self-sacrificing. Words we don’t apply to women who have babies. It’s 2018. There should be nothing revolutionary about the father choosing to stay at home with this child. The fact that it still is novel should be a reality check. We still see child-rearing as maternal labour, and men at home with their children as interlopers.

Clapping every time a dad stays home reinforces the idea that men don’t belong it that space. It underlines the pervasive belief that there’s something natural about a man being the breadwinner and that choosing instead to raise a child is a second-class (read: feminine) option.

3. WORKING-CLASS WOMEN ARE UNDERVALUED

THE novelty of a pregnant PM, balancing life and high-pressure career, obscures an important reality: working-class women have always worked. They remain invisible because their work is not valued similarly. Whilst they are less likely to be in high-status jobs, the sort of low-paid, informal, and piecemeal work they do form much of the invisible glue that holds society together.

My own mother worked three jobs because Widowed Mother’s Allowance didn’t come with free school meals, clothing vouchers or anything else that might have eased the burden of an unexpected bereavement. My grandmother had five children and worked when the family needed it. This was not a profound feminist statement, but the reality of raising a family in Paisley in the 60s. It’s what was necessary to pay the bills, to put food on the table and clothes on everyone’s backs. But making meals for schoolchildren or cleaning homes and hospitals are not the sorts of stories that make headlines.

Countless women balance life at home with work. They might not be doing the sort of jobs we consider a career, but they’ve made it work because they had no other option. What working-class women do to provide for their families is never lauded because where work is concerned, success = status.

So while some may roll their eyes at a public figure giving birth, think of the things behind that headline. For women, choosing between work and parenting is still seen as a zero-sum game. For men, staying home is rarely an attractive choice, and only certain types of working women are praised. Can women have it all? Not yet. Not even close.