There were two words in some media reports this week about the arrival of the latest addition to the Packer dynasty which made me cringe: male heir.
Surely in this day and age, it is a notion way past its 'use by' date?
The Daily Telegraph reported: `Australia's richest baby has come into the world, with the male heir to James Packer's $4.5 billion family fortune born early on Monday eveing. Jackson Lloyd Packer was born at the Mater Misericordiae Hospital in Crows Nest. He is the fifth generation male heir of the Packer family dynasty which has at various times ruled the nation's TV airwaves, stocked magazine racks and and taken it gambling dollars.'
Do you have to have a penis to be an heir? Certainly NOT in my view.
Anyway, what's to say that Jackson or his older sister Indigo will want to go in to the family business when they are old enough?
I hope it's not a case of media putting an irrelevant gender slant on what is, really, a fluffy feel good story. After all, we have all come across news reports where gender is made an issue when it shouldn't be.
Quite simply, I am dismayed at the thought that anyone may still think it's only the first-born male of a family who can be an heir. I thought society had moved on for that misguided idea years ago!