Following weeks of chaos and division, the eventual emergence of a May-Leadsom Tory leadership race was quickly billed as the civilised, sensible contest that would focus on the way forward for Britain in the wake of the Brexit vote.

Civilised and sensible? Well, that didn’t last long, did it? Andrea Leadsom’s comments over the weekend about motherhood saw to that. Mrs Leadsom decided to use the fact that she happens to be a mother as a blunt instrument with which to beat her rival for the top job, Theresa May, who is not.

“Genuinely I feel that being a mum means you have a very real stake in the future of our country, a tangible stake,” Mrs Leadsom told The Times. “[Theresa May] possibly has nieces and nephews, but I have children who are going to have children who will directly be a piece of what comes next.”

So, being a mother makes her eminently more suitable to be Prime Minister, she appears to conclude. What an astonishing thought process, on so many levels. It’s hard to know where to start - the laughably grandiose tone is perhaps a good place. Maybe having a cat or a hamster also makes you more qualified as a politician and human being? Why is no one talking about whether they have pets?

The second thing that strikes you is the lack of, for want of a better term, “sisterhood” displayed by Mrs Leadsom. Both she and Mrs May, who are in their fifties, have spent their working lives in male-dominated professions, no doubt being judged twice as harshly as male colleagues. The fact that this didn’t engender a bit more common understanding is, quite frankly, off-putting.

Then there’s simple cruelty involved. Only a few days previously Mrs May had spoken in the media of the extreme sadness she felt at not being able to have children. For her rival to use this most personal of circumstances against her in this way is unforgivable.

But there are also, surely, more universal questions behind all of this. Why does it matter whether either of these women has children? Why is this anybody’s business but their own? Comments like this highlight that despite progress throughout society in equality, women are still primarily supposed to see themselves as walking wombs.

Of course, Mrs May isn’t the only senior politician to be judged in this way. Both First Minister Nicola Sturgeon and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have faced similar speculation and intrusion over why they do not have children. This time last year a New Statesman front cover featuring a sketch of the two of them alongside Mrs May and then-Labour leadership hopeful Liz Kendall, all staring forlornly into an empty cradle, caused a similar controversy.

But sadly, it seems we haven’t moved forward. The Home Secretary always strikes me as a very private person; you get the feeling her team felt she probably had to “address” the issue in some way.

There are a myriad of reasons why any person, male or female, does not have children. Maybe they can’t have them. Maybe they didn’t want them. Maybe they did want them but didn’t find the right partner. Maybe they felt other things were more important in their lives. All these things are valid, and also very personal. They are not things that most people would choose to discuss with anyone other than their most intimate confidante. Why should they have to explain it to a journalist? I am a woman in my forties, and I don’t have children. I cannot conceive of having to “explain myself” to a relative stranger on this issue. It’s both sad and anger-inducing that Mrs May felt she had to.

Forcing people to speak publicly about this also encourages others to place a value judgement on them. Should we pity women who don’t have children or should we judge them as selfish? Do we judge those who have children in the same way? Of course not.

And, frustratingly, it appears this line of questioning is now being extended to men as well as women. A number of newspapers focused, for example, on Andy Murray’s status as a father in the run up to yesterday’s Wimbledon final. Would the fact he is a parent help or hinder his chances of winning, they mused at length? This was not only patronising, but completely lacking in understanding of how elite sport works.

Looking at the reaction to Mrs Leadsom’s comments makes it hard to judge how they will play into the contest. After all, this incident certainly gives the previously unknown MP more name recognition going forward. Was this what she was after in the first place? Who knows. And for every young feminist outraged by what she said, there will likely be others who agree that Mrs May is somehow diminished by not being a mother. That, after all, is how society has judged women since time in memoriam.