|
Help |
Site Map
|
Beijing Plus Five:
Reviewing Women's Progress, Part Two
by Jo Freeman
<<
Part One
Women are
making a little progress into politics and government, but not yet enough to make
a difference. Currently, eleven heads of state, twelve ambassadors to Washington,
and fourteen foreign ministers are women. Women
members of Parliament held their own mini-meetings, as did women from local governments.
Phoolan
Devi, who gained renown as India's Bandit Queen, came with 18 other women
MPs. Slightly overwhelmed by the sheer number of meetings to go to, she was pessimistic
about equality coming any time soon. Women's move
into parliament has come slowly, but it has come. According to the Interparliamentary
Union, the percentage of female legislators throughout the world has risen from
11.6 in 1995 to 13.9 in 2000. Women held only 3 percent of all seats in
1955. While women's representation is still low in most countries, there are few
which have no women at all in their political bodies.
In only nine countries, eight in northern Europe plus Mozambique, are women over
thirty percent of the members of parliament (lower house if a bicameral legislature).
To remedy this there has been a push for quotas of women in representative bodies.
That is how women gained so many seats in the Scandinavian countries. While
several countries reserve seats for women in their legislative bodies, it is more
common for political parties to allocate slots on their party tickets. South
Africa's African National Congress party reserves 30 percent of parliamentary
and 50 percent of local government candidacies for women. As a result women
are 29.8 percent of S.A.'s MPs. India requires that one-third of village
council seats go to women. Less than 13 percent of US Representatives are
women, but in Canada they are almost 20 percent. The former Soviet Union
had a one-third quota for women; in the new Russia, women hold 7.7 percent of
the seats in the Duma. There was a general consensus
that women needed to get into decision making positions by any means possible.
Quotas were the most popular proposal; no one questioned whether position would
bring power. Instead there was a pervasive belief that the shear presence
of women leads to gender sensitive laws and better enforcement.
While there does appear to be more woman-sensitive legislation when parliaments
are at least 20 percent women, there is also evidence of tokenism. The
Czech Social Democratic Party has long had an internal quota of 35 percent
women in all party bodies and also has a women's bureau. But when it recently
became the Government, not one woman was appointed to the cabinet. The women
promptly formed a "shadow" cabinet, to show that there were just as many women
as men qualified to head departments.
Words, Words, Words While "unofficial" women
went to panels, seminars and discussion groups, the "official" delegates argued
over words. Nothing was voted on; every word required consensus. None of
these words were binding on any country, yet people argued over them as though
their lives depended on it. Abortion and homosexuality were the most
divisive, but underneath these debates was a basic difference between countries
who valued women only as wives and mothers and those that saw gender equality
as desirable. This difference coincided heavily, but not completely, with
that between developing and industrialized countries. Economic differences
were a subtext for the debates over sex. At the
Fourth World Conference, the buzz word was "structural adjustment" -- policies
required of governments by the International Monetary
Fund as a condition of loans which many third delegates felt hurt women.
This time it was "globalization," though what that meant was not well defined.
In a report presented by NGOs to the UN, several policies were listed which aggravated
poverty for women. They were: privatization of public services, trade liberalization,
deregulation of economies, withdrawal of subsidies, downsizing of government,
substitution of food production by cash crops and failure to monitor and regulate
foreign capital. While some wondered what difference
did all these words make, since any government can ignore them as it chooses,
others said they can have "real effects." Women use the words as a statement
of international norms when arguing for greater rights, and international agencies
use them as goals to be achieved. Joanna
Foster from Zimbabwe's
Center for Women in Law and Development in Africa said the 1995 Platform for
Action was a catalyst. Women used it to support their demands for quotas
for women when new constitutions were written. She cited laws to end discrimination
and more educational opportunities for girls as goals for which the UN document
provided leverage. Perhaps their most important
effect is to raise consciousness among the world's governments. The written
commitments made by governments, Kofi Annan said, "reflect the understanding that
women's equality must be a central component of any attempt to solve the world's
social, economic and political problems....[G]ender equality is now one of the
primary factors shaping [the international] agenda."
This realization has grown gradually since the first UN women's conference in
1975. It reached critical mass in 1992 at the Earth Summit held in Rio de
Janeiro. Although the topic was the environment, women's NGOs formed a caucus
and put their point of view in almost every part of the final document.
They did it again in the 1993
World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna, asserting that "Women's Rights
are Human Rights." And again at the Population
Conference in Cairo in 1994. In 1995, at the World
Summit on Social Development held in Copenhagen, an entire day was devoted
to women's issues. By the Beijing meeting in late summer, no one doubted
their importance. The fact that it was so difficult to agree on language
about "reproductive issues" reflected this importance, as well as the fact that
there were significant differences of opinion on what to do.
There has been a fundamentalist backlash, and it is more common to developing
countries than to developed ones. At this year's UNGASS the Vatican, Iran,
Pakistan, Libya, Sudan, Nicaragua and Algeria were particularly active in trying
to reverse the goals laid out in the Beijing Platform. But even relatively
progressive countries like India have a problem recognizing sexual preference
as a legitimate concern. However, at this meeting,
G-77 (the UN name for the caucus of developing
countries) was not a united front of opposition to reproductive issues as it has
been in the past. It was more concerned with economic progress, which many
now recognize cannot be had independently of progress for women, even when that
means that "women have the right to decide freely and responsibly on matters related
to their sexuality" and should be able to do so without "coercion, discrimination
and violence." The HIV/AIDS epidemic has forced
some to recognize that traditional attitudes toward female sexuality have forced
girls and women into sexual arrangements with men whom known to be infected. Women
have to know that their bodies belong them to resist family and community pressures
which will lead to their deaths. Violence against
women in its many forms -- war, rape, family and domestic -- was identified as
a major impediment to economic progress for women and for developing countries.
In past conferences, some countries had argued that some of these were "private"
matters and not crimes, while others (e.g. war) did not affect women worse than
men. Although the meeting was supposed to end on
Friday, the delegates weren't finished arguing. They kept at it all night,
finally leaving the UN at 5:00 a.m. Saturday after almost agreeing on a "final
outcomes" document. Feminists generally felt that
there was little progress, but were relieved that some of the language crafted
in Beijing had not been removed, as many had feared. Charlotte Bunch of
the Center for Women's Global Leadership said "We regret that there was not enough
political will on the part of some governments and the UN system to agree on a
stronger document with more concrete benchmarks, numerical goals, time-bound targets,
indicators, and resources aimed at implementing the Beijing Platform."
Others concurred. Amnesty International said in a closing release that "When it
comes to women's human rights, there is a persistent lack of political will."
Betty King,
the U.S. representative to the UN Economic and Social Council, wrote a letter
to President Clinton with an "interpretative statement" that outlined the
disagreements of the US with the final document. She also told the UNGASS
that the US believed there were key issues directly connected to issues of gender
and the furtherance of women's rights, in particular "non-discrimination on the
basis of sexual orientation" and access to safe abortions. Both were necessary
to save and protect women's lives. The "final outcomes"
document did have some improvements over the 1995 Platform for Action. These include
the goals of: - Equal access to health care, including contraception,
obstetric and material care, and greater attention to diseases such as breast,
cervical and ovarian cancer, and osteoporosis.
- Universal primary
and secondary education for both boys and girls within the next 15 years, and
a fifty percent improvement in adult literacy.
- The elimination of all
forms of discrimination against women by 2005.
- Reconciling women's employment
with family responsibilities, including better distribution of responsibilities
between men and women for child care and greater responsibility of men to prevent
unwanted pregnancies and to practice safer sex.
- Legislation "to eradicate
harmful customary or traditional practices, including female genital mutilation,
early and forced marriage and so-called honour crimes."
As in the past, the real value of both the official and NGO conferences was simply
bringing women together to exchange ideas and experiences. Courage comes
from knowing you are not alone, and after a week of exhausting meetings in New
York City, thousands of women went home ready to continue their fight for women's
rights.
|
|