PAGE 2
WOMEN’S INEQUITIES GLOBAL
BY NORA 0. W ILDE
The United Nations has scheduled a World Conference
for Women to be held in Beijing in September 1995. This official
governmental conference is being held to assess the changes in
the ten years since the end of the U.N. Decade for Women,
1976-1985.
Earlier optimism about improving lives of women
worldwide has given way to the realization that change does
not equate with progress, that equal laws do not translate into
equal treatment.
Documents adopted by the three women's conferences
(in Mexico City in 1976, in Copenhagen in 1980, and in Nairobi
in 1985) provide a comprehensive list of issues that cause or
perpetuate women's unequal access to resources, services and
jobs. The Beijing conference is charged with identifying the
major obstacles to women's advancement.
Recognizing women's problems was a necessary first
step; many early development programs ignored or undercut
women's needs because the extent of women's contribution to
their countries' economies remained invisible due to work
definitions and perceptions.
Research has now documented women's multi-faceted
activities; donor agencies, governments and non-governmental
organizations have introduced programs designed to ameliorate
the lives of poor women in both rural and urban areas. Like all
development programs, mistakes are easier to present than
successes. Further, trying to solve all women's problems at once
deflects the impact and defuses accountability.
Clearly the 1995 conference requires a new approach.
Yet the protocol that proceeds international conferences is
difficult to change, its steps obscure and are etched in tradition.
Prepatory conferences set up by the U.N. Commission on
the Status of Women and attended by all interested
governments and by non-government organizations add issues
and sharpen views. Meetings of the five regional commissions
(Latin America, West Asia, East Asia and the Pacific, Africa,
and Europe) add their concerns. Consensus is more easily
reached by expanding the lists of problems and issues rather
than electing priorities that each government would then be
expected to implement.
A new approach is more likely to come from the global
women's movement. It was the Second Wave that pressured for
the first conference and that prompted governments and
international agencies to adopt programs that responded to
women as well as to men or to children.
This new approach calls for women to meet in
conferences, seminars, or working groups to discuss women's
conditions worldwide. The goal of each meeting is to identify a
handful of critical issues that can be easily explained and
understood; that have important ripple effects; and that can be
monitored effectively.
The U.S. Council for INSTRAW, the U.N.
International Research and Training Institute for the
MORE IN 94
In spite of the political conservatives' (read pundits)
eagerness to write an obituary for the women's political
movement, 1994’s signs are suggesting just the opposite: that '94
might be an even stronger year for statewide women candidates
than 1992. Predictably, the (male) pundits would rather ignore
women's increasing political strength, so don't expect to read
this story in the mainstream press.
If 1992 was the "Year of the Woman," the hoopla was
mostly around Congressional races, where the net gains were
dramatic (200% in the Senate and 68% in the House), but the
small (4 seats in the Senate and 18 in the House). Although
women gained in state legislatures and statewide elected
offices, those gains were less dramatic and absent at the
gubernatorial level.
After the '92 elections, leaders of the women's political
movement were quick to caution against excessive optimism for
'94. They sressed that the Congressional gains were almost
entirely in open seats (3 or 4 in the Senate and 21 or 24 in the
House), which were unusually plentiful because of redistricting
and the House banking scandal. Feminist leaders make their
top priority the reelection of the 1992 winners and hope that
continued hard work might produce a few more govemorsnips.
But at this point in '94 the prospects for women
statewide candidates are significantly better than was foreseen
a year ago. The principle reason is that three times the number
of women are running this cycle than in '92.
Conscious of the lessons of '92, women are focusing
particularly on open seats. In fact, women are potential
contenders in almost every open race, except for governors' races
in the South.
This level of competitiveness represents a significant
gain over '92. In Senate races that year, women competed for 5
or 8 open seats, winning 3; in gubernatorial races, women
competed for only 2 of 8 open seats, winning none. Clearly, the
high number of opportunities is likely to produce additional
victories.
In addition, women arc strong challengers in a number of
aces. Strong gubernatorial challengers include Kathleen Brown
(D-Calif.), Dawn Clark Netsch (D-I1L), Bonnie Campbell (D-
Iowa), Debbie Stabenow (D-Minn), and Jan Laverty Jones (D-
Nev). Senate challengers are led by Linda Kushner (D-R.L).
Finally, women's political giving continues to rise.
EMILY’S List, for example, has already raised $1.2 million. At
this point in the previous cycle, EMILY hadn't even begun
raising money for candidates.
-NOW NEWS
u
o
Advancement of Women, is promoting such conferences
throughout the United States.
Each local conference will have its own character and
focus, but each will produce a series of priorities. In each locale,
other organizations will become part of the organizing
committee.
The intent is to broaden the audience so that women's
issues are widely discussed and all the U.N. agencies for women
become better known. The expectation is that as more
conferences are held, the media will begin to report on women's
efforts to improving women's lives around the world.
Two conferences were held in June. The West Virginia
University Center for Women's Studies conference had six other
co-sponsors. Discussion focused on the single topic of "Women
and the West Virginia Economy: State and International
Perspectives." Better information on jobs and job training, data
disaggregated by gender and more women on policy boards were
among the priorities defined.
The Bay Area Forum and Fair held at the University of
California, Berkeley, sought to emulate the U.N. world
conferences by intermixing discussion with songs, dances and
exhibitions of art and organizations.
Coordinators of the ten working groups had been
meeting for months to produce background materials and to
select themes.
The proposed priorities illustrate the difficulty in
framing issues in the form of a policy or program that can be
acted on. Subsequent conferences will no doubt refine these ideas
as well as add their own perspectives to Priorities 95.
Policies and programs identified by the Priorities 95
conferences in the U.S. will be collected for distribution around
the country and at the international Priorities 95 workshops in
Beijing. But taking the Priorities 95 to Beijing is not the
ultimate goal. The U.N. itself has no implementing power;
rather it tries to inform and influence governments,
organizations and the media.
While the official governmental conference and the
NGO Forum in Beijing provide opportunities for activist women
from around the world to meet each other and exchange ideas
and to dramatize events for the media, the institutions with
power to introduce new policies or to fund new programs are
largely governmental.
Thus, at each level — local, national and international
- the constituency for Priorities 95 are three:
- Women's groups who can use the ideas to focus on
their own work;
- Governments who might be convinced to carry out
these priority programs or institute these policies;
-- The media which can educate the general population
about issues concerning women and how to address them.
Highlights of Priorities 95 are:
Violence: Women's rights must be recognized as human
rights. Rape as a weapon of war should be declared an
international war crime. The U.N. should establish
international safe havens for women abused in war or by
governments.
Health: Pregnancy should be elevated to a community
service equivalent to jury or army service. Health needs of
women must be met in each of the life cycle stages.
Reproductive: Self-determination must be guaranteed.
Education: All 7-year-old girls should be in school by
the year 2000. An awareness action guide to educate and
empower girls will be developed and field tested in the U.S.
and abroad. Once perfected, this guide should be widely
adopted.
Environment: The industrialized north must accept the
environmental consequences of their consumer policy.
Gender impact statements: Should be an integral part
of all policies, programs and activities undertaken in the
implementation of Agenda 21 passed at the U.N. conference.
Politics: Women should be eligible to run for elected
office at all levels of government from national to community.
Women's government and U.N. positions must increase.
Supporting women's non-governmental groups is essential for
empowerment.
Work: Minimum wage should be related to the market
to provide a livelihood. Prostitution should be decriminalized.
Media: Lists of women experts should be provided to
radio and TV. Media should be encouraged to increase wom ens “4
representation to 50%. Women should be trained in all facets Of
broadcasting and filming.
Housing: Women should have rights to own a house and
the land under it, and have first call on any government
subsidized housing. Alternative types of housing must be
encouraged to allow innovative and affordable facilities for
women with children and women living alone at any age.
Refugees: Gender persecution should qualify a woman
as a refugee. Refugee camps need to provide protection for
women alone.
Grassroots: Women organizing need access to
information. Issues of difference within each country must be
recognized in policies and programs.
Persons to contact for Priorities 95 conferences scheduled
for 1994 include:
January 29: Lisa Griffin -- Society for International
Development, Women in Development at American University,
N ew York City, N.Y. (202) 737-5478.
March 8: Mariam Chamberlain — National Council for
Research on Women, Bay Area-II, S.F., Calif. (212) 274-0730.
March 8: Sherry Keith — San Francisco State
University (510) 548-8340; Elsa Chaney — University of Iowa
(319) 335-0368.
April: Jane Jaquette -- Occidental College, Los Angeles
(310) 828-5849.
Persons to contact for Project 95 conferences still in
planning stages are: Mary Chen - Boston (617) 495-0797; Kathy
Jones - Bunting Institute San Diego, San Diego State University
(619) 594-6524; Avonne Fraser - Minnesota (612) 625-2505;
Nancy Lewis - Humphrey Institute Hawaii, University of
Hawaii, Manoa (808) 956-8465; and Lisa Prugi - Miami,
Florida State University (305) 534-6687.
This article has been reprinted from NOW NEWS,
which is published by the Bend, Ore., chapter of the National
Organization for Women. Nora Wilde is a member of the news
staff.
Cannon Beach.Oregon