Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Obama: Bring the U.S. into the 21st Century on Gender Equality

By Marjorie Cohn, AlterNet. Posted December 22, 2008.


America remains the only democracy that refuses to ratify the most significant treaty guaranteeing gender equality.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Nobel Laureate Slams the Bible, Calls It "A Catalogue of Cruelties"
Mario de Queiroz

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
Do We Really Want to Enshrine Insurance Monopoly into Law? This and 5 Other Complaints About the Health Bill
John Nichols

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
How Biased Media Can Brainwash You
Melinda Burns

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
4 Ways the Stupak Amendment Deprives Women of Access to Abortion
Jessica Arons

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Marjorie Cohn

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

 

Nearly 30 years after President Jimmy Carter signed the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), the United States remains the only democracy that refuses to ratify the most significant treaty guaranteeing gender equality.  One hundred eighty-five countries, including over 90 percent of members of the United Nations, have ratified CEDAW.  

U.S. opposition to ratification has been informed not simply by an objective analysis of how CEDAW's provisions might conflict with U.S. constitutional law.  Rather, it reflects the ideological agenda and considerable clout of the religious right and the corporate establishment. Issues of gender equality raise some of the most profound divisions between liberals and conservatives.  The right-wing agenda was born again in the Bush administration, which issued numerous directives limiting equality between the sexes. Bush targeted funding for family planning and packed the courts and his administration with anti-choice ideologues.  

The parade of horribles trumpeted by ratification opponents includes predictions that it would force the United States to pass an Equal Rights Amendment (ERA). Opposition to the ERA in the 1980s was also grounded in religious fundamentalism. There are fears that ratification may lead to the legalization of same-sex marriage, the abolition of single-sex schools, and create a nation of androgynous children.  

Much of the hysteria directed at ratification is based upon false assumptions. One opponent warned: "A messy divorce case shouldn't end up in the World Court." This is a reference to the International Court of Justice, which does not even have jurisdiction over marital dissolution cases. An editorial in Hanover, Pennsylvania's The Evening Sun predicted CEDAW backers will use the International Criminal Court as an enforcement tool. But, the International Criminal Court only has jurisdiction over war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. Cecilia Royals of the National Institute of Womanhood said, "This treaty represents a battering ram against free and democratic societies, and particularly against women with traditional values." The Weekly Standard charged the treaty "mandates complete sex equality in the military, the overthrow of market wages and implementation of 'comparable-worth' pay scales, rigid gender quotas, abortion on demand, and federally mandated child care."  Many opposed to ratification seek to protect the large corporations -- the backbone of U.S. capitalism -- from having to enact equality provisions that would imperil the bottom line.  

Although President Carter signed CEDAW in 1980, the treaty has never been sent to the full U.S. Senate for its advice and consent to ratification. When the president signs a treaty, we are forbidden from taking action inconsistent with the object and purpose of the treaty. But we don't become a party, with all the treaty obligations, until the president ratifies the treaty with the advice and consent of the Senate.  

After Ronald Reagan became president and the Republicans gained control of the Senate, CEDAW languished in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.  Neither Reagan nor President George H.W. Bush sought ratification.  Reagan made his contempt for CEDAW perfectly clear when he said that once adopted, the treaty would lead to "sex and sexual differences treated as casually and amorally as dogs and other beasts treat them."  

In 1994, at the behest of the Clinton administration, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held hearings and recommended full Senate approval of CEDAW. Yet Committee chairman Jesse Helms continued to hold CEDAW hostage by keeping it from a vote in the Senate. In response to a last-minute campaign against ratification fueled by radio talk shows, a "hold" was placed on the treaty, preventing the full Senate from voting on it.  

Five years later, 10 female members of the House of Representatives, including Nancy Pelosi, delivered to a hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (the Committee) a letter supporting ratification, signed by 100 members of Congress. Jesse Helms scolded them with, "Now you please be a lady," before ordering uniformed officers to "[e]scort them out."  


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: obama, gender equality, cedaw, convention on the elimina

Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, president of the National Lawyers Guild, and the US representative to the executive committee of the American Association of Jurists.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Stop sex prejudice
Posted by: luzmejor on Dec 24, 2008 2:29 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People who live from the labor of others treat their employees the same way they treat women in the home. Employees have obligations, their overseers have none. The model of the nuclear family is the model for the nation as a whole.

It is a false and evil example.

It is very plain that we have not gotten rid of any prejudices and are still identifying many more of those peculiar attitudes that label all sorts of people as "inferior."

Why can't even the most educated people in our nation see those arguments for the farce they are?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Be Afraid
Posted by: bobtr900 on Dec 24, 2008 11:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is, but, another example of religious-repub discrimination toward others: women, in this case.

If a large percentage of women threatened to leave the USA for non discriminating countries this agenda against women would suddenly turn around. Likewise, if large numbers of women threatened the withdrawal of sex.

Were it up to the Republican party and the RR's (the Religious Right) there would still be lynchings of Blacks in America and religion would be supporting those lynchings.

As I have said many times before: does anyone actually think that the mess of the past eight years would just go away if the Religious Right stopped gays and ended abortion? Gays and abortion are just the tip of the iceberg.

The time for all good men to do something is right now, and it is everyday. Because in some way we are ALL, everyone of us, some kind of minority.

Right now women and gays are taking the brunt of the onslaught. During WWII the Jews took the brunt of the onslaught. Tomorrow the Bell Tolls for everyone of us on the left.

Does anyone actually think Schlafly, O'Reilly, Hannity, Buchanan, Noonan, Malkin, Ingraham, Santorum, Scalia, Dobson, Robertson, Hagee, Lahaye, Warren, et.al, are just going to stop at gays and women.These people intend to force their personal and economic beliefs on ALL of the rest of us. And when they win, they will use their political muscle and if necessary their 'military might' (Palin, God told her) to drive their personal theo-economic agenda into other countries of the world. Right now it's Iraq and Afghanistan.

Just wait, they will start on Canada if they are not stopped in America. That is why I often mention WWIII, WWIV and WWV as regards all of these kinds of issues. Just look at what happened during WWII to the Jews and be very afraid. Just look at what happened to Blacks before WWII, and be very afraid.

No matter how much the Repub party and the Religious Right scream that it's not the same, it IS exactly the same. Scalia made their agenda clear when he called for the END of the Rule of Law and the END of democracy in America. This is exactly what they intend to do.

If you doubt it, just remember what the Repubs and their associated religions, including my own, the Catholic Church, has been doing since they put St. Reagan into the WH. He was their 'point man' for this unending hate toward us liberals. It has not yet stopped and it will never stop.

And don't give me that crap about taking cheap shots at the Catholic Church, because it is at the very core of this entire mess of allowing killings for corporate profits. Theo-Fascism abounds in America. The Republican party of thugs and bullies IS the 'gathering place' for not only the Cons and the Neocons but includes the Theocons, as well. 'Moral Relativism' and 'Cafeteria Catholicism' is rampant among them.

These people have not been stopped they have just been slowed down a little bit, and only for now. The only thing that slowed them down is the American voter. At this very moment that voter is being attacked. The Repubs and their associated religions are attacking that voter, the middle class and lower socio-economic class, the UAW auto worker. IOW, the aforementioned are attempting to use economic intimidation to achieve their goals.

All of this crap about Pro-Life and Family Values is just that, crap. The Right Wingers will do their best to force Theo-Economic slavery upon the American worker and his family. Just as they are doing right now upon Iraqi and Afghani families, a well as the families of our troops.

Family destruction for Theo-Economic purposes is a central tactic. If you doubt it just look at what is and has been going on in the Latin American countries, where poverty and human degradation abounds.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Cohn must first confront denial of equal protection to U.S women
Posted by: Twiss Butler on Dec 25, 2008 10:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Before marshalling a detailed rationale for U.S. ratification of the CEDAW Convention, and begging Barack Obama to advance it, Professor Marjorie Cohn should stop trying to bypass the blatant fact that sex discrimination is not unconstitutional under the U. S. Constitution.

Asked in 1983 by Justice Powell if his argument that Bob Jones University's policy against interracial dating violated the 14th Amendment applied to sex as well as race, Justice Dept. lawyer William Coleman Jr. promptly responded, "No! We didn't fight a Civil War over sex discrimination and we didn't pass a constitutional amendment against it." The Supreme Court did not disagree. To pretend that this denial of equal protection does not matter is to maintain the Great American Family Secret that has been successfully maintained by just this sort of disingenuous, self-protective go along get along behavior by generations of women academic, legal, and political professionals.

Professor Cohn's review of the arguments against the Equal Rights Amendment sticks to the superficial explanation that it was defeated by religious conservatives. Far more politically significant was the fact that the amendment was opposed actively or passively by men in general, since keeping women selectively unequal pays off for men, whatever their stated position, just as all discrimination pays off for the class with the power to impose it. Male congressional sponsors held women advocates to a weak interpretation of what equal protection of the law should mean when it meant equality to a human standard that acknowledged the needs of women as well as men, not just equality for women if they could fit into a template shaped to the needs of men alone.

Thus certain claims intended to sink the amendment that Professor Cohn describes in Phyllis Schlafly’s words as “horribles” included certain key sex discrimination issues for which women should have been standing tall. Instead, by rushing to reassure supporters that “ERA has nothing to do with” these issues, ERA leaders as good as drew a target on these issues and invited opponents to shoot there.

This politically short-sighted tactic sabotaged the envisioning of a powerful ERA that would protect women from legal barriers to abortion, a quintessential form of sex discrimination that imposes on those impregnated without limiting the reproductive options of those who do the impregnating. Other issues were the sneaky “benign discrimination” arrangements like illusory “benefits” for women in the draft (combat) exemption that denied women full citizenship, single sex schools whose only distinguishing lesson is the notion of an all-determining biological “difference,” and auto insurance price “breaks” for women which misattributed women’s lower accident frequency to biology instead of the fact that men’s cars were driven more miles and had proportionately more accidents than women’s. Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation was never correctly identified as sex discrimination and has now been taken over as a 14th Amendment equal protection issue that works fully only for men.

These are just a few examples of the policy of avoidance of reality that defeated the Equal Rights Amendment and are making the campaign for CEDAW both a futile effort and a joke on women – much like the dishonest rationale for Roe V. Wade decision that asserts First Amendment rights for a class – women – whose constitutional rights have never been affirmed. Even the 19th Amendment that ratified women’s right to vote is of little use as long as all media of communication act as a filter that prevents presentation of issues central to women’s lives with dignity and respect.
For a more thorough analysis of the issues I have raised here, see: www.equality4women.org.

Twiss Butler
Alexandria, VA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement