Yesterday, I had the privilege of sitting in on the language recommendations negotiations for the Agreed Conclusions of the Commission on the Status of Women at the UN.
Tiny bit of background: the CSW does not write treaties that have the weight of international law. They simply make policy recommendations.
So, it seems to me that there is little risk involved in using strong language. What is the harm in being hopeful about what our country can do in terms of gender equity in general and equal sharing of responsibility for care giving in particular? Apparently a lot.
The three or four times we heard the US delegation speak, it was to weaken the verbs. For example, they want to change "ensure the protection of workers" to "strengthen the protection ..."
Really??!!?! These are just recommendations! What is wrong with recommending the protection of workers as opposed to recommending you do a little better job at protecting workers? I can think of way too many snide, snarky and cynical answers to that question.
The bottom line: we are not a global leader for gender equity. Far from it. There is plenty of work to do and I am in for the fight.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
faith statement:
About Me
- abbykk
- turns out i like this blogging thing... finding it a useful way to process being a seminarian, being an intern, being a seeker and being a little confused about a lot. can we call it a spiritual practice even? i will go with yes.
1 comment:
Good for you, Abby, for putting up a fight! I'm so glad you're a part of this event/opportunity b/c I know it will generate something big... I can hear it in your words. Language is such a powerful tool -- look at how the US wants to use language to downplay the importance! Shameful, just shameful...
Post a Comment