Inadequacies in U.S. Legislation and CEDAW’s Ability to Correct Such Laws

The 1994 Violence Against Women’s Act is undoubtedly a landmark piece of legislation that combats the physical abuse, sexual abuse, emotional abuse, and threats against women.  However, although the VAWA has been proactive in combating domestic violence, there are still more than 4 million women a year that report injuries from current or former partners in the United States.  For the United States to be considered a legitimate democracy and innovator of the free world, discrimination against women must be expelled from our society, and in order to assist in this process CEDAW ratification is a must.  Regardless, what some critics may say about CEDAW in accordance with U.S. law, if there’s a possibility that ratifying the treaty  may prevent just one incident of domestic violence, I thoroughly believe that ratification will be well warranted.

Many of those opposed to U.S. ratification of CEDAW make the claim that the U.S. already has laws in place to combat discrimination against women, i.e. VAWA, Fourteenth Amendment, and Title IX.  I argue that although some laws may be in place, they are for one, not enough, and for two, ineffective; in particular VAWA.  According to the National Organization for Women, “women experience about 4.8 million intimate partner-related physical assaults and rapes every year.  Less than 20 percent of battered women sought medical treatment following an injury.”¹ Some may be surprised that seven-teen years following the passing of VAWA there are still 4.8 million incidents involving domestic violence which is equivalent to roughly 13,000 incidents per day.  However, I offer one short observation that questions the U.S.’s commitment to gender discrimination and its lack of implementation.  The Fourteenth Amendment which includes the “Equal Protection Clause” was ratified in 1868; it took ninety-six years for legislative implementation of the Fourteenth Amendment through the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Moreover, it took 126 years for legislative implementation to protect women when Congress passed VAWA.  This is an unacceptable fact that reeks with the unsavory realization that U.S. lawmakers are not committed to human rights, let alone women’s rights.


Domestic violence which I consider to be an epidemic because of the overwhelming number of incidents per year, I also consider to be a public health issue that affects the community as well as the victim.  According to the Center for Disease Control, “4.8 million intimate partner related physical assaults and rapes… resulted in 1,544 deaths.”² Coupled with these incidents was $8.3 billion in costs for, “medical care, mental health services, and lost productivity (e.g., time away from work)”³ in 2003 alone.

The United States which is only one of five permanent members of the UN’s Security Council must for the reason of domestic violence alone ratify CEDAW which is also closely related to the Declaration on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.  The declaration is particularly important to this relationship because it deals directly with the definition of domestic violence as stated in Article 2 (a), “Physical, sexual and psychological violence occurring in the family, including battering, sexual abuse of female children in the household, dowry-related violence, marital rape, female genital mutilation and other traditional practices harmful to women, non-spousal violence and violence related to exploitation.”⁴ Although articles in the declaration are not binding, they are however, binding to members of CEDAW.  With a clear understanding of domestic violence which is provided in the declaration there comes a clear method of implementation which the convention provides.  For example, Article 5 of CEDAW clearly states, “States parties shall…modify the social and cultural patterns of conduct of men and women, with a view to achieving the elimination of prejudices and customary and all other practices which are based on the idea of the inferiority or the superiority of either of the sexes or on stereotyped roles for men and women.”⁵  

In closing, ratifying CEDAW is not the finish line for eliminating violence against women.  However, with the reports and recommendations that come with being a member to the treaty, they will undoubtedly strengthen the effectiveness and legitimacy of current U.S. laws that denounce violence against women, particularly VAWA.  These reports and recommendations come to the U.S. as low cost and high reward.  Until the U.S. ratifies CEDAW millions of women will be overlooked in the legislative regards of congress, as well as continue to be victims of domestic violence.  In order for the U.S. to maintain its reputation as the leading democratic nation in the world, women’s rights must be addressed through CEDAW ratification.

Post by Nicholas

Notes:

 

1.      1.   "Violence Against Women in the United States: Statistics." National Organization for Women. N.p., 2011. Web. 15 Apr 2011. <http://www.now.org/issues/violence/stats.html>.

2.      2.    "Understanding Intimate Partner Violence." Fact Sheet 2006 n. pag. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Web. 15 Apr 2011. <http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/dvp/ipv_factsheet.pdf>.

3.      3.    Ibid.

4.      4.    United Nations. General Assembly. Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women. , 1993. Web. 15 Apr 2011. <http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/48/a48r104.htm>.

5.    United Nations. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. , 1981. Web. 15 Apr 2011. <http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/text/econvention.htm>.

  

Violence Against Women in Egypt

                                                           Women campaigning in Cairo (2005)

There have been many gains in the consequences for people who commit violence against women in Egypt. The report submitted to the CEDAW committee on 28 January 2010 provided an update of the improvements made in Egypt in terms of women's rights. Egypt ratified the convention in 1981 and has been working towards the equality of women with notable success.

Not so long ago, there were laws on the books that exempted rapists from facing a prison term if they married their victim. Since that law has been repealed, there have been many advancements in combating violence against women. There has been more research and surveys done to determine the situation of violence that women deal with and perceive. Law enforcement officers are trained periodically so that they are prepared to deal with situations where women are experiencing violence. And their have been harsher penalties established for those who commit these crimes.

Violence against women is an issue that spans more areas than just physical abuse and neglect. It also encompasses the issue of female circumcision, which is now punishable by criminal courts in Egypt. The country now considers this procedure a violation of a woman's body and something that causes her physical harm, which constitutes violence. The rates of female have dropped dramatically in 2005, especially in urban areas where around 40% of girls receive the procedure. Though that number still seems high, compare it with a time when almost 100% of girls were circumcised.

However, there are still many challenges in Egypt in regard to violence against women. Some of these include:

• Many Women refrain from speaking openly about family violence or
reporting it to the police, as they consider it a family matter.
• Women's self-image. Some women, especially in rural areas where
education levels are low, still accept certain practices and would not think
about complaining about them.
• Reactionary ideas, individual practices, and negative customs persist in
society.
• Violent incidents have increased due to behavioural changes attributed to
the influence of violence in foreign films and media, which the Egyptian
cinema has begun to imitate.

There are many future efforts that continue to counter violence against women. Women must be better educated on their human rights. Many women still do not consider themselves equal to men, and therefore see violence as their fault or something they deserve. There must also be better education about violence in the media, specifically foreign films that portray graphic images of violence against women. There needs to be more safe houses established for women and children who are victims of violence. Overall the situation in Egypt has improved greatly with the ratification of CEDAW and will continue to make improvements under the committee's supervision.

Post by Meghan

"Egypt: Combined Sixth and Seventh Periodic Reports to CEDAW | Women Living Under Muslim Laws." Women Living Under Muslim Laws. 28 Jan. 2010. Web. 28 Apr. 2011. http://www.wluml.org/node/5913

A Timeline of CEDAW in the United States

1979: The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), a treaty to address all forms of discrimination against women was created and sent to countries for ratification.

July 1980: President Jimmy Carter signs CEDAW and submitted it to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee before leaving office, but it was not passed during his term.

1980-1990: Under the Reagan and Bush Senior Administrations, the treaty stalled in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee not going anywhere.

1990: The Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing about CEDAW.

1993: The United States finally announces its intention to ratify CEDAW at the UN World Conference on Human Rights.

1994: The Clinton Administration expresses support of CEDAW; CEDAW passed in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with a 13-5 vote; despite the Committee's recommendation for ratification, a group of conservative senators put a hold on the treaty, preventing it from passing in Senate and reverting it back to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee where it stalled again.

1995: The United States makes a commitment to ratify CEDAW by 2000 at the UN Fourth World Conference on Women (unfortunately this is not achieved).

1996: Many state legislatures have already passed resolutions supporting CEDAW; this year marks the first whereby state counties and cities start to pass pro-CEDAW resolutions, but the nation as a whole is still not passing it.

1998: The city of San Francisco becomes the first to adopt a CEDAW ordinance within the city, they undergo a critical gender analysis of all government activities in order to implement new policies that reflect nondiscriminatory practices in public life, their efforts show how even the most simple ordinances which seemingly have nothing to do with gender can have unintended implications which need to be addressed.

2002: The Bush Administration takes an initial position in support of CEDAW, quoted, as calling it is "generally desirable"; under the chairmanship of Joe Biden, Democrat from Delaware, and with growing Congressional support. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee passes CEDAW with a 12-7 vote, but it is never debated in Senate.

2002-2008: It stalled many times between the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the State Department for the review of RUDs.

March 2009: President Obama sent the treaty to the State Department where the document was reviewed with the 2002 Senate Foreign Relations Committee's RUDs by an Interagency Working Group.

Post by Sara

All information from:

“Understanding CEDAW: A Timeline.” Physicians for Human Rights. 27 April 2011. .

Women in the 2009 Iranian Election

The primary media focus on Iran’s 2009 election centers on the June protests, deemed the “biggest unrest since the 1979 revolution,” and centered around protests against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection. What was then overlooked was the presence of women’s rights and CEDAW in the array of presidential candidates, surprising considering Iran is one of the 7 nations yet to ratify the Convention.

President Ahmadinejad’s position on women remains conservative, promoting women in traditional roles. His administration renamed the Center for Women’s Participation to the Center for Women and Families, and adopted the Social Safety program which emphasizes traditional dress and restricts women’s education, as well as proposed provisions to the Family Support Bill (which have since been removed) to lesson restrictions on polygamy and tax the Mehrieh, money paid to women as specified in their marriage contract.

Mohsen Rezaee also maintained conservative views, emphasizing traditional roles of women, especially as housewives. He insisted steps would be taken to ensure equality of women for society, simultaneously assuring that salaries and insurance would be provided to housewives in Iran. Rezaee also declared pursuit of policies to balance familial responsibilities between men and women, promote women’s organizations, and encourage fair distribution of opportunities across realms for women.

Mehdi Karoubi’s stance on women and civil rights included the need to revise discriminatory laws and include women in governmental and state decisions in positions such as ministers and on the council of experts.  Karoubi specifically urged signing onto CEDAW, in addition to including articles in the Iranian constitution to support women’s rights. He also noted the importance of housewives in social structure, but also emphasized the importance of educational opportunities and access for women.

Karoubi’s progressive stance on human rights, and specifically women’s rights, aligns with Mirhossein Mousavi’s position as the primary challenger to Ahmadinejad. Mousavi released detailed policy initiatives to adopt as President which included reviewing discriminatory laws and reversing restrictions on women’s opportunities for education implemented by Ahmadinejad. Mousavi also encouraged ratifying CEDAW, though with reservations to “ensure that it is in line with Islamic and cultural values.”

2009 marks the first time women’s rights were discussed in such detail during an election. To read more, and read about several other trends in the electoral process in regards to women, check out this article.

Post by Hannah.

Ardalan, Davar I. "Iranian Women Demand Change." NPR, 5 June 2009. Web. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/sundaysoapbox/2009/06/women_rights_factors_in_irans.html>.

"Poll Results Prompt Iran Protests." AJE - Al Jazeera English. 14 June 2009. Web. <http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/06/2009613172130303995.html>.

CEDAW Case in Hungary

In 2004, a Hungarian woman brought forward a complaint that she had been sterilized without her permission by medical staff at a Hungarian hospital. She had gone in to give birth, but the child was already dead and Caesarian was performed. Before the procedure was to take place she was given a consent form, which featured a small written note mentioning the sterilization - the word sterilization was in Latin.

The woman only found out she was sterilized after the procedure when she asked a doctor how long she would have to wait to have another child.

CEDAW (the Committee) decided that Hungary had failed to comply with Articles 12 (requires appropriate services in connection to pregnancy), 10 (rights to information on family planning), and 16 (being able to decide on number of children to have and when). To remedy the situation, the Committee recommended that the woman be compensated, and that Hungary review its laws dealing with consent and sterilization.

In 2008 the Hungarian government amended existing laws so that the processes of providing information and the obtaining consent were improved. In 2009 the sterilized woman was financially compensated.

The full text of the case can be found here.

Post by Erin

San Francisco: A League of Their Own

Despite the U.S.’s negligence to ratify CEDAW, San Francisco in 1998 passed Ordinance 128-98.  The ordinance’s focus was human rights and in particular women’s rights.  San Francisco used CEDAW as a tool to base much of the ordinance’s legislation on.  Ordinance 128-98 is the first of its kind in the U.S. and in many ways follows through with principles laid out in CEDAW better than some of CEDAW’s own member states.  “[T]he CEDAW human rights framework requires proactive efforts to ensure that government policies, practices and services do not inadvertently reinforce historic patterns of inequality based on gender, race, ethnicity, and other forms of identity.”¹ Ordinance 128-98 commits San Francisco to constant ongoing assessments which have impacted numerous city departments such as the Arts Commission, the Department of the Environment, and the Department of Public Works.  San Francisco’s “CEDAW” Ordinance has undoubtedly advanced the city in a direction that the U.S. can only hope to emulate when or if it ever ratifies the treaty.

All municipal bodies are charged with the obligation to complete a gender analysis.  The analysis supplies a structure that considers, “the cultural, economic, social, civil, legal, and political relations between women and men, while taking account of the ways that gender is inextricably linked to other identity categories like race, immigration status, sexual orientation, age, ethnicity, class, ability, and language.”² The Arts Commission was one of the first to notice a discrepancy with their policy and how it inadvertently prevented some women from participation.  For Instance, in order for anyone to obtain a space or area to sell their artwork they must be present at 8:30 a.m. for a lottery selection.  However, 8:30 a.m. in any city in the U.S. including San Francisco conflicts with parents and their obligation to drop their children off at school.  The Arts Commission immediately and graciously changed its policy and no longer necessitates the artist’s themselves to be present at the time of the lottery drawing.

The Department of the Environment has also benefited immensely from the CEDAW review process.  One implementation that was made in the department was more flexible work options.  One of these options included a program known as the 9/80 program.  This program permits department employees, “to work eight nine hour days and one eight hour day in a two week period so that they could have the tenth day off.”³ One could see how this can benefit a single mother financially considering that’s one less payment for daycare in a two week term.  It also allows department employees to start their shifts at any point between 6:30 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. which in turn allows a mother more flexibility to either drop their child off at school or daycare.  The flexible time programs are commonly used by many department employees, including men.

The CEDAW review process has also assisted in targeting city services that on the surface may seem “gender neutral” but in all actuality are not.  For example, “[t]he Department [of Public Works] highlighted street lighting as one such thing…men and women have a need to feel safe, ‘a woman, in particular, may fear sexual assault, making her feel more vulnerable than a man’ so increasing ‘lighting on dark streets, in parking lots, or near public facilities creates a more equitable outcome.”⁴ Something as small as better illuminated streets which leads to a stronger feeling of safety is not only a beneficial impact that CEDAW provided, but, it came at an extremely cheap price. 

In conclusion, this article has not even scratched the surface of Ordinance 128-98 in its entirety.  However, these few examples provided prove two important factors.  First, CEDAW unquestionably provides advantageous tools to combat discrimination against women.  Second, with San Francisco as proof, once implementation of CEDAW has been enacted into legislation, American’s come together to support and fulfill the obligations laid out in its text.

Post by Nicholas

Notes:
1.  Liebowitz, Debra J. "RESPECT, PROTECT, FULFILL Raising the Bar on Women’s Rights in San Francisco." WOMEN’S INSTITUTE FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS. (2008): p. 1
2.  Ibid. p. 2
3.  Ibid. p. 7
4.  Ibid. p. 7

Women and Political Participation

As of 2010, fewer than one-fifth of the world members of parliament are women. This number, although low, has drastically increased with the influence of CEDAW. The Convention has helped eliminate laws that discriminate against women in the public sphere, which has contributed to the increasing numbers of women in politics. Article 7 of CEDAW calls for the elimination of discrimination of women in the political and public life of the country, and Article 8 states that women must equally participate as government representatives at the international level and work in international organizations. Those two articles alone grant women many rights to participate in the government, which can lead to things like equal education rights and protection against physical violence. The more women present in the government, the more likely that women's rights will be addressed.

The country of Kuwait ratified CEDAW in 1994, but failed to grant women the right to vote. The CEDAW committee addressed the issue in 2004 calling on the government to "take all necessary steps, as a matter of the utmost urgency, to introduce and actively support the adoption of legislation to amend the discriminatory provisions of the Electoral Law... in order to ensure compliance with the Convention." The following year, the government in Kuwait granted women the right to vote. In 2009, women in Kuwait were elected to the country's parliament, a record breaking feat after being given voting rights just four years earlier.

There is an amazing organization called CEDAW in Action in Southeast Asia that promotes the development and advancement of women in a part of the world where there were previously very few rights for women. In terms of political participation, women have made great advancements in this region, primarily because of the establishment of quotas for women in office. These measures are temporary and are used to boost female participation until it becomes the norm. In Cambodia specifically, many of the government representatives are still men. The Committee to Promote Women in Politics (CPWP), set up in 2005, is a group of seven Cambodian NGOs, committed to promoting the inclusion of women in public decision-making. This group was instrumental in the recent local government elections, campaigning for female candidates and educating female leaders on advancing the rights of women.

Some of the major concerns that still exist in Cambodia are the quota system and the qualifications of women. Men in office take issue with forcing a certain number of women in to political office, but because it is a temporary policy, it is generally accepted. The second issue is women's education. Governments from a few decades ago only allowed women to receive an education for a short period of time before they joined the workforce. Many of the women who are of age to be elected have limited education and have spent most of their years working in factories or as maids. However, in the 2007 local elections, women made up 21% of those elected to office, as opposed to 15% in 2002. This shows definite progress that the government attributes to CEDAW.

Post by Meghan.

Ann Warner. 2010. "Recognizing Rights, Promoting Progress: The Global Impact of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women." International Center for Research of Women: Washington, D.C.

CEDAW in Action in Southeast Asia. Promoting Women's Participation in Public Decision-Making.
http://cedaw-seasia.org/cambodia_WomensParticip_DecisionMaking.html

CEDAW as a Tool in the Court Room

Another argument for the ratification of CEDAW is its use as a tool for women in court cases of sex discrimination. In the United States, where there have been laws and policies implemented and constitutional amendments added for the equality of women, women still lack the ability to argue against sex discrimination in certain cases because they cannot use CEDAW as a tool. There have been cases in many countries which have ratified CEDAW, in which women have used articles straight from the report in order to win cases they would have otherwise had no chance of winning. Because of the ratification of CEDAW, women in some surprising countries have been able to win court cases and go against traditions and customary laws and have made some unprecedented changes. Although CEDAW is implemented differently in each country depending on their current situation, these following examples prove that CEDAW is effective and would be effective in the United States as well.

Uganda:
October 21, 2002 in the case, Uganda v. Matovu, a judge from the High Court of Uganda at Kampala used Article 1 of CEDAW to rule that one of their common law rules was unconstitutional and therefore null and void in this case. A man had been accused of defilement against a woman and typically this type of case would have been easily closed in favor of the man because of uncorroborated evidence with the use of a common law which states that the court is expected to “warn itself that it is dangerous to act upon the uncorroborated evidence of the victim [of a sexual offense] and before so acting must satisfy itself that the victim is a truthful witness” (Warner). Because the judge used Article 1 of the CEDAW report and declined to use this law, the women was able to win the case and seek justice. Without the use of CEDAW, the judge would have been inclined to use this common law and the woman most likely would have lost her case.

Bangladesh:
The Bangladesh National Women’s Lawyer Association, in 2009 after a court case in India, “argued that there was a ‘legislative vacuum’ that resulted in ‘harrowing tales of repression and sexual abuse of women at their workplace, educational institutions and other government and non-governmental organizations’ ” (Warner). The court then used CEDAW, mainly article 11, to evaluate their Constitution and use the guidelines of CEDAW to draft legislation, with this in mind the High Court of Bangladesh reached a decision to prohibit sexual harassment which had been seen as “a major barrier to the active participation of women in the workplace” (Warner). This landmark decision of the court now gives women a tool to fight sexual discrimination and harassment in the workplace.

Kenya:
Kenya has had three main court cases in which CEDAW has been used as a tool. The first is the case In re Wachokire in 2002, in which the brother of an unmarried woman claimed that he should get a greater portion of land after their father passed away. The brother tried to use the Kikuyu customary law which stated that any unmarried woman lacked equal inheritance rights due to the fact that she is expected to get married and would then have land in her husband’s name. The Chief Magistrate’s Court ruled that this customary laws violated Article 15 of CEDAW, “which provides for legal equality between women and men” (Warner), as well as being in violation of the Kenya Constitution. Because of this decision and the use of CEDAW the woman received an equal portion of land as her brother.
In the second case, Rono v Rono , two men argued that they deserved greatest shares of their fathers land than his widow or sister by arguing “according to Keiyo traditions, girls have no right to inheritance of their father’s estate” (Warner). But the Kenya’s Court of Appeals ruled that the non-discrimination standards of their Constitution and human rights agreements, which included CEDAW, prevailed over this tradition. A third case in 2008 was very similar, a man “argued that Masai customary law did not recognize a daughter’s right to inherit property from her father’s estate” (Warner). In this case the court used the decision from Rono v Rono and CEDAW to affirm that women do have inheritance rights.

All information from:
Ann Warner. 2010. "Recognizing Rights, Promoting Progress: The Global Impact of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women." International Center for Research of Women: Washington, D.C.

post by Sara

CEDAW and Trafficking in the Netherlands

One argument (of many) in favor of CEDAW ratification by the United States is for the educational benefits gleaned from other nations’ successes and failures. As an international convention CEDAW has had concrete impacts in countless countries, and on countless issues.  

One issue directly addressed by the Convention is that of human trafficking: Article 6 states that “States Parties shall take all appropriate measures, including legislation, to suppress all forms of traffic in women and exploitation of prostitution of women.” As one of only two human rights treaties to address trafficking 

directly, CEDAW has been used frequently as a catalyst for effective responses to trafficking.

The Netherlands has long been a “destination country” for victims of sex trafficking, most frequently of women from Russia, Ukraine, and other Eastern European countries. With assistance from the CEDAW Committee, new legislation was constructed and adopted in 2005 that expanded the nation’s definition of trafficking beyond merely sexual exploitation and amplified punishment of traffickers. The Dutch have also implemented a National Human Trafficking Action Plan, a national Human Trafficking Taskforce, and a National Rapporteur on Human Trafficking, in addition to a 2006 publicity campaign to raise awareness of the consequences of trafficking. The number of victims, however, has continued to increase (by roughly one hundred people from 2007 to 2008) in addition to wider variance in victims’ source countries; this variance, an increase in women from Hungary, Sierra Leone, and China with a decrease in women from Nigeria, is said to be indicative of the evolution of the international trafficking network.

Despite the fluctuations in statistics, CEDAW has helped to strengthen the Dutch response to trafficking overall and will continue to foster a more holistic approach to the issue.

Post by Hannah.

"Dutch Authorities Register 809 Human Trafficking Victims." Crossroads Magazine. 9 Feb. 2009. Web. <http://crossroadsmag.eu/2009/02/dutch-authorities-register-809-human-trafficking-victims/>.

Warner, Ann. Recognizing Rights, Promoting Progress: The Global Impact of the Convention of the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. Rep. International Center for Research on Women, 2010. Print.

Fact and Fiction

There can be some pretty fierce opposition to CEDAW, and unfortunately some of this opposition stems from information that simply isn't true. So here's something to clear up any misconceptions about CEDAW:

Misconception 1: CEDAW is pro-abortion.
This is false. CEDAW doesn't even mention the word "abortion." CEDAW promotes women's health, but it does not say anything about whether or not women should receive abortions.
If that doesn't satisfy you, consider this: Countries where abortion is illegal have, in fact, ratified CEDAW.

Misconception 2: CEDAW is trying to abolish Mother's Day.
I personally think this is one of the silliest misconceptions, but to people who might believe this: it's not true. This particular misunderstanding came about when the CEDAW committee heard about Belarus' plans for Mother's Day,  which would have promoted stereotypical roles of women. One of the goals of CEDAW, stated quite clearly in Article 10c, is to abolish gender role stereotypes.

Misconception 3: CEDAW legalizes and promotes prostitution.
Again, simply not true. Perhaps this misconception stems from a story concerning China and CEDAW. In China and other countries, women are often enslaved and forced into prostitution - and they cannot reach out for help or medical treatment, for fear of getting arrested. CEDAW seeks not the legalization but the decriminalization of prostitution.

EDIT: Just to clear up any possible confusion - decriminalization is not a typo. It also does not mean the same thing as legalization. The point of decriminalizing this kind of prostitution is that it would allow these women to reach out for help without being arrested for something they did not do willingly.

Well, those are the major ones. Other misconceptions - and corrections - can be found at the links included above. It's always important to have reliable and factual information on a topic.

Gender Discrimination in the Category of Employment

The Fourteenth Amendment which has in it the “Equal Protection Clause” was adopted into the U.S. Constitution in 1868 and currently in 2011 women only earn 75 cents to a man’s dollar.  Also, as we have witnessed time and again the exploitation of women in all area's of employment no more recent than the Supreme Court case involving the United State’s largest employer Wal-Mart, which employs roughly 2.1 million workers. Wal-Mart has been accused of sex discrimination, passing women over for promotions, and paying women less than their male counterparts.  CEDAW's Article 11 will particularly assist the United States in legislation that will combat discrimination against women in all facets of American profession's.    Article 11:

1.      States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of employment in order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, the same rights, in particular:

(a)    The right to work as an inalienable right of all human beings;

(b)   The right to the same employment opportunities, including the application of the same criteria for selection in matters of employment;

(c)    The right to free choice of profession and employment, the right to promotion, job security and all benefits and conditions of service and the right to receive vocational training and retraining, including apprenticeships, advanced vocational training and recurrent training;

(d)   The right to equal remuneration, including benefits, and to equal treatment in respect of work of equal value, as well as equality of treatment in the evaluation of the quality of work;

(e)    The right to social security, particularly in cases of retirement, unemployment, sickness, invalidity and old age and other incapacity to work, as well as the right to paid leave;

(f)    The right to protection of health and to safety in working conditions, including the safeguarding of the function of reproduction.

           Post by Nicholas

A Brief History of CEDAW

The Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) was established in 1946 as a commission to protect women's rights. Their goal was to promote the principle that women and men are equal and to create proposals to ensure the development of women. The creation of the commission has resulted in may declarations and conventions that protect and support the rights of women. 


The text of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) was written by the Commission during 1976. The Convention was adopted by the UN in 1979 and was presented at a special ceremony that took place at the Copenhagen Conference on 17 July 1980. That day, sixty-four countries signed the Convention and two submitted their ratifications on the spot. It was ultimately put into force on September 3rd, 1981, after the twentieth country had ratified it. It had been put into force faster than any convention that had come before it. 


Today, only seven countries remain that have not ratified the Convention. The United States is the only developed nation that has not ratified, though it has signed it. 


To learn more about CEDAW's history, accomplishments or to read the full text of the Convention visit:


http://www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/cedaw/ 


Post by Meghan.