Guest Opinion: Should the U.N. Enforce 'Gender Equality'?

Eradication of genders and universal imposition of abortion, sterilization, contraception and sex education?

FRONT ROYAL, VA. (Population Research Institute) - Fifteen years after the Beijing Conference on Women, the radical feminists are at it again.  This time, at the Beijing + 15 session of the Committee on the Status of Women (CSW) meeting currently underway in New York, they are pushing a new agenda.  It is time, they say, for the United Nations to establish a new superagency to promote feminist causes. The activists are organized under the acronym of GEAR--short for the Gender Architecture Reform Campaign--whose immediate goal is to consolidate the four existing U.N. women´s rights entities--UNIFEM, OSAGI, DAW, and IN-STRAW[1]--into a single agency.  Their plan is far more ambitious than a simple restructuring, however.  They envision a U.N. superagency, with a cool billion dollars in funding, that would put "gender equality" and "women´s empowerment" at the very top of the U.N. agenda.  From there, using the clout of the U.N., they would be able to impose this agenda on nations and families around the world. What is "gender equality" and "women´s empowerment," you may be asking.  According to lesbian activist Charlotte Bunch and her fellow GEAR collaborators, it means (1) the eradication of traditional genders and (2) the universal imposition of reproductive health care, which is to say, abortion, sterilization, contraception and sex education. They have already made some progress towards their goals.  GEAR campaigners at the Beijing + 15 meeting say the new agency is authorized by General Assembly Resolution 63/311, passed last fall, which calls for "strengthening the institutional arrangements for support of gender equality and the empowerment of women."  They claim to have UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon on side.  They identify Mary Robinson, the former President of Ireland, Spain´s Prime Minister José Zapatero and, most importantly, the U.S. administration of President Barack Obama as key supporters.  The International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) is a charter member of GEAR, perhaps because it sees itself as the chief beneficiary of the hundreds of millions of dollars that the new agency would pour into abortion and reproductive health programs.  On the governmental side, the delegation from Denmark is taking the lead in lobbying other delegations in support of the new superagency.  The two are leading closed-door strategy sessions.  All this activity does not mean that GEAR is a done deal.  The U.N. proceeds on the basis of consensus, and a general consensus in favor of the new agency will be difficult to achieve. According to a senior IPPF executive, the chief challenge that GEAR faces lies in the months between Beijing + 15 and the UN Annual Ministerial Review in June. He explained that if the reports presented by the member states to their ministers are favorable to the GEAR campaign and show, for instance, high maternal mortality rates, the ministers will be much more likely to accept and promote GEAR at their meeting.  This would smooth the way for an approval of the superagency in the 2010 General Assembly. "If the Danes cannot garner enough support from the other member states, that will be a major setback," he continued. The two chief concerns of the GEAR campaign at present, the executive said, are the pro-life, pro-marriage stance of the current President of the UN General Assembly, Dr. Ali Abdussalam Treki, and the economic crisis that makes it difficult to raise the massive funding needed from donor countries. Other UN agencies, chief among them the UNFPA, are worried that GEAR´s funding drive could negatively impact their own donations.  Developed countries, facing in most cases huge current account deficits, are unlikely to want to shell out hundreds of millions for a new, highly controversial U.N. agency. But funding and Dr. Treki are not their only worries. PRI, together with other Latin American pro-life groups, has brought over a hundred lawyers, researchers, professors, and politicians to this year´s Beijing + 15 session of the Committee on the Status of Women (CSW).  This team of Latin American professionals—four as official delegates—is working with their countries´ UN missions to oppose the GEAR superagency.  Their ranks are swelled by representatives from other organizations, such as the International Solidarity and Human Rights Institute, and groups from other parts of the world, such as the U.K.´s Society for the Protection of Unborn Children (SPUC).  While IPPF, IPAS, UNFPA and others are stridently promoting population control and libertine sexual agendas to receptive feminists, these pro-life professionals are quietly working away, speaking with delegates, attending side events, and participating in negotiations. They are having an impact. One ambassador from a Central American country, who describes himself as "100 % pro-life," has said privately that IPPF is overreaching, and that there are a number of ways that GEAR might be stopped. He is not alone in thinking that the General Assembly resolution mentioned above is insufficient to justify the huge GEAR initiative.  In times of budgetary crisis, a mandate to consolidate four existing U.N. agencies into one could well result in a smaller budget, not a billion-dollar one.  This year will make or break the initiative.  If the radical feminists do not get nearly unified support for GEAR at the current CSW, at the upcoming ministerial meeting, and from the various nations of the world before the next U.N. General Assembly in September of this year, then IPPF´s vigorous push for a superagency may well fail.  One thing is certain.  All of those concerned about the welfare of the natural family and the lives of children, both born and unborn, should absolutely oppose the creation of a UN superagency dedicated to radical feminist goals, which would be the death of both. Fight GEAR.
-----
Steven W. Mosher is the President of the Population Research Institute.  Joan C. Robinson is the Associate Editor of the PRI Review.[1] UNIFEM (UN Development Fund for Women), OSAGI (Office of the Special Advisor on Gender Issues), DAW (Division for the Advancement of Women), and IN-STRAW (International Research and Training Institute for the Advancement of Women).

Free Catholic PDF's - Home / Parish / School / Bulletin Inserts

---

PRI is a 501(c)(3) educational organization. We work to reverse the trends brought about by the myth of overpopulation. Our growing, global network of pro-life groups spans over 30 countries. To date, we have successfully eliminated $790 million in U.S. tax dollars to International Planned Parenthood, UNFPA, and other anti-life aboritionists while redirecting much of this to family friendly programs like Child Survival.

See our current project.

Donate now to directly affect the lives and well-being of mothers and children around the world.