GRSJ224/genderinequalitywithintheUN
Stephen Lewis about gender inequality within the UN
“Nonetheless, despite these sterling and repeated exhortations for equality, we haven’t, in the aftermath, begun to overcome the discrimination, the indignity, the violence visited upon women around the world on a daily basis. Why? Because once consensus is reached and the activists disperse, no major international body steps up to maintain the cohesion and sustain the momentum. Where the rights and needs of women are concerned, the gap between rhetoric and reality remains a yawning chasm” (Lewis, 121)[1].
About Stephen Lewis
Stephen Lewis – a representative of the United Nations; the man who laid the idea of progress for women amid entrenched inequality. He believes that if all the rights that speak to gender equality were followed, the world would be a better place to live. Therefore the main problem rests on the United Nations’ shoulders as it should be practising the rights what it proclaims, especially a recognition of women who continue to be “invisible” at all levels in the society.
The fourth international convention
In the 90’s four biggest international conventions happened to consider the following millennium for the United Nations. Each of these concurred on the requirement for equality fairness and each has been trailed by little activity. There has additionally been guerrilla theatre and efficient portrayal of women at the conventions. Despite the fact that women were frequently denied official status, they ensured they had a voice at the procedures.
Women's rights
Referring to the quote above the regress cannot turn into progress while all the women’s rights were not integrated and legalised into the society at the appropriate level. Thus, the gender mainstreaming in such case does not make any sense, because the inequality gap between men and women’s rights is huge “gender mainstreaming might become a way of maintaining that equality. But when you start from such gross inequality, mainstreaming simply entrenches the disparities” (Lewis, 126)[1]. However the advance on women’s rights is not zero, says Lewis, but it is extremely difficult to keep up the momentum and awareness. That’s why the United Nations is supposed to not only keep the standards of women’s rights on the background but also charge those who break them. Unfortunately, the resources of administration are limited and it cannot deal with this problem, moreover it also lacks overall public acknowledgement and requires support and collaborative actions.
The HIV/AIDS issue
Talking about the collaborative actions in this section, the HIV/AIDS issue cannot be left aside. The Rockefeller Foundation in June 2004 were focused on two parties UNAIDS and UNFPA. The main problem around which the meeting was based on is to understand why the communities of HIV/AIDS and sexual and reproductive health operate as separate departments when they should collaborate with each other. The representative of UNFPA, Thoraya Obaid, stated a few arguments in order to integrate both parties, emphasising the nonsense of such division. Ultimately the expectations of this foundations were not met as “the meeting would not stimulate a far more widespread discussion of sexual and reproductive health, whenever and wherever the MDGS were being addressed” (Lewis, 130)[1]. The issue of HIV/AIDS is incredibly huge and it has assaulted especially women in African countries. This causes thousands death each year, but the government in Africa do not even hit the bar of women rights as their politics is not developed enough. Programs and projects that are focused on developing and ensuring women’s access to services that works with reproductive health. In the present conditions where women’s weaknesses are so settled in, there is a pressing requirement for policies that are coordinated solely to enhancing women’s rights and freedoms so that they get chance to be full-fledged citizens of any country.
About AID programs and Mainstreaming
Currently, there are a couple aid programs that are dealing exclusively with females to change their position in the society; increment support in political undertakings and participate in movements for acknowledgement of their rights, however there is almost no desire on the part of the government to effect such changes. As was already mentioned, mainstreaming is not the best way for any solutions as it simply makes gender-specific disadvantage ignored while companies keep making the excuses like ‘there was no female applicants’ or ‘women did not apply’. Stephen Lewis commenting on this said, “What was nuts, of course, is that there were numbers upon numbers of talented women to do the job, but they were invisible, living in the refracted shadows of the glass ceiling.” (Lewis, 111)[1]. Mainstreaming “is a pox for women” (Lewis, 125)[1]. It implies that all women’s advantages are oppressed to the necessities and targets of a venture. In aid projects, the mainstreaming plan are aimed to reduce the costs; rebuilding departments in order to diminished women’s problems in importance. There has never been a thing of even seeking women’s interest as a problem until it actually became a spread-wide, social issue, which implies that females would be underestimated from the very beginning and “disparities would be entrenched” ( Lewis, 126).[1]