Several weeks ago I wrote a post about the new National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security (NAP).  In this piece for the Women’s Media Center (WMC), I elaborate on the concerns women’s peace and human rights organizations have about the NAP. which to be very clear, is a very positive addition to the tools we have to advocate and work for women’s human rights.  But as I conclude in the WMC piece,

The National Action Plan On Women, Peace and Security offers a powerful opportunity to move towards a gender responsive and informed framework of peace and security, but it will require vigilance to insure that it is truly implemented in a way that assures women’s human rights.

Click here to read the entire WMC piece.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

Shortly before Christmas, President Obama issued an order creating a National Action Plan On Women, Peace and Security (NAP) which reads in part:

(a)  The United States recognizes that promoting women’s participation in conflict prevention, management, and resolution, as well as in post conflict relief and recovery, advances peace, national security, economic and social development, and international cooperation.

(b)  The United States recognizes the responsibility of all nations to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity, including when implemented by means of sexual violence.  The United States further recognizes that sexual violence, when used or commissioned as a tactic of war or as a part of a widespread or systematic attack against civilians, can exacerbate and prolong armed conflict and impede the restoration of peace and security.

(c)  It shall be the policy and practice of the executive branch of the United States to have a National Action Plan on Women, Peace, and Security (National Action Plan).

Sec. 2National Action Plan.  A National Action Plan shall be created pursuant to the process outlined in Presidential Policy Directive 1 and shall identify and develop activities and initiatives in the following areas:

(a)  National integration and institutionalization.  Through interagency coordination, policy development, enhanced professional training and education, and evaluation, the United States Government will institutionalize a gender responsive approach to its diplomatic, development, and defense-related work in conflict-affected environments.

(b)  Participation in peace processes and decisionmaking.  The United States Government will improve the prospects for inclusive, just, and sustainable peace by promoting and strengthening women’s rights and effective leadership and substantive participation in peace processes, conflict prevention, peacebuilding, transitional processes, and decisionmaking institutions in conflict-affected environments.

(c)  Protection from violence.  The United States Government will strengthen its efforts to prevent    and protect women and children from    harm, exploitation, discrimination, and abuse, including sexual and gender-based violence and trafficking in persons, and to hold perpetrators accountable in conflict-affected environments.

(d)  Conflict prevention.  The United States Government will promote women’s roles in conflict prevention, improve conflict early warning and response systems through the integration of gender perspectives, and invest in women and girls’ health, education, and economic opportunity to create conditions for stable societies and lasting peace.

(e)  Access to relief and recovery.  The United States Government will respond to the distinct needs of women and children in conflict affected disasters and crises, including by providing safe, equitable access to humanitarian assistance.

The National Action Plan is a significant addition to U.S. policy and long overdue.  The potential impact of this order is huge.  In an address at Georgetown University, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said,

This is not just a woman’s issue. It cannot be relegated to the margins of international affairs. It truly does cut to the heart of our national security and the security of people everywhere, because the sad fact is that the way the international community tries to build peace and security today just isn’t getting the job done. Dozens of active conflicts are raging around the world, undermining regional and global stability, and ravaging entire populations. And more than half of all peace agreements fail within five years. At the same time, women are too often excluded from both the negotiations that make peace and the institutions that maintain it. Now of course, some women wield weapons of war — that’s true — and many more are victims of it. But too few are empowered to be instruments of peace and security.

Clinton went on to cite examples of why the NAP is so crucial, pointing in particular to recent attacks on women in Egypt by security forces in the aftermath of the Egyptian overthrow of the mubarek government,

“This systematic degradation of Egyptian women dishonours the revolution, disgraces the state and its uniform and is not worthy of a great people,” she told an audience at Georgetown University.

She called the events of the past few days “shocking”.

Unfortunately, there is nothing shocking about what happened in Egypt.  Women’s human rights improved somewhat during the decade preceding the overthrow of Mubarek, but this State Department report from 2010 points to the still systemic misogyny in Egypt before the uprising.  Specifics about violence against women include,

The law prohibits rape, prescribing penalties of 15 to 25 years’ imprisonment or life imprisonment for cases involving armed abduction. The number of cases investigated was small because women were reluctant to report rape. Spousal rape is not illegal. According to a 2007 study by the National Center for Criminal and Social Research, there were approximately 20,000 cases of rape annually.

Although the law does not prohibit domestic violence or spousal abuse, provisions of law relating to assault may be applied with accompanying penalties. However, the law requires that an assault victim produce multiple eyewitnesses, which is a difficult condition for a domestic abuse victim…

…The law does not specifically address honor crimes, in which a man violently assaults or kills a woman, usually a family member, because of a perceived lack of chastity. There were no reliable statistics regarding the extent of honor killings, but observers believed such killings took place during the year, particularly in rural areas.

Sex tourism existed in Luxor and at beach resorts such as Sharm El-Sheikh. Most sex tourists came from Europe and the Persian Gulf region.

There is no specific law criminalizing sexual harassment, but the government prosecuted sexual harassment under existing law. Sexual harassment remained a serious problem. A 2008 ECWR survey found that 83 percent of Egyptian women and 98 percent of foreign women in the country had been sexually harassed and that approximately half of women surveyed faced harassment daily.

Also, significantly, while women were actively involved in the uprising, like so many social movements before, women’s human rights were not an integral part of the agenda.  In fact in the aftermath, as Foreign Affairs points out,  the blowback against those rights has been a serious issue,

After the revolution, conservative forces argued that women’s rights laws passed under Mubarak, like all remnants of his regime, were illegitimate and should be repudiated. For example, several thousand Salafis demonstrated outside of al-Azhar University in Cairo in May, demanding the return of educational authority solely to fathers. The general secretary of the High Council of Islamic Affairs, a government body, called for lowering maternal custody ages from the current age of 15 to age six for boys and nine for girls. Challenges came from supposedly liberal forces as well. In April, the Freedoms Committee of the Journalists’ Syndicate held a conference condemning the current women’s rights standards in Egypt. Three months later, Judge Abdallah al Baga, president of the Family Court of Appeal, submitted a draft bill to the prime minister that called for abolishing khula divorce and reinstating, under some conditions, a practice in which husbands can forcibly return “disobedient” wives to their homes – a practice that has been outlawed since the 1960s.

That Clinton finds the recent violence “shocking” is baffling given that her own State Department produced a report pointing to systemic misogynist violence and abuse less than two years ago. Regardless of the overthrow of Mubarek, at no point has there been any indication that an improvement in women’s rights was on the table and as the Foreign Affairs quote about makes clear, there has been a great deal of concern that things may become worse for women.

There are other reasons to be somewhat guarded in being optimistic about the NAP–The U.S. didn’t give a fig about women’s rights in Afghanistan until it was politically useful to the selling of our invasion.  Ditto Iraq.   It is also worth noting that the U.S. does not consider itself subject to the International Criminal Court, which has the power to prosecute rape and sexual assault as a war crime, yet, as I pointed out in November,  it was very supportive of of the ICC’s charges of rape by Libyan forces prior to the overthrow of Qaddafi, despite the fact that neither Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch could substantiate the charges.

If the U.S. is serious about implementing the NAP, one good place to start would be in our own military.  While more sexual assaults and rapes are being reported and more charges being brought, the rate of conviction is still extremely low.  The NAP could also be used to address the severe impact that the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq  have had on women in those countries.  It can also be used to address the ongoing violence against women in countries like Somalia and the Democratic Republic of Congo where they U.S. has been all but silent regarding these ongoing atrocities.

So while there is cause to celebrate the creation of the National Action Plan On Women, Peace and Security, we should not do so through a rose colored lens.  The NAP has the potential of being a very potent addition to such existing women’s human rights tools as United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325 which addresses many of these same points.  But as the United States’ selective support of the ICC indicates, we need to be vigilant in insisting that it not be subverted as a tool of U.S. imperialism.

 

 

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

On the inaugural episode of Feminist Peace Network Radio, I had the pleasure of talking with feminist shero Robin Morgan about feminism and the role it plays in the Occupy movement and as Robin so aptly pointed out, the role Occupy should play in the feminist movement.

My great thanks to Allie McNeil of A World of Progress Radio (AWOP) for helping with the chat room and providing much needed support for my pre-first show jitters and to everyone who listened in.  For those of you who are wondering, yes there will be more shows after the first of the year, stay tuned!

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

Once again this year, the Feminist Peace Network is proud to participate in the Take Back The Tech campaign which takes place concurrently with the 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence that runs from November 25-December 10. 

While the internet is an extraordinary tool for sharing information and connecting with other people, it is also a readily available means of harassing and intimidating people. Women are subjected to an astounding amount of harassment and threatening behavior on the internet and in the ten years I’ve been publishing my work electronically, I have received all manner of hate mail, from the annoying, “Go back to the kitchen” to the death threats that I turned over to law enforcement.

I am hardly alone in this.  It has gotten so bad that blogger and activist Sady Doyle recently started a Twitter campaign using the hashtag #MenCallMeThings to raise awareness about just how bad it is.  As Doyle explained on her blog,

It doesn’t matter how uniquely charming and witty and acquainted with various fine bourbons you are. Are you a woman? Then they don’t like you.And they especially don’t like you telling them what to do. By, for example, asking them to cut it out with the misogyny.

What I got, friends, were comments. Comments about myself. And blogs about myself. And message-board discussions, also about myself. And e-mails. What I got was what every woman (feminist or not) and openly anti-sexist person (woman or not) on this our Internet gets: I got targeted. With threats, with insults, with smear campaigns, with attempts to threaten my employment or credibility or just general ability to get through the day with a healthy attitude and a minimal amount of insult.

Although as a matter of policy, I usually don’t publish blatantly misogynist comments or respond to them,  they are still in my inbox and they throw my mind off kilter sometimes to the point where I can’t write.  While I know of course that they don’t reflect on me, these toxic missives sometimes still get under my skin, making me both angry and despairing.  Comments such as,

All of u stupid b*****. You don`t wanna cook on Thanksgiving Day, then you don`t eat!!! Go to McD and get a burger with large fries, as I am sure all of are overweight/anorexic.

and,

Just sick and tired of all you good for nothing educatedbut illitrate “feminists” (sic) taking stats out of your hats like some magician.

are not enabling to say the least. (Also sadly, correct spelling and basic grammar competence tend to be quite optional in hate mail.)

On a personal level, it is hard to understand how on earth  the men who write these comments could possibly think saying such things are acceptable,  But when I wake up at three in the morning pondering why this is, it doesn’t take much to realize  that the answer lies in large part in the relentless sexist and misogynist messaging that permeates our media, on radio and television, in movies and video games and on the internet.

One website that has recently come under fire for enabling the acceptability of misogynist hate speech is Facebook.  For a long time, they have allowed all manner of pro-rape pages, justifying them as expressions of free speech. It finally took a massive social media campaign to get them to begin to re-examine their policy.  As this article on ZDNet explains,

It only took two long months, over 186,000 signatures on a petition to Mark Zuckerberg, and finally a furious Twitter campaign to get Facebook to remove Pages that graphically celebrated and encouraged rape and sexual violence.

However, the article continues,

The social media behemoth has a massive problem with sex. This is exactly what happens when a social network refuses to roll up its sleeves and define sexual expression in its Terms. Specifically, I mean Facebook’s urgent need to define different types of sexual speech or expression as healthy or harmful to its community.

Sex is the Achilles’ Heel of all social businesses. And to that end, transparency can be a cruel mistress.

With zero tolerance for porn and a refusal to define it, Facebook has deleted breast cancer survivor communities (labeling one breast cancer survivor page as “pornography”), retail business pages, individual profiles of human sexuality teachers, pages for authors and actors, photos of LGBT couples kissing (for which Facebook just apologized), and even the occasional hapless user’s profile who has the misfortune of having someone else post porn on their Wall.

With no comprehensible or clear methodology around sexual speech, we see pages deleted that discuss female sexuality, while pages that joke about and encourage raping women and girls rack up the likes.

Not to mention – a petition, and two months, and a whole lotta common sense about doing the right thing with over-the-top troll pages? Just how incompetently can you run your product, Facebook? Very, apparently.

A few weeks ago I discovered for myself that this is indeed true when I received a letter from Facebook telling me they had removed something that I had posted which they claimed violated their terms of service.  The letter read,

Hello,

Content that you shared on Facebook has been removed because it violated Facebook’s Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. Shares that contain nudity, pornography, or graphic sexual content, are not permitted on Facebook.

This message serves as a warning. Additional violations may result in the termination of your account. Please read the Statement of Rights and Responsibilities carefully and refrain from posting abusive material in the future. Thanks in advance for your understanding and cooperation.

The Facebook Team

Ominous sounding indeed.  They didn’t tell me what they found offensive, but the only thing that they removed so far as I know was a link to another page called “Occupy A Vagina” which I found offensive and that I wanted to make other people aware of.  In other words, I wanted to make others aware that another Facebook page was offensive, so I got warned.  And the Occupy A Vagina page remained up, despite numerous people reporting it as offensive.  According to the page’s author who claims to be female, it is supposed to be a joke.  Not, however, one most rape victims would likely laugh at.

The really disturbing part of this is that one might think that it was just a bad call by their filtering system that can be easily explained. But who do you contact to point out the error?  Unfortunately, Facebook’s customer service policy seems to be a cross between frat house and CIA rendition which translates to we can come after you for totally absurd reasons and there is nothing you can do about it and we won’t even talk to you.  You can’t explain because Facebook makes it all but impossible to communicate with them–no contact form, no email, no phone number.

Via the electronic rights advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation, I was able to obtain a phone number.  But when you press the option for customer service, you get a recording telling you they don’t offer customer service by phone and referring you back to the website where there wasn’t any way to contact them in the first place. Like I said, frat house meets rendition policy.

I am hardly alone in ending up in Facebook’s customer terms of service black hole, see here and here.  But that doesn’t make it better.  The effect of receiving a notice like that is chilling.  For days I hesitated to post  things to Facebook.  It is beyond ironic that they tsked tsked me for posting something they deemed inappropriate when what was inappropriate was other Facebook content which they left alone.  Too many people have been victimized by their idiotic filters and lack of customer service and the result is that those of us who are working full time to address misogyny and sexual violence are being victimized while those who promote it still have a free run on Facebook.

I’ve been publishing my work on the internet for ten years now.  When I first began, I published my work primarily on other websites.  But after a particularly bad trolling attack (800 comments long) on one website which the website’s owners basically blew off, it became very clear to me that it was absolutely necessary to have a website where that was not acceptable. Women control only a very small percentage of the media, but at least on the internet, we can create our own misogyny-free writing spaces and as I have pointed out many times before it is crucial to support these spaces and to speak out when websites like Facebook blatantly allow misogynist hatred to be perpetuated.

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare
 

Listening to people yell, “Mic Check!” at Occupy locations throughout the country, it is hard not to observe that those with the loudest voices are the ones who really get heard with this system, and those voices usually are male baritones.  Talking to women here in Washington and also reading reports from elsewhere, it is clear that many women find this system of having to yell at the top of your lungs to be one that is an uncomfortable way to communicate and participate.  Some women report being harassed when they speak, and even of mics being grabbed from them.

We are constantly told it is a system of consensus but was everyone really consulted about how communications would work?  It seems unlikely. While many of us want to work on communicating about issues such as reproductive rights and unequal pay (that have long been on the feminist agenda) and why they are so important to true change,  it is hard to do so when the communications system itself is intimidating.

The other day I listened to (mostly) young men at Occupy DC say that they wanted us to tell them when we found something they said to be offensive so that they could learn and change how they are interacting with women.  It was good that they were attending a session on sexism, but hello?  How many decades have we been pointing this out–YOU SHOULD KNOW THIS ALREADY!  And yes, I’m shouting, I am just flabbergasted and utterly depressed that we are still having this discussion in progressive, revolutionary circles.

It isn’t rocket science even if every movie, ad and video game tells you this behavior is cool, it isn’t. What it is is a manifestation of the system you claim to want to change. Don’t ask us to keep pointing out your misogynist behavior, you really should be able to figure it out yourselves, take responsibility for it and stop it because you know what, you are wasting precious time and energy and keeping us from discussing what feminism brings to a movement that aims to address economic inequities, starting with the most obvious point that women get paid less than men, so those inequities hit us the hardest. There is a lot more to it than that, but that is pretty easy to grasp, so let’s start there and insist that this very basic truth is a crucial issue that must be addressed if we are to achieve real change.

Listen also to Jon Stewart’s interview of Nobel Peace Prize winner, Liberian activist Leymah Gbowee on The Daily Show. Towards the end of the first segment, Stewart compliments her for being “charming and vivacious” despite what she has gone through. Had she been a man, I think we can assume he would not have used those descriptors.  Effectively what he was saying was that oh yeah sure, you led a peace movement that ended a civil war at great risk to yourself and won a Nobel Peace Prize, but hey, you’re still a woman so by gosh I must objectify you.

But no amount of sexist cutesy drivel on Stewart’s part can detract from Gbowee’s powerful words. Especially if you are not familiar with her story and even if you are, listen to her talk about what they found it necessary to do and her call to those of of in the U.S. for action.

———-

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive – Leymah Gbowee Extended Interview Pt. 1
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

———-

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart Mon – Thurs 11p / 10c
Exclusive – Leymah Gbowee Extended Interview Pt. 2
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor & Satire Blog The Daily Show on Facebook

———-

It is time for women to be heard in the Occupy movement and to do so we need to move beyond the mic check system that effectively drowns us out and not waste time pointing out blatant, obvious and clearly offensive behavior.  That is not why we are at Occupy.

What Gbowee and the women of Liberia did, sitting, meditating and going on strike offers us a different model. To sit down and not participate in the systems that oppress us, be they in Occupy camps or elsewhere. We need to be clear that we will communicate what we need to communicate on our own terms and in a way that is comfortable and empowering to us.

———-

I am writing this as police move in to try to shut down Occupy in numerous locations.  We know what many of us have suspected, that DHS and federal law enforcement is involved in this.  Tomorrow, November 17th is a national day of action.  It would be wise to use this as an opportunity to channel what Gbowee modeled for us in Liberia and to think of the words of Ghandi.

 

DeliciousFacebookGoogle+RedditStumbleUponTwitterPrintFriendlyEmailEvernoteDiggShare