I recently attended a talk at the London School of Economics, where Professor Naila Kabeer discussed the place of women and gender issues within the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) as the 2015 deadline is approaching with varying results. She spoke passionately about her experience of the MDG creating process and also raised some striking points about the role that the Vatican play within UN discussions.
What are the Millennium Development Goals?
The Millennium Development Goals, have been referred to as “the world’s biggest promise“; they are the products of several years of discussion, evolution of policy and ultimately an elaborated version of the OECD-DAC International Development Goals. I won’t go into more detail as you can find that more eloquently written elsewhere.
As the official ending point for the goals in 2015 is approaching, we are beginning to take stock of the MDG achievements and the global gains as a result of their implementation. The biggest successes have been achieved in gender equality within education, increasing the number of girls in school, whereas the largest failure has been in maternal mortality. However, it is important to note that the MDGs focus on averages and proportions – the poorest may be left far behind these figures. According to a 2012 report from the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), inequalities and lack of progress hide behind percentages and graphs. Vastly populated countries like China and India may be improving, thereby impacting significantly on these averages, whereas entire countries may see no change whatsoever. As we well know, it is always vital to critically think about these figures and not accept them easily.
In addition, many of the MDGs are vague and wishy washy in their choice of language; ‘promote gender equality’ fails to explicitly admit to the realities of gender violence, subordination and concrete discrimination that women face.
What does The Vatican have to do with this?
The Vatican City is the smallest state in the world. However, I had taken it for granted that it would still have a place in discussions at UN level. Whilst the Vatican is unable to vote in the General Assembly, it still has enormous and historically important influence over decision making in this context. Kabeer relayed an incident in 2012, (the 56th sessions) where the Holy See in the Vatican, along with other religious groups, successfully removed sexual reproductive rights from the MDGs. Kabeer exclaimed that the Vatican is made up of “ageing men, sworn to celibacy” and that “their only role in the UN is the defence of religion” which means we should expect nothing less of them, really!
However, to have a group that consistently argue against and attempt to block the development of these conversations cannot be conducive to a positive, open and realistic approach to development. Instead, it is inevitably patriarchal and avoiding any uncomfortable issues that don’t fit in with their vision of proper morality.
Where are the women in all this?
Kabeer rightfully raised the point that gender inequality and discrimination should not be placed up against or viewed as existing separately to other forms of discrimination. Indeed, this is where the weight of gender lies. It exists and interacts alongside various other social realities; gender issues go across economy and development, so if we neglect it in our analysis we distort development.
Kabeer went on to explain that sexual rights have come to dominant feminist discourse of the MDGs, and she does not view this in a favourable light. Accordingly, a hermetically sealed vision of gender development issues such as sexual health neglects these broader problems of social and economic justice. Sexual and reproductive health are essential aspects of women’s development, but equality cannot realistically be achieved without including the other facets of development. Therefore, Kabeer suggested that women should not simply be seen in the light of gender and sexuality, but understood as “members of a marginalised economic group”. We need to remember their place in production more generally, not just as an assertion of the importance of their role in reproduction.
Taking Africa as as example –more money is transferred to the developing world in the form of remittances from family members who have migrated, than through aid. I think it is important for us to think outside the box and challenge the extent to which the UN is the best place to look for help and bringing about development. Kabeer’s talk made me question the extent to which the UN can be viewed as a secular, forward thinking body that can realistically bring about change. 2015 is just around the corner, and I am keenly looking forward to seeing what steps are taken once the Millennium Development Goals deadlines have passed.
About the Author
