The Nettie Column

THINGS are not going well with women all over the world and in many places things go very badly. If the world were a village with one thousand inhabitants, 501 would be women, and 499 men. Of those 140 women and 50 men would be illiterate, 156 women and 78 men would live in dire poverty. In that village women account for two thirds of all working hours and they receive ten per cent of the revenues. Men would possess 93 per cent of the village, the mayor would be a man and there would be nine male and one woman councillors.'

This is a quotation from a booklet published by the Dutch Humanist Council for Human Rights on the occasion of the UN World Conference on Women at Beijing -- while I am writing this it has just started. For the last few weeks the conference has had wide publicity in the Dutch press, and there have been more radio and television programmes on women's issues than usual. One TV documentary, in particular, about violence towards women in Pakistan, made me realise once more how extraordinarily privileged I am in comparison with billions of other women. I have a wonderful family, my husband does not beat me, I can travel, say what I want to say, get health care if needed, I do work I like and so on.

In Pakistan, mistreatment of women does not only occur very frequently, it is legal as well. Victims hardly dare to report it: in cases of rape, they risk being accused of adultery which implies a prison sentence. For single women though, there is an alternative because, as an Imam explained: 'Under Islam he who rapes a woman must marry her.' He did not say whether the victim was allowed to refuse such a bonus.

Benazir Bhutto, who was interviewed as well, told that she would abolish the laws enabling men to use violence towards women, if that were possible. However, she can only make careful and diplomatic efforts to introduce small changes. One of her most recent initiatives is a publicity campaign in which battered victims are shown, and when visiting these women she gets media coverage. I hope it will help some.

Back to Beijing. This UN Conference on Women is already the fourth of its kind and when looking at their outcome - lots of words and very little action - one is inclined to ask whether these meetings are worth all the trouble. Why do so many women keep on packing their bags and travelling great distances to have endless, often very frustrating, discussions at those UN conferences? One answer is equally simple as true: the world has no other, no better, institution for dealing with human rights' issues than the United Nations. Though there are countless reasons for irritation and criticism, turning away from the only platform where nearly all countries get together would not contribute anything to improving the situation of women.

Another answer is that, however slowly, these conferences do have results. To start with, there is the growing consciousness that it is people, individuals as well as groups, who should be the focus of whichever kind of policies. In Cairo, this resulted in a clearly formulated policy review: from demographic and target figures to the right of men and women to make their own decision about the number of children they will have, the use of artificial contraceptives, and the importance of sexual education especially for young people.

Moreover, the value of such a process of changing attitudes should not be underestimated. For instance: ministers who had never bothered about the health or the position of women, were for ten days bombarded with statements on women's desires and needs and with accounts of their actual position. This kind of experience may well stimulate these ministers to contribute to women's emancipation in their own country. Another example: female genital mutilation will not be abolished from one day to another, but in countries where it is practised the realisation that it is unacceptable is growing. So maybe Beijing will bring women some steps forward as well.

TALKING of the United Nations, we have just received the annual - and as always excellent -report from our IHEU representative with the UN in Geneva, James Dilloway. At all recent sessions of the Commission on Human Rights and the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities he has spoken in the debate on certain agenda items, such as the violation of human rights in the case of Taslima Nasteen and Dr. Xiao Xuehui. Also on the occasion of the fiftieth UN anniversary, Mr Dilloway made a wide-ranging intervention which aided some positive decisions of the Human Rights Commission. (Extracts of his report will appear in the next issue.)

RECENTLY a decision of the federal constitutional court of Karlsruhe, Bavaria, created a great uproar among representatives of the Christian Socialist Union and of Roman Catholic and Protestant churches. It so happened that the court had decided that crosses and crucifixes do not belong in state schools. Actually, this is a long overdue step towards the realisation of the separation of church and state as laid down in the German constitution.

IHEU made a press statement welcoming the court’s decision and expressing its incomprehension at the excessive reactions on the part of Christian politicians and church representatives: 'They act as if the weal and woe of the West were depending on crosses in schools. Apparently they do not want to recognise what the issue really is: not the abolition of a Christian symbol, but the protection of freedom of and from religion for all life stances. The decision is not aimed at Christians, but it wants to make clear that practising a religion should be limited to their private lives. From their vehement protests it is obvious that Christian politicians have always regarded schools as missionary posts for the churches.'

What they did not expect, was that their campaign would have an opposite effect: it has triggered a wide public discussion about the abolition of other unjustified church privileges, e.g. the collection of church taxes by the state and religious education as a regular subject in schools. And from now on, there will be less and less toleration of crosses and Bible texts in public buildings including funeral halls.

Of course, our German humanist friends are fighting in the first ranks in this 'war of the crosses'.