Promoting Conversations in a State-centric Reality – Queer and Feminist Perspectives on the Consultative Structure Set up by the United Nations under Article 71 of the UN Charter

Abstract

The Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (the CEDAW Convention) has been in force for over thirty years; but the battle against discrimination and abuse of women is far from over. In the reverberation of the anti-essentialist critique of the second wave of the (legal) feminist movement, we are in need of as many perspectives and experiences as possible to find new and innovative ways of protecting the basic rights of women to life, equality, health and dignity. In the fight against gender inequality, women around the world have traditionally formed networks and coalitions to advance women’s rights, to educate the public, and to give greater exposure to the many problems women face around the globe. The international women’s movement, as channelled mostly through the work of international non-governmental organisations (NGOs), contributing to the process of making international law has so far done well in advancing women’s human rights in general. However, this achievement, I argue, has been made possible by some serious trade-offs within the women’s movement itself with regard to the mainstreaming of perspectives and voices heard on the international level. The approach of most feminist NGOs on this level has generally been to unite voices to gain strength rather than to find strength in the diverse experiences of women. It is submitted that on a theoretical level, complex systems with different levels of participants – like the one generating international law – tend to force participants into conventional approaches to law. Hence feminist NGOs have been forced to seek high levels of representation, and most importantly, to claim to speak on behalf of all to fit into the state-centric system.