[Gc-ig-a] Re: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] [governance] Post mortem andnext steps on IG

[conchita poncini]

I am all for not having a laundry list except when a fundamental human right
is at stake for over half of the population.  Just because at WGIG this
aspect was forgotten or ignored does not mean it is carved in stone - we
have to correct the omission..

In reply to my comments, you are actually confirming my determination of the
fundamental importance of the  word "gender sensitive" in this very
paragraph. For over 25 years I have heard this refrain that
non-discrimination and inclusive of both women and men.  By the way, women
are also children, young persons, persons with disability, older persons,
poor people.Yes, but not on equal terms, not even on equitable terms because
the other half of the population that is disadvantaged intersects with the
other forms of discrimination besides gender  - race, ethnicity, culture,
economic power (exclusion from property, inheritance, income earning,
educational, health and other social  rights), socialized division of labour
has formed the glass ceiling and sticky floor, not taking into account the
multiple and double roles of women as primary caretakers of chldren and
other family memeers  and as income earners.  The playing field is simply
not even!!. This is why there is the feminisation of poverty and
feminisation of HIV/AIDs and the majority of ICT holders are men.  Your
reasons are precisely what has been repeatedly said by governments who are
in a culture that continues to follow a gender insentivie paradigm. Men do
not have bad intentions, they just currently hold the power of ICTs and all
economic power.  WE need to introduce this human value of shared rights and
responsiibities.

Governance of the Internet cannot be just  technical matters.  It should
also be a human right and human development issue.  If one is gender
sensitive, one would look at ICTs with a gender lens where women are over
half the population and with the lens of the universal basic human rights
Let us make sure we are speaking of the same concepts enunciated in the 9
major world conferences, including the last one in Sept. 2005 (A/60/L.1
where 171 heads of states committed to gender equality and gender
mainstreaming.

Let us please support this disadvantaged population.

Conchita


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jacqueline Morris" <jam at jacquelinemorris.com>
To: <plenary at wsis-cs.org>
Cc: <gc-ig-a at genderwsis.org>; <ifuw at ifuw.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 12:21 PM
Subject: [Gc-ig-a] Re: AW: [WSIS CS-Plenary] [governance] Post mortem
andnext steps on IG


Vittorio
Exactly the principle that we have been applying, as you know from
WGIG. We need to get away from the laundry list of issues in the
language - it rapidly becomes meaningless. To get the concept across
and deeply embedded is vital.
I agree with the other danger that you raise - that if gender language
is in many paras but not all, then we open the door for those paras
where it is not specified to be treated as if gender does not apply
there.
Jacqueline

On 10/4/05, Vittorio Bertola <vb at bertola.eu.org> wrote:
> [Please note that by using 'REPLY', your response goes to the entire list.
Kindly use individual addresses for responses intended for specific people]
>
> Click http://wsis.funredes.org/plenary/ to access automatic translation of
this message!
> _______________________________________
>
> conchita poncini ha scritto:
> > Thanks Rik for clarifying.  OF course I never meant to shout but am
> > determined to ascertain that gender sensitivity is there.  I agree that
> > it should appear most appropriate and I have certainly read this very
> > carefully and was at the session when the Chair read his Food for
> > Thought.  I am all for substance and if we do not make WSIS principles
> > gender sensitive, then it remains a paradigm of the haves and not
> > inclusive of the have-nots who are at present women..  This is precisely
> > why I included it in the paragraph where it recognizes the scope and the
> >  necessity for IG to be people-centered, inclusive, development oriented
> > and non discriminatory, and certainly should be "gender sensitive.".
>
> Sorry, but I support Rik on this issue. The sentence you mention is a
> very short and high-level one, and I think that "non discriminatory"
> already includes all types of diversity. If you want to add gender
> equality (which of course is a highly commendable principle in itself)
> then I expect that activists against other types of discrimination would
> stand up and ask for the same, and thus you might have to mention, just
> to name a few, North-South equality, inclusion of youth, indigenous
> peoples, people with disabilities etc. I think it would be preferrable
> to keep "non discriminatory" as a general principle that encompasses all
> types of disequalities and social injustices, rather than discuss among
> ourselves which kind of disequality deserves more to be mentioned.
>
> Moreover, as this general principle really applies to everything, I
> think you should carefully refrain from trying to get it inserted here
> and there as much as possible; either you push to get it mentioned in
> each and every paragraph, which is clearly impossible and will only get
> everyone upset at you, or partial additions will be used against you to
> say that in every issue where it is not explicitly mentioned it should
> not be applied.
> --
> vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<-----
> http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>


--
Jacqueline Morris
www.carnivalondenet.com
T&T Music and videos online

_______________________________________________
Gc-ig-a mailing list
Gc-ig-a at genderwsis.org
http://lists.genderwsis.org/mailman/listinfo/gc-ig-a