Re:Gender works to end gender inequity and discrimination against girls and women by exposing root causes and advancing research-informed action. Working with multiple sectors and disciplines, we are shaping a world that demands fairness across difference.
In a vote of 23 to 19, the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution to request the High Commissioner to commission a study to be finalised by December 2011 to document discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, in all regions of the world, and how international human rights law could be used to end violence and related human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity. It also decided to convene a panel discussion during the nineteenth session of the Human Rights Council, informed by the facts contained in the study commissioned by the High Commissioner.
From the news release:
Regarding human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity, the Council requested the High Commissioner to commission a study to be finalised by December 2011 to document discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, in all regions of the world, and how international human rights law could be used to end violence and related human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity. It also decided to convene a panel discussion during the nineteenth session of the Human Rights Council, informed by the facts contained in the study commissioned by the High Commissioner.
Action on Resolution on Human Rights, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity
In a resolution (A/HRC/17/L.9/Rev.1) regarding human rights, sexual orientation and gender identity, adopted by a vote of 23 in favour, 19 against, and 3 abstentions, the Council requests the High Commissioner to commission a study to be finalised by December 2011 to document discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity, in all regions of the world, and how international human rights law can be used to end violence and related human rights violations based on sexual orientation and gender identity; decides to convene a panel discussion during the nineteenth session of the Human Rights Council, informed by the facts contained in the study commissioned by the High Commissioner and to have constructive, informed and transparent dialogue on the issue of discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity; and decides also that the panel will also discuss the appropriate follow-up to the recommendations of the study commissioned by the High Commissioner.
The result of the vote was as follows:
In favour (23): Argentina; Belgium; Brazil; Chile; Cuba; Ecuador; France; Guatemala; Hungary; Japan; Mauritius; Mexico; Norway; Poland; Republic of Korea; Slovakia; Spain; Switzerland; Thailand; Ukraine; United Kingdom; United States and Uruguay.
Against (19): Angola; Bahrain; Bangladesh; Cameroon; Djibouti; Gabon; Ghana; Jordan; Malaysia; Maldives; Mauritania; Nigeria; Pakistan; Qatar; Republic of Moldova; Russian Federation; Saudi Arabia; Senegal and Uganda.
Abstentions (3): Burkina Faso; China and Zambia.
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
The Racial and Gender Report Card (RGRC) assesses the hiring practices of women and people of color in most of the leading professional and amateur sports and sporting organizations in the United States. The annual reports consider the composition - assessed by racial and gender makeup - of players, coaches and front office/athletic department employees in our country's leading sports organizations, including the National Basketball Association (NBA), National Football League (NFL), Major League Baseball (MLB), Major League Soccer (MLS) and Women's National Basketball Association (WNBA), as well as in collegiate athletic departments.
The undisputed champion among the men's professional leagues when it comes to racial and gender hiring practices, the NBA once again has received a combined "A" for its continued effort to employ minorities and women in important positions within the league and its 30 teams.
An annual report released Thursday by the University of Central Florida's Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport noted the NBA earned it's highest-ever combined grade of 92.2, reflecting an A-plus for race and A-minus for gender. That's up from the previous high of 91.5 in 2010, when it earned an A for race and A-minus for gender.
The NBA remains the only men's pro sports league with a combined "A" for race and gender.
And the numbers aren't even close, according to the primary author of the 38-page report, Richard Lapchick. The report notes that 42 percent of the professional positions in the NBA office are held by women and 36 percent are filled by people of color - numbers Lapchick said speaks to strides the league has made under Commissioner David Stern.
University of Central Florida Institute for Diversity and Ethics
A Chicago Tribune survey of six schools in Illinois and Indiana found that police investigated 171 reported sex crimes since fall 2005, with 12 resulting in arrests and four in convictions. Only one of the convictions stemmed from a student-on-student attack, the most common type of assault.
From the article:
The rate of arrests and convictions is far below the average for rapes reported nationally.
The trend leaves untold number of college women feeling betrayed and vulnerable, believing that their allegations are not taken seriously. The Tribune's findings also raise fresh questions about the way college administrators and law enforcement officials handle the allegations, even as the Obama administration calls attention to the issue with a series of initiatives and investigations aimed at better protecting students from sex crimes.
According to a study published in Psychology of Women Quarterly, both men and women tend to overlook the more subtle daily acts of sexism they encounter. Things such as calling women "girls" but not calling men "boys" or referring to a collective group as "guys" are forms of subtle sexism that creep into daily interactions. The study helps not only identify which forms of sexism are most overlooked by which sex, but also how noticing these acts can change people's attitudes. The study also goes on to differentiate the way men and women's beliefs change once they become aware of subtle sexism. Women need to "see the unseen," the authors note, to make corrections, whereas men need not only to be aware of the sexist behavior or comments, but also to feel empathy for the women targeted. These results are consistent with other studies which found that empathy is an effective method for reducing racial and ethnic prejudice.
Three experiments were conducted in the United States and Germany to test whether women and men endorse sexist beliefs because they are unaware of the prevalence of different types of sexism in their personal lives. Study 1 (N ¼ 120) and Study 2 (N ¼ 83) used daily diaries as a method to encourage individuals ‘‘to see the unseen.’’ Results revealed that encouraging women to pay attention to sexism, in comparison to attention to other social interactions, led to a stronger rejection of Modern Sexist, Neosexist, and Benevolent Sexist beliefs (Studies 1 and 2) and to negative evaluations of Modern and Benevolent Sexist men described in profiles as well as to more engagement in collective action on behalf of women (Study 2). In contrast, for men, paying attention to sexism did not have these effects. Results from Study 2 suggest, and from Study 3 (N ¼ 141) confirm, that men’s endorsement of Modern and Neosexist beliefs can be reduced if attention to sexism and emotional empathy for the target of discrimination is encouraged. Finally, a follow-up survey indicated that the attitude change in women and men was stable over time. The implications of these findings for interventions to reduce women’s versus men’s endorsement of sexist beliefs are discussed.
A TrustLaw expert poll identifies Afghanistan, Democratic Republic of Congo, Pakistan, India and Somalia as the world's most dangerous countries in which to be female in 2011. The poll by TrustLaw Women, the Thomson Reuters Foundation’s recently launched women’s rights news and information service, asked 213 gender experts from five continents a number of key questions to help establish the “most dangerous countries for women”. Poll respondents included aid professionals, academics, health workers, policymakers, journalists and development specialists. All were chosen for their expertise in gender issues.
Afghanistan emerged as the most dangerous country for women overall and worst in three of the six risk categories: health, non-sexual violence and lack of access to economic resources.
Respondents cited sky-high maternal mortality rates, limited access to doctors and a near total lack of economic rights. Afghan women have a one in 11 chance of dying in childbirth, according to UNICEF.
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), still reeling from a 1998-2003 war and accompanying humanitarian disaster that killed 5.4 million people, came second mainly due to staggering levels of sexual violence in the lawless east.
More than 400,000 women are raped in the country each year, according to a recent study by U.S. researchers. The United Nations has called Congo the rape capital of the world.
"Statistics from DRC are very revealing on this: ongoing war, use of rape as a weapon, recruitment of females as soldiers who are also used as sex slaves," said Clementina Cantoni, a Pakistan-based aid worker with ECHO, the European Commission's humanitarian aid department.
"The fact that the government is corrupt and that female rights are very low on the agenda means that there is little or no recourse to justice."
Rights activists say militia groups and soldiers target all ages, including girls as young as three and elderly women. They are gang-raped, raped with bayonets and have guns shot into their vaginas.
Pakistan ranked third largely on the basis of cultural, tribal and religious practices harmful to women. These include acid attacks, child and forced marriage and punishment or retribution by stoning or other physical abuse.
"Pakistan has some of the highest rates of dowry murder, so-called honour killings and early marriage," said Divya Bajpai, reproductive health advisor at the International HIV/AIDS Alliance.
Some 1,000 women and girls die in honour killings annually, according to Pakistan's Human Rights Commission.
India ranked fourth primarily due to female foeticide, infanticide and human trafficking.
In 2009, India's then-Home Secretary Madhukar Gupta estimated that 100 million people, mostly women and girls, were involved in trafficking in India that year.
"The practice is common but lucrative so it goes untouched by government and police," said Cristi Hegranes, founder of the Global Press institute, which trains women in developing countries to be journalists.
India's Central Bureau of Investigation estimated that in 2009 about 90 percent of trafficking took place within the country and that there were some 3 million prostitutes, of which about 40 percent were children.
In addition to sex slavery, other forms of trafficking include forced labour and forced marriage, according to a U.S. State Department report on trafficking in 2010. The report also found slow progress in criminal prosecutions of traffickers.
Up to 50 million girls are thought to be "missing" over the past century due to female infanticide and foeticide, the U.N. Population Fund says.
Some experts said the world's largest democracy was relatively forthcoming about describing its problems, possibly casting it in a darker light than if other countries were equally transparent about trafficking.
Somalia ranked fifth due to a catalogue of dangers including high maternal mortality, rape and female genital mutilation, along with limited access to education, healthcare and economic
"I'm completely surprised because I thought Somalia would be first on the list, not fifth," Somali women's minister Maryan Qasim told TrustLaw.
"The most dangerous thing a woman in Somalia can do is to become pregnant. When a woman becomes pregnant her life is 50-50 because there is no antenatal care at all. There are no hospitals, no healthcare, no nothing.
"Add to that the rape cases that happen on a daily basis, the female genital mutilation that is being done to every single girl in Somalia. Add to that the famine and the drought. Add to that the fighting (which means) you can die any minute, any day."
Poll respondents included aid professionals, academics, health workers, policymakers, journalists and development specialists.
The U. S. Office of Personnel Management report to Congress the annual progress under the Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program (FEORP). In FY2010, the Federal workforce was 17.7 percent Black, 8.0 percent Hispanic, 5.6 percent Asian/Pacific Islander, 1.8 percent American Indian/Alaska Native, 0.7 percent non-Hispanic/Multi-racial, and 66.2 percent White. Minorities as a whole constituted 33.8 percent. Women comprised 43.9 percent of all Federal permanent employees, and Men comprised 56.1 percent, though the overall employment of women in the FW experienced a 0.3 percentage point decline from 2009 to 2010. The number of minorities at the Senior Pay levels increased by 9.4 percent, from 3,709 in 2009 to 4,059 in 2010. Women represented 31.2 percent of the Senior Level positions. The proportion of women and minorities in GS grades 13 through 15 increased by 7.9 percent and 9.4 percent, respectively.
OPM has the responsibility to annually report to Congress on progress under the Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program (FEORP). The report is prepared in compliance with the law (5 U.S.C. 7201 and 5 CFR Part 720, Subpart B) and contains information on the representation of minorities within the Federal Government and best practices of Federal agencies.
From the Executive Summary:
Major findings in the FY 2010 FEORP Report are:
The number of minorities in the Federal Workforce (FW) increased by 5.0 percent from 616,457 to 647,588 in 2010, or 31,131 employees. The Federal workforce is 17.7 percent Black, 8.0 percent Hispanic, 5.6 percent Asian/Pacific Islander, 1.8 percent American Indian/Alaska Native, 0.7 percent non-Hispanic/Multi-racial, and 66.2 percent White. Minorities as a whole constituted 33.8 percent of the FW.
Women comprised 43.9 percent of all Federal permanent employees, and Men comprised 56.1 percent. The overall employment of women in the FW experienced a 0.3 percentage point decline from 2009 to 2010.
Representation of Hispanic men and women, Asian American/Pacific Islander men and women, and American Indian/Alaska Native men and women in the Federal workforce in 2010 remained the same as reported in 2009.
The number of minorities at the Senior Pay levels increased by 9.4 percent, from 3,709 in 2009 to 4,059 in 2010. Women represented 31.2 percent of the Senior Level positions. The proportion of women and minorities in GS grades 13 through 15 increased by 7.9 percent and 9.4 percent, respectively.
The number of clerical jobs declined by 1.4 percent, from 124,065 in 2009 to 125,784 in 2010. Meanwhile, the number of professional, technical and administrative jobs increased by 4.8 percent.
The Millennials, Abortion and Religion Survey, conducted by Public Religion Research Institute and released at the Brookings Institution, is one of the largest public opinion surveys on abortion and religion ever conducted. The survey also finds that there are large generational differences on two issues that have often been linked in political discourse: abortion and same sex marriage.
A solid majority of Americans say abortion should be legal in all (19%) or most (37%) cases, compared to 4-in-10 who say it should be illegal in all (14%) or most (26%) cases.
With the exception of white evangelical Protestants, majorities of all major religious groups say abortion should be legal in all or most cases.
A majority of Americans across the political spectrum say it is more socially acceptable today to be “pro-choice” rather than “pro-life.”
Nearly 6-in-10 (58%) Americans say that at least some health care professionals in their communities should provide legal abortions.
With the exception of white evangelical Protestants and Latino Catholics, majorities of all major religious groups agree that at least some health care professionals in their community should provide legal abortions.
Americans who live in large metropolitan areas are much more likely than those who live in rural communities to say legal abortion services should be available in their community (67% vs. 39% respectively).
The binary “pro-choice”/“pro-life” labels do not reflect the complexity of Americans’ views on abortion. Seven-in-ten Americans say the term “pro-choice” describes them somewhat or very well, and nearly two-thirds simultaneously say the term “pro-life” describes them somewhat or very well. This overlapping identity is present in virtually every demographic group.
The decoupling of attitudes on abortion and same-sex marriage suggests that these topics, which served in the past as the heart of the “values” agenda, are no longer necessarily linked in the minds of Americans.
Roughly the same percentage of Americans said abortion should be legal in all or most cases in 1999 (57%) as say this today (56%).
In contrast, the percentage of Americans who said marriages between same-sex couples should be recognized by the law as valid has grown 18 points over this same period, from 35% in 1999 to 53% in 2011.
Millennials are less supportive of legal abortion than their demographic profile would suggest.
Millennials generally have traits associated with higher levels of support for the legality of abortion: they are more educated, more liberal, and more likely to be religiously unaffiliated.
Millennials exemplify the decoupling of attitudes on legal abortion and same-sex marriage. They are much more likely than the general public to favor same-sex marriage, but they are not significantly more likely than the general public to support the legality of abortion (60% vs. 56% in the general public).
Millennials have largely positive top of mind associations with same-sex marriage but have largely negative top of mind associations with abortion.
Millennials are conflicted about the morality of abortion, but most say same gender sexual relationships are morally acceptable. Nearly 6-in-10 (57%) Millennials say sex between two adults of the same gender is morally acceptable, compared to only 46% who say having an abortion is morally acceptable.
Unlike all other age groups, Millennials register different levels of support for the availability and legality of abortion. On the one hand, Millennials are strongly committed to the availability of abortion and are significantly more likely than the general public to say that at least some health care professionals in their community should provide legal abortions (68% vs. 58% respectively). But they are no more likely than the general public to say that abortion should be legal in all or most cases. These findings suggest general measures of legality may not fully capture support for legal abortion among Millennials.
On the issue of abortion, Americans hold complex and sometimes contradictory views, and grasping this complexity is critical for understanding the dynamics of the debate.
Approximately 3-in-10 Americans hold decidedly mixed views about the circumstances in which having an abortion should be possible. When measured on a composite scale of support for abortion in five specific circumstances, 43% say abortion should be possible in most or all of these circumstances, 29% say abortion should not be possible in most or all of these circumstances, and 28% hold decidedly mixed views.
Majorities of Americans simultaneously say abortion is morally wrong (52%) and that it should be legal in all or most cases (56%).
The study identified and tested a number of hypotheses about independent influences on attitudes about the legality of abortion. The following factors are independent predictors of support for the legality of abortion, even when controlling for other demographic characteristics:
Having a situationalist rather than a principle-based approach to morality has a positive impact on support for the legality of abortion.
Knowing someone who has had an abortion has a positive impact on support for the legality of abortion.
Having seen MTV’s reality shows about unmarried pregnant teenagers has a positive impact on support for the legality of abortion.
Recently seeing an ultrasound image of a fetus has a negative impact on support for the legality of abortion.
Among Americans who attend church at least once or twice a month, majorities report hearing their clergy talk about the issue of abortion (54%) or homosexuality (51%) in church. Catholics are significantly more likely than Protestants to hear about abortion in church.
More than 7-in-10 (72%) religious Americans believe it is possible to disagree with the teachings of their religion on the issue of abortion and still be considered a person of good standing in their faith. A majority of all major religious groups, including Catholics and white evangelical Protestants agree with this statement.
• “For men, increases in weight have positive linear effects of pay but at diminished returns at above-average levels of weight.”
• Gaining weight is more damaging to women’s earnings than to men. “For women, increases in weight have negative linear effects on pay, but the negative effects are stronger at below-average than at above-average weight levels.”
• “Whereas women are punished for any weight gain, very thin women receive the most severe punishment for their first few pounds of weight gain. This finding is consistent with research showing that the media’s depiction of an unrealistically think female ideal leads people to see this ideal as normative, expected, and central to female attractiveness.”
• “Very thin” women earned approximately $22,000 more than their average weight counterparts.
• “Thin” women earned a little over $7,000 more than their average weight counterparts.
• “Heavy” and “Very Heavy” women lost over $9,000 and almost $19,000, respectively, than their average weight counterparts.
When it comes to pay, do the thin win? The effect of weight on pay for men and women.
Judge, Timothy A.; Cable, Daniel M.
Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 96(1), Jan 2011, 95-112. doi: 10.1037/a0020860 [fee]
Cultivation theory suggests that society holds very different body standards for men versus women, and research indicates that the consequences of defying these social norms may not be linear. To test these notions in the employment context, we examined the relationship between weight and income and the degree to which the relationship varies by gender. For women, we theorized a negative weight–income relationship that is steepest at the thin end of the distribution. For men, we predicted a positive weight–income relationship until obesity, where it becomes negative. To test these hypotheses, we utilized 2 longitudinal studies, 1 German and 1 American. In Study 1, weight was measured over 2 time periods, and earnings were averaged over the subsequent 5 years. Study 2 was a multilevel study in which weight and earnings were within-individual variables observed over time, and gender was a between-individual variable. Results from the 2 studies generally support the hypotheses, even when examining within-individual changes in weight over time. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)
CareerBuilder surveyed more than 1,300 diverse workers to gauge how their work experience has evolved with their growing proportions in the U.S. workforce. The study focused on larger economies and workforces, targeting the top 20 markets in the U.S. by population. The results for six diverse segments - African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, women, workers with disabilities and Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender (LGBT) workers – were compared to non-diverse workers, defined as Caucasian males who are not LGBT, and not disabled. The national survey was conducted from February 21 to March 10, 2011. The survey findings point to continued inequalities between diverse and non-diverse segments in pay, career advancement and feelings of discrimination.
From the Executive Summary
Certain diverse segments ranked the same or higher than non-diverse workers in compensation, reflecting a
movement toward better equality in the workplace.
LGBT (Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender) workers were the most likely to earn six figures, slightly outpacing non-diverse workers. Women were the least likely to earn six figures.
Disabled workers were the most likely to earn less than $50k, while Asian workers were the least likely of all segments.
Non-diverse workers and LGBT workers were the most likely to hold management jobs while Hispanic workers were the most likely to hold entry level/administrative jobs.
African American workers are the most likely to report feeling discriminated against in their current jobs, while Asian workers were the least likely to feel discriminated against among all segments, including non-diverse workers.
Asian and African American workers are the most likely to change jobs when the economy improves.
More than half of non-diverse workers feel diverse workers have a better chance of landing new jobs; one-third of diverse workers agree
The National Cancer Intelligence Network's study found significant disparities in the survival rate of poor women diagnosed with breast cancer in the UK. However, the division is markedly less when women were diagnosed via cancer screening versus presenting with symptoms of the illness.
The 'All Breast Cancer Report' is the first in-depth analysis in the UK to look at how the impact of treatment and route of diagnosis - either through screening or symptoms presented to a GP - affects the chance of surviving the disease, among people with different levels of poverty.
This gap could, in part, explain why England's breast cancer survival rates are lower than in some other countries. Poorer women are being diagnosed with more advanced stage tumours which are detected too late for surgery or need more aggressive treatment.
For women presenting with symptoms of breast cancer, the report found a 15 per cent difference between the most (68 per cent) and least (83 per cent) deprived in those women who survive for more than five years.
But there was very little difference in survival between the most and least deprived women who were diagnosed through screening.