International ResearchScape Journal International ResearchScape Journal
Volume 3 Article 7
2015
‘Please be a lady… you are not going to be heard’: The Debate over ‘Please be a lady… you are not going to be heard’: The Debate over
the Rati?cation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms the Rati?cation of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms
of Discrimination against Women of Discrimination against Women
Kasie Durkit
Bowling Green State University
, durkitk@bgsu.edu
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/irj
Part of the American Politics Commons, Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons, International and
Area Studies Commons, Law and Gender Commons, Social Policy Commons, and the Women's Studies
Commons
Recommended Citation Recommended Citation
Durkit, Kasie (2015) "‘Please be a lady… you are not going to be heard’: The Debate over the Rati?cation of
the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women,"
International
ResearchScape Journal
: Vol. 3, Article 7.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.25035/irj.03.01.07
Available at: https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/irj/vol3/iss1/7
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at ScholarWorks@BGSU. It has been
accepted for inclusion in International ResearchScape Journal by an authorized editor of ScholarWorks@BGSU.
Durkit
1
‘Please be a lady… you are not going to be heard’: The Debate over the Ratification of the Convention
on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
Kasie Durkit
durkitk@bgsu.edu
Faculty Mentors:
Dr. Melissa Miller
Dr. Neil Englehart
Dr. Benjamin Greene
Durkit: ‘Please be a lady… you are not going to be heard’: The Debate ove
Published by ScholarWorks@BGSU, 2015
Durkit
2
‘Please be a lady… you are not going to be heard’: The Debate over the Ratification of
the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
Abstract
Why did the United States fail to ratify the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women? This overarching question forms the basis of this paper and will be
answered using an array of primary and secondary sources. This paper gleans most of its evidence from
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearings of 1994 and 2002, letters from both President Jimmy
Carter and former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Congressional Research Service reports on CEDAW
from 2013 and 2007, several Senators’ statements in the Congressional Record, Congressional
testimony, and the text of the CEDAW treaty. This paper integrates these primary sources with
secondary sources, citing legal analyses by former Attorney General Harold Hongju Koh, positions
taken by lobby groups such as Amnesty International, the Heritage Foundation, and Concerned Women
for America, the text, “Circle of Empowerment” by CEDAW Committee veteran Hannah-Beate Schopp-
Schilling, and research on the legislative impact of CEDAW by Dutch legal analyst Rikki Holtmaat.
This paper contends that CEDAW’s failure stemmed from:
1) the belief that U.S. women’s rights are already “covered,”
2) the convergence of federalism and inherent constitutional restrictions,
3) the belief that CEDAW will subvert American sovereignty, and,
4) distorted interpretations of the CEDAW Committee’s recommendations.
Introduction
With one hundred of their colleagues’ signatures clutched tightly in their hands, nine women from the
U.S. House of Representatives marched resolutely through the halls of the Dirksen Office Building in
pursuit of change. For four years they had watched as Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman
Jesse Helms refused to hear discussion on the ratification of the United Nations treaty “Convention on
the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women,” known colloquially as the “Magna
International ResearchScape Journal, Vol. 3 [2015], Art. 7
https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/irj/vol3/iss1/7
DOI: https://doi.org/10.25035/irj.03.01.07
Durkit
3
Carta” of women’s rights. Now in 1999, these women were going to do something about that. Not
finding Helms in his office in the Dirksen Office Building, the women regrouped, and decided to break-
in to a nearby room where he was holding a hearing. Locating Helms, the women marched straight up to
him and demanded one thing: put the CEDAW treaty on the agenda. The chairman’s answer? A police
escort out of the hearing room and Helms’ provocation, “Please be a lady…you are not going to be
heard,” (Dewar A31).
The object of these Congresswomen’s moxie, “CEDAW,” is an international women’s rights treaty
initially signed by President Jimmy Carter in 1980, but never ratified by Congress. It is unequivocally
the most comprehensive women’s rights treaty of its kind. With the threefold aim of achieving women’s
full equality before the law, improving the position of women in society, and combating entrenched
gender stereotypes, CEDAW works to highlight the breadth of women’s inequality and eradicate all
manifestations of it. Overtly asymmetrical in its intent and purpose, CEDAW recognizes that it is
women who face extensive, extant gender discrimination, and therefore CEDAW seeks to eliminate
discrimination solely against women, rather than discrimination against men and women. Further, the
Convention encourages nations to take all appropriate measures to modify existing laws, regulations,
customs, and practices that constitute discrimination against women. CEDAW highlights the need for de
facto equality between women and men economically, politically, socially, civilly, educationally, and
culturally. Lastly, CEDAW holds ratifying countries accountable for change by asking that countries
submit a progress report every four years tracking their implementation of treaty guidelines, while
utilizing a twenty-three member CEDAW Committee to monitor these reports and make
recommendations for improvement (Holtmaat 3-21).
Though he was a serious roadblock, Jesse Helms was not the only factor contributing to CEDAW’s
failure in the United States. The Convention has languished for thirty-four years in the U.S. Senate
Durkit: ‘Please be a lady… you are not going to be heard’: The Debate ove
Published by ScholarWorks@BGSU, 2015
Durkit
4
Foreign Relations Committee, never making it to the floor for a vote. It has languished while 187 of 193
United Nations members have ratified and implemented CEDAW worldwide. It has languished despite
the United States’ recognition that it is the only developed country in the world that has failed to reach
ratification.
Reasons for CEDAW’s Failure in the United States
Why did the United States fail to ratify the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Discrimination against Women? This overarching question forms the basis of this paper and will be
answered using an array of primary and secondary sources. This paper gleans most of its evidence from
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearings of 1994 and 2002, letters from both President Jimmy
Carter and former Secretary of State Colin Powell, Congressional Research Service reports on CEDAW
from 2013 and 2007, several Senators’ statements in the Congressional Record, Congressional
testimony, and the text of the CEDAW treaty. This paper integrates these primary sources with
secondary sources, citing legal analyses by former Attorney General Harold Hongju Koh, positions
taken by lobby groups such as Amnesty International, the Heritage Foundation, and Concerned Women
for America, the text, “Circle of Empowerment” by CEDAW Committee veteran Hannah-Beate Schopp-
Schilling, and research on the legislative impact of CEDAW by Dutch legal analyst Rikki Holtmaat.
From these sources, this paper argues that there are four factors contributing to CEDAW’s failure in the
United States: the belief that women’s rights are already “covered” in the United States, inherent
Constitutional restrictions and the problem of implementing CEDAW in a federal system, the belief that
CEDAW will subvert American sovereignty, and distorted understandings of the CEDAW Committee’s
recommendations.
In order to understand why the CEDAW treaty has thus far failed to be ratified in the United States and
why it continues to take a back-seat for ratification, it is helpful to understand the beginnings of
International ResearchScape Journal, Vol. 3 [2015], Art. 7
https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/irj/vol3/iss1/7
DOI: https://doi.org/10.25035/irj.03.01.07