Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-01-Speech-3-084"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000301.6.3-084"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, celebrating International Women’s Day is a necessary step in the process of women attaining the position which they have always deserved because of their innate dignity. Celebrating this day should involve bringing together two basic aspects: first, the aspect which makes us remember our ability to relate to the history of this cause and of everyone associated with it, and amongst these I would like to highlight, in order to be completely fair, non-governmental organisations. There is also the symbolic aspect, which has the potential to take the cause of equal opportunities for men and women into the future.
Parity means a balance between men and women in the way social and political representation are structured. Being a woman is one of the two fundamental ways of being human. Women and men are aspects of humankind that separate as much as they unite and these two sides are therefore brought into constant competition with each other. A balanced democracy, if we accept this observation, derives benefit from the creativity this generates and uses it to make decisions which are the most correct, fair and appropriate to the problems that they are seeking to solve. That is why I believe in parity, the new face of sexual equality, which gives universality back its true meaning and its rightful place in a politically organised society.
The Beijing Action Platform represents an historic point in the long journey that we are talking about today. Therefore, the assessment of it which is now under way must not be an excuse for taking a step backwards. It is not a new declaration, merely an assessment of how the Member States that have signed up to it are actually complying with it. Its principles, the values it enshrines and the objectives it seeks to achieve must be upheld. It is true that it could go further, but it should never be disparaged. This is the position that the EU must adopt.
The conclusions of the European assessment procedure carried out in January in Geneva are in line with this and confirm once again the need to fully implement the twelve areas identified. The process leading up to the launch of the Fifth Community Programme for Gender Equality 2001-2005 is also under way. From what we know of this process, it seems obvious that it is crucial to pursue and strengthen the policy of equality between men and women at Community level because, despite all the progress made and all the work done, we still see significant examples of disparity between men and women in economic, political, social and civil terms. In its capacity as the current holder of the presidency of the Union, Portugal welcomes this programme and wishes it success so that we can build a Europe of equal opportunities for all.
Women and men shape and structure the societies in which they live through the interplay of the differences between them. This proposal offers a new way of viewing public and private life; it is designed to combat the public’s suspicion of politicians and of their behaviour, an alternative designed to overcome distrust about the way in which democratic structures function and about their transparency. Furthermore, this is a process designed to minimise the disaffection felt by sections of the public towards the traditional political parties and their approach to politics.
The policy of gender equality brings a certain added value to society by benefiting women as well as men in terms of helping them to fulfil their personal, social and professional potential. It will furthermore contribute considerably to social progress, by acknowledging and fostering each gender’s own resources, by helping to strengthen democracy, by bringing the decision-making process closer to the voting public, by introducing new approaches to the political scene which take specific account of women, and by helping to improve the quality of life and to strengthen democracy.
A Portuguese thinker, reflecting on the issue of equality in 1922, stressed that “a prerequisite for equality is equality of rights and power.” I am sure that no one could deny the wisdom of his attitude, and that no one who recognises the truth of it would deny that it is a fundamental part of democracy. So let us build that democracy! This is the only way in which we will be able truthfully to state that humanity is a form of solidarity that has continued throughout history.
(
)
By eliminating something that has always been sidelined, this celebration will contribute to men and women seeing themselves as both the origin and the purpose of their own dignity, in a process which is concerned not so much with sanctifying time, but with purifying it of prejudice. This kind of celebration makes sense because, by discussing the past, we give ourselves the opportunity to free ourselves of the stigma which has, throughout history, affected women because they have been forced to live in poverty, because they have had to accept second place in terms of education, and because they are naturally weaker, which exposes them to gratuitous violence, and to being forcibly excluded from positions of power and from the decision-making process. Furthermore, women have suffered because of their health, which is affected by motherhood, by violence, and even by sexual exploitation. They have also suffered from the burden society imposes on them in terms of family responsibility, a weak economic position and, as regards employment, from lack of time for themselves, and also, from the whole complex process of treating women as sexual objects, from which they suffer as regards the media, trafficking in women and sexual exploitation. The list of human rights which are abused where women are concerned simply goes on and on.
The scholars of ancient Greece bequeathed to us the assumption that there is a natural link between equality and justice. Aristotle was unequivocal in stating that “the just man complies with the law, adheres to equality and makes us comply with the law and equality, whereas the unjust man leads us to illegality and inequality”. In contrast with the apparent simplicity of this philosophy, however, Voltaire warned us two thousand years later that “equality is the most natural cause and at the same time the most utopian. As man is given to excess in everything, when he can be, he is excessive in his inequality”. Modernity and the system of democracy in which it exists is based on the idea of a social contract, a form of association which, in the words of Rousseau, “defends and protects the person and property of each member with all common force and according to which each member, in association with the others, nevertheless only obeys himself and remains as free as before. As a result of each person committing himself completely, the conditions are the same for everyone. Because the conditions are the same for everyone, it is in no one’s interests to make the conditions more difficult for anyone else”. We know however, that these conditions of equality and universality did not include women. In post-modern society, now that we have declared that Rousseau’s social contract is no longer sufficient, we must call for a new form of contract, one which is richer and more enriching because it is more in tune with human nature, with its natural polarity between men and women.
We must seek a new kind of social contract between men and women, but this proposal is a result of democracy itself. We are living in an era in which politics has become debased and in which democracies suffer from a lack of political commitment on the part of their citizens. We must look at this fact in the light of the implications of the combination of citizenship and democracy, concepts which mutually define each other. To my mind, preventing women from fully exercising their rights as citizens is one of the determining factors in the crisis of democracy, which only an integrated policy on gender equality can help to reverse. This highlights the goal of parity, which will take shape when a democracy of equals emerges, a new model which will bring about a new social contract between men and women, a path or short-cut towards an inclusive society. Globalisation has various implications for democracy. It accordingly highlights the need for a new ethic, as the shortcomings of personal and social ethics have been demonstrated time and time again. The concepts of fluidity, mobility and speed are taking hold on a hitherto unseen scale: a world-wide scale. Concepts and realities such as transnationalism, regionalism and tribalism have established a permanent place for themselves in our daily lives, causing problems and dilemmas, often in very drastic ways. Whilst progress towards democracy being irreversibly established throughout the world appears to have become an accepted fact, we are discovering at the same time the extent of the social suffering caused by the effect of globalisation on the weakest sectors of society and therefore on women, as poverty insists on being a feminine word and on having a feminine face.
The truth is that the accumulation of wealth and power has led to a rise in the number of socially excluded people. Technological progress has brought with it an increase in unemployment. The globalisation of the economy and of financial systems has stripped the state of powers it previously had, and the state has now been relegated to the position of a parallel state. At the same time and as a result of this, we are seeing the emergence of nomadism, which is making social inclusion more difficult to achieve – another point to add to the factors I have already mentioned. In short, exclusion certainly takes many forms, but it is a constant source of shame within our system, which is coming to be defined as the “democracy of our discontent”, in other words, a process of exclusion, disaffection, stigmatisation and disqualification unparalleled in history or in any part of the world.
Under the Portuguese presidency, and bearing in mind the efforts and the contributions made by the various Member States, the Lisbon Special Summit, which will be held on the theme ‘Employment, economic reform and social cohesion: towards a new Europe of innovation and knowledge’, seeks to counter these risks, which have historically always been more serious for women, particularly in those areas most directly related to the specific theme proposed.
So the summit is intended to adopt measures which will establish conditions for access to knowledge, to lifelong training and to overcoming the constraints that make people shy away from technological advances with all the implications that this may have. We are therefore seeking to overhaul the European social model and at the same time to increase employment and social cohesion. We are seeking to adopt a position which will reverse the traditional exclusion of women, which is determined by the responsibilities traditionally assumed by women. This will only be possible if there is a new social contract in which reconciling family life and professional life is given strategic importance and in which “sharing” is the key word.
It is, however, in the world of politics that the exclusion of women can be seen most vividly. That is why the choice of today’s subject shows such good judgement, as it will be a determining factor in the future, once equality is established in legal terms. Introducing the feminine approach is crucial if we are to deal with the complexities of modern life. It is obvious that the lack of real equality betrays a lack of legitimacy in our political structures and demonstrates how unrepresentative they are. All of this reveals the inadequacy of simply establishing legal equality which, although it was intended to guarantee equality from the outset, has not been able to guarantee this in practice. The supposed universality of the writings of the founders of modern democracy, whom I mentioned earlier, did not involve treating women as citizens. Women were not thought of as having rights. Given that real democracy presupposes and implies the equal participation of all citizens, on this evidence the difference between the sexes leads to a significant strengthening of the democratic system. Humanity is divided into two sexes, and we need a system in which discussions and decisions are undertaken by men and women on an equal basis."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples