Skip to comments.When the Sisterhood Rules the World: The Sad Tale of UNICEF
Posted on 12/21/2004 3:07:23 PM PST by CareyRoberts
Women often swap jokes that start with the line, What if women ruled the world? Heres one of my favorites: If women ruled the world, men would learn phrases like, Youre beautiful, Im sorry, and Of course you dont look fat in that outfit.
So lets ask the more serious question, What if the Gender Warriors ruled the world?
I could take numerous cases where that scenario has already happened, where the Sisterhood has swept into power and recast entire organizations. Examples that spring to mind are the New York Times, National Public Radio, the American Psychological Association, Amnesty International, the National Institutes of Health, and others.
But lets take one example where feminists have been around long enough to really leave their mark: UNICEF.
When I was a kid, people knew there was inefficiency and waste at the United Nations. But everyone would still look to UNICEF as the one agency that was really making a difference, helping children to stay healthy and get a grade-school education.
That was true until the day Jim Grant, visionary UNICEF leader, died.
So in 1995, President Bill Clinton no doubt at the urging of Hillary -- nominated Carol Bellamy as Grants replacement. Bellamy is as doctrinaire a feminist as you will find. While serving as a state senator in New York, Bellamy had voted against a bill that would have granted legal rights to an infant who managed to survive a botched abortion.
Once she settled into her tony digs on New Yorks Upper East Side, Bellamy quickly became bored with UNICEFs mundane programs that doled out measles vaccines and oral rehydration tablets. She wanted to launch UNICEF into the uncharted realm of gender ideology and social engineering.
Feminist dogma teaches that correct ideology should prevail over good science. Take the breastfeeding issue, for instance.
Breastfeeding is known to be healthier and safer than bottle feeding, especially in low-income areas of the world where sanitation is poor. But the feminists charged the UNICEF breastfeeding program portrayed women as the human equivalent of milking cows. So no more of breast is best.
Bellamy advocated favoring girls over boys, a practice the United Nations euphemistically refers to as positive discrimination. She pushed through her pet Go Girls! program, which ignored the fact that in some parts of the world, the schooling of boys lags behind girls.
At an April 3, 2003 press conference, a hyper-inflated Carol Bellamy issued this chauvinistic claim: Women are the lifeline of these southern African communities. They put food on the table, and theyre the ones that keep families going during such crises.
But four months later, Bellamy had her comeuppance [http://mensnewsdaily.com/archive/r/roberts/03/roberts082803.htm].
In August 2003 the Catholic Family and Human Rights Group (C-FAM) issued its explosive report, Women or Children First? The expose documented how UNICEF had become involved in back-door support for abortion programs around the world. The account concluded that under Carol Bellamy, Radical feminism has come to define the current UNICEF, even to the possible detriment of UNICEFs original mandate to help children [www.c-fam.org/pdfs/unicef.pdf].
The Americans werent the only ones disturbed with UNICEFs new direction.
Earlier this month the leading British medical journal Lancet landed another direct hit. The editorial highlighted UNICEFs failure to develop a coherent strategy for child survival, and how this shortcoming was contributing to the 10 million child deaths each year [www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=17686].
Taking aim at UNICEFs new-found obsession with promoting girls and womens rights, Lancet leveled this blistering critique: The most fundamental right of all is the right to survive. Child survival must sit at the core of UNICEFs advocacy and country work. Currently, and shamefully, it does not.
Thankfully, Carol Bellamys term of office will expire in 2005.
The fact of the matter is, we will never know how many children around the world became the collateral damage of radical feminism. And there is no doubt it will take many years to restore the luster to UNICEFs once-lofty reputation.
Radical feminists argue that men have run the show for too long, and now its their turn to rule the roost.
But they would be well-advised to not showcase Carol Bellamys UNICEF, where the feminist dream turned into a childrens nightmare.
I used to do Trick-or-Treat-for-Unicef. Lately, I've read one shocking thing after another about the agency, and I couldn't figure out what had happened . . . til I read this very informative article. Thanks for the information!
Paging Hanity, Coulter, Rush (especially Rush), Malkin, and every conservative with a mike, computer, or pen.
If women ruled the world...
There'd be a war every 28 days.
The language of diplomacy would be replaced with screams of "Bitch!" and hair-pulling.
They still would be lousy drivers.
There'd still be ugly women you still couldn't drink pretty.
You could reduce world leaders to tears by pointing out that they have a zit.
Heather Locklear would still be hot.
And lesbians would still mostly be women who are so mean and ugly no man would want to screw them anyhow.
I thought that you might find this article interesting because of the conversation that we had earlier today about a similar subject.
I do little for any organzed charity except my local church and the Scotish Rite Hosptal for this reason (OK, Boy Scouts, March of Dimes, the local Make-A-Wish get a fair amount, and we do donations of "stuff" and change to the Salvation Army.)
I chased the local United Way out of our offices.
"I chased the local United Way out of our offices."
You really DO need a charity scorecard these days. I give at my church and the Salvation Army. That's all I really trust with my $$. I do make it a point NOT to donate to any charity with UN in the name.
About 5 years ago I stayed at a Westin hotel in Singapore. When I checked out I noticed an itsy bitsy notice at the bottom of my receipt saying that they had added $1 a day to my bill as a voluntary donation to Unicef. I told the clerk to redo the bill without the donation. He was quite shocked but complied. When I got home a letter went off to Westin's corporate marketing group. Wishy washy answer.
The question is: "What if the Gender Warriors ruled the world?"
The answer is: "a childrens nightmare."
Jim Grant may have been a visionary leader, but I believe UNICEF started getting into the family planning business before Carol Bellamy came along. It just got a whole lot worse after she took over.
Basically, hardly any foreign aid helps people in the poorer countries any more with things that they need. Most of them focus on condoms, condoms, condoms, and more condoms, with vasectomies and sterilizations and abortions thrown in for good measure.
Regretably, USAID is part of the problem, although things have improved a little under Bush.
M. Thatcher...war with Argentina
I. Gandi...war with Pakistan
G. Meier...war with arab nations
I'll let others come up with some more since I don't have time to research this one.
Interesting group of folks, isn't it? The American Psychological Association in particular seems to have assumed low earth orbit the last couple of years - they're the folks who came out with reports concluding (1) that children did better without fathers, and (2) that no particular damage was caused by sex with children under 12. This explains a lot about that.
Shaka Zulu's mother *LOL*
We have since donated to "Operation Iraqi Children" in his name, and, while he deemed it acceptable, the ridiculous amount of kavetching over this "controversy" still continues.
Ain't liberals grand?
You have fogrotten Mad Albright who bombed Serbia on behalf of Al Qaeda ally.
/caught on film smooching with terrorist/
Sadly, it is not just UNICEF which has this problem of ideology over science and common sense. AIDS pc has hampered efforts to combat the disease in developing nations as well. As well, the pro-Choice lobby employs cultural imperialism whcih hampers efforts to get good quality basic healthcare and other programs to women (targeting in particular countries where abortion is culturally offensive to women themselves).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.