| |
|
The OAS/FTAA and Womyn
by Aurita Withers
|
|
Wom[y]n constitute half of the world’s population, perform nearly
two-thirds of its work hours, receive one-tenth of the world’s income
and own less than one-hundredth of the worlds property” (united
nations). Organizations like the OAS and agreements like the FTAA do
significantly more to maintain these inequalities than they do to
alleviate them.
The OAS does have a body dedicated to womyn’s
issues and both the OAS and FTAA discuss some of the issues impacting
womyn. However, final decisions in the OAS are made by a group of
(almost exclusively) men. Womyn’s issues are not as much of a priority
of the OAS as trade is, which almost always directly conflicts with
womyn’s interests. As a result, the OAS and FTAA pays lip service to
womyn and the only meaningful action that takes place surrounding
womyn’s issues is when it benefits the corporate good.
Womyn are
systemically excluded from decision making processes throughout the
Americas. If you take a look at the OAS web page (www.oas.org), there is
a picture of the OAS general assembly. It is a picture of a group of
elite men. Womyn are not in the upper levels of decision making in the
OAS, nor are they in the governments which are members of the OAS (there
are a few women at this level, but they are tokenistic and largely
forced to work in the interest of men). The OAS recognizes every country
in the Americas (except Cuba) as democratic, how are any of these
governments democratic or representative of the people when they largely
exclude womyn? They aren’t. Women have been removed from decision
making which results in any of the decisions made, which have any
significant standing, are in the interests of (elite) men.
The
OAS/FTAA works to “foster free trade” in the interest of corporations.
What is the corporation? Vandana Shivahas described it as: created both
as a way of getting more power and allowing those who own them to be
able to escape the responsibility for wielding this power. The
corporation was a fiction imagined in the likeness of white men with
property. That is what a corporation is: a white man with property. Yet,
because it has been abstracted from these white men with property,
people do not see them as being responsible. (Sharma and Campbell, 72)
As the corporation works in the interests of white men with property,
the OAS/FTAA, therefore, also works in the interest of white men with
property. The FTAA says it will work towards “straightening the role of
wom[y]n in society.” The FTAA, like most other male dominated
organizations, views womyn’s role in society as “underproductive”. How
is it that a demographic group can perform two-thirds of the worlds work
and still be underproductive?
The FTAA states that it will
“promote the fulfillment of wom[y]n’s potential, enhancing their
productivity though education, training skill development and
employment” and that it will “adopt appropriate measures to improve
wom[y]n’s ability to earn income beyond traditional occupations, achieve
economic self-reliance, and ensure wom[y]n’s equal access to the labor
market at all employment levels, the social security systems, the credit
system, and the acquisition of goods and land.” Doesn’tthat sound good?
On
paper almost everything the FTAA and OAS say sounds very good. However,
the realities of how the OAS/FTAA goes about achieving its goals have
tremendous human costs and further marginalize oppressed groups. What
the FTAA means when it says it will increase the productivity of womyn
is that it will increase the amount of paid labour for womyn. Current
economic measurements do not factor in most of womyn’s work as it is
performed in the home or doing subsistence agriculture. Womyn’s work
largely focuses on reproducing society. Womyn’s work is the backbone of
society, because of this work, families are fed, clothed, kept warm and
educated. However, womyn’s work is largely unpaid and, therefore, not
considered to beproductive.
The OAS/FTAA works to force many
Latin American womyn into the paid labour sector in order to make them
productive. This occurs by making it impossible for people who had once
been community or self sufficient to remain so. The robbing of
indigenous and peasant land and its transition into cash crops, the
flooding of land for hydro projects and the destruction of if for oil
drilling, mining, logging and other mega projects are always that the
OAS uses to force people, and particularly womyn into themarket economy.
Once
forced off of their land, many womyn are must work in sweat shops and
other low paying as it is often the only employment available for
“unskilled” womyn. Sweat shops employ about 90% womyn and they rely on
easily exploitable and expendable work forces. Because of the FTAA sweat
shops will become even more common throughout the Americas than they
are now as labour laws are reduced or eliminated if they interfere with
profit.
Although many womyn in the “Third World” are forced to
work in the paid labour sector because they can no longer support their
families by other means, they continue to maintain most or all of their
domestic duties. This means that womyn who once worked full time caring
for and educating children now work full time in the market economy as
well. Many women in the “Third World” are working two or more working
days in a single day as a result of the spread of capitalist
globalization.
Because womyn retain most of the responsibility
for the care of children, the ill and elderly, use the forests, gather
water, utilize inter-tidal zones, the ocean and other sensitive water
bodies, and perform much of the world’s subsistence agriculture, they
are often the first to recognize environmental problems. The devastating
impact that OAS endorsed mega-projects and the FTAA have on the
environment has an extremely negative impact on womyn, particularly in
the “Third World” (both in kanada, the u$a and Latin America).
There
is great diversity in the lives and experiences of the womyn of the
Americas. The OAS/FTAA impacts many different womyn differently, but
what remains constant is that the OAS/FTAA works to maintain patriarchy,
rather than eliminate it. The OAS/FTAA does discuss “womyn’s issues”
but that is far from sufficient. As long as the OAS/FTAA, and other
organizations and agreements like them, exist patriarchy will remain a
strong oppressive force in the Americas
|
|
|
