Woman; 434; International Tribunals on Crimes Against Women

Why why. Good evening. Tonight our topic is crimes against women. My guests

Diana Diana was one of the organizers of the international tribunal of crimes against women held in Brussels in March 1976. She is co-author of crimes against women. The proceedings of the international tribunal. Diana is an associate professor of sociology at Mills College in Oakland California. Her last book was titled The politics of rape. Also with me is Judith Friedlander Judy was one of the organizers of the New York tribunals on crimes against women. She's an assistant professor of anthropology at SUNY in purchase. She's author of being Indian in way up on a study of forced identity on contemporary Mexico in contemporary Mexico Genia myth that the title of your book. Welcome to both of you. Diana one of the reactions that I got when we talked about doing a program on the international tribunal was what are the crimes against women and people thought that was really very far out. It's interesting.

We also are unaware of them so it would be useful to go over some of them but first I should say that we defined crimes against women as any form of oppression against women because we all see it all as totally unjustifiable. So for example there was a lot of testimony on forced motherhood by which we mean the inaccessibility of abortion or contraception by making it illegal or too expensive. The consequence of course of that is that women are forced to be mothers against their will and there was testimony for example from Portugal about there being at least 2000 deaths a year because women resort to unsafe abortions. And so this is the casualty rate. There was also testimony on first non motherhood where women's children are taken away because they're seen as unfit mothers merely because they are single or because they are lesbian or because they are in prison. There was testimony from Japan on this topic. There was a tremendous amount of testimony on

medical crimes abuses by gynecologists and other doctors. So tical atrocities unnecessary mastectomy and hysterectomy as for sterilization there was a great deal of testimony on economic crimes and crimes within the family. For example the double workload of women in the labor force effect they have to come home and do all the housework and the unpaid nature of housework. The double oppression of Third World women there was a really incredible panel on that topic. Also the fact that women can get divorces still in some cultures for example. And there was a case of an Irish woman who was beaten by her husband and tried to escape. But because her husband said that she was crazy the police stopped her on her way with some of her children to leave the city and forced her into a mental hospital where she had to stay just on the word of her husband.

This happens not infrequently. There was testimony the oppression of single mothers and single women. The persecution of lesbians the neglect of elderly women and then the whole area of violence against women where there was more testimony than perhaps anything else. I think you've very clearly defined what you're talking about in terms of crime. Do you organize the NewYork tribe you know. That was before the Brussels tribunal right. We had tribunals one week before the Brussels tribunals working very closely with the women in Brussels and the idea was that we would in a sense be a support group to what was happening in Brussels. Women in the United States women in other countries too perhaps would not be able to go to Brussels but we are very concerned about the very same issues. So we patterned our tribunals on exactly the same format following the same categories of crimes that Diana has just mentioned and perhaps one of the major differences. Without between our tribunals and the Brussels tribunal was that we also focused on on

analysis. We had testimonies of women who had suffered one or many of these crimes and then we had women who had been studying these issues and in a sense put this in an analytical context. So both were going on at the same in other words you didn't just do a consciousness raising thing. I'm not minimizing what you did. But you also offer some practical advice or analysis and also yes practical advice in the sense that it was a network for women who were involved in a number of different political activities to meet and to alert the others as to what was going on not only in New York but in the larger metropolitan area. Diana how did the tribunal come about. There was a small group that met. Feminist camp in Denmark in August 74. We want to support International Women's Day and we were frankly suspicious of how it would be organized since it was being initiated by you and by governments and we felt that we really needed to have a movement

activity that would be a grassroots than that. So we felt a need and we got together and organized it. What kind of cooperation did you get as far as finding a site and that kind of thing is what sort of bureaucratic hassles Did you have. Well it was uphill battle from the beginning mostly because the whole idea of international sisterhood is very new. One of our slogans was sisterhood is powerful international sisterhood is more powerful which we really do believe. But still a lot of people don't yet and I think that one of the achievements of the tribunal is that people agree with that. But there wasn't a whole lot of interest before the tribunal in helping us particularly. We won't get any support from governments and so on. So all I can say is that it was a miracle that we were able to do it and it was made possible by donations of money and also some people taking risks. For example a woman in the Belgian government make it

possible for us to meet in the politic Congress. What about Mexico City I mean can we do a little comparing between the two meetings. You were both in Mexico City. Yes but I think we should back step a little bit and say that we decided to go to Mexico City in order to talk about the tribe you know it was a very definitely a conscious act on our part to publicize the tribunals to more women particularly to Latin American women who might not have heard about it through the European or the American North American. So you had planned to do the tribunal before Mexico City it was not a reaction to Mexico City although there was reason to react. Absolutely. Exactly right. What were your reactions. Well in general it seemed to me that there was an attempt to make it completely apolitical panels Crofts for example a sort of suppression that was a major topic for the first two days on women and economic development. The whole stress was on how to integrate women into the system but the system itself needs to be

changed. We don't want to be integrated into a patriarchal system we want to change and get rid of the patriarchal system and equalitarian system. So the Mexican was a very reformist and even in fact it's difficult to discuss sexism much focus particularly at the governmental part of the Tribune. A lot of people didn't even understand the word sexism and did not wish to discuss it. It was not a feminist event at all. Exactly and I think it's also important to note that whereas Third World women working class women participated in the two tribunals in Brussels and in New York there were of course a lot of Third World women representing the same classes at the Mexico City meeting that they had been brought in by their government. And in many cases fooled about the purpose of why they were coming I know of one case where peasant women's women came in from a small village told that they were going to meet Mrs. each other via And where the actually the entire community had spent time drawing

up a petition of all the things that were necessary that this village needed. And of course these women never got close to Mrs. and had been invited to receive in a folkloric fashion. The delegations from the countries around the world. I would actually like to say what Simone de Beauvoir had to say on this topic if I may read from my book very briefly she says it is not by chance that this tribunal will open after the closing of the proposed year of the woman organized by a male society to confuse women. The feminist gathering in Brussels and tend to take their destiny into the own hands they are not appointed by parties nor by nations know about any political or economic group. It is us women that they will express themselves in effect under whatever regime moral code social environment in which they find themselves. All women suffer from a specific form of oppression. They will be meeting in Brussels to denounce it. I think that I think so I think she hit the nail on the head. There was not much

contact really was there in Mexico City with with women from other countries and in a political sense I mean this is one of the things that I heard about Brussels was that the moving kind of coming together between the Arab and the Israeli women. Were there examples of that in Mexico City it's my impression that there were not seems to be a lot of division although not all the time. In fact we organized a tribunal a mini tribunal where we were talking about the international tribunal and why we were having it and what sorts of crimes we wanted to focus on. And spontaneous testimony from the floor it was a very very powerful meeting. And that was one of the aims of the tribunal was that if we if we come together to face pression the crimes against us. This should you not tell us. Whereas if you don't focus on your oppression very often all sorts of differences of race and culture and nation age and so on come between you and

that's what happened with Mexico. Ideological differences were allowed to disrupt everything exactly and that was it. There was a quite a disruption between the Latin Americans and the North Americans for instance except for the fact that the Mexican feminist movement did invite an international group outside of the context of the Congress to come to their own to meet with them and to talk about what was happening in other countries. So there was a chance to meet but it was sort of thank goodness there was a chance to meet it happen outside the context unfortunately. Let's talk about some of the specific crimes and you ran down a list earlier but I didn't even finish my list which is interesting. I would like to that's what you might want to follow up some of them but the whole area of violence I just mentioned violence but I didn't really specify to talk about pornography there. You know we talked about rape and wife beating a woman battering as it's come to be called and I must say from the testimony in the book it's very clear the battering is a more appropriate word for it.

Also the whole problem of female castration which is still continuing in many parts of the world also femicide which is you'll have to define him as such. All right it's a take up of the word genocide. Of course it means the killing of women because they are women and rape murder is a very obvious example. Of course it applies to young girls as well. It's not just by chance that they are females. Likewise women who are being battered by the husbands who the police reported it alerted them that they are afraid and are not helped and end up being killed. Examples of femicide and there was testimony by a black woman from the Bay Area about her sister who was murdered by her sister's husband in just this fashion. She was a woman who was beaten left her husband told the police she was afraid of her husband that he was going to try and kill her. They would not protect her they said they can't do anything. When she was killed. What

happened to him was that he got one in jail. But he was allowed to go to his job during the day and one year later he was out and that was because it was seen as a crime of passion. So that's an example of femicide. I think probably the female castration needs more explanation yes. Yes I understood that not many people know what it's about I think castration is something that happens to men but in fact it's far more that it happens to women. There was testimony from this topic. Also a number of countries were mentioned where it's still going on. Egypt and Sudan Kenya Morocco and many others particularly Africa basically and it involves To me the excision of the US and often a whole lot more than that and this is followed by in it in February which is a

sobering up of the woman so that there's just the young girl just a tiny hole left for her to your innate know under which circumstances does this happen this happens to particularly in the rural areas it used to happen to is it a right if you are right I think. Right exactly I think that should be made clear you just said circumcision right before you were talking about castration castration is usually a form of punishing men. This is socially accepted for not for women or young girls who have done something wrong. But this is an act of becoming a woman in a sense having her sexuality really restrained to puberty right. Exactly and men have many puberty rites but the resulting complete castration and also often disastrous effects afterwards tremendous number of infections tremendous difficulty with childbirth. The idea is then when they get married they are cut open before the husband leaves again they might be sewn up again.

And of course it's a very very cruel way of trying to keep the woman faithful by destroying her sexuality. However we have to realize that the different equally cool methods have been used in different cultures for bonding and the Arabs have a right to explain what that is. Well basically women have to stay in the home they cannot be seen by any other man than the men in the family. Otherwise they have to be completely covered. Some women have just never seen. Then again of course the violence against women is such that we have to face the fact that most women are afraid to step out of their houses a night. This is I think one of the things that people will be curious to know and I'm sure you both can give an evaluation of this and that is how does the United States stack up in all this. I mean what for instance physical violence.

Well it's generally agreed in the United States it is extremely violent culture. If you look at the figures on homicide on rape on aggravated assault the US is far higher than any other country in Western Europe. And I think that we have to realize that this problem is related to sex roles to sexism because it's mostly the men who are being violent and it's mostly women who are afraid of being victims men also victimize each other tremendously. Look at the motive figures for example 63 percent of men are men. Only four percent are women and women. But the point is that men are not afraid of being killed and beaten by women. These problems are problems and we are not going to solve the problem until we realize that what comes out of it is the whole masculine Listy the raising of men to think that to be masculine they have to always be

the superior tough strong sometimes to be superior. Tough words. It's my impression that most women in this country are not aware of an international level. And you know I think I think the book has to rethink it's very moving. And you know I was really educated by it and I'm sure lots of other people will be too. Why why are we so why are we being so narrow Why have we been in control of the media for one thing let's face it. And so that what happens to women does not get into the media very much. And we are way behind for example. Black people in their consciousness about what is happening to black people in the rest of the world they have a far greater consciousness for example of what's happening to blacks in South Africa than we have about some of the crimes I've just mentioned. And this is precisely what we need to get away from we need to extend a sense of. Sisterhood beyond all these

manmade boundaries and what happens to women to young girls in India in Japan in Africa must affect us too. I think this is very very important. Did you when you did the tribunal in New York were you emphasizing the international issues or were you talking about the United States primarily. We did not limit ourselves to the United States particularly in the case of women political prisoners. We did discuss this aspect on on the international level. We decided that we would invite women who were Americans mostly to come and testify because it was a national or at least a local tribunals. But we did recognize the fact that the crimes that we had in the United States were not unique to the United States that you did find them elsewhere. And in fact that comes back to the point Diana that you were making before. There might be greater violence in the United States but of course how do you measure women's oppression there are many different ways. And consequently we want to be aware of all the different ways that you can look at the way

women have been oppressed and that was one of the reasons also why we had. Some of the people to come who did analyses we had anthropologists discuss sort of cross-culturally the position of women in so-called primitive societies and in complex societies because this problem is not a problem that has or has arisen with so-called complex societies as some people have thought. We find that there is gang rape occurring in Brazil in New Guinea in Africa and this is these are happening in so-called egalitarian societies. Now this is a highly controversial I should make clear this is a highly controversial issue among anthropologists but the new evidence seems to be leading one to suggest that we must have a much more sophisticated analysis and understanding of what creates the possibility for women almost universally to be the second sex. Do you like to dwell on this issue of violence. Because I find even the women do live in this country

fearful about leaving their houses at night sometimes just being alone in the house at night. They nevertheless often see other people's oppression. Clearly you know they don't realize right credible fact that you know I mean almost all of us can understand the stories of the political prisoners in Portugal for instance the women who were tortured there. But however we can't apply it here. So therefore I think we think there isn't that kind of violence. And that also you mentioned the problem of pornography which I'm very interested to know what the testimony was and what I we have a view I think of the Scandinavian countries as being sexually liberated including the women and so on and I think we. Now we look at them a little bit in awe and I'm curious to know about the testimony. Yes actually the demo was the only country to testify on this issue and the country where there is no censorship and so on. And the testimony came

from the porno model who said that she had gone into it thinking that she was so liberated that this would not touch her and wouldn't bother her. But that after three months she felt really violated and abused and compromised and very bad and full of self-hatred just performing what she had before. And so she not that she did get out of it but part of the Testament also was a film about rape three men raping one woman and. It was just so upsetting. Only three minutes of the film was shown because women could not bear to see the rest of it. Insisted the lads return but to think that some men paid to see that it is quite appalling and it does seem that there is a tendency for pornography to get more and more extreme as people get satiated by more and more extremely violent that's not a

perfect example of this of course which was which was an issue that was raised that the New York tribunals write a national tribunal as well as an international right. Yeah actually. Movies announcing themselves as bad as killing women. Maybe you can tell whether they really do or not. I mean to actually use that as a way of trying to get people in is extraordinary. I understand that some of the women testified. With some danger to themselves that they took risks to testify particularly women from Iran and Chile the women who were testifying about the oppression and violence towards political prisoners they were very afraid. We didn't take photographs and so on and off to the left. Some of the embassies wanted to know who they were. There were long telegrams announcing the test and so on. The black South

African Also the black Aboriginal Australia as well. This also happened in Mexico City in our tribe you know there was a woman from Bolivia who also at great risk talked about herself and I might add that as a result of that we in New York received letters from women in Latin America telling us about cases in Latin America at great risk to themselves writing us saying please if you respond to us don't use any of the names we have listed here in these letters you've destroyed the list. Yes. What did this do to your heads. Knowing about all this. I mean especially Uganda being in Brussels and the testimony you heard in New York. Well you know it's of course to press and oppression but I feel so much more of a sense of the importance of of being in touch with it just as I think Jews need to be in touch with what happened in Germany

and blacks need to be in touch with what's happening in South Africa. It's it's part of our own oppression doesn't have to have have to happen to us personally always but if it's happening to our people I think we we need to be aware of it. And I feel that so much that that overwhelms for me just being upset by it also because you see I feel like in this book and during the trial we are helping to solve things. So it's a very active thing to be doing and that feels really powerful. I think that's that's the same feeling we had in New York. It was our tribe you know was very action oriented in the sense that we were hearing and we were having the opportunity of joining a number of women who are doing really acting on these issues and just publicizing this was extremely important to us. And it was also very exciting to see that women who. Belong to different races and different classes whose political affiliations really vary tremendously.

We're all able to come together over these issues ranging from very left wing groups the Puerto Rican Socialist Party to the Committee for the defense of political prisoners in the Soviet Union to the radical feminists who are usually considered to be very middle class in New York to the sisterhood of black single mothers to a group who are working on wife beating as it was called in those days awake. It's cetera et cetera. There was just an enormous spread and this you can you will say then without qualification that there is an international women's movement. Can you. At some level I think so yes. Yes. And also the tribunal itself has learned many things like I have about 30 seconds. So many places do you think they're going to be. There have been some here in New York one was not the only one.

There was one time for a conference on violence against women which led us to form a group of women against pornography and media violence which is very active there been many things like that. But we also had one one of the things that I wanted to talk to you about and we're not going to get time is is about the media reaction to the tribunal which was not terrific Was it an example of censoring. Thank you. The book is very moving. Thank you both thank you Judy for being here. Thank you for watching and good night. This program was produced by W. and he is solely responsible for

its content. Major funding was provided by public television stations additional support was provided by unrestricted general program grants from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and the Ford Foundation. A.