.- A recently submitted report on human rights in counter-terrorism efforts uses language defining gender as âa social and shifting constructâ that is not static but changeable. Critics charge that the United Nations bureaucracy has made the report âhighly ideologicalâ and has distracted from its true purpose of protecting women.
Focusing upon gender-based issues, the report âProtection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms While Countering Terrorismâ was authored by U.N. Special Rapporteur Martin Scheinin.
In his report summary, Scheinin wrote that many of the reportâs measures concern the human rights of women. However, he added, âgender is not synonymous with women, and, instead, encompasses the social constructions that underlie how womenâs and menâs roles, functions and responsibilities, including in relation to sexual orientation and gender identity, are understood.â
âGender is not static; it is changeable over time and across contexts,â he stated.
Understanding âgenderâ as âa social and shifting construct rather than as a biological and fixed category,â in the rapporteurâs view, would help identify the âcomplex and inter-related gender-based human rights violations caused by counterterrorism measures.â Scheinin wrote that such understanding would also help âdesign strategies for countering terrorism that are truly non-discriminatory and inclusive of all actors.â
Austin Ruse, President of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), told CNSNews.com that the document was âhighly ideologicalâ and that acceptance of Scheininâs definition will trigger U.N. debate. His âradicalâ definition of gender will gain more impetus because of its inclusion in a report authored by a special rapporteur and accepted by the General Assembly.
âEven though the radicals have tried to get this statement agreed to, that gender is a social construct, the General Assembly has decided not once, not twice, but three times that gender is based in nature,â Ruse added.
The C-FAM president said he doubted the report had a chance of being accepted by the General Assembly, noting a âgrowing oppositionâ to it. Though acknowledging uncertainty about the issue, he told CNSNews.com he fully expected a âmassive negative reactionâ to the report.
Julie Gunlock, a senior fellow at the Independent Womenâs Forum, charged that the report veered from its intended subject of women and diluted its importance.
The changes âmanaged to turn this into something that looks more like some politically correct corporate human resources manual,â she told CNSNews.com.
In a Monday e-mail Ruse told CNA that the report points to an âongoing tensionâ between U.N. Member States and the United Nations bureaucracy.
âWhat happens is that the Member States make a decision, then the hard left bureaucracy does exactly what it wants even if it is the opposite of what Member States decide. While the Member states have decided this issue on behalf of tradition, this pipsqueak bureaucrat injected his own ideology and his own sexual proclivities into this report.â
Ruse said that the writer is a âhomosexual activistâ who helped author âother nasty reports.â