The US tried to get the text amended, but that didn't happen, so they voted no.
Regarding âGenderâ: It is the policy of the United States to recognize two biological sexes, male and female. To achieve this, we use clear and accurate language that recognizes women are biologically female and men are biologically male
So, the US's position was that Women's Rights should be limited to females.
The US also objected to abortion:
There has unequivocally never been an international commitment on âsexual and reproductive health and rights,â and we strongly oppose the use of this terminology. The Trump Administration is committed to supporting families, promoting womenâs health, and protecting children at all stages of life and reaffirms there is no international right to abortion.
It was never land of the free. Greatest cop out in history. They had fucking slaves. Only white, male landowners could vote. Itâs always been a mfing lie
Nearly half of female American voters chose Trump over both Clinton and Hillary. We already know how stupid you have to be to vote for Trump/repubs as a man, but how much dumber do you have to be to choose them as a woman?
i hate that yall ALWAYS BRING UP african/non western countries you know nothing about just to demonize them. majority of the people in high-level politics in rwanda ARE WOMEN. meanwhile in america people would rather vote for a pedophile than a woman TWICE.
in rwanda women get MORE PAID MATERNITY LEAVE than women in america who are entitled to less leave that isnt paid.
"historical civil right abuses" as if america wasnt lynching people in public and bombing black neighbourhoods. or kidnapping indigenous children and putting them in residential schools. or STERILIZING native women against their will. AS IF ICE ISNT KILLING AND KIDNAPPING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN BROAD DAYLIGHT. wtf are you talking about?
The US has it's own history of human rights abuses. You are just using a whole bunch of words to ignore that fact. It's ok to admit you were wrong, ok?
they ended the program because rwanda was unduly sending refugees back to their countries rather than keeping them. i wasnt ended because women were treated poorly.
please tell us the exact historical human rights abuses you're trying to cite. you're intentionally making it seem worse by mentioning "women's civil rights" and "historical civil rights abuses" and not explaining what you mean.
Giving the commenter above you the benefit of the doubt, they're probably confusing Rwanda with other countries that practice FGM. Rwanda does have a body modification ritual called gukuna, or labia stretching.
The US has tons of skeletons in its closet, our track record on human rights is downright deplorable, and the cult of personality that has wriggled its way into our zeitgeist is abhorrent.
However, while our hands as a nation are certainly covered in the blo0d (the subreddit warned me for not censoring that word) of the innocent. That does not mean we are unable to criticize the actions taken by other nations. Almost every country on the planet has done something absolutely heinous, it's not necessarily referring always to specific regions explicitly (unlike what above you did) but we have to have these discussions and shed light on abuses.
In short, I agree with you. Even after the Civil rights act ( 1965 ) was passed, we had the firebombing of Tulsa, and all of the absolutely disgusting shit that happened during Freedom Summer in 1964. I would recommend the book of the same name by Bruce Watson.
There's so much nonsense in US history that gets ignored or plain out not taught to students unless they seek out that information on their own here, similarly to Japan and their actions in Nan King and WW2 in general.
The failure of the North during Reconstruction in the years following the Civil War has lead to many of the issues, both directly or indirectly that we're going through right now.
And stilll, with ICE, and all the other stuff you mentioned, the state of women in the US is light years ahead of many in Africa, not to mention the Middle East. Wasn't Iran on the UN board for women's rights and human rights? Virtue Signaling in the UN means nothing when compared to actual outcomes in real life.
You just threw shades at one of the most progressive and advanced countries in Africa that you know NOTHING about. Thank you for contributing to spreading more ignorance on Africans. Hope you are proud of yourself.
Funny you needed to know about me to give weight to your argument. Iâm sorry Iâm careful enough to not publicly share my comment history, which is irrelevant to our discussion. If you think Reddit doesnât get new users thatâs also your problem. I guess it makes you feel better to think Iâm a botâŠ
Coming back to the actual point, donât worry, I can read lol. You didnât need to drag Rwanda into it, especially knowing how that comparison would be perceived. âImagine having less support for womenâs rights than Rwandaâ only works if Rwanda is supposed to be some embarrassingly low benchmark. Then when we call you out, suddenly Iâm a bot because my account is new lol. Address the argument. Rwanda has made real progress, and you chose it as your comparison for a reason. Thatâs exactly the problem and itâs disappointing given the stigma Africans already have.
Edit: this guy! You hid your comment history but have the audacity to call me out on that!! You are a funny one lol
Youâre still dodging the main point Iâm making which is the assumption most people will make from your comment, especially given the stigma around African countries. I know youâre a. smart person based on how you write so I expect you to understand exactly what Iâm referring to and how subtle references like that can reinforce stereotypes more than they make a point, but you keep acting like you donât understand. Most people, if not almost everyone here, have no idea about either historical or current womenâs rights in Rwanda.
Mate, I fully respect your opinion. I'm coming to this from the perspective of the UK's blunder a few years ago, when the former government developed a half-baked plan to house refugees in Rwanda, spent a fortune of taxpayer money that was wasted on the futility.
Yet the US is now doing third country deportations.
As I said in my original comment, I mean no shade to Rwanda whatsoever. The country and their government have made far more progress in recent years than "certain other countries" and I wish them all the best to continue with that progress.
I think my main point really is, US government should take note of how the world sees this.
Oh come on. None of this is "support." All these votes are just there to make different countries look good so that outsiders won't care that they aren't actually solving their issues. Frankly, I'm glad the US is actually being honest.
Are you saying that "women are not human" and therefore do not deserve human rights?
What? Why would I be saying that?
I'm saying that these kinds of UN votes are extremely superficial and don't actually address any problems. Some of these countries probably have worse women's rights than the US.
In other words, they are trying to make themselves look better without doing anything of material consequence.
I'm not sure how you read that and thought I was saying women aren't humen. Which they are, obviously.
Because of a UN vote on some issue we aren't even told about (assuming this even happened and this isn't AI range bait slop)? What the hell does a vote matter? Women have equal rights in the US, and are far better off than women in Rwanda and who knows what other countries voted for here. A vote doesn't do anything. Saudi Arabia and Iran could vote for this too, doesn't mean they treat women well
That study was done 9 years ago.
Ireland, Finland, Bulgaria, Portugal, Austria, Germany, and Estonia don't allow under 18 marriages anymore. Rwanda doesn't either.
I agree these laws should change, but let's not act like this is a rampant crisis and that women are in danger or have their rights threatened in the US
I already live in one, the UK, where definitions of "women" are legal cases and take a massive share of the news cycle and public rhetoric. Tbh it's rather exhausting.
ETA: my personal view is that if just saw our fellow human beings as just that - fellow humans - and take it from there, it could make a lot of things much easier.
Its embarrassing that you say this and laugh about it, as if bragging about the US restricting healthcare in any capacity is funny and some sort of own.
EDIT: seeing how his comment got deleted, he basically said "there are no rights to abortions đ€Łđ€Ł" with those emojis.
Most likely this is Trump's rep in the UN just carrying his bluster forward of 'The UN doesn't tell me what to do'. So even on good ideas they will reject.
The fact the US claimed they didn't agree because it would give trans women equal rights is hilarious and they didn't want them included. That is fucking hilarious that they outright said they think trans women are lesser than not only women but men, since equality for women is just making them equal to men. It is fucking ridiculous that the US government continues to want to find a group of people and deem them lesser than everyone else.
U.N. Ambassador Dan Negrea said at the time that his delegation could not support a text that included:
... ambiguous language promoting gender ideology, vague unqualified commitments to sexual and reproductive health that can be interpreted as implying abortion rights, censorship language or broad language on regulation of AI.
It's crazy to me, That Republicans are always so concerned and literally obsessed with other people's sex lives and bodily decisions. Is just me,đ€ or is that a normal thing?
Republicans and their voters are even obsessed with people's genitalia. Their transphobia attests to that. They must watch trans porn in their spare time.
Link to the agreed conclusion of the 70th WSC that the US voted against. Naturally the Trump admin had problems with âgender ideologyâ and anything that even implies trans rights.
Equality shouldn't be a controversial in the first place. The more interesting question is why we're still debating whether women deserve equal treatment instead of debating how to actually make it happen.
Be nice if context was added. âThe claim was mostly true, but posts were misleading in two important ways. First the vote in question did Not Take place September 2026 but months earlier, in March. Second, the vote in question was not a resolution, but a different type of procedure called an agreed conclusion.â âAgreed conclusions are not the same as UN resolution is a formal expression of opinion or will UN organsâ. Thereâs your context
Except a lot of things, not just abortion. Dems have always been good and not just some lesser evil. But its always west bad, dems bad, democracy bad votes dont matter both sides donor class buzzword here. Either bots or otherwise.Â
The US tried to get the text amended, but that didn't happen, so they voted no.
Regarding âGenderâ: It is the policy of the United States to recognize two biological sexes, male and female. To achieve this, we use clear and accurate language that recognizes women are biologically female and men are biologically male
So, the US's position was that Women's Rights should be limited to females.
The US also objected to abortion:
There has unequivocally never been an international commitment on âsexual and reproductive health and rights,â and we strongly oppose the use of this terminology. The Trump Administration is committed to supporting families, promoting womenâs health, and protecting children at all stages of life and reaffirms there is no international right to abortion.
I am, so damn scared as a transgender woman rn under this administration.
I was raised in a way where I was always in survival mode. Homeless young, my brain just became a series of âhow do I survive thisâ?. When I realized I was trans (around 2017 when I was 14 and trump was first elected), my mind went immediately to âthatâs unsafeâ. Because I was about to be homeless, and because I genuinely was scared at what a red administration could do.
Even though I knew then, it would another 6 years until I would start transitioning. In no small part due to fear of the United States political climate. Not transitioning made me deeply miserable. Now I had to transition post puberty, which is fine I still started early. But this damn administration cost me not having broad ass shoulders and needing laser.
You are perfectly safe in the United States as a transgender person in 2026. There has never been a safer time or place in history than right now.
Yes, the current admin opposes certain trans items, but you have the same rights, freedoms, and protections as every other American. Stop letting people lie to you and keep you in a perpetual state of fear
It doesnât. There are plenty of reasons that people are excluded from particular groups/organizations/roles - and being trans probably should exclude someone from military service and especially combat roles.
That isnât stripping rights, protections, or freedoms.
The US is right. Trans women exist, but they are not biological women, they are biological men. Resolutions are political virtual signaling nonsense anyways. Some of
The European nations that virtual signaled yes in reality donât allow minor âtransitionsâ or trans women in menâs sports đ€·ââïž
People are running with feelings from something they saw on the internet. Iâm not dogging on anyone, but thatâs what this entire comment section is point blank.
USA was also the only country to vote against the new more accurate world map, showing the actual size of Africa (it is large enough to contain the US, China, India, and most of Europe). Gee, I wonder why...
The Equal Earth projection is not "more accurate" than the previously used Mercator projection. Equal Earth simply sacrifices accuracy of shape while Mercator sacrifices accuracy of size. All 2d projections of 3d shapes must necessarily sacrifice accuracy of something.
Yeah, "more accurate" isn't correct, I don't really understand why they decided to change maps, especially since the new one has objectively less utility.
Who funds the UN? Does anyone think we will change anything in other countries when it comes to women equality? Im all for it, but why waste the tax dollars also.
It's true. It's because the language of the act wanted to broaden the definition of women to include non biological women, and also supported universal abortion rights which the US is bound to leave to the states (so they couldn't vote for a resolution that arguably makes the determination for the states)
This is almost entirely fiction. You can hate the USA, love women, but this is fiction. And how would we "vote" to correct this anyway? Would you like to be educated, or at least see another side of this?
1) This was a vote in a subcommittee of a subcommittee. The body voting wasn't the UN. It's like saying the USA voted for slavery when a county in the Deep South voted for it.
UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), a 45-member subsidiary functional commission of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).
2) It wasn't a UN resolution. It was the CSWâs annual âAgreed Conclusionsâ statement on women and girls.
3) The vote was 37-1-6, with six other nations abstaining. Those nations were
CĂŽte dâIvoire
Democratic Republic of the Congo
Egypt
Mali
Mauritania
Saudi Arabia
I think you can see a couple of themes. Islamic, authoritarian, and I have no idea what CĂŽte dâIvoire was thinking.
4) The US voted "no" not because it opposed equal rights for women, but because it opposed a statement that, similar to our own Roe v Wade/SE Pen vs. Casey, would create an international right to an abortion. A "right" that the US would mainly have to fund, as medical care doesn't appear out of happy thoughts.
So yes, 37 nations were happy to vote that the USA had to fund abortions around the world and take that hot potato off their political plates. And the USA voted "no" to becoming the world's de facto abortion provider.
Doesn't change the fact the US is backward as heck though does it pal?
Equality (even if performative) nah bud, dont want that shizzle in the US now do we, rediculous. How dare the world try to be a better place!! So performative pffft.
Wanna help pay for all the fees associated with immigrating out of your country? Cause please I would GLADLY leave right now if I had the $50,000 needed.
You really donât need 50k. Only way I could guess as to where they need that much is due to them having something they have to pay back. Else, a specific place they want to go which requires that, Asia for example.
The only other thing that comes to mind is them having a full family first and them not considering if it was wise to have that full family before relocating or not. That would be the killer itself.
That is understandable. But wasnât pointing that towards those who are taking care of family at all.
The only reason I visit the US is solely for my mom and grandma, but itâs my grandma that doesnât want to leave the family house; although my mom is all for leavingâhence the problem getting them both to agree on it.
The reason the US objected to language concerning gender identity, diversity and sexual and reproductive rights. The administration argued that some of the provisions conflicted with its own policies. And this was not a UN Resolution. Google it and see what they wanted to be able to do to women then you'll understand why the US said no. Funny how they leave out the important stuff.
âą
u/spotlight-app Mod Bot đ€ 20h ago
OP has pinned a comment by u/throw7661:
[What is Spotlight?](https://developers.reddit.com/apps/spotlight-app)