689. The United Nations Condemn Abuse - If Only They Had More Influence To Improve Women's Plight
1949 could have been a year of historical significance for women, because of the United Nations' Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_for_the_Suppression_of_the_Traffic_in_Persons_and_of_the_Exploitation_of_the_Prostitution_of_Others
1949 could have been a year of historical significance for women, because of the United Nations' Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_for_the_Suppression_of_the_Traffic_in_Persons_and_of_the_Exploitation_of_the_Prostitution_of_Others
The Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others is a resolution of the UN General Assembly. The preamble states:
"Whereas prostitution and the accompanying evil of the traffic in persons for the purpose of prostitution are incompatible with the dignity and worth of the human person and endanger the welfare of the individual, the family and the community"
It was approved by the General Assembly on 2 December 1949[2] and came into effect on 25 July 1951.
"The Convention requires state signatories to punish any person who "procures, entices or leads away, for purposes of prostitution, another person, even with the consent of that person", "exploits the prostitution of another person, even with the consent of that person", run brothels or rent accommodations for prostitution purposes. It also prescribes procedures for combating international traffic for the purpose of prostitution, including extradition of offenders."
Unfortunately, very little if any improvement of women's plight followed, instead the so called sexual revolution and pseudo-liberation brought out the worst in even more men. If anything has changed, it was a shift away from direct violence towards an increase of paid abuse and of insults by predators mistaking all women suitable to be pursued as prey.
Genghis Khan would not get away today with his habitual raping, but a recent US president non-violently abused a dependent person without any damaging consequences for himself. His wife lacked the dignity and backbone to divorce him. Thus she contributed to the unfortunate trivialization of such abuse.
Only the methods of abuse have softened, but not the male attitude of feeling entitled to abuse.
The following pages contain a map and a list of all countries, which have ratified or signed the convention:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Persontrafficconvention.png
http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=VII-11-a&chapter=7&lang=en
Interestingly and sadly enough, many rich western countries including Germany, USA, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia have not.
The following pages contain a map and a list of all countries, which have ratified or signed the convention:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Persontrafficconvention.png
http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=VII-11-a&chapter=7&lang=en
Interestingly and sadly enough, many rich western countries including Germany, USA, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia have not.
I am ignorant of the reasons, and could not find them by googling.
So I can only speculate. I suspect the majority of those politicians with the power to prevent or accept such a convention to be themselves avid and ruthless abusers of female bodies.
Whenever they experience an urge, they feel entitled to have easy access to an objectified female body without any necessity of being further bothered after the completion of the abuse. They experience paying for the abuse of prostitutes as the least problematic way to reach their goal. Being rich and powerful, they can afford it.
Whenever they experience an urge, they feel entitled to have easy access to an objectified female body without any necessity of being further bothered after the completion of the abuse. They experience paying for the abuse of prostitutes as the least problematic way to reach their goal. Being rich and powerful, they can afford it.
Paying is the least risky method in any society, where this form of abuse is tolerated by nearly all men. These politicians have reputations and the thereupon depending positions of power and income to loose by any too drastic use of manipulation, deceit or violence.
But by facilitating and not obstructing abuse these politicians are also guided by what they at least believe to be the best interest of their male voters. Such voters are those men, who have been damaged and desensitized by the oversexation of society to objectify women, because attachment and long-term bonding are beyond their mental abilities.
These politicians get double benefits from perpetuating and facilitating the abuse of women. The can allow abuse to themselves without consequences and they can buy male votes. Thus male voters and male politicians reinforce each other. Unfortunately many foolish women also vote for abuse-enhancing politicians without being aware, how they empower their own worst enemies.
But by facilitating and not obstructing abuse these politicians are also guided by what they at least believe to be the best interest of their male voters. Such voters are those men, who have been damaged and desensitized by the oversexation of society to objectify women, because attachment and long-term bonding are beyond their mental abilities.
These politicians get double benefits from perpetuating and facilitating the abuse of women. The can allow abuse to themselves without consequences and they can buy male votes. Thus male voters and male politicians reinforce each other. Unfortunately many foolish women also vote for abuse-enhancing politicians without being aware, how they empower their own worst enemies.
