Abstract
The equality of women and men is included in the Treaty of Lisbon as an independent fundamental right for good reason. Women are not a minority and participate fully in the Christian Democratic view of humankind. It is high time to translate this principle into policy, as an aim to be actively pursued. Equality is not a goal in itself. When women's talents get a chance to blossom, this will not only benefit the economy but also strengthen political decision-making. Thus, it is not only jurists and politicians, but also—and indeed, especially—our theologians and philosophers, who should immerse themselves in what Christian Democratic tradition has to say about the equality of women and men.
Keywords
Introduction
In November 1992 in Athens, the European People's Party (EPP) adopted its most recent Basic Programme. The need for this Basic Programme arose after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent political shifts on the European continent. With this Programme the EPP recognised the emergence of a new Europe and saw a historical challenge for the EPP, namely to build a new European society based on Christian Democratic values from both the Western and Central European Christian Democratic traditions (1992, 1–3).
One of these values is the equality of men and women. In relation to this theme, the question arises as to where European Christian Democracy found itself on the eve of the new Europe. How was the equality of women and men interpreted at the time, and what developments have taken place since then in European Christian Democratic thinking?
Equality of men and women: a shared value
In the first place, the EPP Basic Programme of 1992 attests to a view of humankind in which both men and women are distinguished and recognised as unique persons possessing human dignity. 1 The recognition of a view of humankind that explicitly includes men and women did not, however, lead the EPP to recognise the fundamental equality of men and women as a separate basic right. In the paragraph on ‘fundamental equality’, the category ‘sex’ has the same rank as categories such as ‘nationality’, ‘health status’ and ‘religion’. 2
See the paragraph ‘Our concept of man’, which contains a separate article that states: ‘on the basis of Judaeo-Christian values, we regard every man and every woman as a person, i.e. as a unique human being who is irreplaceable, totally irreducible, free by nature and open to transcendence’.
‘Notwithstanding their differences in terms of gifts, talents and abilities, each person must be able to achieve personal development in freedom and equality at his or her own level, whatever his or her origin, sex, age, race, nationality, religion, conviction, social status or state of health’ (Article 118).
Fifteen years later the recognition of this view of humankind was extended to include separately formulated provisions. This happened in EPP thinking as well as in the Treaty of Lisbon, which was adopted by the European Union in 2007. This accord was preceded by many years of discussion, in which the EPP, as the strongest European political family, had substantial input. The EPP Women and European-oriented politicians from the Christian Democratic Appeal—Hanja Maij-Weggen and René van der Linden, amongst others—put their stamp on these discussions. The Treaty of Lisbon assumes that the equality of women and men is one of the shared values of the EU and reinforces this in a principle of equality pertaining exclusively to men and women. Both in the description of the values and in the description of the goals of the European Union, the equality of men and women is explicitly mentioned. 3
The section of the Treaty entitled ‘General Provisions’ describes the values of the Union as follows: ‘The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the Member States in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail’ (Article 1a). Article 2 then describes the goals of the Union, which include the following: ‘[The Union] shall combat social exclusion and discrimination, and shall promote social justice and protection, equality between women and men, solidarity between generations and protection of the rights of the child’ (Article 2.3).
No longer do we see the concept of ‘sex’ mentioned as part of a category consisting of a variety of characteristics. Characteristics such as ‘nationality’ and ‘race’ re-appear in Articles 1 and 2 in different formulations. The setting apart of the relationship between men and women in a separate provision connects seamlessly with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which is part of the Treaty of Lisbon. The Charter contains a comparable separate article (Article 23), which states that ‘the equality of men and women must be guaranteed in all areas, including employment, profession and remuneration’. Thus the accord certainly does not view the equality of men and women merely as an abstract idea. On the contrary, it is a shared value as well as a fundamental right, and a goal that must be actively pursued.
It is clear that between 1992 and 2007 a process of social awareness took place. In politics and in society the notion that, based on demographics, women could not be considered a ‘minority category’ began to sink in. In most countries women even form the majority of the population because on average they have a longer lifespan than men. In addition, women were increasingly participating in all areas of society, which also fostered emancipation. On many fronts women all over Europe kept demanding their rights to an equal place in a variety of sectors of society: in the labour market, in politics and in religious affairs, but also in the areas of finance and social security. All these developments gradually found expression in jointly formulated accord texts, in which the equality of women and men is set out as a separate provision. On the European scene, the Treaty of Lisbon is the most recent basic document in which this is crystallised.
2007–2011: From Theory to Practice
Although the ink on the Treaty of Lisbon has barely dried, the average European citizen seems to be largely unaware that the equality of women and men has become an independent European fundamental right. To a certain extent this is understandable—not everyone participated in the public debate or was involved in the issue through a political or social organisation. There was also, however, an undeniable lack of knowledge, for example, among politicians and journalists. This was mainly due to a lack of interest or need to pursue this issue. Thus it happened that at the 2009 EPP Congress in Bonn, the president of the EPP Women had to explain to the plenary congress of more than 700 delegates the meaning of the concept of ‘gender’. A substantial number of delegates appeared to be unfamiliar with this concept and were therefore not inclined to support a resolution put forth by the EPP Women entitled ‘Women and the Economic Crisis’. 4 Furthermore, there is the spirit of the post-modern age, in which unequivocal truths no longer exist. The desire for authenticity is widespread, and in the search for it, each person arrives at his or her own, ‘authentic’, truths (Taylor 1992). In contrast to the past, these truths are often individual rather than collective. In the political arena we see this attitude reflected, for example, in the rise of the phenomenon of ‘fact-free politics’. The traumas of the twentieth century have shocked and disillusioned the European people. In the contemporary world, people will not allow any truths to be prescribed or imposed from above. 5
In the resolution there was an urgent request for a gender analysis of the consequences of the crisis, as well as the inclusion of the gender dimension in measures to control the crisis.
See the articles by R. van Riessen, A. Deddens and others in ‘Het echte leven’ (2011).
Despite this lukewarm receptive climate, the European Commission has meanwhile shown that it does not regard the fundamental right of equality between men and women as merely symbolic. As a sequel to the Treaty of Lisbon, the European Commission launched a strategy for promoting this equality for the period 2010–2015. Its goal is to strengthen awareness of the equality of women and men in all areas of EU policy. It is within the framework of this strategy that last year European Commissioner Viviane Reding presented the covenant ‘More women in the boardroom’ to the EU and its Member States. This covenant includes the proposal to get more women into top positions in business by means of quotas. In almost all large companies, over 80 % of the top managers and directors are male.
Fitting perfectly into the time juncture described above, there has been much discussion on this theme, especially among the EPP Women. The question is, of course, how far government can go in imposing a certain vision of equality on other societal institutions. Christian Democrats have always been cautious in this respect, based on the principle of sphere sovereignty. Nevertheless, this does not excuse government from its responsibility as an initiative-taking and directing body. Thus, the decisions as to when, why and to what extent one should intervene and provide direction are always political. Within the Christian Democratic political decision-making process, this determination will also have to be made again and again, based on both a contextual analysis and a consideration of social interests, as well as an assessment of compatibility with party principles, including—but not only—the principle of sphere sovereignty.
The introduction of quotas for women should not be seen as equality fetishism, because it is a completely justifiable proposal, not only to achieve the goal of equality for women and men but also, and especially, for economic reasons and the importance of personal development. When women are left behind in the filling of top positions, a large amount of potential talent goes to waste. It is already the case that today girls perform better in school than boys, and that more than half of students are women. These female students are also more successful than their male counterparts. If we want to encourage this talent to come to fruition and the EU wants to become the strong economy it proclaims it wants to be, mental barriers and other impeding mechanisms must be removed.
In the Netherlands specifically, it can be said that women tend to park their knowledge and expertise in a comfortable part-time job. The norm for women is that family comes before work, whereas the opposite is true of men. Related to this, the labour force culture does not encourage women to climb higher. When work takes second place for women, it is difficult for managers (male or female) to take women's ambitions seriously. Quotas could be an instrument for changing this culture. The instrument may appear to force the matter, but it is necessary to initiate a process of awareness. This is exactly the intention of European Commissioner Reding. 6
As was expressed by her officials at the EPP Women symposium ‘Quota for women in politics and enterprises’, held in Brussels on 13 April 2011. See also ‘Vrouwen aan de top’ (2012).
The discussion about quotas, of course, is only one example of the discussion on the equality of men and women that is currently taking place. The fundamental right turns out to be about much more than simply equality as a goal in itself. It is just as much about making good use of talent and strengthening the economy. In other discussions it also becomes clear that in reality much more is at stake than equality as a goal in itself, for example, in the make-up of lists of candidates for elections. The Council of Europe has formulated a guideline of ‘at least 40 % of either sex’. This pursuit of equality of men and women is aimed at strengthening the democratic composition of parliament in such a way that it reflects the demographic situation. After all, what else is parliament meant to do?
A Christian Democratic perspective
New cases regularly appear showing that practice is more resistant than theory regarding the equality of men and women. Therefore, it is good that in 2007 this fundamental right was formulated as a separate provision, because it forces European society to focus on its shared principles in several ways.
First, the fundamental right contributes to increasing awareness among all European citizens. Second, it functions as a permanent standard. The question regularly comes up as to why this provision was included in the Treaty of Lisbon and what its consequences should be. What, in the abstract sense, was it about again? What is the long-term value and relevance of this provision? Only by asking these questions can one take a critical stance towards the spirit of the time and towards oneself. Without such a critical view, the delusions of the day take over and as a result politicians, policymakers, journalists and citizens lose their capacity for critical thinking. Third, this provision, formulated as a goal, forces European society to actively interpret its values. The bull must be taken by the horns. Equality between men and women must be expressed concretely in political viewpoints, in proposed policies and eventually in their implementation in practice as well.
Finally, the Treaty of Lisbon challenges (European) Christian Democrats to reflect once again on the equality of women and men as a theme in our spiritual traditions that must be approached separately. This goes beyond treating it as one topic among others in the study of the concept of ‘equality’ and requires that it is approached as an independent project. It poses a challenge for Christian Democratic party ideologists not to limit themselves in this search to either the Reformationists or to Augustine. In the Augustinian tradition the accent is placed on the story of creation according to Genesis 3. There the emphasis is on the fact that man is a sinner who must be saved, with the woman as the temptress to all evil. There is, however, another inspiring Christian tradition, namely that of Eastern Christianity, which places greater emphasis on the story of creation according to Genesis 1 and less on that of Genesis 3. The starting point of this tradition is that man is a being that must be encouraged to develop. Central to this is the thought that God has entrusted His creation to humankind, which He created in His image, both male and female (Ouweneel 2011). Thus, it appears that the fundamental right in the Treaty of Lisbon is not that new because it is based on age-old ideas. Based on this Christian tradition, the focus of which is on talents and development, a fundamental right that expresses the equality of women and men from a Christian Democratic perspective can only be acclaimed. That is what this fundamental right is basically about. Therefore, it is not only jurists who should immerse themselves in the Christian Democratic tradition of equality of women and men but also, and especially, Christian Democratic theologians and philosophers.