'Woolly, Half-Baked and Impractical'? British Responses to the Commission on the Status of Women and the Convention on the Political Rights of Women 1946-67

• Published in: Twentieth Century British History 2012-12, Vol.23 (4), p.473-495
• Main Author: Laville, Helen
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Central Government; Colonialism; Commissions; Congresses and Conventions; Delegates; Experts; Females; Lobbying; Ratification; Representation; Rights; UN Commissions; United Kingdom; United Nations; Women's rights; Womens Rights
• ISSN: 0955-2359; 1477-4674
• DOI: 10.1093/tcbh/hwr043

This article traces the relationship between women's associations and the British government with regard to the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), from its establishment in 1946 to British ratification of the Convention on the Political Rights of Women (CPRW) in 1967. Whilst international women's associations were instrumental in articulating the legitimacy of women's rights as an international concern in the inter-war period, and in securing the establishment of the CSW, appointment to the Commission was controlled, not by these organizations, but by national governments. Whilst many countries selected their delegates from women's associations, the British government rejected this approach and instead selected their delegates on the basis of party political affiliation. These delegates were consequently less interested in the promotion of the international women's rights agenda than in the protection of British interests and reputation. A lobbying campaign by British women's associations worked to secure more expert British representation and to ensure that the British position was more sympathetic to the goals of the Commission. This lobbying was not limited to the question of representation, but included support for the work of the Commission: women's associations and their allies in government urged the UK to ratify the CPRW. This article argues that successful ratification of the CPRW reflected both the persistence of the women involved and also the changing context of both British domestic and colonial rule and the British position on United Nations-sponsored human rights. Adapted from the source document.