The Case for a Cross-Concentration Gender Education
By Megan Vidovich
In 1995, then-First Lady Hillary Clinton declared to the United Nations that “women’s rights are human rights.” This proclamation challenged traditional schools of thought on gender equality and set the stage for 189 countries to unanimously adopt the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action in an unprecedented global commitment to gender equality.
Today, that proclamation may not seem so groundbreaking. To us SIPA students, of course women’s rights are human rights. But women’s rights—and gender equality more broadly—carry consequences beyond the human rights framework.
Despite highlighting progressive gender policies through the Human Rights, Gender and Equity (HRGE) concentration and the Institute of Global Politics’ Women’s Initiative, SIPA’s curriculum has yet to appreciate the depth of what gender equality can do for international prosperity:
Gender parity in the labor force could add $12 trillion to global GDP.
Eliminating gender bias could allow the 48 percent of women in STEM who have been hindered by workplace harassment to thrive in their careers.
Women’s participation in peace processes can increase the likelihood of agreements lasting fifteen years by 35 percent.
The list goes on. HRGE students would know the above arguments to be the strategic case for gender equality. This framing can, and should, be taught to students in every other concentration.
Yet, gender exists in a bubble at SIPA. International security lectures fall short of understanding the effects of militarization on women and girls. Innovative AI courses hardly mention the rapid growth of technology-facilitated gender-based violence.
Issues of gender equality have historically been dismissed by policymakers as “special interests” of little consequence. But when gender is ignored, the whole world loses out.
That’s why gender mainstreaming, the integration of a gender lens and analysis in law and policy, is so important. If SIPA can provide us with a comprehensive gender education, we can go on to change the status quo that relegates gender to the periphery.
HRGE’s own Professor Rachel Vogelstein refers to the inclusion of gender equality in policy as not only the right thing to do, but the smart thing to do. As the Faculty Co-Director of HRGE, Director of the IGP Women’s Initiative, and former Special Advisor on Gender at the National Security Council, Vogelstein has worked to prioritize gender-progressive policies throughout her career.
When asked about SIPA’s approach to gender, Vogelstein replied, “As significant as it is to have a dedicated academic program or initiative…that's focused on gender equality and women's issues, it is also important to integrate these issues into other academic curricula that they affect.”
Why can't SIPA have both: a gender equality specialization and gender integration across the curriculum?
Calling for gender mainstreaming in SIPA coursework is not to diminish the importance of HRGE and the Women’s Initiative. Their work is crucial to analyze the disproportionate effects global issues have on women and girls. Importantly, as the only current SIPA platforms for such issues, they foster critical thinking on gender-sensitive policy solutions.
However, keeping gender in a silo at SIPA without an interdisciplinary approach risks teaching future leaders that gender belongs on the sidelines of foreign policy.
Vogelstein made the dual approach to gender inclusion—with both specialization and mainstreaming—possible while serving in the Secretary's Office of Global Women's Issues at the U.S. Department of State. Under former Secretary Clinton, Vogelstein and colleagues updated the Foreign Service Institute’s officer training program to include a mandatory module on gender equality and an optional in-depth course on the topic.
Vogelstein refers to this as the “both, and” approach—and she thinks it would be successful at SIPA.
In our conversation, she noted, “The question…is not only, ‘Have you provided a curriculum to folks who want to specialize in this area?’ but also, ‘Have you provided basic training to folks who are going to practice foreign policy…[who] at least should be familiar with the relationship between gender equality and prosperity, stability, and security?’”
“I hope that would be the case for anyone coming through SIPA.”
As a leading international policy school, SIPA has an obligation to mainstream gender throughout its coursework. Failing to do so trains the next generation of leaders to neglect gender equality, to the detriment of international progress.
If gender is siloed at SIPA today, it will be discarded by policymakers tomorrow. It’s time to change the way we think about gender at SIPA—in pursuit of gender equality in and of itself, and for its promise.