About
The article explores the U.S. abandonment of key gender equality commitments at the 2025 UN Commission on the Status of Women—signalling a shift toward nationalist, anti-gender policies that undermine global efforts to advance women’s rights. As U.S. leadership retreats, feminist movements and civil society actors are increasingly stepping in to defend international norms and push back against rising anti-gender backlash.
Written by
Ditte Bjerregaard, Center for Violence Prevention1
At the United Nations’ Commission on the Status of Women (CSW69) in March 2025, the U.S. delegation made a quiet but historic break with international women’s rights. While Washington still claims to champion women and girls, its actions tell a different story. The U.S. refused to endorse the conference’s final declaration, rejected references to the UN’s Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), and dismissed gender quotas and climate policies as globalist overreach.
It was a remarkable moment: the world’s best branded democracy, once a key driver of international gender rights, distancing itself from the very institutions it helped shape. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia—a country where women’s rights remain tightly restricted—led the negotiations. The irony was unmistakable.
This is not just a bureaucratic shift; it signals a deeper ideological transformation in U.S. domestic and foreign policy—one in which women’s rights are no longer framed as a matter of equality, but as a battle for nationalism, misogyny, and isolationist politics.
America’s Lonely Stance on Women’s Rights
The U.S. is the only G7 country that has not ratified CEDAW, the landmark treaty that serves as the foundation for gender equality in international law. Historically, however, Washington still aligned itself with UN gender initiatives—at least rhetorically.
That changed at CSW69. The U.S. delegation made clear that it does not recognize CEDAW and rejects any language that suggests non-signatories have obligations under the treaty. Even more dramatically, the U.S. refused to acknowledge the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) on gender equality, calling them a “globalist project” that threatens American sovereignty.
The shift is not just about treaties—it reflects a broader political agenda. Under the Trump administration, the U.S. has redefined “women’s rights” in a way that aligns with nationalist and socially conservative values. The new doctrine rests on three pillars: biological essentialism, anti-quota, anti-welfare rhetoric, which frames gender equality as a matter of individual responsibility rather than structural support; and weaponizing women’s safety for border control, linking gender-based violence to immigration as a justification for stricter border policies.
Why This Matters
For decades, the U.S. has played a critical role in shaping global gender policies. Even when it failed to ratify CEDAW, it pushed for women’s rights through diplomatic and financial means. That influence is now decreasing.
By stepping away from UN gender frameworks, the U.S. is emboldening conservative and authoritarian states that have long sought to weaken international commitments to gender equality. This shift also strengthens the growing global anti-gender movement—a network of far-right actors working to roll back women’s rights, LGBTQ+ protections, and reproductive freedoms worldwide.
Meanwhile, the leadership vacuum is being filled by other players. The European Union and Latin American nations are emerging as key defenders of feminist policies at the UN. Civil society groups and grassroots feminist movements are also taking on a prominent role in holding governments accountable.
The Beginning of the End for the U.S
This isolationist approach to gender rights is not just a foreign policy issue—it reflects deeper transformations within the U.S. itself. Trump’s policies at the UN mirror domestic battles over gender, race, and national identity. The rejection of international gender agreements aligns with the dismantling of reproductive rights, anti-LGBTQ+ laws, and the broader rollback of civil liberties under his administration.
The strategy is clear: redefine women’s rights as a conservative cause, sever them from global human rights frameworks, and use them to justify nationalist policies. This transformation has profound implications—not just for American women, but for gender equality worldwide.
Why Women Will Still Lead
Civil society groups are already mobilizing to counteract these setbacks, but it is important to remember that we cannot replace state power in setting international norms. Feminist movements have always been resilient in the face of political backlash. The question now is whether they can push back against a global tide of anti-gender politics—without the support of the world’s best promoted “democracy”.
- Center for Violence Prevention | Center for Voldsforebyggelse (CFV): https://centerforvoldsforebyggelse.com/ ↩︎
