THE NOVELLE MUN

Model United Nations

COMMITTEE

UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON THE STATUS OF

WOMEN (UNCSW)

AGENDA

The Feminist Demands on Trans Rights:

Negotiating Inclusion, Biological Essentialism,
and Gender Autonomy in Contemporary Women's
Movements

BACKGROUND GUIDE

CHAIRPERSON
Mr. Neel Brahma

The Novelle MUN | UNCSW Committee | 2026

THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

LETTER FROM THE EXECUTIVE BOARD

United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (UNCSW)

The Novelle MUN, 2026

Dear Esteemed Delegates,

It is our privilege to welcome you to the UNCSW committee at The Novelle MUN. The
agenda before you asks this committee to do something that the real Commission on
the Status of Women has struggled with for over a decade: to determine how the
international women's rights framework should treat the relationship between sex,
gender identity, and the legal category of ‘woman’, at a moment when feminist
movements themselves are deeply divided on the question.

This is not an abstract or manufactured controversy. At CSW69 in March 2025,

marking the thirtieth anniversary of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action,
delegates negotiated a Political Declaration under extraordinary pressure. The final
text held the line on references to lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and intersex (LBTQI)
inclusion, but sexual and reproductive health and rights language was removed as the
price of consensus. One year later, CSW70 came even closer to collapse, with agreed
conclusions requiring a forced vote for the first time in the Commission's history. In
parallel, the United Kingdom's Supreme Court ruled unanimously in For Women
Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers (April 2025) that the terms ‘man’, ‘woman’, and
‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 refer to biological sex, a decision celebrated by gender-
critical campaigners and condemned by trans-rights advocates, while the Court itself
insisted the ruling was not a victory of one group over another. Meanwhile, the United
States withdrew from UN Women's Executive Board and cut funding to UN agencies
working on ‘gender ideology’, reshaping the financial and political landscape in which
this Commission operates.

This agenda sits at the intersection of international law, competing feminist

philosophies, domestic politics, and the lived realities of women and trans people
worldwide. You will be asked to represent your country's authentic position — not your
personal views — on questions that provoke genuine disagreement even among
feminists themselves. Some delegations will argue that the legal category of ‘woman’
must remain anchored to biological sex to protect sex-based rights, single-sex spaces,
and the integrity of sex-disaggregated data. Others will argue that gender identity is
itself a protected human right and that excluding trans women from the category of
‘woman’ replicates the very exclusion feminism has historically fought against. Both
positions are held by serious people who consider themselves feminists, and this
committee will only succeed if delegates engage with that complexity honestly.

A few guiding words from your Executive Board:

 • Represent your assigned country's actual foreign policy and treaty record, not
your personal opinion on the underlying moral question.
• Ground every argument in the UN Charter, CEDAW, the Beijing Platform for
Action, relevant Human Rights Council resolutions, and verifiable evidence — not
slogans from either side of the debate.
• Engage in genuine diplomacy. This is a topic where coalitions cut across the usual
blocs; be prepared for unexpected alliances.
• This background guide is a starting point, not a ceiling. Delegates are expected to
research beyond it, including primary texts from advocacy organisations on
multiple sides so as to represent them fairly.
• Language matters enormously on this agenda. Use precise, sourced terminology
and be prepared to justify your delegation's word choices in negotiation, just as
real CSW delegates do.
We have crafted this guide with rigorous attention to accuracy, currency, and balance.
We are here to facilitate debate, not to decide its outcome. The resolutions and
directions this committee takes are entirely in your hands.

We look forward to a conference marked by rigorous research, careful listening, and

diplomacy that takes seriously the stakes this agenda holds for millions of women and
trans people worldwide.

With highest regards and great expectations,

Mr. Neel Brahma

Chairperson, UNCSW

The Novelle MUN 2026

THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I: Understanding the United Nations .......................................................... 6

PART II: The United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (UNCSW) ........ 8

PART III: Understanding the Agenda .................................................................. 10

PART IV: Questions to Ponder ............................................................................ 18

PART V: Possible Sub-Agendas and Points of Debate ....................................... 20

PART VI: Delegate Dos and Don'ts ..................................................................... 23

PART VII: Sources and Research Guide ............................................................. 25

PART VIII: Country and Bloc Positions ............................................................. 27

PART IX: Glossary of Key Terms ........................................................................ 29

PART X: Further Reading and Research Guide .................................................. 31

THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

PART I: UNDERSTANDING THE UNITED NATIONS

1.1 What is the United Nations?

The United Nations (UN) is the world's largest, most inclusive intergovernmental
organisation, established on 24 October 1945 in the aftermath of the Second World
War. It was created to prevent another world war, to provide a forum for dialogue and
cooperation, and to advance human rights, development, and international law.

Today the UN has 193 Member States. It operates on principles enshrined in the UN
Charter: sovereign equality of Member States, the peaceful resolution of disputes, and
respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms — including, per Article 1(3),
‘without distinction as to race, sex, language, or religion.’ This founding non-
discrimination clause is a recurring reference point in debates over how expansively
‘sex’ and ‘gender’ should be interpreted across the UN system.

FACT DETAILS

Founded 24 October 1945 (UN Day celebrated annually)

Headquarters New York City, USA (offices in Geneva, Vienna, Nairobi)

Member States 193 full members (as of 2026)

Official Languages Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian, Spanish

UN Women (est. 2010); Commission on the Status of Women (est.

Key Gender Body
1946)

Annual Budget Approximately $3.5 billion (regular budget)

UN Charter Foundational treaty signed 26 June 1945 in San Francisco

1.2 Principal Organs of the United Nations

ORGAN MEMBERSHIP FUNCTION

Main deliberative forum; adopts

General Assembly (UNGA) All 193 Member States
resolutions; approves budget

Primary responsibility for

15 members (5 permanent
Security Council (UNSC) international peace and security;
+ 10 elected)
binding resolutions

Coordinates economic, social,

Economic and Social
54 members cultural and educational policy;
Council (ECOSOC)
CSW's parent body

International Court of Settles legal disputes between

15 judges
Justice (ICJ) states; gives advisory opinions

Secretariat UN staff worldwide Carries out day-to-day operations;

ORGAN MEMBERSHIP FUNCTION

led by the Secretary-General

Reviews human rights records;

Human Rights Council
47 members holds the Independent Expert on
(subsidiary of UNGA)
SOGI mandate

1.3 What is Model UN (MUN)?

Model United Nations (MUN) is an academic simulation in which students take on the
roles of delegates representing UN Member States. Delegates research their assigned
country, debate issues of global importance, negotiate with other delegates, and draft
outcome documents proposing solutions to real-world problems.

MUN develops research and analytical skills, public speaking, negotiation, coalition-
building, and diplomatic writing. On an agenda as sensitive as this one, MUN also
demands something further: the discipline to represent a country's genuine position —
even one a delegate personally disagrees with — with intellectual honesty and without
personal animus toward those who hold opposing views in the room.
THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

PART II: THE UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON

THE STATUS OF WOMEN (UNCSW)

2.1 Structure and Composition

The Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) was established by ECOSOC
resolution in 1946 as the principal global intergovernmental body dedicated
exclusively to the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women. It is a
functional commission of ECOSOC, comprising 45 Member States elected for four-year
terms on the basis of equitable geographical representation.

CSW convenes annually in March at UN Headquarters in New York for a two-week

session. It is distinctive among UN bodies for the scale of civil society participation:
thousands of accredited NGOs, coordinated through the NGO Committee on the Status
of Women, attend the session's parallel and side events, making it one of the largest
annual gatherings on women's rights in the world.

Every five years, marking an anniversary of the 1995 Beijing Declaration and Platform
for Action, CSW negotiates a Political Declaration instead of its usual annual Agreed
Conclusions. 2025 marked the thirtieth anniversary (‘Beijing+30’), making CSW69 a
landmark and unusually contentious session; this committee simulates the ongoing
implementation debates that followed.

2.2 Mandate and Functions

• Monitors implementation of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (1995)
and the 2030 Agenda's Sustainable Development Goal 5 (Gender Equality).
• Prepares recommendations and reports to ECOSOC on promoting women's
political, economic, civil, social, and educational rights.
• Negotiates and adopts Agreed Conclusions (annually) or a Political Declaration
(every five years) on a priority theme.
• Reviews national reports submitted voluntarily by Member States on progress
toward gender equality commitments.
• Provides a platform through which the CEDAW Committee's jurisprudence and
General Recommendations are discussed in a political, negotiated forum.

2.3 CSW Powers and Limitations

WHAT CSW CAN DO WHAT CSW CANNOT DO

Negotiate and adopt Agreed Conclusions or

Issue binding resolutions or treaties
Political Declarations

Recommend policy action to ECOSOC and

Compel any state to change domestic law
Member States
 WHAT CSW CAN DO WHAT CSW CANNOT DO

Convene civil society and Member States on Override the CEDAW Committee's treaty-
gender policy monitoring role

Set the annual priority and review themes for Adjudicate individual human rights
global gender debate complaints

NOTE: CSW outcome documents carry significant normative and political weight even
without legal enforceability. They shape how UN agencies, donors, and national
governments frame gender policy, and are frequently cited in domestic litigation and
legislative debate — which is precisely why negotiations over specific words (‘gender’, ‘all
women and girls’, ‘sex characteristics’) are fought so intensely.
THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

PART III: UNDERSTANDING THE AGENDA

3.1 Background: Feminism, Sex, and Gender — the Conceptual

Battleground
For most of the twentieth century, feminist movements organised around the category
of ‘woman’ understood as a class of people subject to distinct forms of discrimination
and violence rooted in biological sex — reproduction, sexual violence, exclusion from
property and suffrage, and unpaid domestic labour. CEDAW (1979), the foundational
women's rights treaty, defines discrimination ‘on the basis of sex’ without further
elaborating a separate concept of gender identity.

From the 1990s onward, scholarship associated with thinkers such as Judith Butler
popularised a distinction between biological sex and gender as a socially constructed,
performed identity. This conceptual move opened space for trans women (people
assigned male at birth who identify and live as women) to be understood as women in a
social and political sense, and for legal systems to recognise gender identity
independent of birth sex. The Beijing Platform for Action itself (1995) was
accompanied by a contested interpretive note stating that the term ‘gender’ was used
in its ordinary, generally accepted meaning, a form of words itself won only after
fraught negotiation with the Holy See and allied delegations.

Three analytically distinct concepts recur throughout this debate, and delegates should
use them precisely:

• Sex: a classification based on reproductive anatomy and chromosomes, typically

assigned at birth.
• Gender identity: a person's internal sense of being a man, woman, both, neither,
or another gender, which may or may not align with sex assigned at birth.
• Gender expression: the external presentation of gender through dress, behaviour,
or names, which is a distinct question from either sex or gender identity.
The central controversy on this agenda is whether the legal and political category
‘woman’ — and the rights, protections, and data systems attached to it — should be
defined by sex or by self-identified gender, and what follows for international law and
policy either way.

3.2 Two Contested Positions Within Feminism

Delegates must understand that this is not simply a conflict between feminists and
trans-rights advocates; it is, in significant part, a conflict within feminism about how to
define its own subject.

Sex-based / ‘gender-critical’ feminism

This position holds that sex is a material, binary, and largely immutable category, and
that women's legal protections — single-sex spaces, sports categories, prisons,
refuges, safeguarding data, and sex-disaggregated statistics — must be organised
around biological sex in order to protect women and girls from male-pattern violence
and to preserve the analytical usefulness of sex as a category. Proponents argue that
replacing ‘sex’ with self-identified ‘gender’ in law risks eroding hard-won, sex-specific
protections and that women's consent should govern access to female-only spaces.
Some organisations that hold this position describe themselves as ‘gender-critical’; the
term ‘TERF’ (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) is also widely used but is considered
a pejorative by many to whom it is applied, and delegates should use it only when
accurately describing how it is used in sourced material, not as a neutral descriptor.

Gender-inclusive / intersectional feminism

This position holds that gender identity is itself a recognised dimension of human
dignity and non-discrimination, that trans women are women and should be included
within the legal and political category on that basis, and that feminist movements
should build solidarity with LGBTQI movements as part of a broader intersectional
struggle against patriarchal and heteronormative structures (drawing on the legacy of
the Combahee River Collective and Kimberlé Crenshaw's intersectionality framework).
Proponents argue that excluding trans women from the category ‘woman’ replicates
exclusionary logics feminism has otherwise repudiated, and that gender-identity
legislation (‘self-identification’ or ‘self-ID’ models, as pioneered by Argentina's 2012
Gender Identity Law) advances rather than undermines women's autonomy over their
own bodies and categories.

KEY TENSION: A significant strategic complication for this agenda is that gender-critical
feminist organisations in several countries have found themselves in tactical alignment
with religious and socially conservative governments and movements that also oppose
reproductive rights, comprehensive sex education, and LGBTQI rights more broadly —
causes gender-critical feminists themselves often support. Conversely, gender-inclusive
feminists face criticism from within their own movement for allegedly subordinating sex-
based women's rights advocacy to a broader coalition. Delegates representing any country
should expect this internal feminist rift to appear inside their own delegation's civil society
and public opinion, not just between rival blocs.

3.3 Timeline of Key International and Legal Developments

DATE EVENT

1979 CEDAW adopted; defines discrimination against women on the basis of sex

Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action adopted at the Fourth World
1995
Conference on Women

UK Gender Recognition Act allows legal gender change via Gender

2004
Recognition Certificate (GRC)

Yogyakarta Principles drafted by independent experts, applying human rights

2006–2007
law to sexual orientation and gender identity

2011 UN Human Rights Council adopts Resolution 17/19, its first resolution on
DATE EVENT

sexual orientation and gender identity

Argentina passes a Gender Identity Law based on self-identification, widely

2012
cited as a model by gender-inclusive advocates

UN Human Rights Council creates the mandate of Independent Expert on

2016
protection against violence and discrimination based on SOGI

Yogyakarta Principles plus 10 published, expanding on gender expression

2017
and bodily autonomy

Several jurisdictions (Ireland, parts of the EU) adopt self-ID gender

2019–2022
recognition laws; others debate and reject similar reforms

WHO's ICD-11 reclassifies ‘gender incongruence’ outside the mental-

2022
disorders chapter

UK's Cass Review reports on gender-identity services for children and young
2024
people, recommending caution on medical pathways

US federal executive actions recognise only two, unchangeable sexes in

Feb 2025
federal policy; restrictions announced on transgender athletes' visas

CSW69 (Beijing+30) adopts a Political Declaration; LBTQI-inclusive language

Mar 2025
is retained but SRHR language is removed

UK Supreme Court rules unanimously in For Women Scotland Ltd v The

Apr 2025
Scottish Ministers that ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010 means biological sex

US withdraws from UN Women's Executive Board and cuts funding to

2025
UNFPA, citing opposition to ‘gender ideology’

CSW70 negotiations nearly collapse; Agreed Conclusions adopted only after a

Mar 2026
forced vote, the first in the Commission's history

3.4 The International Legal Framework

INSTRUMENT RELEVANCE

Prohibits discrimination ‘on the basis of sex’; text does not

CEDAW (1979) explicitly address gender identity, leaving interpretation
contested

Beijing Declaration & Platform Global blueprint for gender equality; accompanied by a
for Action (1995) disputed interpretive note on the meaning of ‘gender’

Non-binding expert principles applying existing human

Yogyakarta Principles (2007)
rights law to SOGI and gender identity; influential but not
& +10 (2017)
treaty law

Non-binding but establish a monitoring mandate

UN HRC Resolutions on SOGI
(Independent Expert on SOGI) and recurring HRC debate

General non-discrimination guarantees, cited by both sides

ICCPR Art. 2 & 26
in arguing for sex-based or gender-identity-based protections

Domestic rulings (persuasive, e.g. UK's For Women Scotland (2025, sex-based reading);
not binding on UN) Argentina's Gender Identity Law (2012, self-ID reading) —
INSTRUMENT RELEVANCE

cited internationally as contrasting models

3.5 CSW Negotiating Dynamics: CSW69 and CSW70

At CSW69 (March 2025), negotiations over the Beijing+30 Political Declaration took
place against a backdrop of intensified opposition from the incoming US
administration, the Holy See, Russia, and allied delegations, who pushed to weaken or
remove ‘gender ideology’-coded language. Progressive delegations and civil society
mobilised to hold the line on LBTQI-inclusive language and a first-ever explicit
reference to gender-based violence, but sexual and reproductive health and rights
(SRHR) language was ultimately traded away to secure consensus — a outcome many
feminist NGOs characterised as a partial defeat.

By CSW70 (March 2026), the political climate had hardened further: the US had
withdrawn from UN Women's Executive Board, cut funding to UNFPA, and framed its
position explicitly as a defence of ‘biological truth’ against ‘gender ideology’. For the
first time in the Commission's history, the survival of the Agreed Conclusions was
genuinely in question, and the text was ultimately adopted only via a forced vote rather
than the consensus CSW has traditionally sought.

Delegates should treat this pattern — shrinking consensus, contested terminology, and
funding leverage used as a negotiating tool — as the live political context for this
committee's work, not merely historical background.

3.6 Underlying Practical Stakes

Beneath the definitional debate lie concrete policy questions this committee will be
asked to address:

• Single-sex spaces and services: refuges, prisons, changing rooms, and hospital
wards, and how eligibility should be determined.
• Sport: eligibility rules for women's competitive categories and the balance
between inclusion and competitive fairness.
• Healthcare and youth gender services: access to gender-affirming care, and how
to weigh bodily autonomy against clinical caution following reviews such as the
UK's Cass Review.
• Safeguarding and data: whether sex or gender identity should govern official
records, prison allocation, and sex-disaggregated statistics used to measure
discrimination against women.
• Funding architecture: how the withdrawal of major donors over ‘gender ideology’
objections affects UN Women, UNFPA, and civil society funding for both women's
and LGBTQI programming.
• Language in UN documents: whether official texts use ‘women and girls’, ‘all
genders’, ‘sex characteristics’, or other formulations, each of which is understood
by negotiators to carry substantive meaning.
THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

PART IV: QUESTIONS TO PONDER

The following questions are designed to guide your research, shape your position
papers, and orient your debates. Delegates are strongly encouraged to develop their
country's position on each cluster of questions.

4.1 On Definitions and Legal Categories

• Should international instruments define ‘woman’ by reference to biological sex,
self-identified gender, or a context-dependent combination of both?
• Does CEDAW's silence on gender identity mean the treaty is neutral on this
question, or that its sex-based framing should be read as controlling?
• What weight should the Beijing Platform for Action's disputed interpretive note on
‘gender’ carry thirty years on?
• How should the UN system treat domestic court rulings, such as the UK Supreme
Court's 2025 judgment, that interpret ‘sex’ in ways that diverge from some UN
agencies' guidance?
• Can a single global standard accommodate the wide variation in national legal
definitions of sex and gender, or should CSW defer to national sovereignty on this
question?

4.2 On Movement Politics and Strategy

• Is the rift between sex-based and gender-inclusive feminism a genuine
philosophical disagreement, a political wedge exploited by external actors, or
both?
• Should feminist movements prioritise unity across their internal disagreement, or
is open contestation over definitions a healthy part of movement development?
• How should CSW respond to the fact that some sex-based feminist organisations
find themselves allied with governments that oppose reproductive rights and
LGBTQI rights more broadly?
• What role should trans people themselves play in negotiations that determine their
legal status, and how should CSW ensure their voices are heard alongside those of
cisgender women's organisations?

4.3 On the UN's Normative and Institutional Role

• Should CSW attempt to resolve this definitional question at all, or is it better
addressed through the CEDAW Committee, the Human Rights Council, or national
legislatures?
• What should CSW do when major donor states condition funding for UN Women or
UNFPA on adopting a particular position on gender identity?
• How should CSW balance safeguarding-based arguments for sex-based single-sex
spaces against non-discrimination arguments for gender-identity-based access?
• What precedent does a forced vote (as at CSW70) set for the Commission's
historic practice of consensus, and is consensus still achievable or desirable on
this agenda?
• Should CSW issue guidance on terminology (e.g., ‘women and girls’ versus ‘all
genders’) for use across the UN system, and who should have authority over such
guidance?
THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

PART V: POSSIBLE SUB-AGENDAS AND POINTS

OF DEBATE

5.1 Sub-Agenda Map

SUB-AGENDA FOCUS

A. Defining ‘Woman’ in Legal category, CEDAW interpretation, Beijing Platform

International Law and Policy language

B. Single-Sex Spaces, Sport, and Refuges, prisons, changing rooms, competitive sport
Safeguarding eligibility

C. Healthcare, Bodily Autonomy, Access to gender-affirming care, clinical caution,

and Youth Gender Services informed consent

D. Movement Politics: Coalition,

Internal feminist debate, unlikely alliances, civil society
Fracture, and Alliance
dynamics
Realignment

E. Funding, Multilateral
Donor withdrawal, UN Women/UNFPA funding,
Architecture, and the Future of
consensus vs. voting
CSW

F. Data, Language, and Statistical Sex-disaggregated data, official terminology, monitoring

Categories in UN Reporting frameworks

5.2 Detailed Points of Debate

Sub-Agenda A: Defining ‘Woman’ in International Law and Policy
• Should CEDAW be reinterpreted, supplemented by protocol, or left as-is regarding
gender identity?
• What is the legal significance of national rulings like For Women Scotland for UN-
level standard-setting?
• Is a two-tier approach — sex-based protections for certain purposes, gender-
identity-based recognition for others — workable in practice?

Sub-Agenda B: Single-Sex Spaces, Sport, and Safeguarding

• How should refuges and shelters for survivors of gender-based violence determine
eligibility?
• What eligibility criteria should govern women's categories in international sport,
and who should set them — sporting federations, states, or the UN?
• How should prisons balance the safety of trans and cisgender women in custody?

Sub-Agenda C: Healthcare, Bodily Autonomy, and Youth Gender Services

• How should the UN system respond to divergent national reviews (e.g., the Cass
Review) on youth gender-affirming care?
 • What is the proper balance between bodily autonomy and clinical safeguarding for
adolescents?
• Should access to gender-affirming healthcare for adults be framed as a
reproductive and bodily autonomy issue within CSW's existing SRHR mandate?

Sub-Agenda D: Movement Politics: Coalition, Fracture, and Alliance

Realignment
• Should CSW formally recognise the internal feminist debate in its outcome
documents, or treat it as outside its remit?
• How should the Commission engage both gender-critical and gender-inclusive civil
society organisations without appearing to endorse either?
• What lessons can be drawn from the CSW69/CSW70 negotiating experience for
future consensus-building?

Sub-Agenda E: Funding, Multilateral Architecture, and the Future of CSW

• How should CSW respond to donor states conditioning funding on ideological
positions?
• Should the Commission diversify its funding base to reduce dependency on any
single donor bloc?
• Is a shift from consensus to voting a permanent and appropriate change, or a
crisis to be reversed?

Sub-Agenda F: Data, Language, and Statistical Categories in UN Reporting

• Should UN gender statistics be collected on the basis of sex, gender identity, or
both, and how should this affect trend comparability?
• What terminology should UN Women and CSW documents use going forward, and
how should disagreement over terminology itself be handled procedurally?
• How can data systems protect the privacy and dignity of trans respondents while
preserving the analytical integrity of sex-based data on issues like maternal health
and violence against women?
THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

PART VI: DELEGATE DOS AND DON'TS

DO DON'T

Address the Chair as ‘Distinguished Chair’ Speak or engage in conversation without

and other delegates as ‘Honourable Delegate’ being recognised by the Chair

Research your country's actual foreign policy, Assume your country's position mirrors your
treaty ratifications, and domestic law on this personal views, or that of a country with a
agenda similar name or region

Use contested terms (e.g. ‘TERF’, ‘gender

Use precise terminology and be ready to
ideology’) as neutral descriptors rather than
justify your delegation's word choices
as sourced quotations

Use formal third-person language: ‘The

Use first-person ‘I’ in formal speeches
delegation of … believes’

Prepare a Position Paper citing CEDAW, the

Submit a Position Paper without citations or
Beijing Platform, relevant HRC resolutions,
factual backing
and national legal sources

Engage respectfully with delegates whose

Treat this agenda as a proxy for personal
country position differs sharply from your
attacks on classmates or committee members
own

Use evidence, treaty text, and case law to Rely on rhetorical appeals to emotion in place
support arguments of sourced argument

Submit draft Agreed Conclusions / resolutions

Submit text with vague language such as
with properly formatted operative and
‘countries should try to do better’
preambulatory clauses

Remain in character as your assigned country Abandon your country's position because you
throughout the conference personally disagree with it

6.1 Resolution and Agreed Conclusions Writing Basics

Consistent with real CSW practice, this committee may produce either a General
Assembly-style resolution or a CSW-style Agreed Conclusions / Political Declaration
document. Both use the same clause architecture:

CLAUSE TYPE PURPOSE EXAMPLE STARTERS

States background, context, past Recalling… Affirming… Noting

Preambulatory
actions, recognises facts with concern… Reaffirming…

Urges… Calls upon…

Contains the actual proposed
Operative Recommends… Encourages…
actions and solutions
Requests…

Begins with a letter (a), (b), (c)

Sub-clause Details within an operative clause
and elaborates the main clause
THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

PART VII: SOURCES AND RESEARCH GUIDE

7.1 Accepted Sources for Research and Citation

CATEGORY SOURCE NAME WEBSITE / URL

Primary UN Sources UN Women / CSW Session Outcomes [Link]

OHCHR (incl. Yogyakarta Principles

Primary UN Sources [Link]
context)

[Link]
Primary UN Sources CEDAW Committee documents
(CEDAW)

Primary UN Sources UN Treaty Collection [Link]

UN Human Rights Council SOGI [Link]/en/special-

Primary UN Sources
mandate procedures

National / Judicial UK Supreme Court judgments [Link]

UK Equality and Human Rights

National / Judicial [Link]
Commission

Think Tanks / Research Chatham House [Link]

Think Tanks / Research Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) [Link]

Think Tanks / Research Brookings Institution [Link]

via institutional library

Academic Journals Feminist Legal Studies
access

via institutional library

Academic Journals TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly
access

Advocacy (cite as Sex Matters (gender-critical

[Link]
position, not fact) advocacy)

Advocacy (cite as Human Rights Campaign / GLAAD

[Link] / [Link]
position, not fact) (trans-inclusive advocacy)

News Sources Reuters [Link]

News Sources BBC World Service [Link]/news/world

News Sources The Guardian International [Link]

News Sources Associated Press [Link]

AWID / OURs (feminist civil society

Civil Society Analysis [Link] / [Link]
coalitions)

Note on advocacy sources: organisations on both sides of this debate produce serious
research but are not neutral. Delegates must cite them as representing a position (e.g. ‘Sex
Matters argues that…’), never as settled fact, and should cross-check factual claims against
primary legal or UN documents.
7.2 Sources NOT Accepted
NOT ACCEPTED REASON

Not peer-reviewed; editable by anyone; use only as a

Wikipedia
starting point

Personal blogs or social media

Unverified, lacking editorial accountability
posts

Partisan opinion pieces presented Useful only for representing a perspective, not for
as fact establishing facts

AI-generated content as evidence Cannot be independently verified; hallucination risk

Undated or unattributed articles Cannot establish recency, authority, or accuracy

7.3 Key UN Documents and Legal Instruments to Know

DOCUMENT RELEVANCE

Core treaty on discrimination against women, on the basis of

CEDAW (1979)
sex

Beijing Declaration & Platform Global blueprint for gender equality, with contested ‘gender’
for Action (1995) interpretive note

CSW69 Political Declaration Most recent major CSW outcome document; central
(2025) precedent for this session

CSW70 Agreed Conclusions Most recent annual outcome; adopted by forced vote after
(2026) near-collapse

Yogyakarta Principles (2007) Non-binding expert application of human rights law to SOGI
& +10 (2017) issues

UN HRC Resolution 17/19 First UN Human Rights Council resolution on sexual

(2011) orientation and gender identity

UK Equality Act 2010 / For

Women Scotland judgment Key comparative national case cited heavily in this debate
(2025)
THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

PART VIII: COUNTRY AND BLOC POSITIONS

The following provides a structured overview of key country and bloc positions on this
agenda. Delegates should research beyond this guide to develop nuanced, accurate
country-specific positions, since domestic politics on this issue frequently cut across
traditional geopolitical blocs.

KEY INTERESTS AND RED

COUNTRY/BLOC GENERAL POSITION
LINES

Promotes a sex-based, ‘biological Withdrew from UN Women's

United States
truth’ framing in federal and Executive Board; cut UNFPA
(current
multilateral policy; opposes ‘gender funding; visa restrictions tied to
administration)
ideology’ language sex-based athlete eligibility

Strongly opposes gender-identity- Alliance with the Holy See and

based language; frames the issue as OIC-aligned states at CSW;
Russia
Western cultural imposition and sovereignty and ‘traditional
traditional-values defence family’ framing

Sees itself as defending

Opposes gender-identity-based complementary, biologically-
Holy See (Permanent
redefinition of ‘woman’ and ‘family’ rooted sex roles; influential in
Observer)
on doctrinal grounds negotiating blocs despite non-
voting status

Balancing internal
Generally supports gender-identity
disagreement (Hungary, Poland
inclusion and LGBTQI-inclusive
European Union historically more gender-
language, though members are
(most members) critical) with a broadly
internally divided (e.g., on youth
progressive EU common
healthcare)
position

Domestically shaped by the 2025

Supreme Court ruling defining ‘sex’ Navigating a legally settled but
as biological under the Equality politically contested domestic
United Kingdom
Act; officially maintains that trans landscape; cautious multilateral
people retain discrimination posture
protections

Historically a global leader in self-

Internal political realignment
identification gender recognition
makes Argentina's CSW position
Argentina law (2012); recent government has
a live and unpredictable
shifted toward more gender-critical
variable
rhetoric

Generally supportive of gender- Strong funding commitments to

Nordic countries
identity inclusion within a strong UN Women/UNFPA; view this
(Sweden, Norway,
SRHR and gender-equality issue as part of a broader
Finland, Denmark)
framework human rights agenda

Latin America Mixed: several states support Domestic religious and political
(CELAC, divided) inclusive language; others, coalitions strongly shape each
influenced by evangelical and country's position
 KEY INTERESTS AND RED
COUNTRY/BLOC GENERAL POSITION
LINES

Catholic constituencies, resist it

Generally cautious; many states

prioritise broader development and Wary of being drawn into a
African Union anti-poverty framing over the debate perceived as externally
(varied) definitional debate; some have imposed by Western donors on
restrictive domestic laws on either side
LGBTQI rights

Non-aligned, cautious; balances a Strategic autonomy; avoids

domestic legal framework being cast into either bloc;
India
recognising a third gender category emphasises national sovereignty
with traditional social norms over social policy

Generally opposes gender-identity- Alliance of convenience with

based redefinition of ‘woman’ on Russia and the Holy See on this
OIC bloc (varied)
religious and cultural grounds, specific agenda, despite
though positions vary by state differing agendas elsewhere

Internally divided between gender- Neither speaks with one voice;

Feminist and LGBTQI
critical and gender-inclusive delegates should expect
civil society (non-
organisations, both highly active in lobbying from both camps
voting but influential)
CSW's parallel NGO forum during committee sessions
THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

PART IX: GLOSSARY OF KEY TERMS

TERM DEFINITION

A classification based on reproductive

Sex anatomy and chromosomes, typically
assigned at birth.

A term used variously to mean social roles

associated with sex, or an individual's
Gender
internal sense of identity; contested and
context-dependent.

A person's internal sense of being a man,

Gender identity
woman, both, neither, or another gender.

The external presentation of gender through

Gender expression
dress, behaviour, or names.

Describing a person whose gender identity

Cisgender
matches the sex they were assigned at birth.

Describing a person whose gender identity

Transgender differs from the sex they were assigned at
birth.

The position that sex is a fixed, material

Biological essentialism / sex-based feminism category that should ground women's legal
protections.

Self-description used by advocates of sex-

Gender-critical feminism based definitions of ‘woman’ in law and
policy.

‘Trans-exclusionary radical feminist’; a term

widely regarded as pejorative by those it is
‘TERF’
applied to; use only as a sourced quotation,
not as neutral description.

A framework, drawing on Kimberlé

Crenshaw's work, analysing how overlapping
systems of oppression (race, class, gender,
Intersectional feminism
sexuality) shape experience; often associated
with gender-inclusive positions on this
agenda.

A legal model allowing individuals to change

their legal gender through a personal
Self-identification (‘self-ID’)
declaration, without medical or judicial
gatekeeping.

A UK legal document certifying a change of

Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) legal gender under the Gender Recognition
Act 2004.

CEDAW Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of

TERM DEFINITION

Discrimination Against Women (1979).

Global policy framework for gender equality

Beijing Platform for Action adopted at the 1995 Fourth World
Conference on Women.

Non-binding expert principles (2007, updated

Yogyakarta Principles 2017) applying international human rights
law to sexual orientation and gender identity.

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity;

SOGI shorthand used across UN human rights
mechanisms.

Statistics collected and reported separately

Sex-disaggregated data by sex, used to measure gender gaps and
discrimination.

A legal provision permitting services or

Single-sex exception spaces to be restricted to one sex under
specified conditions.

Policies and practices intended to protect

Safeguarding vulnerable people, frequently invoked in
debates over access to single-sex spaces.

CSW's standard annual negotiated outcome

Agreed Conclusions
document.

CSW's outcome document adopted every five

Political Declaration years, marking Beijing Platform
anniversaries.

Medical and psychological care supporting a

person's gender identity, ranging from social
Gender-affirming care
transition to hormonal or surgical
interventions.

A 2024 independent UK review of gender-

identity services for children and young
Cass Review
people, recommending increased clinical
caution.
THE NOVELLE MUN | UNCSW | BACKGROUND GUIDE

PART X: FURTHER READING AND RESEARCH

GUIDE

10.1 Essential Reading

• CEDAW full text — [Link]/womenwatch/daw/cedaw
• Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (1995) — [Link]
• CSW69 Political Declaration (2025) and CSW70 Agreed Conclusions (2026) —
[Link]/csw
• Yogyakarta Principles and Yogyakarta+10 — [Link]
• UK Supreme Court judgment, For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers
[2025] UKSC 16 — [Link]
• UK Equality and Human Rights Commission guidance following the 2025 ruling —
[Link]
• The Cass Review (2024), final report — [Link]

10.2 Recommended Academic Journals

• Feminist Legal Studies — peer-reviewed analysis of law and gender
• TSQ: Transgender Studies Quarterly — leading journal in transgender studies
• Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society — major feminist studies journal
• International Feminist Journal of Politics — gender and global governance

10.3 Research Strategy for Delegates

STEP RESEARCH ACTION

Read this background guide in full; note every concept you do not fully
1
understand.

Look up your assigned country's actual votes and statements at CSW69 and
2
CSW70.

Identify your country's domestic legal framework on sex, gender recognition, and
3
anti-discrimination law.

Read CEDAW in full and the Beijing Platform for Action's relevant paragraphs on
4
gender.

Find at least one source representing each side of the internal feminist debate,
5
and summarise both fairly.

Identify which negotiating bloc your country belongs to at CSW and what that
6
means for coalition-building.

Draft a Position Paper (2–3 pages) covering: country background, stance on each
7
sub-agenda, and proposed solutions.
STEP RESEARCH ACTION

Prepare 2–3 speeches (opening statement plus at least one substantive speech)
8
with cited evidence.
A FINAL WORD FROM THE EXECUTIVE BOARD
You are about to engage with one of the most contested questions in contemporary
human rights diplomacy. The definitional dispute at the heart of this agenda is not
settled anywhere in the world, and the negotiations you will simulate mirror real,
unresolved fault lines that have brought the Commission on the Status of Women
closer to breakdown than at any point in its history.

Represent your country faithfully. Listen carefully to delegates who see this issue
differently than you do. Ground every claim in evidence. And remember that behind
every clause in this debate are real women and real trans people whose rights and
safety are genuinely at stake — which is exactly why careful, honest diplomacy matters
here more than almost anywhere else on the UN's agenda.

The Novelle MUN 2026 | United Nations Commission on the Status of Women
Chairperson: Mr. Neel Brahma